Systematic Screening For Behavior Disorders Research Articles

Measuring Teachers’ Perceptions of Student Behavior Using the Systematic Screening for Behavior Disorders in Middle School Students

Universal screening serves to identify students at risk for emotional and behavioral difficulties while their behavior is still amenable to treatment. However, there are few universal screeners available for middle school students who may be at heightened risk for developing emotional and behavioral difficulties due to major academic and social challenges. The Systematic Screening for Behavior Disorders (SSBD), often considered the gold standard for behavior screeners, was recently validated for use in middle schools. However, there is little research on the reliability and validity of the SSBD for screening middle school students and the differences among teachers of different academic subjects. The purpose of this study was to extend the previous research validating the SSBD assessing its technical adequacy and sensitivity in middle school students among teachers of different academic subjects. Results indicated that the SSBD provided reliable and valid evidence for identifying at-risk middle school students. This study provided evidence that the SSBD identified internalizing and externalizing students with a similar degree of accuracy.

Preliminary Psychometric Findings on the Arabic Systematic Screening for Behavior Disorders

This study was a first step toward adaptation of the Arabic version of the Systematic Screening for Behavior Disorders, Second Edition (SSBD-2) for public schools in the State of Kuwait. The study aimed to assess the face validity of the Arabic SSBD-2, investigate differences among the scores of students nominated by teachers as at risk for emotional or behavioral disorders (EBDs) on the Arabic SSBD-2 scales, test the internal consistency of the Arabic SSBD-2 items, and assess the social validity of the Arabic SSBD-2 through surveying teacher satisfaction. Seventy-seven teachers and 346 students from the first through ninth grades across 21 public elementary and middle schools participated. The findings showed significant differences between male and female students at risk for EBDs on the critical events index, whereas no differences were detected between the males and females on the combined frequency index of adaptive and maladaptive behaviors. The internal consistency coefficients for the combined frequency index of adaptive and maladaptive behaviors was strong (α = .84 and α = .88, respectively). In addition, 72.6% of teachers advised use of the Arabic SSBD-2 in Kuwaiti public schools. This study’s findings encourage further psychometric evaluations of the Arabic SSBD-2.

A Critical Review of Five Commonly Used Social-Emotional and Behavioral Screeners for Elementary or Secondary Schools

The goal of this paper was to critically review and evaluate five common social-emotional and behavioral screeners: Behavioral and Emotional Screening System (Kamphaus and Reynolds 2007), Behavior Intervention Monitoring Assessment System (McDougal et al. 2011), Social Skills Improvement System Performance Screening Guide (Elliott and Gresham 2008), Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (Goodman Journal of Child Psychology, Psychiatry, and Allied Disciplines, 38, 581–586, 1997), and Systematic Screening for Behavior Disorders (Walker and Severson 1992). School professionals are often involved in choosing universal screening assessments; therefore, this review was intended to inform the audience about important features such as use, standardization sample and norms, scores and interpretation, and psychometric properties of commonly used social-emotional universal screeners.

Initial Evidence for the Reliability and Validity of the Student Risk Screening Scale With Elementary Age English Learners

We report findings of a validation study exploring the Student Risk Screening Scale (SRSS; Drummond, 1994) for use with English learners (ELs) attending a large suburban elementary school. First, we explored the reliability of the SRSS by examining internal consistency, with results indicating adequate internal consistency (.83). Second, we examined and established a convergent validity of the SRSS scores with the social skills improvement system–performance screening guide (SSiS-PSG; Gresham & Elliott, 2007) and the systematic screening for behavior disorders (SSBD; Walker & Severson, 1992). Results indicated that SRSS scores were negatively correlated with SSiS-PSG scores, thereby suggesting that an increased behavioral risk is associated with decreases in teacher-reported reading performance, math performance, motivation to learn, and prosocial behaviors. In addition, the results yielded additional evidence of convergent validity with SSBD and SRSS scores. SRSS scores improved the chance estimates of predicting the internalizing behaviors of ELs (area under the curve [AUC] = .72) and externalizing behaviors of ELs (AUC = .98) as measured by the SSBD. Third, we examined the relation between SRSS scores and academic performance as measured by dynamic indicators of basic early literacy skills Next (Good & Kaminski, 2011), which suggested an inverse relation ( r = −.41). Fourth, we examined the teachers’ perceptions of the screening tool.

