We wish to thank all of the faculty who completed this survey and who work tirelessly to provide students with evidence-based training in cognitive assessment. We thank Randy Floyd who reviewed an early draft of this manuscript and Vincent Alfonso for providing the original survey.

Decision-makers in school psychology are presently engaged in the process of determining how to, if possible, move forward with conducting mandated psychoeducational evaluations of students in schools during the pandemic. Whereas prominent organizations within the profession (e.g., American Psychological Association, National Association of School Psychologists) have issued guidance and encouraged practitioners to delay testing, it is not clear whether that is a viable option in every jurisdiction. Accordingly, professionals are now considering the potential use of telehealth platforms to conduct assessments, in some form, as we move forward and deal with this crisis. The goal of this brief commentary is to raise some provisional limitations associated with the use of telehealth to conduct psychological assessments that we believe will have to be considered as use of these platforms is debated. Recommendations for professional practice are also provided.

Due to physical distancing guidelines, the closure of nonessential businesses, and the closure of public schools, the role of telehealth for the delivery of psychological services for children has never been more debated. However, the transition to teleassessment is more complicated for some types of assessment than others. For instance, the remote administration of achievement and intelligence tests is a relatively recent adaptation of telehealth, and despite recommendations for rapid adoption by some policymakers and publishing companies, caution and careful consideration of individual and contextual variables and the existing research literature, as well as measurement, cultural and linguistic, and legal and ethical issues, is warranted. The decision to use remotely administered achievement and intelligence tests is best made on a case-by-case basis after consideration of these factors. We discuss each of these issues as well as implications for practice and policy, as well as issue provisional guidance for consideration for publishing companies interested in these endeavors moving forward.

Due to physical distancing guidelines, the closure of non-essential businesses, and the closure of public schools, the role of telehealth for the delivery of psychological services for children has never been more debated. However, the transition to teleassessment is more complicated for some types of assessment than others. For instance, the remote administration of achievement and intelligence tests is a relatively recent adaptation of telehealth, and despite recommendations for rapid adoption by some policy makers and publishing companies, caution and careful consideration of individual and contextual variables, the existing research literature as well as measurement, cultural and linguistic, and legal and ethical issues is warranted. The decision to use remotely administered achievement and intelligence tests is best made on a case-by-case basis after consideration of these factors. We discuss each of these issues as well as implications for practice, policy, and as well as issue provisional guidance for consideration for publishing companies interested in these endeavors moving forward.

There is an ever-increasing need for school psychology training programs to demonstrate their ability to produce competent practitioners. One method of addressing this need is through the assessment of self-efficacy. However, little research on self-efficacy in school psychology exists likely due to the lack of a psychometrically sound measure of this construct. To address this gap, we examined the construct validity of the Huber Inventory of Self-Efficacy for School Psychologists Research Version (HIS-SP-RV), a preexisting measure of self-efficacy, with a sample of 520 school psychology graduate students. Results suggest that the HIS-SP-RV is not a valid measure of trainee self-efficacy. We then created and conducted a psychometric evaluation of a shortened measure, the Huber Inventory of Trainee Self-Efficacy (HITS). Results supported the validity of a five-factor model. Implications for the use of the HITS for program evaluation, to improve trainee competence, and for future research are discussed. C 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Psychology in the Schools