COUC 521 LIBERTY UNIVERSITY Chapter 14 and 16_2025.pdf

Chapter 14 and 16

Chapter 14 – personality assessment

Defining personality

oSome researchers regarded personality as synonymous with

temperament, that is, the natural predisposition of an individual’s

thoughts, feelings, and behaviors.

oSome defined personality in terms of outward, observable

behaviors; for example, Watson (1924) characterized personality as

“the end product of our habit systems.” In contrast, some theorists

focused on underlying inner, subjective qualities. In this vein, Allport

viewed personality as “the dynamic organization within the

individual of those psychophysical systems that determine his

unique adjustment to his environment.”

oPersonality is generally considered to encompass stable and

enduring behaviors.

oFor this textbook, we define personality as the reasonably stable

patterns of thoughts, emotions, and behaviors derived from both

genetic predisposition and social learning that distinguish one

person from another and crystalize over time.

oTraits, states, and types

oTraits

Personality traits can be viewed as the distinguishing

characteristics or qualities possessed by an individual. Traits

can be defined as “dimensions of individual differences in

tendencies to show consistent patterns of thoughts, feelings

and actions” (McCrae & Costa, 2003 , p. 25). Traits are

assumed to be relatively stable over time, differ among

individuals, and influence behavior. Words such as

“outgoing,” “passive,” “extrovert,” “perfectionist,” and

“motivated” reflect specific personality traits related to an

individual’s behavior, whereas traits associated with

emotional qualities include “happy,” “anxious,” or “moody.”

The collection of traits forms a profile of general social

personality strengths and weaknesses that can be used to

distinguish one person from another (Harwood, Beutler, and

Groth-Marnat, 2012 ).

Allport (1937 ), an American psychologist who pioneered the

study of personality traits, was the first theorist to identify the

thousands of words that discriminate human personality

characteristics, and after searching dictionaries, he found

over 18,000 trait-like words. He whittled that list down to

about 3000 words and categorized them into three levels:

cardinal traits (dominate and shape a person’s behavior),

central traits (general characteristics found in all persons

within particular cultures), and secondary traits

(characteristics seen in only certain circumstances).

oStates

In reference to personality, the word state refers to the

transitory exhibition of some trait (Kalimeri, 2013 ). Whereas

trait refers to an enduring personality characteristic, state

usually refers to a temporary behavioral tendency. For

example, a person may be described as being in an anxious

state after experiencing a traumatic event but may not be

considered an anxious person (trait) in general. Although few

personality inventories distinguish traits from states,

Spielberger (1970 ) designed the State-Trait Anxiety Scale to

identify the anxiety individuals feel at a particular moment

(state) versus the way they feel generally (trait).

oTypes

Some researchers expanded on the trait approach of

understanding personality by sorting traits into various

clusters or types. If traits can be considered specific

characteristics of an individual, types can be regarded as a

general description of a person. The first focuses on individual

attributes, whereas the latter represents an enumeration of

essential qualities or features that have more far-reaching

implications (Kroeger & Thuesen, 2013 ). For example,

extraversion can be considered a personality type that is

associated with traits such as sociability, talkativeness,

assertiveness, adventurousness, and high levels of energy.

Personality typologies have existed at least since

Hippocrates’s classification of people into four types

(melancholic, phlegmatic, choleric, and sanguine), and many

more typologies have been created over the years. Most

notable is the personality typology developed by Carl Jung

(1921 ) that became the basis for the Myers-Briggs Type

Indicator (MBTI; Myers, McCaulley, Quenk, & Hammer, 1998 ),

probably the best known instrument that assesses personality

type.

Personality inventories

oPersonality inventories are commonly used to identify and measure

the structure and features of one’s personality, or one’s

characteristic way of thinking, feeling, and behaving (Weiner &

Greene, 2011 ). Some personality inventories measure specific

traits (such as introversion) or states (such as anxiety), while others

evaluate broad dimensions of personality that encompass a broad

range of characteristics and attributes. In addition to measurement

and evaluation, personality inventories can be used for other

purposes, such as increasing self-knowledge and self-understanding

(Urbina, 2014 ).

oThe following are examples of how professionals from various

disciplines may use personality inventories:

A career counselor administers a personality inventory in

order to help a person choose a career.

A clinical mental health counselor administers a personality

inventory to narrow down a varied set of symptoms to

determine the diagnosis of a particular psychological disorder.

A school counselor looks at a high school student’s personality

inventory results to determine if any difficulties are related to

the student’s academic problems.

An employment counselor uses a personality inventory to

identify a client’s personality attributes (e.g.,

conscientiousness, emotional stability, agreeableness) that

contribute to effective work performance.

A neuropsychologist administers a personality inventory to

determine the extent to which an individual’s brain injury has

affected cognition and behavior.

oApproaches to personality inventory development

Personality inventories may differ in the approach by which

they are constructed. Four common approaches to personality

inventory development are rational, theory, criterion group,

and factor analysis, or a combination of these approaches.

oRational approach

One of the oldest methods of personality test construction is

the rational approach, which involves the use of reason and

deductive logic to construct test items. In other words, items

are developed based on the degree to which they are logically

assumed to be related to a given construct. An example is the

Woodworth Personal Data Sheet (Woodworth, 1920 ),

considered to be the first structured (i.e., objective)

personality inventory. The 116-item self-report inventory was

assembled in response to needs for psychiatric screening

during the U.S. entry into World War I. Test items consisted of

statements that Woodworth believed were indicators of

psychological maladjustment. Items were simply listed on

paper (e.g., Are you happy most of the time?), and the

respondent answered yes or no. Instrument development

using the rational approach means that the measure is

entirely dependent upon the test author’s assumptions about

the construct (i.e., personality) being measured, and these

assumptions may or may not have been well founded.

oTheory-based approach

Unlike the rational approach, personality inventories

constructed using a theory-based approach are founded on an

established theory of personality. For example, instruments

that use projective techniques are based on the

psychodynamic theory of personality, which emphasizes the

importance of the unconscious (i.e., hidden emotions and

internal conflicts). Thus, projective instruments are thought to

reveal examinees’ unconscious by allowing them to respond

to some type of unstructured stimuli (such as an inkblot,

picture, or incomplete sentence), resulting in the examinee

projecting or expressing unconscious fears, conflicts, or

needs.

Similarly, the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI; Myers et al.,

1998 ) was constructed based on Jung’s (1921 ) theory of

psychological type. Jung identified two dimensions that

combined to create personality types: attitudes (extraversion

and introversion) and functions (sensation, intuition, thinking,

and feeling). Based on Jung’s original concepts, the MBTI sorts

an individual’s preferences into four separate categories: (a)

extraversion or introversion, (b) sensing or intuitive, (c)

thinking or feeling, and (d) judging or perceiving.

