Identifying student strengths is central to transition planning. However, school personnel use few assessments that operationalize behavioral and emotional strengths, and the psychometric functioning of those measures have not been established with transition-age students. In this two-part study, we used a national sample of transition-age students to examine validity evidence for scores from the Behavioral and Emotional Rating Scale-3: Teacher Rating Scale (BERS-3 TRS). Study 1 evaluated the internal structure and test score reliability of the scores for 275 students with exceptionalities. Study II used a sample of 566 students to examine differences in scores between students with and without exceptionalities. Findings from these studies represent evidence for the validity and interpretation of scores for transition-age students with exceptionalities.
AchenbachT. M.McConaughyS. H.HowellC. T. (1987). Child/adolescent behavioral and emotional problens: Implications of cross-informant correlations for situational specificity. Psychological Bulletin, 101(2), 213–232.
2.
American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, National Council on Measurement in Education, & Joint Committee on Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing. (2014). Standards for educational and psychological testing. AERA.
3.
BrowneM. W.CudeckR. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In BollenK. A.LongJ. S. (Eds.), Testing structural equation models (pp. 136–162). SAGE.
4.
CarterE. W.TrainorA. A.SunY.OwensL. (2009). Assessing the transition related strengths and needs of adolescents with high-incidence exceptionalities. Exceptional Children, 76(1), 74–94. https://doi.org/10.1177/001440290907600104
5.
ChatzinikolaouR. (2015). How can strength-based interventions be useful for educational psychologists working with children and young people?Educational Psychology Research and Practice, 1(1), 10–16. https://doi.org/10.15123/uel.8856x
6.
CholewaB.HullM. F.BabcockC. R.SmithA. D. (2018). Predictors and academic outcomes associated with in-school suspension. School Psychology Quarterly, 33(2), 191–199. https://doi.org/10.1037/spq0000213
7.
ClimieE.HenleyL. (2016). A renewed focus on strengths-based assessment in schools. British Journal of Special Education, 43(2), 108–121. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8578.12131
8.
CohenJ. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
9.
CollierM. L.GriffinM. M.WeiY. (2016). Facilitating student involvement in transition assessment: A pilot study of the Student Transition Questionnaire. Career Development and Transition for Exceptional Individuals, 39(3), 175–184. https://doi.org/10.1177/2165143414556746
10.
De Los ReyesA. (2013). Strategic objectives for improving understanding of informant discrepancies in developmental psychopathology research. Development and Psychopathology, 25, 669–682. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954579413000096
11.
De Los ReyesA.AugensteinT. M.WangM.ThomasS. A.DrabickD.BurgersD. E.RabinowitzJ. (2015). The validity of the multi-informant approach to assessing child and adolescent mental health. Psychological Bulletin, 141(4), 858–900. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0038498
12.
DonovanS. A.NickersonA. B. (2007). Strength-based versus traditional social-emotional. reports: Impact on multidisciplinary team members’ perceptions. Behavioral Disorders, 32(4), 228–237. https://doi.org/10.1177/019874290703200401
13.
Duppong HurleyK.LambertM. C.EpsteinM. H.StevensA. (2014). Convergent validity of the strength-based Behavioral and Emotional Rating Scale with youth in a residential setting. Journal of Behavioral Health Services & Research, 42(3), 346–354.
14.
EpsteinM. H. (2004). Behavioral and emotional rating scale-2: A strength-based approach to assessment. PRO-ED.
15.
EpsteinM. H.PeirceC.LambertM. C. (2022). Behavioral and emotional rating scale-3: A strength-based approach to assessment. PRO-ED.
16.
EpsteinM. H.RudolphS.EpsteinA. A. (2000). Using strength-based assessment in transition planning. Teaching Exceptional Children, 32(6), 50–54. https://doi.org/10.1177/004005990003200607
17.
EpsteinM. H.SharmaH. M. (1998). Behavioral and emotional rating scale: A strength-based approach to assessment. PRO-ED.
18.
