Brian Daniels’s research while affiliated with University of Massachusetts Boston and other places

The present study examined the dependability of three newly developed direct behavior rating multi-item scales (DBR-MIS) of academic enablers (i.e., academic engagement, interpersonal skills, and study skills). Twenty-two K-5 teachers completed all three 5-item DBR-MIS daily for 1 week for one student in their class. Teachers' ratings on each item during the first occasion were used to create individualized DBR scales with 1-4 items. Items with the lowest ratings (indicating least frequent academic enablers) were included first and subsequent items were added in ascending order. Dependability of both full DBR-MIS and individualized DBR scales was evaluated using generalizability theory. Results indicated that the full DBR-MIS demonstrated high dependability and required only 1-4 assessment occasions (i.e., < 10 as the criterion) to inform absolute decision-making for progress monitoring. The three-and four-item individualized DBR-MIS demonstrated comparable dependability to their respective full five-item DBR-MIS. Dependability estimates of individualized scales in general were higher than standard D study-derived estimates with the same number of items (i.e., dependability estimates obtained by manipulating the number of items from the full standard scales modeled in D studies). Results support continued investigation of the DBR-MIS as a viable progress monitoring tool for school-based applications. Further research and implications for practice were discussed.

Single-case design research studies have historically used external observers to collect time series data that may be used to evaluate intervention effectiveness; however, single-case interventions implemented in educational settings may use the person implementing the intervention (e.g., teacher) to collect data in order to maximize feasibility. The implementer’s knowledge of intervention goals and phase has the potential to influence assessment of dependent variables, particularly when ratings involving some degree of judgment (e.g., Direct Behavior Rating-Single Item Scales [DBR-SIS]) are used. Given the potential for rater effects and expectancy to influence data collection, this study sought to determine whether DBR-SIS measuring social skills collected in vivo by interventionists with full knowledge of intervention goals and phase were equivalent to data collected by external raters masked to intervention phase. Results indicated in vivo DBR-SIS differed from those completed by masked external raters, which has the potential to result in different conclusions regarding intervention effectiveness. The potential for negative effects resulting from sole reliance on in vivo ratings conducted by an interventionist may be mitigated by including additional data streams collected by external personnel masked to intervention phase or by using effect sizes that account for baseline trends. Implications for training and practice are discussed.

Social, emotional, and behavioral (SEB) screening frequently employs a variable-based approach wherein individual scale scores indicate risk. However, a person-centered approach wherein risk is indicated by profiles, or constellations of scores across all scales, could help schools prioritize students based on the pervasiveness of SEB needs and match students to appropriate interventions. This study used latent profile analysis (LPA) to identify profiles within two diverse student samples ( n = 16,270 in year one; n = 4019 in year two) based on teacher ratings on the Behavior Intervention Monitoring Assessment System, Second Edition (BIMAS-2). Results suggested four profiles including one profile with elevated risk across all scales, one profile with low behavioral risk and above average social functioning, one profile with borderline risk across all scales, and one profile with typical scores across most scales. Implications for linking universal screening to intervention are discussed. Impact and Implications: Many school districts employ universal screening to prevent and address wide-ranging student needs. Grouping students based on shared sets of needs has the potential to efficiently identify and prioritize students with pervasive risk in order to match them to comprehensive services. Results from this study capture the first attempt to identify student need profiles using BIMAS-2 scores. Future research should refine this process to derive more usable and consistent student profiles allowing direct links to comprehensive student services.

School psychologists provide services to help youth succeed socially, emotionally, behaviorally, and academically by conducting assessment, consultation, and intervention at both the individual and systemic levels (National Association of School Psychologists, https://www.nasponline.org/x55315.xml, The Professional Standards of the National Association of School Psychologists, 2020). While these three domains are considered the primary focus of school psychology practice, incorporating leadership and advocacy skills within these domains is required of school psychologists (Augustyniak et al. 2016), particularly in the context of persistent educational inequalities faced by students from marginalized backgrounds. Given this, it is imperative for school psychologists to provide leadership in this area through ongoing critical reflection and engaging in culturally responsive practices, as well as action toward equitable service delivery at the individual and systemic levels (Verga & Speight 2003). The purpose of this chapter is to describe ways school psychologists can serve as leaders for advocating for marginalized students in schools. The chapter describes the importance of supporting marginalized students and describes individual and systemic leadership efforts school psychologists can engage in to advocate for students. Throughout the chapter, vignettes are included to illustrate examples of the practices described.