Combinations of these four preferences result in 16 separate

personality types that are used to describe the examinee.

oCriterion group approach

The criterion group approach is an empirical method of

personality test construction that involves selecting items that

can discriminate between relevant criterion groups and

control groups. The approach begins with a population sample

with known personality characteristics, such as a group of

individuals diagnosed with schizophrenia (i.e., the criterion

group). An instrument based upon this population sample is

administered to both the schizophrenic group and a control

group (usually a “normal” population) to identify the items

that distinguish the two groups. The items that distinguish the

schizophrenic group from the control group are then placed in

a separate scale. The scale is then cross-validated to see how

well it distinguishes the schizophrenic group from other

groups. Using the criterion group method, the emphasis is on

the discriminating power of the instrument; what is important

is the fact that the test discriminates, not the reason it does

so. This method of instrument construction is exemplified by

the creation of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality

Inventory (MMPI-2) and MMPI-2-RF, which were developed

based on the ability of tests’ items to detect symptoms of

psychopathology in adults.

oFactor analysis

Factor analysis is another empirical approach that uses

statistical procedures to (a) analyze interrelationships among

a large number of variables (e.g., personality traits) and (b)

explain these variables in terms of their common underlying

dimensions (factors). For constructing personality inventories,

factor analysis helps in condensing numerous personality

traits into fewer dimensions of personality that can then be

measured and evaluated. For example, Cattell and colleagues

(1970) developed the Sixteen Personality Factor, Sixth Edition

(16pf) by reducing 18,000 personality descriptors (originally

identified by Allport) into 181 personality clusters, from which

12 factors were generated using factor analysis. These factors

laid the foundation for the first 16pf published in 1949. More

than half a century and several revisions later, the 16pf

continues to be a widely used instrument measuring normal

adult personality. Another example is the NEO Personality

Inventory (NEO PI-R), a 240-item inventory that is based on

five dimensions of personality (known as the Five Factor

Model): neuroticism, extraversion, openness, agreeableness,

and conscientiousness. These broad factor analytically–

derived categories have been shown to represent the

underlying structure of Allport’s 18,000 personality adjectives

(Costa Jr. & McCrae, 1992 ) and have received much support

from theorists and researchers.

oCombined approaches



Many personality inventories are constructed using a

combination of rational, theory-based, criterion group, and

factor analysis.



Categories of personality inventories

oStructured personality inventories



Structured (also called objective) personality inventories are

usually standardized, self-report instruments made up of

items that are presented to people who then indicate how

accurately the items describe their personality using a limited

set of response options (Kamphaus & Frick, 2010 ). For

example, many structured personality inventories use

selected-response items (e.g., true/false, matching, multiple

choice) or rating scales. Responses on personality inventories

are not scored in terms of correctness (right or wrong) but are

scored in reference to the personality characteristic being

measured. For example, a true response on a personality test

item may indicate the presence of a particular trait, not that

the question was answered correctly. Because of the selected-

response format, items on structured personality inventories

can typically be answered rapidly, allowing for the use of

numerous items covering many aspects of personality without

lengthy administration times (Cohen & Swerdlik, 2010 ). In

addition, items can be scored quickly and reliably using

various means (e.g., hand-scoring, computer-scoring) as well

as interpreted accurately and efficiently, particularly with the

use of computer software programs.



Structured personality inventories can have a broad or narrow

scope. An instrument with a broad scope measures and

provides scores on a wide array of personality variables.

Broadly focused personality inventories can be very

comprehensive and time-consuming (taking 1 to 2 hours to

complete), may contain hundreds of test items, and may

provide several scores on scales or subscales. The MMPI-2 is

the best example of a personality inventory with a broad

scope; it contains 566 true/false items resulting in scores on

several separate scales. A version of the MMPI (MMPI-2-RF)

was developed by Ben-Porath and Tellegen to be aligned with

the MMPI-2 restructured clinical scales. This new version is

338 true/false items and can be used for a wide range of

assessment purposes.



In contrast, structured inventories with a narrow scope focus

on targeted aspects of personality, such as specific symptoms

(e.g., depression or anxiety) or behaviors. They are typically

briefer than broad personality inventories, often taking no

longer than 15 or 20 minutes to complete. Frequently used in

clinical assessment, hundreds if not thousands of narrowly

focused inventories are available that aid in (a) screening and

diagnosing mental disorders (i.e., an eating disorder or a

mood disorder), (b) developing treatment plans, (c)

monitoring treatment progress, and (d) evaluating treatment

outcome. For example, the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI-II)

is a widely used inventory with items that focus specifically on

symptoms of depression.



Structured personality inventories can focus on pathological

or nonpathological aspects of personality. Pathology refers to

anything that deviates from a healthy, normal condition. In

terms of personality, pathological is used to indicate

symptoms or other manifestations of mental or behavioral

disorders (i.e., psychopathology). Examples of

psychopathology include such symptoms as depressed mood,

anxiety, hallucinations, and delusions, to name just a few. The

Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI-2) and the

Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory (MCMI-IV) are examples of

personality inventories with a pathological focus—their

general intent is to identify the presence or absence of

symptoms or behaviors that relate to specific

psychopathological categories. Nonpathological inventories

de-emphasize pathology as a defining characteristic of

personality and focus on “normal” personality characteristics.

They are developed for use with a normal population and

assess the presence or absence of such nonpathological

personality characteristics as sociability, responsibility, and

flexibility. Personality inventories with a nonpathological focus

include the California Psychological Inventory (CPI); the

Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI); the NEO Personality

Inventory (NEO PI-R); the Sixteen Personality Factor, Sixth

Edition (16pf); and the Riso-Hudson Enneagram Type

Indicator.

oPERSONALITY INVENTORIES

oThe Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI-2)



The MMPI-2 (Butcher et al., 2001 ), one of the most widely

used personality inventories, is a comprehensive, structured

instrument that assesses major symptoms of adult

psychopathology. It is often used by clinicians to assist with

the diagnosis of mental disorders and the selection of

appropriate treatment methods.



The MMPI-2 contains 10 clinical scales that assess dimensions

of personality and psychopathology. The clinical scales were

developed using an empirical approach: items were selected

for each scale on the basis of their ability to discriminate

between clinical and normal groups. It also has nine validity

scales used to detect response styles, which refers to a test

taker’s pattern of responding to items. A test taker may

respond to items in a variety of ways that can compromise

the validity of the test (Butcher et al., 2001 ).



Validity scales: cannot say, variable response inconsistency,

true response inconsistency, infrequency, back infrequency,

infrequency-psychopathology, lie, correction, superlative

presentation



Clinical scales: hypochondriasis, depression, hysteria,

psychopathic deviate, masculinity-feminity, paranoia,

psychasthenia, schizophrenia, hypomania, social introversion



Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory (MCMI-IV)

oThe Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory (MCMI-IV; Millon, Grossman,

& Millon, 2015 ) is a 195-item self-report, true/false instrument

designed for adults (18 years and older) and takes approximately

30 minutes to complete. It is one of the few inventories that focus

on personality disorders along with symptoms that are frequently

associated with these disorders. The inventory consists of 25 scales

that are divided into the following categories: modifying indices,

clinical personality patterns, severe personality pathology, clinical

syndromes, and severe syndromes.

oHowever, the MMPI-2 focuses primarily on clinical symptoms,

whereas the MCMI was specifically designed to assist in diagnosing

personality disorders. An important advantage of the MCMI-IV is that

it is considerably shorter than the MMPI-2 (195 items vs. 567 items)

yet provides a wide range of information.

