Clinical Assessment in School Psychology: Impervious to Scientific Reform?

IF 3.3 4区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL Canadian Journal of School Psychology Pub Date : 2024-01-08 DOI:10.1177/08295735231224052
S. C. Dombrowski, Ryan J. McGill
{"title":"Clinical Assessment in School Psychology: Impervious to Scientific Reform?","authors":"S. C. Dombrowski, Ryan J. McGill","doi":"10.1177/08295735231224052","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Given the interdisciplinary influences on school psychology along with its requirement to comply with federal and state law in the United States, scientific progress in the area of cognitive assessment and specific learning disabilities (SLD) identification has experienced slow, if not stagnant, progress. Extrapolation of research from one discipline to that of assessment is common in school psychology where test authors and creators of interpretive and diagnostic systems make theoretical and empirical justification for their claims with correlational research and factor analysis. Although these methodologies may appear to support an underlying theory or interpretive approach, they can produce divergent results depending upon sample size and methodological choice. Consequently, greater replication and reproduction is required. Federal and state law in the United States may perpetuate low value practices among practitioners who view them as acceptable since they are legal. School psychology does not have regulatory agencies to oversee practices. All of these influences impinge on scientific progress in cognitive assessment and SLD identification. Fortunately, Canada is not beholden to omnibus special education law so its academic institutions and agencies (e.g., school districts) may be better poised to engender scientific progress in cognitive assessment and SLD identification.","PeriodicalId":46445,"journal":{"name":"Canadian Journal of School Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Canadian Journal of School Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/08295735231224052","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Given the interdisciplinary influences on school psychology along with its requirement to comply with federal and state law in the United States, scientific progress in the area of cognitive assessment and specific learning disabilities (SLD) identification has experienced slow, if not stagnant, progress. Extrapolation of research from one discipline to that of assessment is common in school psychology where test authors and creators of interpretive and diagnostic systems make theoretical and empirical justification for their claims with correlational research and factor analysis. Although these methodologies may appear to support an underlying theory or interpretive approach, they can produce divergent results depending upon sample size and methodological choice. Consequently, greater replication and reproduction is required. Federal and state law in the United States may perpetuate low value practices among practitioners who view them as acceptable since they are legal. School psychology does not have regulatory agencies to oversee practices. All of these influences impinge on scientific progress in cognitive assessment and SLD identification. Fortunately, Canada is not beholden to omnibus special education law so its academic institutions and agencies (e.g., school districts) may be better poised to engender scientific progress in cognitive assessment and SLD identification.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
学校心理学的临床评估:无法进行科学改革?
在美国,由于学校心理学受到跨学科的影响,同时又必须遵守联邦和各州的法律,认知评 估和特殊学习障碍(SLD)鉴定领域的科学进展一直很缓慢,甚至可以说是停滞不前。在学校心理学中,将某一学科的研究推而广之到评估领域是很常见的,测试作者和 解释与诊断系统的创建者通过相关研究和因素分析为他们的主张提供理论和经验上的 支持。尽管这些方法看似支持一种基本理论或解释方法,但根据样本大小和方法选择的不同,它们可能产生不同的结果。因此,需要进行更多的复制和再现。美国联邦和各州的法律可能会使从业人员中的低价值实践长期存在,他们认为这些实践是可以接受的,因为它们是合法的。学校心理学没有监管机构来监督实践。所有这些影响都阻碍了认知评估和 SLD 鉴定方面的科学进步。幸运的是,加拿大并不受制于总括性特殊教育法,因此其学术机构和机关(如学区)可以更好地促进认知评估和特殊学习障碍鉴定方面的科学进步。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Canadian Journal of School Psychology
Canadian Journal of School Psychology PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL-
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
10
期刊介绍: The Canadian Journals of School Psychology (CJSP) is the official journal of the Canadian Association of School Psychologists and publishes papers focusing on the interface between psychology and education. Papers may reflect theory, research, and practice of psychology in education, as well as book and test reviews. The journal is aimed at practitioners, but is subscribed to by university libraries and individuals (i.e. psychologists). CJSP has become the major reference for practicing school psychologists and students in graduate educational and school psychology programs in Canada.
期刊最新文献
Adolescent Dating Violence Prevention: Teaching Social Justice Oriented Skills and Strategies to Undergraduate-Level Teachers and Social Workers Introduction to Special Issue: How Research Reform in Psychology Can Influence Professional School Psychology Advancing Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion in School Psychology Science and Scholarship: Changing Training and Practice in the Field of School Psychology Math Abilities Among Children with Neurodevelopmental Difficulties: Understanding Cognitive Factors and Evaluating a Pilot Intervention The Role of Reciprocated Friendships in the Behavioral Correlates of Sociometric Categories
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1