FrancisG. L.RegesterA.ReedA. S. (2019). Barriers and supports to parent involvement and collaboration during transition to adulthood. Career Development and Transition for Exceptional Individuals, 42(4), 235–245. https://doi.org/10.1177/2165143418813912
19.
GreeneG. (2018). The emperor has no clothes: Improving the quality and compliance of ITPs. Career Development and Transition for Exceptional Individuals, 41(3), 146–155. https://doi.org/10.1177/2165143417707205
20.
HedgesL. V.OlkinI. (1985). Statistical methods for meta-analysis. Academic Press.
21.
HennesseyM. N.TerryR.MartinJ. E.McConnellA. E.WillisD. M. (2018). Factor structure and basic psychometric properties of the Transition Assessment and Goal Generator. Career Development and Transition for Exceptional Individuals, 41(2), 99–110. https://doi.org/10.1177/2165143417691021
22.
HuL. T.BentlerP. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 1–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118
JimersonS. R.SharkeyJ. D.NyborgV.FurlongM. J. (2004). Strength-based assessment and school psychology: A summary and synthesis. The California School Psychologist, 9, 9–19.
25.
KellamS. (1990). Development epidemiological framework for family research on depression and aggression. In PattersonG. R. (Ed.), Depression and aggression in family interaction (pp. 11–46). Erlbaum.
26.
KohlerP. D.GothbergJ. E.FowlerC.CoyleJ. (2016). Taxonomy for transition programming 2.0: A model for planning, organizing, and evaluating transition education, services, and programs. Western Michigan University. www.transitionta.org
27.
LambertM. C.JanuaryS.-A.EpsteinM. H.SpoonerM.GebreselassieT.StephensR. (2015). Convergent validity of the Behavioral and Emotional Rating Scale for youth in community mental health settings. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 24(12), 3827–3832. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-015-0191-x
28.
LambertM. C.JanuaryS.-A. A.GonzalezJ. E.MartinJ.EpsteinM. H. (2021). Comparing behavioral and emotional strengths of students with and without emotional disturbance. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment. https://doi.org/10.1177/07342829211038451
29.
LeBuffeP. A.ShapiroV. B.NaglieriJ. A. (2018). The Devereux Student Strengths Assessment (DESSA): Assessment, technical manual, and user’s guide. Apperson.
30.
LombardiA. R.RifenbarkG. G.RogersH. J.SwaminathanH.TaconetA.MazzottiV. L.MorningstarM. E.WuR.LangdonS. (2022). Establishing construct validity of a measure of adolescent perceptions of college and career readiness. Career Development and Transition for Exceptional Individuals. https://doi.org/10.1177/21651434221081229
31.
LoveB. L. (2019). We want to do more than survive: Abolitionist teaching and the pursuit of educational freedom. Beacon Press.
MazzottiV. L.RoweD. A.KelleyK. R.TestD. W.FowlerC. H.KohlerP. D.KorteringL. J. (2009). Linking transition assessment and postsecondary goals: Key elements in the secondary transition planning process. Teaching Exceptional Children, 42(2), 44–51. https://doi.org/10.1177/004005990904200205
34.
McDonaldR. P. (1978). Generalizability in factorable domains: “domain validity and generalizability”: 1. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 38(1), 75–79. https://doi.org/10.1177/001316447803800111
35.
McDonaldR. P. (1999). Test theory: A unified treatment. Erlbaum.
36.
MerrellK. W. (2001). Assessment of children’s social skills: Recent developments, best practices, and new directions. Exceptionality, 9, 3–18.
37.
MorningstarM. E.AllockH. C.WhiteJ. M.TaubD.KurthJ. A.Gonsier-GerdinJ.RyndakD. L.SauerJ.JorgensenC. M. (2016). Inclusive education national research advocacy agenda: A call to action. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Exceptionalities, 41, 209–215.
38.
MorningstarM. E.LissJ. M. (2008). A preliminary investigation on how states are responding to the transition assessment requirements under IDEIA 2004. Career Development for Exceptional Individuals, 31(1), 48–55. https://doi.org/10.1177/0885728807313776
39.