oThe California Psychological Inventory (CPI)



First published in 1957, the California Psychological Inventory

(CPI) is a self-administered personality inventory composed of

434 true/false statements that assess personality dimensions

in “normal” people between the ages of 12 and 70 (Gough,

2000 ). Except for the MMPI-2, the CPI is the most thoroughly

researched and frequently used personality inventory. Test

items focus on typical behavior patterns, feelings and

opinions, and attitudes relating to social, ethical, and family

matters (e.g., “I enjoy social gatherings just to be with

people”). The results are plotted on 20 scales (representing

personality traits) that are clustered into four general domains

(see Table 14.3 ). The inventory was normed on a

standardization sample of 6000 men and 7000 women of

varying age and socioeconomic status and included high

school and college students, teachers, business executives,

prison executives, psychiatric patients, and prison inmates.

oThe Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI)



Another nonpathological personality inventory is the well-

known and widely used Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI;

Myers et al., 1998 ). Developed in the 1940s by Katharine

Cook Briggs and Isabel Briggs Myers, the MBTI was designed

for measuring an individual’s preference according to the

typological theories of Carl Jung (Myers & Myers, 1995 ). The

instrument sorts an individual’s preferences into four separate

categories, each composed of two opposite poles:



Extraversion (E) or Introversion (I) Extraversion and

introversion are terms used to categorize where

individuals prefer to focus their energy. People who

prefer extraversion direct their energy to the outside

world of people, things, and situations. Those who

prefer introversion focus their energy on the inner world

of ideas, emotion, information, or beliefs.



Sensing (S) or Intuitive (I) Sensing and intuitive

categorize how an individual prefers to process or

acquire information. The sensing type prefers to deal

with facts, be objective, or use the five senses to notice

what is real. The intuitive type prefers to look beyond

the five senses to acquire information, to generate new

possibilities and ways of doing things, or to anticipate

what isn’t obvious.



Thinking (T) or Feeling (F) Thinking and feeling

categorize how an individual prefers to makes decisions.

Thinking indicates a preference to make decisions

based on logic and objective analysis of the evidence.

Feeling types prefer to make decisions based on their

values and subjective evaluation.



Judging (J) or Perceiving (P) Judging and percieving

categorize how individuals prefer to organize their lives.

The term judging does not mean “judgmental.” It simply

indicates a preference for living in a planned, stable,

and organized way. Perceiving indicates a preference

for more spontaneity and flexibility, responding to

things as they arise.



These four categories are combined to form 16 possible

personality types (or combinations of preferences) that best

describe the examinee. Each type tends to be characterized

by its own interests, values, and unique gifts. Types are often

referred to by an abbreviation of four letters, indicating the

four type preferences.



NEO Personality Inventory–Revised (NEO PI-R)

oThe NEO PI-R is a well-known, highly regarded personality inventory

based on the Five Factor Model of personality, which suggests that

the basic dimensions of personality contain the following

components: neuroticism, extraversion, openness to experience,

agreeableness, and conscientiousness. The NEO PI-R includes scales

for each of the five personality factors as well as six facet (trait)

scales for each domain:



Neuroticism Tendency to experience negative emotions

(anxiety, anger hostility, depression, self-consciousness,

impulsiveness, and vulnerability)



Extraversion Amount of energy directed outward into the

social world (warmth, gregariousness, assertiveness, activity,

excitement seeking, and positive emotions)



Openness to Experience Level of openness to new ideas

and new experiences (fantasy, aesthetics, feelings, actions,

ideas, and values)



Agreeableness Tendency toward friendly, considerable, and

modest behavior (trust, straightforwardness, altruism,

compliance, modesty, and tender-mindedness)



Conscientiousness Associated with responsibility and

persistence (competence, order, dutifulness, achievement

striving, self-discipline, and deliberation)

oThe 16pf Questionnaire, Sixth Edition (16pf)



The 16pf (Cattell et al., 1970) is a comprehensive measure of

adult personality traits. It has been widely used for a variety

of applications, including treatment planning, couples’

counseling, vocational guidance, and hiring and promotion

recommendations. There are 16 personality factors, which are

also grouped into five global factors. Sixteen personality

factors and five global factors are derived from client

responses. The 16 personality factors are warmth, reasoning,

emotional stability, dominance, liveliness, rule-consciousness,

social boldness, sensitivity, vigilance, abstractedness,

privateness, apprehension, openness to change, self-reliance,

perfectionism, and tension. The five global factors are

extraversion, anxiety, tough-mindedness, independence, and

self-control. Raw scores on all personality and global factors

are converted to sten scores, which are shown in the report

on a low-average-high continuum.

oRiso-Hudson Enneagram Type Indicator



The Riso-Hudson Enneagram Type Indicator (RHETI 2.5) is a

144-item personality type instrument that produces a

personality profile across nine personality types. Riso (1990 )

postulated that this ancient system will help individuals

unlock their hidden aspects so that they can become freer

and better-functioning individuals. He believes that the study

of one’s profile leads to self-understanding and then to the

understanding of others. The nine Enneagram types follow:



Reformers Idealistic, purposeful, orderly, self-

controlled, and perfectionistic



Helpers Generous, concerned, demonstrative, people-

pleasing, and possessive



Achievers Self-assured, adaptable, ambitious, driven,

and image-conscious



Individualists Creative, expressive, dramatic,

introverted, and temperamental



Investigators Perceptive, analytical, secretive, and

isolated



Loyalists Likable, dependable, anxious, and suspicious



Enthusiasts Accomplished, extroverted, spontaneous,

acquisitive, and scattered



Challengers Powerful, self-confident, decisive, willful,

and autocratic



Peacemakers Peaceful, receptive, passive, agreeable,

and complacent



The nine Enneagram types can be further divided into three

ranges of functioning: healthy, average, and unhealthy (see

Table 14.4 ). The test authors believe that assessing the level

of functioning is important because people with the same

personality type will differ significantly if they are healthy or

unhealthy.



Projective instruments and techniques

oIn contrast to structured personality inventories, projective

instruments and techniques require examinees to answer questions

related to ambiguous stimuli (such as inkblots, pictures, or phrases)

using open-ended responses. What is projective about these

instruments is the requirement for clients to generate a response in

the face of ambiguity; in so doing, people interpret instrument

stimuli in a way that reveals or projects elements of their own

personal characteristics (e.g., concerns, needs, conflicts, desires,

feelings).

oThe Rorschach Inkblot Test



The Rorschach Inkblot Test, developed by Herman Rorschach

(1921 ), is a test that measures individuals’ view or perception

of their world or environment. It consists of a series of

irregular but symmetrical inkblots (see Figure 14.3 ); subjects

are asked to look at the inkblots and verbally describe what

they see. By analyzing what someone sees on the inkblot,

examiners can make various hypotheses about the

individual’s emotions, cognition, coping skills, perception of

others and relationships, and self-perception. The test

consists of 10 bilaterally symmetrical inkblots printed on

separate cards. Five cards are black and white; two are black,

white, and red; and three are multicolored.

