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.

This study examined the potential influence of Disney films on children's concepts of death. A content analysis was performed on 23 death scenes from 10 selected full-length Disney Classic animated films. The portrayal of death focused on five categories: character status; depiction of death; death status; emotional reaction; and causality. The findings indicate that some animated Disney films present scenes that eclipse the permanence and irreversibility of death and often leave deaths (especially those of villains) emotionally unacknowledged. Previous work has shown that many children tend not to discuss death with their friends or parents for many reasons. More importantly, the films may serve as catalysts to introduce the concept of death into discussions between children, peers, and adults.

: 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.

This study reports findings from a validation study of the Student Risk Screening Scale for use with 9th- through 12th-grade students (N = 1854) attending a rural fringe school. Results indicated high internal consistency, test-retest stability, and inter-rater reliability. Predictive validity was established across two academic years, with Spring Student Risk Screening Scale (SRSS) scores differentiating students with low-, moderate-, and high-risk status on office discipline referrals, grade point averages, and course failures during the following academic year. Teacher ratings evaluating students’ performance later in the instructional day were more predictive than teacher ratings evaluating students’ performance earlier in the instructional day. Educational implications, limitations, and future research directions are presented.

No abstract