Understanding how to intensify an intervention is critical to implementing response-to-intervention (RtI), a tiered, problem-solving framework to deliver evidence-based interventions per student needs. Research and practice guidelines provide conflicting recommendations for delivering math interventions (i.e., treatment intensity) within RtI. The present study used an adapted alternating treatment design to examine the impact of varying the session length, or number of minutes per intervention session, on student outcomes (i.e., digits correct per min, DCPM). Four female first-grade students identified in the frustrational range (i.e., less than 14 DCPM) for subtraction computation received a packaged intervention (i.e., Cover-Copy-Compare and Schema-Based Word Problem Instruction). The math intervention during the shortest (i.e., 10-min) session length led to similar improvements compared to two of the recommended session length conditions (i.e., 20–40 min) for three out of four students. Following the 5-week intervention, all four students reached an instructional level (i.e., 14–31 DCPM) for the intervention targets, similarly, across all three session length conditions. Implications for research on treatment intensity, math interventions, and RtI are discussed.

Prevalence estimates suggest that up to 20% of students in schools experience significant internalizing behaviors that impact behavioral, social, or academic functioning. School-based interventions have great potential to promote student mental health; however, validated and feasible brief assessments are needed to progress monitor students’ responses to these supports. The purpose of the current study was twofold: to (a) develop and validate teacher-completed brief rating scales for progress monitoring internalizing concerns in elementary-aged students and (b) determine the reliability of the resultant measures. First, item content was generated and subjected to evaluation by two panels of school-based consumers and researchers. Within the second phase of development, exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses were used to reduce the initial number of items and ensure that the items were indicators of one latent factor. Teachers in grades K–3 ( N = 307) each completed ratings for one randomly selected student in their classroom. Results of factor analysis for each scale indicated one-factor solutions for the 4-item Anxious/Depressed (ω = .88) and 4-item Socially Withdrawn (ω = .87) scales.

Daily report card (DRC) intervention provides a structured method for increasing communication between teachers and parents regarding student behavior; however, limited research has investigated the effectiveness and acceptability of DRC intervention with preschool students. Additionally, effectiveness of DRC intervention is enhanced when parents provide consistent reinforcement for students’ goal attainment. The purposes of the study were to (a) extend DRC intervention to examine effectiveness and acceptability with preschool students and (b) evaluate the impact of proactive antecedent e-mail prompts on home intervention integrity (i.e., parents’ provision of contingent reinforcement). DRC intervention was implemented in a multiple-baseline-across-subjects design for 3 preschool students to evaluate impacts of (a) the intervention on classroom engagement and disruptive behavior measured via systematic direct observation and (b) proactive antecedent e-mail prompts on parents’ home intervention integrity. Although DRC intervention resulted in negligible level changes in student engagement and disruptive behavior, variability of disruptive behavior reduced following intervention. Antecedent e-mail prompts did not improve home intervention integrity due to high baseline levels (i.e., ceiling effects). Finally, parents and teachers found DRC intervention to be feasible and appropriate for preschool. Limitations of the study and implications for expanding DRC intervention to preschool are discussed.

Social, emotional, and behavioral (SEB) screening is an essential component of multi-tiered systems for supporting students’ social-emotional development. SEB screening facilitates early identification and intervention for individual students and may be used to evaluate population-level response to universal positive behavior supports and social-emotional learning programs. Although school-based SEB screening research is common, the majority of studies have focused on screening tools for use with students in K-12 settings. The current study expands upon prior research to systematically review research on school-based teacher-report SEB screening tools for students in preschool. Results indicated 17 studies published in peer-reviewed journals between 2008-2019, which evaluated 6 teacher-report SEB screening tools with preschool populations. All 17 (100%) research studies evaluated the technical adequacy of the screening tools and 1 (5.9%) research study explicitly evaluated aspects of usability and provided novel data to support usability. Results indicate a need to continue to evaluate the technical adequacy of preschool SEB screening tools and to place more explicit focus on evaluating the usability of the tools. Recommended Citation Daniels, Brian; Bender, Stacy L.; Ballard, Staci; Iun, Anastasia; and Fowler, Danielle (2022) "Universal Social, Emotional, and Behavioral Screeners for Preschool Students: A Systematic Review," Perspectives on Early Childhood Psychology and Education: Vol. 6: Iss. 2, Article 10. Available at: https://digitalcommons.pace.edu/perspectives/vol6/iss2/10