oThematic Apperception Test



The Thematic Apperception Test (TAT; Murray, 1943 )

originally was based on Henry Murray’s (1938) theory of

personality. The TAT includes a series of black-and-white

picture cards that contain a variety of characters, situations,

and objects. Examinees are asked to look at and make up

stories about each picture. After each TAT card story, an

inquiry process begins, and the examiner asks a series of

questions to better understand the examinee’s story, such as

what led up to the event shown, what is happening at the

moment, what the characters are thinking and feeling, and

what the outcome of the story was. Questions may involve

further clarification of the characters’ thoughts and feelings

and how the story was generated. There are numerous

approaches to interpreting the TAT. Some interpretations

involve examiners identifying a hero or main character within

the story, the belief being that the examinees will identify

with the character and project their unconscious motives,

feelings, and needs onto the character (Aronow, Weiss, &

Reznikoff, 2013 ). Furthermore, common themes among the

stories should be identified, and how the client relates the

story should be noted.

oVerbal Expressive Projective Techniques



Verbal expressive projective techniques allow a counselor to

understand elements of personality through the presentation

of verbal stimuli and elicited verbal responses. The stimuli and

responses can be transmitted orally or in writing. These types

of projective techniques allow a counselor to evaluate

personality information when an individual has difficulty with

self-evaluation (Panek, Jenkins, Hayslip, & Moske, 2013 ). To

use verbal projective techniques, the client needs good

language skills and should be able to hear or read words and

express himself or herself orally or in writing. An example of a

verbal projective technique is projective questions. Examples

of questions are as follows:



If you could be anything you wanted to be, what would

you be?



If you had three wishes, what would you wish for?



If you had a magic wand, what would you change about

your life?



These types of questions allow the individual to reflect some

degree of their personality traits and states in their responses

(Weiner & Greene, 2011 ). Counselors can interpret

individuals’ views of themselves and the world through the

use of these types of techniques.



Sentence-completion tasks are another verbal projective

technique in which examinees are presented with a list of

sentence stems (the beginning of a potential sentence) with a

blank space after each stem. The task of the examinee is to

complete the sentence.



The typical way to conduct sentence-completion tasks is for

the examinee to read the stems and then provide a written

response, but oral administration and response is also an

option.



The basis of all sentence-completion forms is that the

examinee’s responses may provide insight into the

individual’s self-image, developmental characteristics,

interpersonal reactions, needs, and perceived threats

(Hodges, 2011 ). Although published sentence-completion

instruments yield an overall score, most examiners simply

read over the completed sentences and form impressions

about what examinees’ responses might signify about their

personality characteristics.



Similar to sentence completion is story completion. There are

different versions of the story completion technique (Koppitz,

1982; Thomas, 1937 ), but in general, it involves developing

stories about a hypothetical child of the same age and gender

as the child being assessed.



Projective drawings

oProjective drawings are perhaps the oldest category of projective

assessment procedures often used with children and adolescents

(Weiner & Greene, 2011 ). As with other projective approaches,

drawings are thought to contain nonverbal clues and symbolic

messages about a child’s self-concept, motivations, concerns,

attitudes, and desires (Cummings, 1986 ). One of the most common

drawing techniques is the Draw-a-Person test (DAP; Machover, 1949

) (see Figure 14.4 ). In this technique, a child is simply given a paper

and a pencil and asked to draw a picture of a whole person. The

drawing must be created in the presence of the counselor. After the

child completes the drawing, an inquiry process ensues in which

counselors ask questions about the drawing, such as “Tell me a

story about this person,” “What is the person doing?” or “How is the

person feeling?” Answers to the questions as well as the drawings

themselves are used to form various hypotheses and interpretations

about the child’s personality and functioning.

oWhile many methods are available to score human figure drawings,

Koppitz’s (1968) scoring system is one of the most frequently cited.

Koppitz’s scoring system focuses on 30 emotional indicators in

children’s drawings. Emotional indicators are specific details in

drawings (e.g., tiny or large figures, transparent [X-ray] bodies,

crossed eyes, showing teeth, hands cut off, no eyes, etc.) that

distinguish between normally adjusted children and emotionally

disturbed children. The presence or absence of three or more

emotional indicators may indicate underlying problems or

maladjustment in the child.

oFor example, poor achievement might be reflected in poorly

integrated body parts, a monster or grotesque figure, omission of

body, omission of arms, or omission of mouth (Koppitz, 1982 , p.

285). The drawing of a hostile, aggressive child might show a big

figure, transparency, crossed eyes, teeth, long arms, big hands, or

genitals. Depressed, withdrawn children characteristically include

tiny figures and short arms but no eyes.

oAnother drawing technique is the House-Tree-Person Technique

(HTP; Buck, 1948 ). In this technique, children are asked to draw a

house, a tree, and a person on separate sheets of paper (see Figure

14.5). The picture of the house is supposed to arouse children’s

feelings about their home life and family relationships. Drawing a

tree is expected to elicit feelings about inner strengths or

weaknesses. The picture of the person is believed to reveal

children’s view of themselves (i.e., self-concept).

oFamily drawings are a projective drawing technique that provides a

nonthreatening way to assess children’s perception of their families.

For example, the Kinetic Family Drawing (KFD) asks the child to

“Draw a picture of everyone in your family, including you, doing

something” (Burns & Kaufman, 1970 , p. 5). The instructions

emphasize the family engaging in some activity, hence the term

kinetic. After the image is completed, an inquiry phase begins in

which the child is asked to (a) explain who each figure is (e.g.,

name, age, relationship to the child); (b) describe all the figures,

what they are doing in the picture, how they are feeling, and what

they are thinking about; and (c) tell a story including what

happened immediately before the actions in the drawing and what

happens next. Family drawings can be analyzed and interpreted in

terms of actions, styles, and symbols (Burns & Kaufman, 1972 ), in

addition to figures’ positions, distance in relation to one another,

and barriers between figures.

oIssues with Structured and Projective Instruments



Although most textbooks on assessment divide personality

inventories into the dichotomy of structured (i.e., objective)

and projective, some theorists and researchers argue that

both terms are misleading (Ortner & Schmitt, 2014 ). For

example, as a word, objectivity implies neutrality and

impartiality. Yet, objective instruments are only objective from

the vantage point of the scorer—test takers complete the test

based on their own opinions and are certainly not objective in

that regard. In truth, objective refers to the type of item

response (e.g., multiple-choice, true/false) that does not

require the examiners administering the test to rely on their

judgment to classify or interpret the test taker’s response. On

the other hand, the term projective typically refers to

instruments in which the stimulus is a task or activity that is

presented to a person who is required to generate a response

with minimal external guidance or constraints imposed on the

nature of that response. Yet, what is projective is “the

requirement for test takers to generalize a response in the

face of ambiguity; thus, they project or put forward elements

of their personal characteristics”.



Another issue is the question of whether projective

instruments have adequate reliability and validity to justify

their use. The Rorschach has mixed reviews in terms of its

psychometric properties, and the Thematic Apperception Test

(TAT) and projective drawings have generally failed to provide

research support for their reliability and validity. Although

many psychologists, counselors, and other helping

professionals still believe that the instruments help them

develop a better understanding of the test taker, the use of

projective instruments has drastically decreased. In some

cases, like the assessment of children, researchers have

called for the elimination of projective techniques.



