Teachers’ preferences and perceptions of the psychological report: A systematic review

Abstract

This review summarizes primary studies on teachers’ preferences and perceptions of the psychological report. A systematic search identified 19 studies meeting the inclusion criteria. These studies were evaluated in terms of (a) psychological report section focus, (b) methodology, (c) research results, (d) discussion, and (e) recommendations. Across the 19 studies, 1,309 general and special education teachers indicated and rated their preferences and perceptions of the psychological report. In terms of the entire psychological report and especially the report recommendations, teachers preferred longer, descriptive, and more detailed reports. Teachers preferred reports that provided enough detail to aid in individualized education planning and recommendation and intervention implementation. Teachers also preferred reports written in integrated theme‐based formats as opposed to test‐by‐test formats. Teachers rated the level of detail and degree of psychological jargon used in reports as currently unsatisfactory. This review summarizes teacher preferences and identifies report features that aid in report comprehension and also provides a research basis from which to inform training and practice in psychological report writing.

Preservice teachers' impressions of psychoeducational reports

“…Additionally, Pelco et al (2009) have noted that half of their respondents were unable to generate teaching recommendations based on assessment data only. Such findings indicate that teachers need more concrete and explicit recommendations in psychological reports than they typically receive (Umaña et al, 2020).…”

“…A psychoeducational report (hereafter also called a psychological report) identifies a child's abilities, highlights areas of need and provides recommendations to improve functioning (Harvey, 2006). However, to be successfully implemented, the psychological report must be deemed accessible and useful by educators (Mastoras et al, 2011; Umaña et al, 2020). Unfortunately, work to date has identified several barriers that decreases its utility.…”

“…Recently, Umaña et al (2020) conducted a systematic review that included 19 studies from 1980 to 2019 on teachers' perceptions of psychological reports. Several important trends emerged.…”

“…First, several studies reported that teachers preferred reports that were organized by theme (e.g., cognitive and academic) rather than by test (e.g., Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children‐Fifth Edition; Pelco et al, 2009). Teachers preferred interpretive reports that were “informative, descriptive, detailed, specific, and responsive to referral concerns” (Umaña et al, 2020; p. 516). Preferred reports reflected the clinician's expertize in generating a cohesive understanding of a child's abilities (e.g., Salvagno & Teglasi, 1987).…”

Translating reports: School psychologists, knowledge-making and pedagogy

“…Research into psychoeducational reports is long standing (e.g., Cason, 1945) and on-going (e.g., Umana et al, 2020). However, the focus of most studies has been the preferences teachers, parents and psychologists have for the format and content of reports (Mallin et al, 2012; Pelco et al, 2009).…”