School experiences of early adolescent Latinos/as at risk for emotional and behavioral disorders.

Previous research has shown that Latino/a middle school students exhibiting emotional or behavioral disturbance are at risk for undesirable academic outcomes. The purpose of this study was to understand the perceptions and experiences of at-risk Latino/a students to identify ways to improve interventions targeted to promote their academic retention and success. Participants included 11 Latino/a students between the ages of 11 and 13 years, 8 males and 3 females, who were screened as being at risk for behavior disorders using the Systematic Screening for Behavior Disorders (SSBD). These students shared their perceptions and experiences of schooling during in-depth qualitative interviews. Interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA) was used to understand how these students made sense of their school experiences. Students' descriptions tended to be contextualized within relationships with peers, teachers, and family members. Many students shared experiences of being the target of overt racism and microaggressions from peers. Students believed they were more likely to be successful in school when teachers displayed flexibility with deadlines, provided extra help, and communicated a sense of warmth and caring. The data from this study suggested that school psychologists can benefit from attending to at-risk students' perceptions, which, in the context of this study, would require facilitating an inclusive school climate, fostering effective teacher and student relationships, and facilitating parent-teacher relationships during the difficult transition from elementary to middle school.

A Validation of the Student Risk Screening Scale for Internalizing and Externalizing Behaviors: Patterns in Rural and Urban Elementary Schools

ABSTRACT: We report findings of two studies, one conducted in a rural school district (N = 982) and a second conducted in an urban district (N = 1,079), offering additional evidence of the reliability and validity of a revised instrument, the Student Risk Screening Scale–Internalizing and Externalizing (SRSS-IE), to accurately detect internalizing and externalizing behaviors. The SRSS-IE was modified to include seven additional items characteristic of internalizing behaviors. Items were developed based on information gleaned from current measures and the existing knowledge base as well as teaching experience with students with emotional or behavioral disorders. The original 7 items developed by Drummond (1994) were retained, resulting in a total of 14 items (SRSS-IE14). Scoring procedures remained the same as with the SRSS, with elementary teachers evaluating each student on each item using a 4-point Likert-type scale. In both studies, we examined item-level data, internal consistency, and factor structure. Results supported retention of five of the seven additional items, yielding the SRSS-IE12. In the second study, we explored and established convergent validity of the SRSS-IE12 as well as the two subscales (SRSS-E7, seven original externalizing items, and SRSS-15, five retained internalizing items) with the Systematic Screening for Behavior Disorders (H. M. Walker & Severson, 1992). Limitations and future directions are offered, including how to use information in designing Tier 2 and Tier 3 intervention supports.

Initial Evidence for the Reliability and Validity of the Student Risk Screening Scale for Internalizing and Externalizing Behaviors at the Elementary Level

We report findings of an exploratory validation study of a revised instrument: the Student Risk Screening Scale-Internalizing and Externalizing (SRSS-IE). The SRSS-IE was modified to include seven additional items reflecting characteristics of internalizing behaviors, with proposed items generated from the current literature base, review of current measures, and teaching experience with students with emotional and behavioral disorders. The original seven items developed by Drummond (1994) were retained in the exact form, yielding an instrument containing 14 items (SRSS-IE14), each rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale. First, we explore the reliability of the SRSS-IE14 by examining item-level data, internal consistency, and factor structure with 2,460 elementary students. Results of a data analytic plan grounded in classical test theory support retention of five additional items, yielding the SRSS-IE12. Second, we established convergent validity of the SRSS-IE12 with two well-established screening tools: the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (Goodman, 1997) and the Systematic Screening for Behavior Disorders (Walker & Severson, 1992). Limitations and future directions are offered.