Personality inventories with a positive focus

oSome personality inventories are based on positive psychology (i.e.,

the study of the conditions and processes that contribute to the

optional functioning of people) and assess positive aspects of

personality (Spielberger & Butcher, 2013 ). Some researchers agree

that an individual’s happiness or satisfaction with life is an essential

criterion for mental health and successful outcomes in counseling.

Thus, positive personality variables include those quality-of-life

variables associated with happiness or satisfaction, such as self-

efficacy, resiliency, coping skills, life satisfaction, and well-being.

The Quality of Life Inventory (QOLI) and the Satisfaction with Life

Scale (SWLS) are examples of positively focused personality

inventories.

oMany positively focused inventories specifically assess self-esteem.

We define self-esteem as the manner in which people evaluate

themselves and the ensuing judgments about themselves based on

those evaluations. Rosenberg (1965 ) defined self-esteem more

broadly as a favorable or unfavorable attitude toward the self. Self-

esteem is a popular construct in counseling and psychology, and it

is related to specific personality traits (e.g., shyness), behavior,

academic achievement, anxiety, and depression.

oThe quality of life inventory



The Quality of Life Inventory (QOLI; Frisch, 1994 ) is a brief

but comprehensive measure of a person’s overall satisfaction

with life. People’s life satisfaction is based on how well their

needs, goals, and wishes are being met in important areas of

life. The inventory consists of 32 items that ask test takers to

describe how important certain aspects of their lives (such as

work or health) are and how satisfied they are with them. The

QOLI yields an Overall Quality of Life score (reported as a T

score and percentile) that is classified as very low, low,

average, or high. The inventory also yields Weighted

Satisfaction Ratings for 16 areas of life (such as health, self-

esteem, love, work, etc.). The satisfaction ratings are

summarized on a profile report with ratings ranging from –6

(extreme dissatisfaction) to 6 (extreme satisfaction). Negative

weighted satisfaction ratings denote an area of life in which

the individual may benefit from treatment; ratings of –6 and –

4 are considered of greatest concern and urgency.

oCoopersmith Self-Esteem Inventory



The Coopersmith Self-Esteem Inventory (SEI; Coopersmith,

1981 ) assesses attitudes toward the self in general and in

specific contexts—social, academic, and personal contexts. It

was originally designed for use with children, drawing on

items from scales that were previously used by Carl Rogers.

The SEI consists of a school form for ages 8 to 15 years and

an adult form for ages 16 and above. It has five scales for self-

esteem in relation to general self, social self/peers,

home/parents, and school/academic, as well as a lie scale.

Respondents answer items by choosing “like me” or “unlike

me.”

oPiers-Harris Children’s Self-Concept Scale, 2nd Edition (Piers-Harris



This instrument is a 60-item self-report questionnaire that

assesses self-concept in children ages 7 to 18 (Piers &

Herzberg, 2002 ). It can be administered in paper-and-pencil

or computer format, and children usually complete the scale

in 10 to 15 minutes. The scale yields a general measure of

overall self-concept (Total-TOT) as well as six subscales:

behavioral adjustment (BEH), intellectual and school status

(INT), physical appearance and attributes (PHY), freedom from

anxiety (FRE), popularity (POP), and happiness and

satisfaction (HAP).



Behavioral Adjustment (BEH) The behavioral

adjustment subscale measures admission or denial of

problematic behaviors at home or school.



Intellectual and School Status (INT) The intellectual

and school status subscale measures children’s

evaluations of their own intellectual abilities and

academic performance.



Physical Appearance and Attributes (PHY) The

physical appearance and attributes subscale measures

children’s appraisal of their physical appearance, as well

as attributes such as leadership and the ability to

express ideas.



Freedom from Anxiety (FRE) The freedom from

anxiety subscale measures feelings of anxiety and

negative mood.



Popularity (POP) The populatity subscale measures

children’s evaluation of their own social functioning.



Happiness and Satisfaction (HAP) The happiness

and satisfaction subscale measures a child’s feelings of

happiness and satisfaction with life.

oOther Self-Esteem Inventories



A number of other self-esteem inventories are available to

counselors. The Culture-Free Self-Esteem Inventories, 3rd

Edition (CFSEI-3), are a set of self-report inventories that

measure self-esteem in children and adolescents ages 6 years

and 0 months to 18 years and 11 months. It consists of

different forms for three age categories: children of ages 6 to

8 years are administered the Primary form, youth of ages 9 to

12 are administered the Intermediate form, and adolescents

of ages 13 to 18 are administered the Adolescent form. All

three forms of the inventory provide a Global Self-Esteem

Quotient (GSEQ). The Intermediate and Adolescent forms

provide scores in four areas: Academic Self-Esteem, General

Self-Esteem, Parental/Home Self-Esteem, and Social Self-

Esteem. The Adolescent form provides an additional self-

esteem score: Personal Self-Esteem. Raw scores can be

converted into standard scores, percentiles, and descriptive

ratings.



The Tennessee Self-Concept Scale, 2nd Edition (TSCS:2; Fitts

& Warren, 1996 ), measures self-concept in individuals ages 7

to 90 years and is available in Adult and Child forms.



The Multidimensional Self-Esteem Inventory (MSEI; O’Brien &

Epstein, 2012 ) is a 116-item Likert-type scale that measures

self-esteem. The MSEI yields scores on (a) Global Self-Esteem,

(b) eight components of self-esteem (competence, lovability,

likability, personal power, self-control, moral self-approval,

body appearance, and body functioning), (c) Identity

Integration (sense of identity), and (d) Defensive Self-

Enhancement (a validity scale measuring the tendency to

embellish one’s self-esteem).



Response styles

oThe concept of the response style (also called response bias) in

personality assessment refers to the ways in which a test taker

responds to an item in some characteristic manner that distorts the

test results.

oSome test takers may be more apt to respond yes or true on items

than no or false, and others may answer questions with random

responses. The problem with response bias is that the test taker is

not providing honest, accurate answers to questions, which can

render the results suspect or even invalid.

oOf course, there are more response styles that can emerge than just

answering yes to all items. Common response styles are as follows

(Cohen, Swerdlik, & Sturman, 2012 ):



Social Desirability Choosing the response that best presents

self in a favorable light



Acquiescent Tendency of the test taker to accept or agree

with statements regardless of the item content (i.e.,

answering all items as “true” or “yes”)



Nonacquiescence Disagreeing with whatever item is

presented (i.e., answering all items as “false” or “no”)



Deviance Making unusual or uncommon responses



Extreme Choosing extreme, rather than middle, ratings on a

rating scale



Gambling/Cautiousness Guessing, or not guessing, when in

doubt about the answer

Chapter 16 – assessment in education

School assessment programs

oSchools implement assessment programs to provide information

needed to improve the public schools by enhancing the learning

gains of all students and to inform parents of the educational

progress of their children. School assessment programs may consist

of several, diverse instruments used for a variety of purposes, such

as the following:

Identifying the readiness of kindergarten and first-grade

students.

Determining whether students have mastered the basic and

essential skills required by the school system.

Placing students in educational programs.

Identifying students with special needs.

Evaluating the curriculum and specific programs of study.

