An investigation into the use of assessment materials in schools for pupils with Social, Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties
An online survey of current practice
Gavin Weedy: Teacher at Goldwyn School, Ashford, Kent
Why bother with this survey? “Without the careful identification, classification, and
selection that should be a part of good assessment, social behaviour interventions are likely to be haphazard and disorganized at best and ineffective at worst. Clearly, practitioners and researchers who are serious about understanding and dealing effectively with children’s social skills and related social–behavioral issues must provide the proper foundation for their work through carefully planned assessment activities.” (Merrell, 2001)
My role As a practitioner I am directly involved in the
assessment of pupils with SEBD in a school
I am in contact with many colleagues in other settings
Driven by providing the best outcomes for the pupils and thence the school.
I am interested in spreading the word about best practice
Methodology of survey Using a Critical Realist paradigm:
Looks for causal mechanisms rather than social laws –the same causal powers can generate different outcomes
Allow for scope for change as research develops
Allows for both a Quantitative approach, such as “How many schools are using X, Y or Z assessment?”
And a Qualitative approach, such as “Why are they using X, Y or Z assessment?”
Design of the questionnaire used in the survey
Trialled with colleagues
10 simple questions – some with “yes” or “no” answers to get basic quantitative data
Others with scope for more in depth to generate qualitative answers
Quick to complete
Online for ease of completion
Potential for computer analysis
How was the survey carried out? Online survey of day schools, residential schools and
Pupil Referral Units.
Initial introductions via Kent Special School Heads group
Introductions via colleagues such Educational Psychologists
Word of mouth through attendance at SEBDA conferences
Known colleagues in other settings
Issues with data collection Replies needed on a timescale – perhaps missed out
some potential respondents ( though the research is ongoing after the thesis is submitted)
Small scale study of invited participants. Not truly representative.
Contentious wording of “assessment”
Use of alternative language - “behaviour profile”
Data analysis methods Online via
SurveyMonkeyTM
Using AtlasTI qualitative data analysis programme
Data generated A total of 20 establishments or individuals were asked
to complete the survey
11 respondents (in the timeframe)
Represents 55% compared to average of 31-34% for online survey requests
Tables of responses created and analysed
Qualitative responses coded and used in code families to establish any links such as
“is associated with”
“is a property of”
Questionnaire results Q1. When a new pupil is admitted to your provision, or soon
after, do you carry out some form of assessment? Could you please indicate if you use pre-intake testing.
Q2. If you do, do you use a named assessment tool(s)?
Q3. If you answered "Yes" to question 2, which assessment tool(s) do you use? Please outline for what purpose it is used.
Action outlined Frequency of action in
sample
Comment
Reading 3
Spelling 2
Sentence
comprehension
2
Literacy (generic) 1
Numeracy 2
National Curriculum
(NC) levels
2
Speech and language
screening
1
Behaviour specific 3 One developed
“in house”
One for
attachment
disorders
One for
behaviour
readiness for re-
integration
Pupil attitudes 2
Specific learning
difficulties
1 SnAP
Achievement 1
Ability 1
Resiliency 1 scale
Psychological reasons 2
Solution focussed
questions
1
Intelligence 1
respondent Named assessment purpose
1 WISC-IV Clinical tool for measurement
of learning disabilities and attention
disorders
1 WIAT-II Assessment of reading, language and
numerical attainment
1 Resiliency Scales Identify and measure core personal
qualities of resiliency in youth aged 9:0
years to 18:11 years.
1 Solution Focussed
Questions
Designed to help people explore their
strengths and resources rather than
concentrate on their problems and
deficits.
4 SNAP Special Needs
Assessment Profile
Diagnostic Assessment and Profiling for
Specific Learning Difficulties
4 WASI - Wechsler
Abbreviated Scale of
Intelligence
Test for different forms of intelligence
4 Beck Youth Inventory Testing for psychological profiling
4 WRAT 4 - The Wide
Range Achievement
Test
Measures an individual's ability
to read words, comprehend sentences, s
pell, and compute solutions
to maths problems.
6 PASS – pupils attitude
to self and school
Measurement of a pupil’s attitudes
towards themselves as learners and
their attitudes towards school,
7 WRAT 4 - The Wide Range
Achievement Test
Measures an individual's ability
to read words, comprehend sentences, spell, and
compute solutions to maths problems.
7 Num NFER National
Foundation for Educational
Research
Basic numeracy
7 PASS – pupils attitude to self
and school
Measurement of a pupil’s attitudes towards
themselves as learners and their attitudes towards
school,
7 Boxall Profile Aimed at looking at behaviour relating to
attachment issues.
8 The Muntham Wheel “ for monitoring and recording progress within the
areas of classroom conformity, task orientation and
the SEAL outcomes.”
8 McSherry behaviour
readiness to integrate scale
Determine readiness for pupils with SEBD to return
back into mainstream settings
9 STAR rating scale Not specified
12 CAT Cognitive Abilities Tests Test of reasoning ability
Named assessment tool and its function
Q4. If you named a particular assessment tool(s), can you briefly outline why you chose that one.
Reason given Frequency of action in
sample
Comment
Staff ability 1 Staff trained
Suggestion from
Educational
Psychologist (EP)
1
Offers best
information
1
Specific test reason 2 Resiliency scales – can
be built upon for
intervention
McSherry – good for
reintegration
“we built it” 1
Not named 1
“It’s very good” 1
“best we can find” 1
“mirrors school ethos
of care”
1
Q5. Do you have a behaviour monitoring system?
