The Influence of Diagnostic Labels on the Evaluation of Students: a Multilevel Meta-Analysis

Franz, David J.; Richter, Tobias; Lenhard, Wolfgang; Marx, Peter; Stein, Roland; Ratz, Christoph

doi:10.1007/s10648-023-09716-6

Cited by 12 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 130 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In nonexperimental studies, Whitley (2010) and Shifrer (2013) showed that students labelled as learning disabled are less likely expected by their teachers to achieve a university degree than similar achieving but non-labelled students. In a recent meta-analysis about the effect of diagnostic labels on the evaluation of students, Franz et al (2023) distinguished between different types of assessments, such as behavioural evaluations, attitudes towards the child, evaluation of the personality and academic evaluations among others. They conclude that diagnostic labels for students negatively affect academic evaluations, including performance expectations and expectations of the academic future.…”

Section: Teachers' Expectations and The Learning Disability Labelmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Influence of the ‘Learning Disability’ label on teachers' performance expectations—a matter of attitudes towards inclusion?

Kashikar,

Soemers,

Lüke

et al. 2024

Research in Spec Educ Needs

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Teachers' expectations influence students' outcomes. Studies demonstrate that teachers lower their performance expectations of students with learning problems when these students are labelled with a 'Learning Disability' (LD) diagnosis. Our study aims to investigate whether these effects can be replicated in N = 429 special and regular education teachers. We also investigate whether positive implicit and explicit attitudes towards inclusion mitigate the negative effects of the LD label on teachers' performance expectations. Teachers were randomly assigned to the experimental (n = 214) or control group (n = 215). Both groups read the same description of a fictitious student with learning problems. In addition, the student was labelled as ‘learning disabled’ in the experimental group only. Results show that teachers' expected graduation level and school track recommendation were negatively affected by the LD label. It also led to a more frequent assumption that the student has an LD. Regardless of the LD label, special education teachers had lower performance expectations than regular education teachers. A positive implicit attitude towards inclusion reduced the likelihood that teachers believe that the labelled student has an LD. The findings are placed in the context of international research on disability labels and inclusive education.

show abstract

Section: Teachers' Expectations and The Learning Disability Labelmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, labelling students risks exposing them to stereotypes, prejudice and discrimination. A recent metaanalysis found that Learning Disability (LD) labels for students have a negative impact on various teacher judgements of these students (Franz et al, 2023).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Influence of the ‘Learning Disability’ label on teachers' performance expectations—a matter of attitudes towards inclusion?

Kashikar,

Soemers,

Lüke

et al. 2024

Research in Spec Educ Needs

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…More fundamentally, this concern could apply to any mental health diagnosis. For example, a meta-analysis of stigma associated with diagnostic labels in academic settings found no significant stigmatizing effects for behavioral disorders alone but did find effects for a combination of behavioral and emotional disorders (Franz et al, 2023). Despite any empirical evidence, assertions about stigma specific to ODD and CD contribute to an overall jaundiced and unfounded bias on the part of clinicians (e.g., Burke et al, 2022) that hinders sound assessment and diagnostic practice.…”

Section: Factors Affecting Clinical Judgment In the Assessment Of Dbdsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Sound studies on stigma would operationalize multiple types of potential stigmatization and would measure the real-world effects following the introduction of a diagnostic label. One concern evident in the existing research (e.g., Franz et al, 2023) is that some studies have characterized stigma to include a participant’s prediction of poor future academic functioning upon learning a diagnosis. In reality, such predictions would accurately reflect the empirical evidence that ODD and CD do predict increased risk for dropping out of school, higher rates of conflict with and rejection from school peers, and other types of impaired academic performance (e.g., Burke et al, in press).…”

Section: Factors Affecting Clinical Judgment In the Assessment Of Dbdsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evidence-Based Assessment of DSM-5 Disruptive, Impulse Control, and Conduct Disorders