Helping students make educational and vocational decisions.

Assessing the intellectual ability and aptitude of individual

students.

Measuring achievement in specific courses and subject areas.

oPlanning a School Assessment Program

Planning a school assessment program is a complex process

that requires cooperation among a diverse group of

stakeholders. In order to ensure the development of an

assessment program that is best practice and comprehensive,

the planning process should involve the superintendent’s

staff, principals, school counselors, teachers, parents,

community leaders, representatives from local postsecondary

institutions, and other administrative leaders in the school

district.

A number of steps should be followed in designing a school

assessment program:

Identify the goals and purposes of the assessment

program.

Identify the types of information needed to make

decisions.

Identify the types of instruments to be given and

establish procedures for selecting them.

Identify the responsibilities of the staff in the

assessment program.

Develop procedures for disseminating assessment

results to appropriate individuals.

Develop an evaluation strategy to continuously monitor

the assessment program.

oInstruments Used in School Assessment Programs

School assessment programs encompass several different

types of assessment instruments used at different grade

levels (see Figure 16.1 ). For example, state achievement tests

are given to students in grades 3 through 8 and one grade in

high school to assess their progress in achieving their state’s

educational standards. Readiness tests may be administered

to preschoolers to determine their readiness to enter

kindergarten or first grade. As students reach the middle and

high school years, instruments assessing interests, abilities,

and values may be utilized to obtain information for post-high-

school planning.

oAchievement tests

Every state requires schools to administer achievement tests

that are aligned with their educational standards. As we

addressed in the chapter on assessing achievement (Chapter

11), states may develop their own standardized achievement

test or use a commercially developed achievement test

battery, such as the Stanford Achievement Test (Stanford 10).

On these examinations, students must earn a minimum test

score to prove mastery in order to be promoted to the next

grade or graduate high school. Schools may also administer

the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP),

which tracks student achievement in 4th, 8th, and 12th

grades. Many elementary schools administer diagnostic

reading tests to screen and monitor student progress in

learning reading skills. Other forms of achievement

assessment include curriculum-based assessment,

curriculum-based measurement, and performance-based

assessment.

oIntellectual Ability Tests

Tests that measure intellectual ability are used in the schools

for a variety of purposes. They may be used to help identify

students with intellectual disabilities or learning disabilities, or

to place students into specialized academic or vocational

problems. Most schools administer ability tests, such as the

Cognitive Abilities Test (CogAT) or the Otis Lennon School

Ability Test (OLSAT 8), to screen students for placement in

gifted and talented programs.

oReadiness tests

Schools frequently use the scores from readiness tests to

determine whether children are “ready” for kindergarten or

are “ready” for promotion to first grade. Readiness tests

assess whether children have the underlying skills deemed

necessary for school learning. As we indicated previously,

school readiness tests should be used with caution and careful

examination of normative groups. There is a strong potential

for cultural bias with these types of instruments.

oAptitude tests

Four of the most widely used aptitude tests are the Armed

Services Vocational Aptitude Battery (ASVAB), the General

Aptitude Test Battery (GATB), the Differential Aptitude Test

(DAT), and the Career Aptitude Placement Survey (CAPS).

Some school districts administer an aptitude test in the 10th

grade. Civilian counselors working with the ASVAB will visit

high schools and administer the test to all high school

students who want to take the test for educational and

vocational guidance purposes. Students meet with armed

services personnel only if they request an interview.

oAdmissions tests

Most high school counselors are in charge of coordinating

programs to administer the PSAT, PLAN, SAT, ACT, or other

college admissions tests to students in the 10th, 11th, and

12th grades. Coordinating the administration of admissions

tests can include providing orientation about admissions tests

to students and parents, having information about prep

classes, and ensuring that students meet the necessary

deadlines for complete test registrations.

oCareer assessment instruments

Various career assessment instruments are used in the

schools, especially at the middle school and high school

levels. General interest inventories are often given at both

levels. In addition, school counselors often administer career

development inventories that help the school district evaluate

the educational and vocational needs of the students. Popular

career assessment systems include the COPSystem, the Kuder

Career Planning System, and the College and Career

Readiness System.

Assessment activities of school counselors

oSchool counselors are actively involved in assessment in the schools

and are frequently engaged in selecting, administering, scoring, and

interpreting various assessment instruments for diverse purposes.

oSchool counselors need knowledge of the process of identifying

students with learning disabilities as well as students who qualify for

gifted and talented programs. Furthermore, teachers and

administrators often rely on school counselors as a resource to

provide them with information about assessment instruments, to

answer measurement-related questions, and to interact with

parents on assessment issues.

oIn addition to student assessment, school counselors are

responsible for evaluating the effectiveness of comprehensive

school counseling programs (Dahir & Stone, 2011 ). Various

assessment instruments are used to show the impact of a school

counseling program on school improvement and student

achievement. School counselors must show that each activity or

intervention they implement was developed from a careful analysis

of students’ needs, achievement, and/or other data. School

counselors must also report on immediate, intermediate, and long-

range results, showing how students are different as a result of the

school counseling program. This aspect of the school counselor role

is directly related to the concept of accountability. Under the ASCA

National Model, school counselors must be able to demonstrate that

they have an impact on student success (American School

Counselor Association, 2012 ).

oAssessment is one of the biggest workload demands of a

professional school counselor (McCarthy, Van Horn Kerne, Calfa,

Lambert, & Guzmán, 2010 ). Whether engaged in assessment to

evaluate student performance or to evaluate a comprehensive

school counseling program, school counselors play a primary role in

school assessment programs. Thus, counselors need knowledge and

training in a wide range of diverse assessment activities. In a survey

of professional school counselors, Ekstrom, Elmore, Schafer, Trotter,

& Webster (2004 ) found that 80% of the 161 respondents indicated

performing assessment-related activities such as reading about

ethical, special needs, and multicultural issues; communicating

assessment information to parents, school administration and

teachers, and other professionals; and integrating test and nontest

dates when making decisions.

oEkstrom et al. (2004 ) also found that the assessment activities

performed by school counselors may vary according to the

educational level (elementary, middle school, and high school) at

which they work.

oFor example, high school counselors were more likely to be involved

in administering standardized tests than counselors in elementary

schools. High school counselors also used assessment instruments

more often for helping students with career planning. Middle school

counselors spent more time designing or adapting assessment

instruments for use in planning or evaluating school counseling

programs, as well as reading professional literature about

assessment. Elementary school counselors were less likely to

schedule testing, to interpret results from assessment instruments,

or to use assessment information in counseling or in making

placement decisions. Of counselors in all three educational levels,

high school counselors had more responsibility for selecting,

administering, and interpreting assessment instruments.

oNeeds assessments

Needs assessment is a formal process of gathering

information from a range of sources (e.g., students, parents,

teachers, administrators) about their perceptions of the needs

of the student population. Needs assessments determine the

students’ needs or desired outcomes and, in doing so, identify

the priorities of the school counseling program within the

philosophical framework of the school and community.

Most needs assessment instruments are informally

constructed to assess students’ needs in three broad areas:

academic, career, and personal/social.

