Why do teachers refer pupils for special education? An analysis of referral records

Lloyd, John Wills; Kauffman, James M.; Landrum, Timothy J.; Roe, Donald

doi:10.1080/09362839109524774

Cited by 78 publications

(43 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, little research has been conducted to systematically examine the impact of goodness-of-fit between student and teacher on teacher impressions of behavior (Greene, 1996). Multiple teacher variables, such as flexibility of teacher expectations (Lloyd, Kauffman, Landrum, & Roe, 1991), knowledge of ADHD (Greene, 1996), interpretation of behavior and tolerance for misbehavior (Whalen, 1989), and behavior management practices (Good & Brophy, 1991) may lead to variability in ratings of students. Furthermore, negative halo effects may cause spuriously high ADHD ratings in oppositional children (Abikoff, Courtney, Pelham, & Koplewicz, 1993), and unrealistic expectations regarding Ritalin efficacy for adolescents may bias treatment decisions (Smith, Pelham, Gnagy, & Bukstein, 1998).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Agreement among teachers' behavior ratings of adolescents with a childhood history of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder

Molina

Pelham²,

Blumenthal³

et al. 1998

Journal of Clinical Child Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Examined agreement among secondary school teachers' behavior ratings for 66 adolescent boys with a history of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. Behavior ratings consisted of the Teacher Report Form, Iowa/Abbreviated Conners, and the Disruptive Behavior Disorders Rating Scale. Ratings from 2 to 5 teachers were collected for each adolescent. In contrast to previous studies, agreement was examined using statistical indices that corrected for chance agreement and discrepancies in scores (i.e., intraclass correlation [ICC], kappa) in addition to traditional indices (i.e., Pearson correlation and percentage agreement) typically used in the relatively sparse literature on teacher agreement for adolescent behavior ratings. Agreement was poor for dimensional subscale scores (Pearson correlations were in the .40-.50 range, and ICCs were in the .20-.50 range) as well as for categorization of youth as above or below clinical cutoffs (percentage agreement was between 52% and 96%, but ICCs and kappas ranged from .17 to .57). Findings suggest that, regardless of behavior rating scale used, a multiple teacher assessment strategy should be adopted for clinical assessment, treatment design, and evaluation of treatment efficacy.Teacher ratings of child behavior are tremendously useful when a goal of clinical work or research is to assess the disruptive behavior of a child (i.e., overactivity, impulsivity, attentional difficulties, defiance, or severe conduct problems). Not only is determination of treatment efficacy dependent upon teachers' observations, but adequate diagnosis of disruptive behavior disorders depends upon their input. For example, diagnosis of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) requires determination of impaired functioning in Requests for reprints should be sent to Brooke Molina, Western Psychiatric Institute and Clinic, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, 3811 O'Hara Street, Pittsburgh, PA 15213. molinab@msx.umpc.edu. Jonathan Blumenthal is now with the National Institute of Mental Health, Bethesda, MD.Portions of this study were presented at the 1996 meeting of the American Psychological Association, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. [DSM-IV]; American Psychiatric Association, 1994). Because children spend so much of their time in school, functioning in the academic domain is of particular importance. Furthermore, academic performance is often severely impaired by difficulties with behaviors such as attentional problems and noncompliance, making teachers especially salient and ecologically valid reporters of child functioning. Research has also shown that teacher ratings are more sensitive than parent ratings to stimulant medication effects (Sprague, Christensen, & Werry, 1974), which makes collection of teacher reports imperative when a goal of treatment is to determine medication efficacy. Clearly, examination of a child's functioning in school should always be included in comprehensive assessments and treatment of childhood disruptive behavior disorders. HHS Public AccessAn incr...

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Agreement among teachers' behavior ratings of adolescents with a childhood history of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder

Molina

Pelham²,

Blumenthal³

et al. 1998

Journal of Clinical Child Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In fact, during the school years, the determination of need for services, followed by referral and use, quite often occurs as a result of poor social adaptation of children to the teacher's behavioral task demands (Gerber and Semmel, 1984;Horcutt, 1996;Lloyd et al, 1991;Mattison et al, 1986;Poduska, 2000;Shinn et al, 1987). Hocutt (1996) refers to the "teachability" of students when discussing factors that teachers consider when thinking about children's need for services.…”

Section: Early Aggressive Disruptive Behavior As a Predictor For Sermentioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of the Good Behavior Game, a universal classroom-based behavior intervention, on young adult service use for problems with emotions, behavior, or drugs or alcohol

Poduska¹,

Kellam²,

Wang³

et al. 2008

Drug and Alcohol Dependence

108

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background-The Good Behavior Game (GBG) is a classroom behavior management strategy focused on socializing children to the role of student and aimed at reducing early aggressive, disruptive behavior, a confirmed antecedent to service use. The GBG was tested in a randomized field trial in 19 elementary schools in two cohorts of children as they attended first and second grades. This article reports on the impact of the GBG on service use through young adulthood.Methods-Three or four schools in each of five urban areas were matched and randomly assigned to one of three conditions: 1) GBG, 2) an intervention aimed at academic achievement, or 3) the standard program of the school system. Children were assigned to classrooms to ensure balance, and teachers and classrooms were randomly assigned to intervention conditions.Results-This study provides evidence of a positive impact of a universal preventive intervention on later service use by males, although not by females, for problems with emotions, behavior, or drugs or alcohol. For both cohorts, males in GBG classrooms who had been rated as highly aggressive, disruptive by their teachers in the fall of first grade had a lower rate of school-based service use than their counterparts in control classrooms.Phone: 410-347-8553, Email: jpoduska@air.org. Publisher's Disclaimer: This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final citable form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain. Replication-The design employed two cohorts of students. Although both first-and second-grade teachers received less training and support with the second cohorts of students than with the first cohort, the impact of GBG was similar across both cohorts. NIH Public Access KeywordsGood Behavior Game; developmental epidemiology; universal prevention; classroom behavior management; aggressive behavior; mental health service use

show abstract

“…Boys appear to be referred at higher rates than girls, at approximately a ratio of 2 to 1 (Christenson et al, 1983;Flynn & Rahbar, 1994;Lloyd, 1991). Males and females behave differently in the classroom and the more externalizing behavior of boys, hyperactivity and/or disruptiveness, may influence the teacher's referral decision (Lloyd, 1991;Smart, Sanson, & Prior, 1996;Ysseldyke et al, 1983) as they will not tolerate disruptive or destructive behavior (Campbell, Dobson, & Bost, 1985;Schumm & Vaughn, 1992). …”

Section: Referral To Placement Practicesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Interventions may be initiated by the classroom teacher in an attempt to ameliorate or remediate any skills deficits of a student prior to a referral (Yell, 1998). When these efforts are thought to be ineffective, it is usually the classroom teacher that seeks a more formalized remedy by referring a child to the special education identification process (Lloyd, 1991). The two most common reasons for referring a student to this process are academic and behavioral concerns (Christenson, Ysseldyke, Wang, & Algozzine, 1983;Lloyd, 1991;).…”

Section: Referral To Placement Practicesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Retention and special education referral practices before and after the implementation of high-stakes testing

Buslinger-Clifford¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Why do teachers refer pupils for special education? An analysis of referral records

Cited by 78 publications

References 25 publications

Agreement among teachers' behavior ratings of adolescents with a childhood history of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder

Agreement among teachers' behavior ratings of adolescents with a childhood history of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder

Impact of the Good Behavior Game, a universal classroom-based behavior intervention, on young adult service use for problems with emotions, behavior, or drugs or alcohol

Retention and special education referral practices before and after the implementation of high-stakes testing

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About