Systematic Screening for Emotional and Behavioral Disorders at the High School Level

The authors examined the utility of a modified version of the Systematic Screening for Behavior Disorders for use at the high school level to address issues of comorbidity. Results suggested that the modified version was able to discriminate among students with varying degrees of risk in terms of academic performance as measured by GPA. In terms of convergent validity, teachers were able to differentiate between the social skills of students rated with typical behaviors and those at risk for externalizing or comorbid behaviors in terms of cooperation, self-control, school adjustment, and empathy skills. Furthermore, teachers were better able to discriminate externalizing behaviors relative to internalizing behaviors. Overall, solely relying on teacher nominations may be sufficient for discriminating between the presence versus absence of risk. However, it may not be sufficient to discriminate among the presence of different types of risk, particularly internalizing behaviors. Limitations and educational implications are discussed.

The Impact of the Adult–Child Relationship on School Adjustment for Children at Risk of Serious Behavior Problems

This study investigated the effect of the adult-child relationship on students’ social outcomes, academic competence and school engagement in a two-year Tier 2 intervention, the Check, Connect and Expect program. One hundred and three students from 2nd through 5th grade, their classroom teachers, and nine school-based coaches participated in this study. Students were identified as at-risk of developing emotional and behavior problems based on Systematic Screening for Behavior Disorders (SSBD; Walker & Severson, 1992). Results indicated that teacher-reported social skills, academic competence and school engagement were negatively associated with SSBD maladaptive behaviors, and were positively associated with coach-student and teacher-student relationships. The teacher-student relationship had a major influence on students’ behavior outcomes, academic competence, and school engagement. However, the coach-student relationship only had unique effect on students’ social skill outcomes based on these data. These findings suggest that close teacher-student relationship can lead the developmental trajectory of children at risk toward positive school adjustment.

Score Reliability and Validity of the Student Risk Screening Scale

In this article we examine the psychometric properties of the Student Risk Screening Scale (SRSS) for use in diverse, urban elementary schools. Results of two studies suggest strong internal consistency and test–retest reliability. Both studies also suggest strong convergent validity with other psychometrically sound, systematic screeners including the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (Study 1) and the Systematic Screening for Behavior Disorders (Study 2). In addition, both studies suggest initial SRSS scores predict (a) suspension rates for students in kindergarten through fourth grades and (b) performance on state achievement tests for third grade students. Limitations and directions for future research are discussed.

Gender Differences and Similarities in a Screening Process for Emotional and Behavioral Risks in Secondary Schools

Few research studies have examined how screening outcomes may be different or similar for males and females, despite evidence that male students outnumber female students in special education populations and are more likely to experience school failure. During the 3 years of this study, 15,932 students in Grades 6 through 9 were screened with the use of a modified version of the Systematic Screening for Behavior Disorders (SSBD). Within this period, 1,065 nominations were collected for students identified as at risk for internalizing and externalizing problems, of which 77.4% were male. The average ratio of males to females nominated was approximately 5:1 for externalizing behaviors, 2:1 for internalizing behaviors, and 3:1 for total nominations. Reliability coefficients on the Adaptive and Maladaptive scales from the SSBD Stage 2 were comparable for both genders as determined by Fisher’s z tests. On the Adaptive scale, female students tended to be rated higher by their teachers. A multivariate analysis (general linear model) was conducted to examine gender socioeconomic status, and the internalizing—externalizing dimension at SSBD Stage 1 as predictors of scores on the three SSBD Stage 2 scales (Critical Events, Adaptive, and Maladaptive).