MuthénL. K.MuthénB. O. (2021). Mplus: Statistical analysis with latent variables: User’s guide (Version 8.7). Authors.
40.
NeubertD. A.LeconteP. J. (2013). Age-appropriate transition assessment: The position of the division on career development and transition. Career Development for Exceptional Individuals, 36(2), 72–83. https://doi.org/10.1177/2165143413487768
41.
NunnallyJ. C. (1978). Psychometric theory (2nd ed.). McGraw-Hill.
42.
ParisD. (2012). Culturally sustaining pedagogy: A needed change in stance, terminology, and practice. Educational Researcher, 41(3), 93–97. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X12441244
43.
PasE. T.BradshawC. P. (2014). What affects teacher ratings of student behaviors? The potential influence of teachers’ perceptions of the school environments and experiences. Prevention Science, 15, 940–950. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11121-013-0432-4
44.
PattonJ. R.ClarkG. M. (2014). Transition Planning Inventory-Second edition. PRO-ED.
45.
PrinceA. M.PlotnerA. J.YellM. J. (2014). Postsecondary transition and the courts: An update. Journal of Disability Policy Studies, 25(1), 41–47. https://doi.org/10.1177/1044207314530469
46.
RoweD. A.MazzottiV. L.HiranoK.AlversonC. Y. (2015). Assessing transition skills in the 21st century. Teaching Exceptional Children, 47(6), 301–309. https://doi.org/10.1177/0040059915587670
47.
SinclairJ.HansenS. G.MachalicekW.KnowlesC.HiranoK. A.DolataJ. K.BlakelyA. W.SeeleyJ. R.MurrayC. (2018). A 16-year review of participant diversity in intervention research across a selection of 12 special education journals. Exceptional Children, 84(2), 312–329. https://doi.org/10.1177/0014402918756989
48.
SitlingtonP. L. (1996). Transition to living: The neglected components of transition programming for individuals with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 29(1), 31–52. https://doi.org/10.1177/002221949602900106
49.
SitlingtonP. L.PayneE. M. (2004). Information needed by postsecondary education: Can we provide it as part of the transition assessment process?Learning Exceptionalities: A Contemporary Journal, 2(2), 1–14.
50.
SlaneyK. L.MaraunM. D. (2008). A proposed framework for conducting data-based test analysis. Psychological Methods, 13(4), 376–390. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0014269
51.
StataCorp. (2021). Stata statistical software: Release 17. StataCorp LLC.
52.
TestD. W.MazzottiV. L.MustianA. L.FowlerC. H.KorteringL.KohlerP. (2009). Evidence-based secondary transition predictors for improving postschool outcomes for students with exceptionalities. Career Development for Exceptional Individuals, 32(3), 160–181. https://doi.org/10.1177/0885728809346960
53.
ThomaC. A.TamuraR. (2013). Demystifying transition assessment. Brookes Publishing Inc.
54.
TrainorA. A.CarterE. W.KarpurA.MartinJ. E.MazzottiV. L.MorningstarM. E.NewmanL.RojewskiJ. W. (2020). A framework for research in transition: Identifying important areas and intersections for future study. Career Development and Transition for Exceptional Individuals, 43(1), 5–17. https://doi.org/10.1177/2165143419864551
55.
TsangK. L. V.WongP. Y. H.LoS. K. (2012). Assessing psychosocial well-being of adolescents: A systematic review of measuring instruments. Child: Care, Health and Development, 38(5), 629–646. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2214.2011.01355.x
56.
UllmanJ. B. (2001). Structural equation modeling. In TabachnickB. G.FidellL. S. (Eds.), Using multivariate statistics. Allyn & Bacon.
WheatonB.MuthenB.AlwinD. F.SummersG. (1977). Assessing reliability and stability in panel models. Sociological Methodology, 8(1), 84–136.
59.
YeagerK. H.MorganJ. J.BrownM. R.HigginsK.JacksonI. (2021). Transition strength and needs of high school students with emotional and behavioral disorders. Career Development and Transition for Exceptional Individuals, 44(4), 241–252. https://doi.org/10.1177/2165143420988527
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
