This study reports results of a survey of 63 special education teachers in a 13-county area of Northwestern Ohio. Teachers were asked to describe reports they typically receive as to types of information provided in several sections of the report. Teachers were also asked to rate sections of the report according to how useful these were for several purposes. Teachers receive a standard form of report including background data, test results, and general recommendations. Several areas to be targeted for self-assessment and development by psychologists interested in improving their report-writing are suggested.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BagnatoS.The efficacy of diagnostic reports as individualized guides to prescriptive goal planning. Exceptional Children, 1980, 46, 447–554.
2.
BakerH.Psychological services: from the school staff's point of view. Journal of School Psychology, 1965, 3, 36–42.
3.
BardonJ. I.School psychology: the post Larry P. era. School Psychology Review, 1980, 9, 159–167.
4.
BrandtH.GiebinkJ.Concreteness and congruence in psychologists' reports to teachers. Psychology in the Schools, 1968, 5, 87–89.
5.
GrimesJ.Shaping the future of school psychology. School Psychology Review, 1981, 10, 206–231.
6.
KaplanM. S.ClancyB.ChrinM.Priority roles for school psychologist as seen by superintendents. Journal of School Psychology, 1977, 15, 75–80.
7.
KeoghB. K.Psychological evaluation of exceptional children: old hangups and new directions. Journal of School Psychology, 1972, 10, 141–145.
8.
LandauS. E.GerkenK. C.Requiem for the testing role?School Psychology Digest, 1979, 8, 202–206.
9.
MussmanM.Teachers' evaluations of psychological reports. Journal of School Psychology, 1964, 3, 35–37.
10.
RuckerC.Report writing in school psychology: a critical investigation. Journal of School Psychology, 1967, 5, 101–108.
11.
TallentN.ReissW.Multidisciplinary views on the preparation of written clinical psychological reports: III. The trouble with psychological reports. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 1959, 15, 444–446.
