Brief Report: How Accurate is Teacher Report of Autism Symptoms Compared to Parent Report?

Abstract

The Checklist for Autism Spectrum Disorder (CASD) completed by a psychologist (following standardized procedures integrating parent interview data, teacher report, and clinical observations) was compared with the CASD completed independently by mothers and teachers in 168 children with ASD and 40 with ADHD (1-12 years). The 30 CASD autism symptoms are scored as present or absent. Using mother scores 36% of children with ASD scored below the autism diagnostic cutoff, and 75% scored below the cutoff based on teacher scores. Many symptoms deemed present by the psychologist were not reported on the mother and teacher CASD. Mother-teacher correlations indicated little correspondence. Mother and teacher CASD scores should never be used alone. Diagnostic instruments must be administered following standardized procedures.

Exploratory factor analysis of the Adapted Skillstreaming Checklist for children with autism spectrum disorder

“…The current results were also limited to only parent ratings. Teachers are considered a critical source of information on the skills and symptoms of children with ASD (Norris & Lecavalier, 2010) due to their advanced knowledge of typical and atypical child development and observations of the children in educational settings (Constantino & Gruber, 2012;Mayes & Lockridge, 2018). Furthermore, because schools are the principal settings where psychosocial interventions are provided to these children (Kasari & Smith, 2013), teachers are often used to assess the children's treatment responsiveness.…”

Reliability and validity of teacher ratings on the Adapted Skillstreaming Checklist for children with autism spectrum disorder

“…Diagnostic instruments have generally lacked treatment sensitivity as they were not developed to measure more-subtle changes in skills/symptoms (Lord et al, 2014), and they are often not feasible in applied settings including schools (Constantino et al, 2003). According to Mayes and Lockridge (2018), the field is moving toward assessment techniques that can be done quickly and efficiently and are cost effective and valid. Rating scales may constitute an effective means for assessing the skills/behaviors of children with ASD without ID, particularly if the measure utilizes continuous scaling which provides an indication of the degree to which the skill/behavior is demonstrated (Constantino & Gruber, 2012; Reynolds & Kamphaus, 2015).…”

“…Rating scales may constitute an effective means for assessing the skills/behaviors of children with ASD without ID, particularly if the measure utilizes continuous scaling which provides an indication of the degree to which the skill/behavior is demonstrated (Constantino & Gruber, 2012; Reynolds & Kamphaus, 2015). Teachers are regarded as critical sources of information as they have extensive opportunities to observe the skills/behaviors of children with ASD without ID in natural contexts (Constantino & Gruber, 2012; Mayes and Lockridge, 2018). Given the increased use of teachers for information on the functioning of these children, it is essential to assess the psychometric properties of rating scales for this informant group.…”

“…The field is in need of measures that accurately and comprehensively assess the skills/behaviors of children with ASD (with and without ID; Davis & Carter, 2014; McMahon et al, 2013) including both social/social-communication skills and behavioral/interest flexibility and control as these dimensions significantly affect daily functioning (Bauminger-Zviely, 2014). These measures will also need to be brief and cost effective, as well as valid (Mayes & Lockridge, 2018) in order to be feasible in applied settings (e.g. schools, clinics, etc.…”

“…Teachers are increasingly recognized as a critical source of information on the skills/symptoms of children with ASD (Norris & Lecavalier, 2010; Schanding et al, 2012) as they possess advanced professional training and knowledge of child development (typical and atypical) and have the opportunity to observe the children in authentic school environments (Constantino & Gruber, 2012; Mayes & Lockridge, 2018). In addition, schools are a primary setting in which psychosocial interventions are delivered for these children (Kasari & Smith, 2013) and teachers are often used to monitor response to intervention.…”