Using Systematic Screening Procedures to Identify Students Who are Nonresponsive to Primary Prevention Efforts: Integrating Academic and Behavioral Measures

Many school systems are adopting three-tiered models of prevention (e.g., Response to Intervention and Positive Behavior Support) to support an increasingly diverse student population (Sugai, Horner, & Gresham, 2002). A central feature of these models is that data are monitored to determine responsiveness. We offer this paper as a guide for researchers and practitioners in using multiple sources of data to support students with reading and behavioral challenges. Specifically, we provide an illustration of how one elementary school used an academic screener (Curriculum-Based Measurement; CBM) in combination with behavior screeners (Systematic Screening for Behavior Disorders [Walker & Severson, 1992] and the Student Risk Screening Scale [Drummond, 1994]) to identify students who were non-responsive to the primary prevention efforts. We provide information on the methodology that includes participants, training procedures, a description of the primary plan, and assessment schedule. Then we offer two illustrations of how the CBM and behavior screening data could be analyzed to identify students for targeted supports and directions for future applications.

A Comparison of Systematic Screening Tools for Emotional and Behavioral Disorders

In this article, the authors examine the psychometric properties of the Student Risk Screening Scale (SRSS), including evaluating the concurrent validity of the SRSS to predict results from the Systematic Screening for Behavior Disorders (SSBD) when used to detect school children with externalizing or internalizing behavior concerns at three assessment points during one academic year. Results suggest strong internal consistency and test—retest stability. Analyses of receiver operating characteristics curves also suggest that the SRSS is more accurate for detecting externalizing than internalizing behaviors. The authors conclude by offering recommendations to school site teams and researchers interested in conducing systematic screenings at the elementary level. Limitations and future directions are offered.

Further validation of the Systematic Screening for Behavior Disorders in middle and junior high school

AbstractThe Systematic Screening for Behavior Disorders (SSBD), a screening system to identify elementary students at risk for emotional and behavioral disorders, was evaluated for use in middle and junior high schools. Teachers completed SSBD Stages One and Two on students in grades 6 to 8 who had characteristics of internalizing or externalizing disorders. Teacher, parent, and self‐rating forms of the Achenbach System of Empirically Based Assessment (ASEBA) and the Social Skills Rating System (SSRS) were also completed on 66 students nominated via the SSBD as at risk for internalizing and externalizing problems. Office discipline referrals and grade point averages, for students nominated at SSBD Stage One, were compared with nonnominated students resulting in medium to large effect sizes. Small to moderate correlations were also found between SSBD Stage Two scores and ASEBA and SSRS scores, including several from the parent and student forms. © 2009 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

A Comparison of Systematic Screening Tools for Emotional and Behavioral Disorders

Early identification of students who might develop emotional and behavioral disorders (EBD) is essential in preventing negative outcomes. Systematic screening tools are available for identifying elementary-age students with EBD, including the Systematic Screening for Behavior Disorders (SSBD) and the Student Risk Screening Scale (SRSS). The SSBD is considered the gold standard for systematic EBD screening. The brevity of the SRSS is often favored with respect to resource allocation. The authors evaluated the concurrent validity of the SRSS to predict SSBD results when used to detect school children with externalizing or internalizing behavior concerns. Between low- and high-risk categories, the SRSS had excellent accuracy for predicting both externalizing (95%) and internalizing (93%) problems on the SSBD. Sensitivity (94%) and specificity (95%) were both excellent for externalizing behavior, but for internalizing behavior, sensitivity was lower (44%), while specificity was excellent (95%). Receiver-operating characteristic analysis also suggested that the SRSS was more accurate for detecting externalizing than internalizing behaviors. Limitations and future directions are offered.

