首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
   检索      


Between-teacher variance of students' teacher-rated risk for emotional,behavioral, and adaptive functioning
Institution:1. University of Florida, College of Education, School of Special Education, School Psychology and Early Childhood Studies, PO Box 117050, Gainesville, FL 32611, United States of America;2. Miami University – Ohio, Department of Psychology, 90 N Patterson Ave, Oxford, OH 45056, United States of America;3. Medical University of South Carolina, 67 President Street, Charleston, SC 29425, United States of America;4. University of South Carolina, Barnwell College, 1512 Pendleton Street, Columbia, SC 29208, United States of America;5. Stony Brook University 101 Nicolls Road, Stony Brook, NY 11794;6. Duke University 2200 W Main St, Durham, NC 27705;1. Michigan State University, United States of America;2. Education Research and Consulting, United States of America
Abstract:As schools increasingly adopt universal social, emotional, and behavioral screening, more research is needed to examine the effects of between-teacher differences due to error and bias on students' teacher-rated screening scores. The current study examined predictors of between-teacher differences in students' teacher-rated risk across one global and three narrow domains of behavioral functioning. Participants included 2450 students (52.1% male, 54.2% White) and 160 teachers (92.1% female, 80.3% White) from four elementary schools in one Southeastern U.S. school district. Teachers rated student behavior on the Behavior Assessment System for Children (Third Edition) Behavioral and Emotional Screening System (BESS)-Teacher Form and completed a survey about their training and perspectives of common behavior problems. Results of multilevel linear regression found between-teacher effects to be greater for internalizing risk scores (intraclass correlation = 0.23) than for externalizing risk scores (intraclass correlation = 0.12) or adaptive behavior scores (intraclass correlation = 0.14). Statistically significant student predictors in most models included student grade, gender, race and/or ethnicity, office discipline referrals, and course grades. We also detected effects of several teacher-level variables in one or more of the models, including teacher gender, teacher ratings of problem severity and concern for hypothetical children displaying behavior problems, and the covariance of random teacher intercept and teacher random slopes for students' office discipline referrals. Although these factors explained some teacher-level variance in students' risk scores, a notable amount of variance between teachers remains unexplained. Future research is needed to fully understand, reduce, and account for differences between teacher ratings due to error and bias.
Keywords:
本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录!
设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司  京ICP备09084417号