Assessing specific learning disabilities

oSchool counselors work individually and with other school personnel

to meet the developmental needs of all students, including those

with specific learning disabilities. A specific learning disability (SLD)

is a neurological disorder that severely impairs children’s ability to

learn or to demonstrate skills in several academic areas:

Oral Expression Ability to convey ideas and information

verbally.

Listening Comprehension Ability to listen to and

understand words, questions, and instructions presented

through spoken words and sentences.

Written Expression Ability to convey ideas and information

in written form.

Basic Reading Skill Ability to decode (read) words.

Reading Comprehension Ability to make sense of and

understand written or printed information.

Mathematical Calculation Ability to learn basic math facts

and perform basic math operations, such as addition,

subtraction, multiplication, and division.

Mathematical Reasoning Ability to apply mathematical

techniques, concepts, or processes to solve problems.

oStudents with an SLD may have difficulty listening, thinking,

speaking, reading, writing, spelling, or doing math problems. They

usually have average to above-average intelligence, but they may

have difficulties demonstrating academic knowledge and

understanding. They will show intra-individual differences in their

academic skills and abilities; in other words, they often do well in

some school subjects but usually have extreme difficulty with

certain skills, such as decoding (reading) words, calculating math

facts, or putting their thoughts and ideas into writing. SLDs are

believed to be caused by some kind of neurological condition that

affects information processing, which means that although students

with SLDs almost always hear and see normally, they have trouble

understanding what they see or hear. SLDs can be caused by such

conditions as perceptual (visual or auditory) disabilities, brain injury,

minimal brain dysfunction, dyslexia, and developmental aphasia

(language impairment). SLDs do not encompass learning problems

that are primarily the result of visual, hearing, intellectual, or motor

disabilities; emotional disturbance; environmental, cultural, or

economic factors; or limited English proficiency. Although the true

prevalence rate of SLDs is not known, it is estimated that

approximately 5% of students have an identified SLD, but that as

many as 15% more students remain unidentified (Cortiello, 2014 ).

oHistorically, the most common method schools have used to identify

students with SLDs is the ability-achievement discrepancy model

(also called the IQ-achievement discrepancy model), which was a

component of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA)

of 1997. This model identifies students as learning disabled when

there is a severe discrepancy between their scores on an ability

(i.e., intelligence) test and their scores on an achievement test.

oThere have been many concerns cited about the use of the ability-

achievement discrepancy approach (National Association of State

Directors of Special Education’s IDEA Partnership, 2007 ). First,

critics have described the ability-achievement discrepancy

approach as a wait-to-fail approach because intervention is withheld

until a discrepancy can be demonstrated, which often does not

occur until the student has experienced several years of academic

failure. Second, the information gathered from the ability and

achievement assessments does not indicate each student’s specific

learning needs. Third, the discrepancy model can create inequitable

treatment for students—that is, disproportionate numbers of

students from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds have

been identified as having SLDs using the ability-achievement

discrepancy approach.

oResponsiveness to Intervention

The IDEA of 2004 changed the evaluation process by which

schools identify students with SLDs. Schools are no longer

required to use the ability-achievement discrepancy model;

rather, schools should use a combination of research-based

instruction, intervention, and assessment procedures for

determining whether students have SLDs. As a result, many

states and school districts have adopted an alternative model

called Responsiveness to Intervention (RTI). RTI is a

comprehensive, multistep approach to identifying students

with SLDs in which services and interventions are provided to

at-risk students at increasing levels of intensity based on

progress monitoring and data analysis. The RTI process

includes the following:

Universal screening of all students to identify those who

are at risk for academic failure.

Providing and monitoring the effectiveness of research-

based instruction and other interventions for at-risk

students.

Providing special education services to those students

who are achieving below age/grade expectations and

fail to make adequate progress (having been provided

research-based instruction and interventions).

Assessment occurs at all tiers, and a wide variety of formal

assessment instruments (e.g., achievement test batteries,

diagnostic achievement tests, school readiness tests, state

achievement tests) and informal instruments (e.g.,

curriculum-based measurement) are used for screening,

progress monitoring, and diagnostic purposes. For example, in

Tier 1, screening tests are administered school-wide to

identify students who are not meeting grade-level

expectations so that instructional or behavioral interventions

can be implemented. Progress monitoring (using curriculum-

based assessment) occurs at Tier 2 to identify students who

continue to need assistance and to evaluate the effectiveness

of instructional and behavioral interventions. In Tier 3,

diagnostic assessment is conducted as part of a

comprehensive evaluation for students who fail to make

sufficient progress in Tier 2 in order to determine their

eligibility for special education.

Table 16.1 Responsiveness to Intervention (RTI) Three-Tier Model

Tier 1: Instruction Screening, instruction, and

behavioral supports are provided for

all students.

School personnel conduct

universal screening of literacy

skills, academics, and

behavior.

Teachers implement a variety

of research-supported

teaching strategies and

approaches. Ongoing,

curriculum-based assessment

and continuous progress

monitoring are used to guide

high-quality instruction.

Students receive differentiated

instruction based on data from

ongoing assessments.

Tier 2: Intervention Students whose performance and

rate of progress lag behind those of

peers receive more specialized

prevention or remediation within

general education.

Curriculum-based measures

are used to identify which

students continue to need

assistance, and with what

specific kinds of skills.

Collaborative problem solving

is used to design and

implement instructional

support for students that may

consist of a standard protocol

or more individualized

strategies and interventions.

Identified students receive

more intensive scientific,

research-based instruction

targeted to their individual

needs.

Student progress is monitored

frequently to determine

intervention effectiveness and

needed modifications.

Systematic assessment is

conducted to determine the

fidelity or integrity with which

instruction and interventions

are implemented.

Parents are informed and

included in the planning and

monitoring of their child’s

progress in Tier 2 specialized

interventions.

General education teachers

receive support (e.g., training,

consultation, direct services

for students), as needed, from

other qualified educators in

implementing interventions

and monitoring student

progress.

Tier 3: special education For students who fail to make

sufficient progress in Tier 2,

comprehensive evaluation is

conducted to determine eligibility

for special education and related

services.

Parents are informed of their

due process rights and

consent is obtained for the

comprehensive evaluation

needed to determine whether

the student has a disability

and is eligible for special

education and related

services.

Evaluation uses multiple

sources of assessment data,

which may include data from

standardized and norm-

referenced measures;

observations made by

parents, students, and

teachers; and data collected in

Tiers 1 and 2.

Intensive, systematic,

specialized instruction is

provided and additional RTI

data are collected, as needed,

in accordance with special

education timelines and other

mandates.

Procedural safeguards

concerning evaluations and

eligibility determinations

apply, as required by IDEA

2004 mandates.

oIndividualized Education Plan (IEP)

If a student is diagnosed as having a specific learning

disability, schools are required to develop an Individualized

Education Plan (IEP). An IEP is a written document created by

a team of teachers, parents, and other school staff (e.g.,

school counselors, school psychologists) that contains a

statement of the student’s present level of educational

performance, a list of annual goals and objectives, and a

description of the special education and related services (e.g.,

speech therapy, counseling, parent training, rehabilitation

counseling, etc.) to be provided to the student. The IEP is

reviewed at least once per year to examine the student’s

progress toward those goals.