The Psychometric Properties of the Arabic Version of the Behavioral and Emotional Rating Scale (BERS)

The Psychometric Properties of the Arabic Version of the Behavioral and Emotional Rating Scale (BERS)

Validation of the Systematic Screening for Behavior Disorders in Middle and Junior High School

The Systematic Screening for Behavior Disorders (SSBD), a multistage screening system designed to identify elementary school—age children at risk for emotional and behavioral disorders, was evaluated for use with middle and junior high school students. During SSBD Stage 1, teachers identified 123 students in grades 6 through 9 with characteristics of internalizing and externalizing disorders. Teachers then completed SSBD Stage 2 behavior rating scales, the Teacher Report Form, and the Social Skill Rating System on 119 of these students identified as at-risk during Stage 1. Office discipline referrals and cumulative grade point averages for at-risk students were compared to those of students not designated by teachers. SSBD Stage 2 scores were compared with scores from the Teacher Report Form and Social Skill Rating System. Internal consistency and interrater reliability of the SSBD were also examined. Results provide evidence for the reliability and validity of SSBD ratings of early adolescent students.

Profiles of Children Served in Early Intervention Programs for Behavioral Disorders

Special education legislation has placed an increased emphasis on early intervention programs for children at risk for early literacy delays and behavioral disorders. Given this trend, it is important to understand the characteristics of students identified and served in at-risk programs. This study presents the findings from a cluster analysis on the early literacy and behavioral characteristics of 195 children screened at risk for behavioral disorders served in an early intervention program. Clustered variables included behavioral measures from the Early Screening Project (ESP; Walker, Severson, & Feil, 1995), Systematic Screening for Behavior Disorders (SSBD; Walker & Severson, 1992), and measures of early reading development from the Woodcock Reading Mastery Tests—Revised (WRMT-R; Woodcock, 1998). Split-half procedures and external criteria were used to validate results. Five distinct subgroups were revealed: Broad Risks, Academic Achievers, Primarily Behavior, Primarily Academic, and Extreme Behaviors. Results indicate heterogeneous characteristics and clear areas of behavioral and early reading risk between subgroups within the greater sample. Implications, limitations, and future research are discussed.

Schoolwide Screening and Positive Behavior Supports

As schoolwide positive behavior supports (PBS) become more commonplace in public schools, efficiently and effectively identifying and supporting students who are at risk for school failure has become increasingly important. This descriptive study examines the functioning of 72 students identified as at risk in 3 elementary schools with established PBS systems, using schoolwide screening, rating scale instruments, and office discipline referrals. The students were identified through the use of the Systematic Screening for Behavior Disorders (Walker & Severson, 1992) administered in the fall. School teams matched the identified students to existing supports and tracked their functioning twice monthly. Teachers completed the Social Skills Rating System (Gresham & Elliot, 1990) on each of the students in the following spring. The number of office discipline referrals for each student was monitored, as was the number of students referred to school-based support teams—such as a Student Study Team, a Functional Behavior Assessment Team—and the number of students who qualified for special education that year. Results suggest that students at risk for school failure are best identified by monitoring office discipline referrals and the use of a systematic schoolwide screening process.

Curriculum Influences on Growth in Early Reading Fluency for Students with Academic and Behavioral Risks

This study applied an early screening approach to determine the risk status of children in five urban schools and monitor their patterns of reading growth over 3 years. A majority of students were from culturally diverse and low-SES backgrounds.Two validated instruments were used for determining (a) academic risk (the Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills [DIBELS]; Good et al., 1998) and (b) behavioral risk ( Systematic Screening for Behavior Disorders [SSBD]; Walker & Severson, 1992, or Early Screening Project; Walker, Severson, & Feil, 1995). DIBELS data for 383 students were used to determine the characteristics and effectiveness of reading curriculum reforms for students in kindergarten through second grade. Results indicated that students with a single risk factor (academic or behavioral) progressed more slowly than the general population in the participating schools.The students with behavioral risks, however, made better progress, becoming more fluent readers than the students with academic risks. Students with both academic and behavioral risks made the least progress. The Reading Mastery curriculum (Reading Mastery, 1995) produced better growth in reading fluency than did Success for All (Success for All, 1999) or the literature-based curriculum. It also produced better growth for students with academic, behavioral, or both risk factors.The Success for All curriculum produced less growth compared to the Reading Mastery curriculum but was superior to the literature-based curriculum. Implications are discussed.