Stephen P. Kilgus

An investigation of the generalizability and dependability of direct behavior rating single item scales (DBR-SIS) to measure academic engagement and disruptive behavior of middle school students.

A total of 4 raters, including 2 teachers and 2 research assistants, used Direct Behavior Rating Single Item Scales (DBR-SIS) to measure the academic engagement and disruptive behavior of 7 middle school students across multiple occasions. Generalizability study results for the full model revealed modest to large magnitudes of variance associated with persons (students), occasions of measurement (day), and associated interactions. However, an unexpectedly low proportion of the variance in DBR data was attributable to the facet of rater, as well as a negligible variance component for the facet of rating occasion nested within day (10-min interval within a class period). Results of a reduced model and subsequent decision studies specific to individual rater and rater type (research assistant and teacher) suggested degree of reliability-like estimates differed substantially depending on rater. Overall, findings supported previous recommendations that in the absence of estimates of rater reliability and firm recommendations regarding rater training, ratings obtained from DBR-SIS, and subsequent analyses, be conducted within rater. Additionally, results suggested that when selecting a teacher rater, the person most likely to substantially interact with target students during the specified observation period may be the best choice.

Direct behavior rating as a school-based behavior screener for elementary and middle grades☆

The purpose of this study was to investigate how Direct Behavior Rating Single Item Scales (DBR-SIS) involving targets of academically engaged, disruptive, and respectful behaviors function in school-based screening assessment. Participants included 831 students in kindergarten through eighth grades who attended schools in the northeastern United States. Teachers provided behavior ratings for a sample of students in their classrooms on the DBR-SIS, the Behavioral and Emotional Screening System (Kamphaus & Reynolds, 2007), and the Student Risk Screening Scale (Drummond, 1994). Given variations in rating procedures to accommodate scheduling differences across grades, analysis was conducted separately for elementary school and middle school grade levels. Results suggested that the recommended cut scores, the combination of behavior targets, and the resulting conditional probability indices varied depending on grade level grouping (lower elementary, upper elementary, middle). For example, for the lower elementary grade level grouping, a combination of disruptive behavior (cut score=2) and academically engaged behavior (cut score=8) was considered to offer the best balance among indices of diagnostic accuracy, whereas a cut score of 1 for disruptive behavior and 8 for academically engaged behavior were recommended for the upper elementary school grade level grouping and cut scores of 1 and 9, respectively, were suggested for middle school grade level grouping. Generally, DBR-SIS cut scores considered optimal for screening using single or combined targets including academically engaged behavior and disruptive behavior by offering a reasonable balance of indices for sensitivity (.51-.90), specificity (.47-.83), negative predictive power (.94-.98), and positive predictive power (.14-.41). The single target of respectful behavior performed poorly across all grade level groups, and performance of DBR-SIS targets was relatively better in the elementary school than middle school grade level groups. Overall, results supported that disruptive behavior is highly important in evaluating risk status in lower grade levels and that academically engaged behavior becomes more pertinent as students reach higher grade levels. Limitations, future directions, and implications are discussed.

Curriculum-based measurement of oral reading (R-CBM): A diagnostic test accuracy meta-analysis of evidence supporting use in universal screening

A great deal of research over the past decade has examined the appropriateness of curriculum-based measurement of oral reading (R-CBM) in universal screening. Multiple researchers have meta-analyzed available correlational evidence, yielding support for the interpretation of R-CBM as an indicator of general reading proficiency. In contrast, researchers have yet to synthesize diagnostic accuracy evidence, which pertains to the defensibility of the use of R-CBM for screening purposes. The overall purpose of this research was to therefore conduct the first meta-analysis of R-CBM diagnostic accuracy research. A systematic search of the literature resulted in the identification of 34 studies, including 20 peer-reviewed articles, 7 dissertations, and 7 technical reports. Bivariate hierarchical linear models yielded generalized estimates of diagnostic accuracy statistics, which predominantly exceeded standards for acceptable universal screener performance. For instance, when predicting criterion outcomes within a school year (≤9 months), R-CBM sensitivity ranged between .80 and .83 and specificity ranged between .71 and .73. Multiple moderators of R-CBM diagnostic accuracy were identified, including the (a) R-CBM cut score used to define risk, (b) lag in time between R-CBM and criterion test administration, and (c) percentile rank corresponding to the criterion test cut score through which students were identified as either truly at risk or not at risk. Follow-up analyses revealed substantial variability of extracted cut scores within grade and time of year (i.e., fall, winter, and spring). This result called into question the inflexible application of a single cut score across contexts and suggested the potential necessity of local cut scores. Implications for practices, directions for future research, and limitations are discussed.

Using Direct Behavior Rating (DBR) to Screen for School Social Risk A Preliminary Comparison of Methods in a Kindergarten Sample

In this study, preliminary evidence of the potential for Direct Behavior Rating (DBR) in screening assessment of school social behavior is provided through evaluation of the concurrent validity of DBR with a commonly used criterion measure. The teacher-completed form of the Social Skills Rating System (SSRS) was selected as the criterion measure given similarity to DBR in both broad construct of interest and intended use. Classroom teachers completed DBRs of academic engagement and disruptive behavior twice daily, along with fall and spring completion of the SSRS. Overall results support a moderate to strong association between the methods, with stronger correlations in the fall assessment period. In addition, evidence of teacher acceptability for DBR is provided. Along with specific recommendations for future research, implications are discussed regarding selection and interpretation of behavior assessment methods for screening purposes.

Direct behavior rating as a school-based behavior universal screener: replication across sites.