Burke,

Butler,

Shaughnessy

et al. 2023

Assessment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The assessment of oppositional defiant disorder, conduct disorder, antisocial personality disorder, and intermittent explosive disorder—the Disruptive, Impulse Control and Conduct Disorders—can be affected by biases in clinical judgment, including overestimating concerns about distinguishing symptoms from normative behavior and stigma associated with diagnosing antisocial behavior. Recent nosological changes call for special attention during assessment to symptom dimensions of limited prosocial emotions and chronic irritability. The present review summarizes best practices for evidence-based assessment of these disorders and discusses tools to identify their symptoms. Despite the focus on disruptive behavior disorders, their high degree of overlap with disruptive mood dysregulation disorder can complicate assessment. Thus, the latter disorder is also included for discussion here. Good practice in the assessment of disruptive behavior disorders involves using several means of information gathering (e.g., clinical interview, standardized rating scales or checklists), ideally via multiple informants (e.g., parent-, teacher-, and self-report). A commitment to providing a full and accurate diagnostic assessment, with careful and attentive reference to diagnostic guidelines, will mitigate concerns regarding biases.

show abstract

“…This often opens the way to new, better collaboration between parents and teachers in organising optimal educational pathways for a child (Honkasilta et al, 2016). However, a mental disorder diagnosis also places the cause of experienced problems singlesidedly in the child and the child's brain, so that the child can easily experience (self-)stigma and feelings of inferiority (Batstra et al, 2012), under-perform as a consequence of teachers' lowered expectations (Franz et al, 2023;Metzger & Hamilton, 2021), and in the longer term, experience exclusion in education and in work (Ringbom et al, 2022). A second disadvantage of labelling school children with a mental disorder is that teachers attend less to contextual factors that may trigger problems in a child's behaviour or learning, once behaviours are given a mental disorder label.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Does Using Core Quadrants Lead to More Teacher Self-Efficacy and Less Perceived Problem Behaviour?

Batstra,

De Vries,

Thoutenhoofd

2024

EJIE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PURPOSE. The number of childhood psychiatric classifications and treatments have risen rapidly in Western countries over recent decades. Since child behaviour often arises as a problem in schools, it seems important to find ways to help teachers successfully engage with pupils whose behaviours they experience as challenging. The present study attempts to shift special education teachers’ focus from challenging pupil behaviour, or pupil mental disorder, to teachers’ self-efficacy and less negative perception of pupil behaviour. METHODS. Ofman’s core quadrant model was used to engage teachers in reflecting on their own key competences, and relate them to possible pitfalls, challenges and aversions in their teaching. The professional development intervention entailed three subsequent team meetings, each lasting two and a half hours. Forty-seven teachers undertook the training, of which half (the control group) were initially put on a waiting list. Via quantitative questionnaires at three different time-points and qualitative post-intervention interviews with teachers involved, we analysed the influence of the intervention on teachers’ perceptions of problem behaviour and the grip they experienced on pupil behaviour (via a measure of self-efficacy). In the interviews, room was also made for reporting other outcomes of the training intervention. RESULTS. Neither quantitative nor qualitative data analysis revealed an effect of the intervention on self-efficacy or perceived pupil behaviour. The interview data suggest that teachers ascribe pupil behaviour they cannot control to factors outside themselves, primarily child mental disorder. CONCLUSION. Core quadrant training does not seem to alter how teachers engage with challenging pupil behaviour, nor does it help to reduce disorder thinking in special education. Our findings flag up the importance of better educating teachers about disorder thinking on the one hand, while on the other hand seeking ways to reduce the likelihood that teachers run out of pedagogical options, and instead further build up a sense of self-efficacy. Points of Interest: Childhood diagnostic classifications are on the rise in recent decades. Teachers often suggest diagnostic investigations of pupils, because they believe this will explain difficult behaviour or academic underperformance. A training aimed to shift the focus from disorder within a child to teacher’s own key competences, pitfalls, challenges and aversions, failed to change self-efficacy, behaviour perception and disorder thinking in teachers. To reduce disorder thinking in schools, simply educating teachers about what disorders are not and cannot explain, might be more effective than training programs, like studied in the present research.

show abstract

The Influence of Diagnostic Labels on the Evaluation of Students: a Multilevel Meta-Analysis

Cited by 12 publications

References 130 publications

Influence of the ‘Learning Disability’ label on teachers' performance expectations—a matter of attitudes towards inclusion?

Influence of the ‘Learning Disability’ label on teachers' performance expectations—a matter of attitudes towards inclusion?

Evidence-Based Assessment of DSM-5 Disruptive, Impulse Control, and Conduct Disorders

Does Using Core Quadrants Lead to More Teacher Self-Efficacy and Less Perceived Problem Behaviour?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About