Developed in concert with the Learning Disabilities Association of America (LDA), this White Paper regarding specific learning disabilities identification and intervention represents the expert consensus of 58 accomplished scholars in education, psychology, medicine, and the law. Survey responses and empirical evidence suggest that five conclusions are warranted: 1) The SLD definition should be maintained and the statutory requirements in SLD identification procedures should be strengthened; 2) neither ability-achievement discrepancy analysis nor failure to respond to intervention alone is sufficient for SLD identification; 3) a “third method” approach that identifies a pattern of psychological processing strengths and weaknesses, and achievement deficits consistent with this pattern of processing weaknesses, makes the most empirical and clinical sense; 4) an empirically-validated RTI model could be used to prevent learning problems, but comprehensive evaluations should occur for SLD identification purposes, and children with SLD need individualized interventions based on specific learning needs, not merely more intense interventions; and 5) assessment of cognitive and neuropsychological processes should be used for both SLD identification and intervention purposes.

No abstract

This study investigated the test-retest and inter-rater reliability and the construct validity of the Social Skills Rating Scales — Teacher (SSRS-T) with an elementary school sample. The SSRS-T is an experimental version of a new series of multi-rater, multi-factor scales for rating the frequency and importance of children's social behavior. The results of this study indicated that the SSRS-T has high (r = .90) test-retest reliability over a 6-week period, is internally consistent (r = .96), and has moderate (r = .65) interrater reliability. The construct validity of the SSRS-T was established by comparisons with the Revised Behavior Problem Checklist and Teacher Ratings of Academic Performance. Data are reported on grade level differences in social skills, teachers' ratings of the importance of behaviors, and the relationships between behavior ratings and direct observations. A discussion of future research and the further developments of the SSRS concludes the article.

The purpose of this article is to help rating scale users organize their thinking about why and how rating scales are to be used and to provide them with information that will be useful in evaluating the adequacy of available rating scales. The first part of the article discusses issues related to establishing a rationale for the use of rating scales, pointing out questions that should be asked regarding purposes for and means of implementing scale use. The second part discusses issues related to selecting a rating scale to meet user needs, such as user friendliness, scale format, score interpretation, reliability, and validity. The section on reliability contains an expanded discussion of how to evaluate the reliability of a scale and the factors that can affect reliability. The validity section focuses discussion on two questions: Does the scale measure the trait validly? Can the scale be validly used to serve its intended purposes? Various methods for establishing the validity of a rating scale are discussed in relation to these two questions. Special attention is given to discussing the effects that rating scale score distributions can have on a scale's validity for specific purposes.

No abstract