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the utility of Direct Behavior Rating Single Item Scale (DBR-SIS) targets of disruptive, engaged, and respectful behavior within school-based universal screening. Participants included 31 first-, 25 fourth-, and 23 seventh-grade teachers and their 1108 students, sampled from 13 schools across three geographic locations (northeast, southeast, and midwest). Each teacher rated approximately 15 of their students across three measures, including DBR-SIS, the Behavioral and Emotional Screening System (Kamphaus & Reynolds, 2007), and the Student Risk Screening Scale (Drummond, 1994). Moderate to high bivariate correlations and area under the curve statistics supported concurrent validity and diagnostic accuracy of DBR-SIS. Receiver operating characteristic curve analyses indicated that although respectful behavior cut scores recommended for screening remained constant across grade levels, cut scores varied for disruptive behavior and academic engaged behavior. Specific cut scores for first grade included 2 or less for disruptive behavior, 7 or greater for academically engaged behavior, and 9 or greater for respectful behavior. In fourth and seventh grades, cut scores changed to 1 or less for disruptive behavior and 8 or greater for academically engaged behavior, and remained the same for respectful behavior. Findings indicated that disruptive behavior was particularly appropriate for use in screening at first grade, whereas academically engaged behavior was most appropriate at both fourth and seventh grades. Each set of cut scores was associated with acceptable sensitivity (.79-.87), specificity (.71-.82), and negative predictive power (.94-.96), but low positive predictive power (.43-.44). DBR-SIS multiple gating procedures, through which students were only considered at risk overall if they exceeded cut scores on 2 or more DBR-SIS targets, were also determined acceptable in first and seventh grades, as the use of both disruptive behavior and academically engaged behavior in defining risk yielded acceptable conditional probability indices. Overall, the current findings are consistent with previous research, yielding further support for the DBR-SIS as a universal screener. Limitations, implications for practice, and directions for future research are discussed.

Preliminary evaluation of various training components on accuracy of Direct Behavior Ratings.

This study examined the impact of various components of rater training on the accuracy of rating behavior using Direct Behavior Rating-Single Item Scales (DBR-SIS). Specifically, the addition of frame-of-reference and rater error training components to a standard package involving an overview and then modeling, practice, and feedback was investigated. In addition, amount of exposure to the direct training component (i.e., number of practice and feedback opportunities) was evaluated, and the rates at which behavior was displayed were carefully manipulated to control for and evaluate training impact by target and rate of behavior. The sample consisted of undergraduate students assigned to one of 6 possible conditions. Overall findings suggested that completion of a training package did result in enhanced accuracy when using DBR-SIS to rate academic engagement and disruption. However, results also supported that the most comprehensive package of DBR training may not always result in greater improvements over a standard package involving direct training. In general, a more intensive training package appeared beneficial at improving ratings for targets that had previously been difficult to rate accurately (e.g., medium rate disruptive behavior). Limitations and implications for future research are discussed.

Direct Behavior Rating Scales as Screeners: A Preliminary Investigation of Diagnostic Accuracy in Elementary School.

This study presents an evaluation of the diagnostic accuracy and concurrent validity of Direct Behavior Rating Single Item Scales for use in school-based behavior screening of second-grade students. Results indicated that each behavior target was a moderately to highly accurate predictor of behavioral risk. Optimal universal screening cut scores were also identified for each scale, with results supporting reduced false positive rates through the simultaneous use of multiple scales.

Ethical Dilemmas in School-Based Behavioral Screening:

In this editorial, four ethical dilemmas associated with adoption and implementation of school-based behavioral screening practices are reviewed. A variety of forums related to public health, education, and research ethics were used in selection and illustration of the dilemmas, which include (a) community acceptance, (b) family rights, (c) identification, and (d) service delivery provision. Reference to regulations that may guide ethical decision making around the parameters of school-based behavioral assessment are provided along with specific implications for both research and practice.

Confirmation of Models for Interpretation and Use of the Social and Academic Behavior Risk Screener (SABRS)

The purpose of this investigation was to evaluate the models for interpretation and use that serve as the foundation of an interpretation/use argument for the Social and Academic Behavior Risk Screener (SABRS). The SABRS was completed by 34 teachers with regard to 488 students in a Midwestern high school during the winter portion of the academic year. Confirmatory factor analysis supported interpretation of SABRS data, suggesting the fit of a bifactor model specifying 1 broad factor (General Behavior) and 2 narrow factors (Social Behavior [SB] and Academic Behavior [AB]). The interpretive model was further supported by analyses indicative of the internal consistency and interrater reliability of scores from each factor. In addition, latent profile analyses indicated the adequate fit of the proposed 4-profile SABRS model for use. When cross-referenced with SABRS cut scores identified via previous work, results revealed students could be categorized as (a) not at-risk on both SB and AB, (b) at-risk on SB but not on AB, (c) at-risk on AB but not on SB, or (d) at-risk on both SB and AB. Taken together, results contribute to growing evidence supporting the SABRS within universal screening. Limitations, implications for practice, and future directions for research are discussed herein.

The influence of test-based accountability policies on teacher stress and instructional practices: a moderated mediation model

Abstract The present study examined the use of student test performance for merit pay and teacher evaluation as predictive of both educator stress and counterproductive teaching practices, and the moderating role of perceived test value. Structural equation modelling of data from a sample of 7281 educators in a South-eastern state in the United States supported the hypothesis that educators who perceived the test as an invalid measure of teaching effectiveness were more likely to report high levels of test stress and to use counterproductive teaching practices, including fear appeals, in an attempt to motivate students for test-taking. This study provides initial evidence for the hypothesised relationships of test-based accountability policy with teacher mental health and instructional practices. Implications for research and practice are discussed.