No abstract

No abstract

Accurate diagnosis and treatment planning for children with autism are a growing concern. This study sought to address two questions: (a) Which domains of the of the Behavior Assessment System for Children (2nd ed.) Teacher Rating Scales (BASC-TRS) are most effective in discriminating students diagnosed with higher functioning autism from children and youth who do not have a disability or psychiatric diagnosis? and (b) Are there noteworthy differences in BASC-TRS domain scores between children and adolescents with autism? The results indicated that children and adolescents with an educational diagnosis of autism were given significantly higher ratings in the domains of Developmental Social Disorders and Withdrawal and significantly lower ratings in Functional Communication. These scales appear to discriminate best between those students with autism and their nondisabled peers. In addition, the results suggest that the differences between students with autism and students without clinical problems may become less pronounced as they grow into adolescence.

As a result of the upcoming Federal reauthorization of the Individuals With Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEA), practitioners and researchers have begun vigorously debating what constitutes evidence-based assessment for the identification of specific learning disability (SLD). This debate has resulted in strong support for a method that appraises an individual's profile of cognitive test scores for the purposes of determining cognitive processing strengths and weaknesses, commonly referred to as patterns of strengths and weaknesses (PSW). Following the Fuchs and Deshler model, questions regarding the psychometric and conceptual integrity of the PSW model are addressed. Despite the strong claims made by many PSW proponents, the findings by this review demonstrate the need for additional information to determine whether PSW is a viable alternative to existing eligibility models and worthy for large scale adoption for SLD identification. Implications for public policy and future SLD research are also discussed.

The acronym R.I.O.T., record review, interview, observation, and test, is a well-known tool for conceptualizing a comprehensive assessment. With COVID-19 and the need to provide school psychological services virtually, it is important to reconsider R.I.O.T. in light of the limitations of virtual assessment. We describe the limitations of virtual assessment and argue that in spite of these barriers, the first three elements of R.I.O.T., record review, interviews, and observations, when used systematically, can provide useful comprehensive assessment data. Specific recommendations are provided for implementing assessment virtually.