Examining the Technical Adequacy of the Social, Academic, and Emotional Behavior Risk Screener

IF 16.4 1区 化学 Q1 CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY Accounts of Chemical Research Pub Date : 2020-12-01 DOI:10.1177/1534508419857225
S. Whitley, Yojanna Cuenca-Carlino
{"title":"Examining the Technical Adequacy of the Social, Academic, and Emotional Behavior Risk Screener","authors":"S. Whitley, Yojanna Cuenca-Carlino","doi":"10.1177/1534508419857225","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Many schools attempt to identify and service students at risk for poor mental health outcomes within a multi-tiered system of support (MTSS). Universal screening within a MTSS requires technically adequate tools. The Social, Academic, and Emotional Behavior Risk Screener (SAEBRS) has been put forth as a technically adequate screener. Researchers have examined the factor structure, diagnostic accuracy, criterion validity, and internal consistency of SAEBRS data. However, previous research has not examined its temporal stability or replicated the criterion validity results with a racially/ethnically diverse urban elementary school sample. This study examined the test–retest reliability, convergent validity, and predictive validity of teacher-completed SAEBRS ratings with racially/ethnically diverse group students enrolled in first through fifth grade in an urban elementary school. Reliability analyses resulted in significant test–retest reliability coefficients across four weeks for all SAEBRS scales. Furthermore, nonsignificant paired samples t tests were observed with the exception of the third-grade Emotional subscale. Validity analyses yielded significant concurrent and predictive Pearson correlation coefficients between SAEBRS ratings, oral reading fluency, and office discipline referrals. Limitations and implications of the results are discussed.","PeriodicalId":1,"journal":{"name":"Accounts of Chemical Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":16.4000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1534508419857225","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Accounts of Chemical Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1534508419857225","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"化学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

Many schools attempt to identify and service students at risk for poor mental health outcomes within a multi-tiered system of support (MTSS). Universal screening within a MTSS requires technically adequate tools. The Social, Academic, and Emotional Behavior Risk Screener (SAEBRS) has been put forth as a technically adequate screener. Researchers have examined the factor structure, diagnostic accuracy, criterion validity, and internal consistency of SAEBRS data. However, previous research has not examined its temporal stability or replicated the criterion validity results with a racially/ethnically diverse urban elementary school sample. This study examined the test–retest reliability, convergent validity, and predictive validity of teacher-completed SAEBRS ratings with racially/ethnically diverse group students enrolled in first through fifth grade in an urban elementary school. Reliability analyses resulted in significant test–retest reliability coefficients across four weeks for all SAEBRS scales. Furthermore, nonsignificant paired samples t tests were observed with the exception of the third-grade Emotional subscale. Validity analyses yielded significant concurrent and predictive Pearson correlation coefficients between SAEBRS ratings, oral reading fluency, and office discipline referrals. Limitations and implications of the results are discussed.
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
检查社会,学术和情感行为风险筛查的技术充分性
许多学校试图在多层支持系统(MTSS)中识别和服务有不良心理健康结果风险的学生。MTSS内的普遍筛查需要技术上足够的工具。社会、学术和情感行为风险筛查(SAEBRS)已经作为一种技术上足够的筛查提出。研究人员考察了SAEBRS数据的因素结构、诊断准确性、标准有效性和内部一致性。然而,以往的研究并没有检验其时间稳定性,也没有在不同种族/民族的城市小学样本中复制标准效度结果。本研究以某城市小学一至五年级多种族学生为研究对象,考察了教师完成的SAEBRS量表的重测信度、收敛效度和预测效度。信度分析导致所有SAEBRS量表在四周内的重测信度系数显著。此外,配对样本t检验不显著,除了三年级情绪分量表。效度分析显示,SAEBRS评分、口语阅读流畅性和办公室纪律转诊之间存在显著的并行和预测性Pearson相关系数。讨论了研究结果的局限性和意义。
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
Accounts of Chemical Research
Accounts of Chemical Research 化学-化学综合
CiteScore
31.40
自引率
1.10%
发文量
312
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: Accounts of Chemical Research presents short, concise and critical articles offering easy-to-read overviews of basic research and applications in all areas of chemistry and biochemistry. These short reviews focus on research from the author’s own laboratory and are designed to teach the reader about a research project. In addition, Accounts of Chemical Research publishes commentaries that give an informed opinion on a current research problem. Special Issues online are devoted to a single topic of unusual activity and significance. Accounts of Chemical Research replaces the traditional article abstract with an article "Conspectus." These entries synopsize the research affording the reader a closer look at the content and significance of an article. Through this provision of a more detailed description of the article contents, the Conspectus enhances the article's discoverability by search engines and the exposure for the research.
期刊最新文献
The change process questionnaire (CPQ): A psychometric validation. Differential Costs of Raising Grandchildren on Older Mother-Adult Child Relations in Black and White Families. Does Resilience Mediate the Relationship Between Negative Self-Image and Psychological Distress in Middle-Aged and Older Gay and Bisexual Men? Intergenerational Relations and Well-being Among Older Middle Eastern/Arab American Immigrants During the COVID-19 Pandemic. Caregiving Appraisals and Emotional Valence: Moderating Effects of Activity Participation.
×
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