Testing a multi-stage screening system: Predicting performance on Australia’s national achievement test using teachers’ ratings of academic and social behaviors
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online February, 2012
Testing a multi-stage screening system: Predicting performance on Australia’s national achievement test using teachers’ ratings of academic and social behaviors
This study addresses the predictive validity of results from a screening system of academic enablers, with a sample of Australian elementary school students, when the criterion variable is end-of-year achievement. The investigation included (a) comparing the predictive validity of a brief criterion-referenced nomination system with more comprehensive behavior ratings, and (b) determining the optimal combination of scores to gather from this system for identifying academic difficulties. Students (n = 360) were rated using both the Performance Screening Guides (PSGs; Elliott & Gresham, 2007) and the Rating Scales (Gresham & Elliott, 2008) of the Social Skills Improvement System. The PSGs were highly sensitive (0.95) predictors of below minimum standard performance on the national test. The Rating Scales, including the brief academic competence scale in particular, added predictive value in most domains. The discussion addresses implications of these findings for school psychologists and other educators interested in the role of social behaviors as academic enablers and predictors of academic achievement.
CapraraG. V.BarbaranelliC.PastorelliC.BanduraA.ZimbardoP. G. (2000). Social foundations of children’s academic achievement. Psychological Science, 11, 306–310.
2.
CohenJ. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 155–159.
3.
Coles–JanessB.GriffinP. (2009). Profiling developmental pathways of interpersonaldevelopment for students with additional learning needs. April, 2009. Melbourne: National Conference of the Australian Association for Special Education.
4.
DemarayM.ElliottS. N. (2001). Social support differences for ADHD students. School Psychology Quarterly, 16(1), 68–90.
5.
DiPernaJ.ElliottS. N. (2000). Academic competence evaluation scales. San Antonio, TX: Harcourt Assessment.
6.
DiPernaJ. C.VolpeR.ElliottS. N. (2002). A model of academic enablers and elementary reading/language arts achievement. School Psychology Review, 31(3), 298–312.
7.
DiPernaJ. C.VolpeR. J.ElliottS. N. (2005). A model of academic enablers and mathematics achievement in the elementary grades. Journal of School Psychology, 43, 379–392.
8.
ElliottS. N.DiPernaJ. C.HuaiN. (2003). Brief academic competence evaluation screening system. Unpublished instrument: University of Wisconsin-Madison.
GreshamF. M.ElliottS. N. (1990). The Social Skills Rating System. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service.
15.
GreshamF. M.MacMillianD. L.BocianK. (1997). Teachers as ‘tests’: Differential validity of teacher judgments in indentifying students at-risk for learning difficulties. School Psychology Review, 26, 47–60.
16.
HogeR. D.ColadarciT. (1989). Teacher-based judgments of academic achievement: A review of literature. Review of Educational Research, 59(3), 297–313.
HurwitzJ. T.ElliottS. N.BradenJ. P. (2007). The influence of test familiarity and student disability status upon teachers’ judgments of students’ test performance. School Psychology Quarterly, 14(2), 115–144.
19.
KettlerR. J. (2007). Screening for early learning problems within an urban population: The Brief Academic Competence Evaluation Screening System. Journal of Urban Learning, Teaching, and Research, 3, 47–58.
20.
KettlerR. J.ElliottS. N. (2010). A brief broadband system for screening children at-risk for academic difficulties and poor achievement test performance: Validity evidence and applications to practice. Journal of Applied School Psychology, 26(4), 282–307.
21.
KettlerR. J.ElliottS. N.AlbersC. A. (2008). Structured teacher ratings to identify students who need help: Validation of the Brief Academic Competence Evaluation Screening System. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 26, 260–273.
22.
KettlerR. J.ElliottS. N.BeddowP. A.ComptonE.McGrathD.KaaseK.BruenC.FordL.HintonK. (2010). What does an alternate assessment measure? A multitrait-multimethod analysis. Exceptional children, 76(4), 457–474.
23.
MaleckiC. K.ElliottS. N. (2002). Children’s social behaviors as predictors of academic achievement: A longitudinal analysis. School Psychology Quarterly, 17(1), 1–23.
24.
Ministerial Council on Education, Employment, Training and Youth Affairs (2008). National Assessment Program: Literacy and numeracy achievement in reading, writing, language conventions and numeracy. Downloaded 18 March 2009 from http://www.mceetya.edu.au.
25.
RobertsE.GriffinP. (2009). Profiling developmental pathways of cognitive and emotional development for students with additional learning needs. April, 2009. Melbourne: National Conference of the Australian Association for Special Education.
26.
WentzelK. R. (1993). Does being good make the grade? Social behavior and academic competence in middle school. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85, 357–364.
27.
WoodsK.GriffinP. (2008). Profiling developmental pathways of communication and literacy for students with additional learning needs. September. pp. 19–20. Fremantle: National Conference of the Australian Association for Special Education.