Q6. If you have a behaviour monitoring system, do you use it to directly inform your intervention strategies. For example, does the data generate "if this occurs"..."then this happens" type of intervention. Could you please give an example if it does.
Q7. If you have a behaviour monitoring system, can you briefly explain how you track intervention strategies.
Action outlined Frequency of action in
sample
Comment
Daily recording 6
Recorded weekly 3
Recorded other 1 Three weekly record
Recorded each half
term
2
Recorded each term 1
Recorded
electronically
2
Recorded on paper
system
1
Recorded method
unspecified
7
Use of credit / points
system
4
Recording of specific
intervention
2
Use of target setting 2
Specific use of term
“review”
5
Mention of specific
intervention measure
2 1 of IEP (individual
education programme
1 of IAP (individual
action plan)
Use of dedicated staff 2 1 of Learning mentor
team
1 of “associated staff”
Q9. If you have a behaviour monitoring system, can you briefly explain how you use the data it generates. For example, reporting to parents or showing progression, etc
Action outlined Frequency of action
in sample
Comment
Reporting to parents 5
End of term reports 2
Showing progress
specifically
2 Using coloured wheel
Annual reviews 3
Changing targets 4
Inform student directly 1
Inform key working 1
Pupil rewards 2
Contributes to whole
school data
1
Weekly case
management
1
Reports to governors 2
Reports to Ofsted /
DFE
1
Other 4 “informs diary writing”
“Inform CPD”
(continuing professional
development)
“Plan more
individualised
interventions”
“Graphs of types of
behaviours”
Q8. How do you know your behaviour intervention strategies are achieving the desired outcome?
Action outlined Frequency of
action in sample
Comment
Reduction in incidents /
physical interventions
5
Increase in appropriate
behaviours
1 Not specified what
“appropriate” are.
Raised achievement /
attainment / learning
4 Includes “qualifications”
Behaviour points 1
Behaviour review
meetings
1
Pupil progress meetings 1
Parental reports of
improvements
1
Improvement in scaling 1
Movement in targets 1
Attendance 2 Attendance is raised
Exclusions 1
Make progress 1 Unspecified – “children make
progress”
Other 2 “when we have understanding
and balance”
“unsure”
Q10. Please feel free to add any comments about SEBD provision and assessment.
ConclusionsIn this survey it is clear that SEBD schools do use assessment widely but
seemingly not for specific behavioural issues. This seems a little unusual
but in discussions with colleagues there would appear to be a simple lack
of knowledge or indeed the confidence to administer this type of testing.
If schools are able to rigorously demonstrate the pupils’ level of emotional
and behavioural difficulty, and subsequent impedance on learning thereof,
they will be able to go some way to defending or celebrating the academic
progress made by pupils.
I will be conducting further research specifically into the area of
behavioural assessment and hope that by posting links to the survey on
the websites of professional associations I will gain a more in depth
picture of what is currently being used.
References Ballantyne C (2005), Moving student evaluation of teaching online: reporting pilot outcomes and issues with afocus on how to
increase student response rate. Paper presented at the 2005 Australasian EvaluationsForum: University Learning and Reaching: Evaluating and Enhancing the Experience, UNSW,Sydney, 28–29 November.
Bhaskar, R. 1998a. "General introduction", in M. S. Archer, R. Bhaskar, A. Collier, T. Lawson, and A. Norrie, eds., Critical realism : essential readings. London: Routledge, pp. ix-xxiv
Creswell, J.W.& Plano Clark V.L.(2011) Designing and Conducting mixed methods research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
Dommeyer, C.J., P. Baum, R.W. Hanna, and K.S. Chapman. (2004). Gathering faculty teaching evaluations by in-class and online surveys: their effects on response rates and evaluations .Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 29, no. 5: 611–623.
Elliott, S. N., Gresham, F. M., Frank, J. L., & Beddow, P. A. (2008). Intervention Validity of Social Behavior Rating Scales: Features of Assessments That Link Results to Treatment Plans. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 34(1), 15–24.
Krauss, S. E., & Putra, U. (2005). Research Paradigms and Meaning Making : A Primer, The Qualitative Report 10(4), 758–770.
Merrell, K. W. (2001). Assessment of Children’s Social Skills: Recent Developments, Best Practices, and New Directions. Exceptionality, 9(1-2), 3–18.
Nair, C.S., C. Wayland, and S. Soediro. (2005). Evaluating the student experience: a leap into the future.Paper presented at the 2005 Australasian Evaluations Forum: University Learning and Teaching:Evaluating and Enhancing the Experience, UNSW, Sydney, 28–29 November
Nulty D.D (2008): The adequacy of response rates to online and paper surveys: what can be done? Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education Vol. 33, No. 3, June 2008, 301–314
Ogier, J. (2005). The response rates for online surveys—a hit and miss affair. Paper presented at the 2005. Australasian Evaluations Forum: University Learning and Teaching: Evaluating and Enhancing theExperience, UNSW, Sydney. 28–29 November
Watt, S., C. Simpson, C. McKillop, and V. Nunn (2002). Electronic course surveys: does automating feedback and reporting give better results? Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 27, no. 4:325–337
Top Related