Relationships between the Schenectady Kindergarten Rating Scales and first grade achievement and adjustment

Abstract

29may be sufficient to present only positive instances. Negative instances, either related or unrelated, may produce more efficient learning when only one type of positive instance is used. REFERENCES AUSUBEL, DAVXD. Mear ingful reception learning and the acquisition of mnce ts. In H. Klausmeier and C. Harris (Eds), Analyses of m e p t learning. New York: Academic Ikm, 1966. BRALEY, LOY 5. Strategy selection and negative instances in concept learning.The Schenectady Kindergarten Rating Scales (SKRS) are a battery of teacheradministered behavior rating scales that have been developed as an economical means of screening large numbers of children in kindergarten so that preventive or remedial programs can be provided for those who are deficient in language, motor, cognitive, or social development (Conrad & Tobiessen, 1967). The present report is a summary of an evaluation of the predictive efficacy of empiricallyderived SKRS profiles. Two general questions were considered: Do children with different diagnoses in first grade have SKRS profiles corresponding to their firstgrade problems; if so, can first-grade diagnoses be predicted on the basis of SKRS profiles? For convenience, the scales are listed and briefly described below in the order in which they appear in the rater's booklet.2 1. Waiting and Sharing (WS), a 7-point scale measuring the child's ability to wait for things, to share possessions, and to take turns. Level ofOrganization of Play (LOP), a 5-point scale concerning the degree to which a child organizes the play material a t hid disposal. 3. CZarity of Speech (CS), a &point scale involving the clarity of a child's apeech and how easily it can be understood. 4. Use of Materials (UM), a 5-point scale concerning the child's ability to represent reality using art materials, 1This invwtigation was supported by P. H. S.

Predictive value of teachers' ratings of young children.

“…Correlations between the ratings and reading achievement in grades 2 through 5 ranged from .45 to .69. Other investigators (e.g., Bryan & Mc-Grady, 1972;Tobiessen, Duckworth, & Conrad, 1971) have developed batteries of scales for predicting achievement, assuming that ratings on a number of scales would offer greater information than would a single, global rating. An example of this approach is the extensive study by Feshbach, Adelman, and Fuller (Note 1), who obtained teacher ratings on 41 characteristics of over 1,500 kindergarten children.…”

The Early Identification of Learning Disabilities

“…Tobiessen et al (1971) found the Schenectady Kindergarten Rating Scales moderately useful in predicting the performance of children in grade 1 who were likely to have learning and impulse control problems. Pate and Webb (1966) published a group test that is reported to identify young children with potential learning problems.…”