In many cases, school counselors are directly involved in the

IEP process. The American School Counselor Association

(2012) stated that “advocating for students at individual

education plan meetings” (p. 56) is an appropriate activity for

school counselors as part of a comprehensive school

counseling program. In addition to attending IEP meetings,

they may consult with teachers, intervene with students, and

support parents. This is true for non-school counselors as well.

Advocacy happens at many levels. Clinical mental health

counselors may serve as part of the education of parents

learning how to best advocate for their children.

Assessing giftedness

oAccording to the United States federal government, “The term

gifted and talented, when used with respect to students, children, or

youth, means students, children, or youth who give evidence of high

achievement capability in such areas as intellectual, creative,

artistic, or leadership capacity, or in specific academic fields, and

who need services or activities not ordinarily provided by the school

in order to fully develop those capabilities (The No Child Left Behind

Act, 2001 ).”

oThese children demonstrate high performance capability in

intellectual, creative, or artistic areas, as well as strong leadership

ability. The National Association for Gifted Children (2008 ) reported

that nearly three million children (i.e., 5% of the U.S. student

population) are considered gifted and talented.

oGifted children require services or activities not typically provided in

a regular classroom setting; thus, most schools have gifted and

talented programs that provide unique educational opportunities for

children who have been identified as gifted and talented. This can

include modifying or adapting regular curriculum and instruction;

accelerated learning opportunities, such as independent study and

advanced placement; opportunities for subject and grade skipping;

and providing differentiated learning experiences. To qualify for

participation in a school’s gifted and talented program, students

must meet certain minimum standards.

oThe process of assessing students for giftedness usually entails two

phases: screening and identification. To screen for giftedness, most

districts conduct annual schoolwide screening using standardized

ability or achievement tests. Students may also be referred or

nominated for giftedness screening by their teacher, school

counselor, or parent. Students must meet a set cutoff score on the

screening test to continue to the identification phase. In the

identification stage, further assessment is conducted focusing on

four areas:

Cognitive Ability The ability to perform at an exceptionally

high level in general intellectual ability, which may be

reflected in such cognitive areas as reasoning, memory,

nonverbal ability, and the analysis, synthesis, and evaluation

of information.

Academic Ability The ability to perform at an exceptionally

high level in one general academic area or a few specific

academic areas significantly beyond others of one’s age,

experience, or environment.

Creative Thinking Ability The ability to perform at an

exceptionally high level in creative thinking, as evidenced by

creative or divergent reasoning, advanced insight and

imagination, and solving problems in novel ways.

Visual or Performing Arts Ability The ability to perform at

an exceptionally high level in the visual arts, dance, music, or

drama.

oTo assess these four areas, a variety of assessment instruments and

strategies may be used (see Table 16.2 ). Cognitive ability and

academic ability are typically evaluated using standardized ability

tests and standardized achievement tests. To be placed into a

gifted and talented program, students must meet or exceed

minimum cutoff scores as defined by state laws.

oCreative thinking ability can be assessed by using intelligence tests,

general giftedness screening instruments, or instruments designed

specifically to appraise creativity.

oInstruments are also available that were developed specifically for

assessing characteristics of giftedness. For example, the Scales for

Rating the Behavioral Characteristics of Superior Students, Revised

(SRBCSS-R; Renzulli, Smith, White, Callahan, Hartman, and

Westberg, 2002 ) is a widely used rating scale that can be

completed by school personnel who are familiar with the student’s

performance.

oStandardized assessment instruments are useful for screening and

identifying giftedness in students and for designing programs and

services based on these needs. Despite their potential usefulness,

tests also have limitations. The technical inadequacy of tests can

result in bias against certain populations of gifted students,

especially those from racial, cultural, and ethnic minority

populations; those from low-socioeconomic environments; and

those with disabilities or for whom English is a second language.

Thus, while standardized tests are critically important in the

assessment process, careful attention is critical to the selection of

appropriate assessment instruments when assessing underserved

gifted students. Furthermore, a score from a single instrument

should never be the sole basis for placement decisions for gifted

and talented programs.

Consulting with teachers

oBecause school counselors are trained in tests and measurement,

they are frequently called upon by teachers to help interpret a

student’s assessment results. Teachers may lack knowledge about

basic measurement concepts and not understand what a student’s

test score means, not be familiar with a new edition of a

standardized test, or need to understand the implications of a

student’s test results for classroom instruction. School counselors

can provide in-service trainings or workshops to educate teachers

about measurement concepts in general or about new editions of

standardized tests. School counselors may also consult with

teachers individually to review and interpret a student’s test scores.

Environmental assessment in the schools

oAssessment in the schools often focuses almost exclusively on

academic achievement and learning outcomes. Although student

outcomes provide valuable information, they cannot give a

complete picture of the educational process. A critical determinant

of student outcomes is the classroom environment, which is

evaluated through the process of environmental assessment.

Environmental assessment involves appraising specific

environmental factors that interact with and predict behavior. The

environment includes everything that surrounds us and experiences

to which we are exposed, including the following:

Physical Space Amount of space that is available and the

way the space is arranged.

Organization and Supervision of Space The organization

of the space according to use or function.

Materials the materials required by the individual who will be

using the environment.

Peer Environment The number and type of people who are

going to share the environment.

Organization and Scheduling The level of organization of

the environment, how activities are scheduled, and the roles

of the people involved.

Safety An environment that is free of hazards and has

adequate supervision.

Responsiveness An environment that provides opportunities

to enhance feelings of competency and independence.

oMany environmental factors with schools can be associated with

students’ academic problems, such as the physical setting,

teacher/student relationship, curricular and educational materials,

and other students’ behaviors. Other variables such as attendance,

social interaction, and class interruptions can also impact student

performance.

oAssessment of the classroom environment needs to focus on (a)

physical and structural dimensions, (b) interactional dimensions,

and (c) instructional dimensions. Physical and structural dimensions

include seating position; classroom design and furniture

arrangement; spatial density; and crowding, noise, and lighting.

Interactional dimensions involve the extent to which students

interact with materials, people, and activities in the environment.

Instructional dimensions refer to teacher behaviors that are related

to student achievement. Strong, Gargani, and Hacifazlioğlu (2011 )

identified several effective teacher behaviors such as accessing

students’ prior knowledge, active interaction, moving around the

classroom, enabling students to generate ideas, creating a

stimulating classroom environment, using visuals and

manipulatives, checking for student understanding, having clear

objectives, presenting concepts clearly, exhibiting equity, and

differentiating instruction

oPerson-environment fit theories stress the need to study the

congruence between the client’s needs, capabilities, and aspirations

and environmental demands, resources, and response opportunities

(Holland, 1997 ). Counselors look for ways that different

environmental arrangements and conditions force accommodations

in behavior and study the individual-environment interactions.

Person-environment fit has wide application and is especially

important when working with preschool children and students with

disabilities who are placed in regular classrooms.

oSeveral assessment instruments have been developed to measure

aspects of the classroom school environment at all levels.

Instruments measure the perceptions of various groups, such as

parents, teachers, students, and administrators. Some of the major

instruments are as follows:

The Classroom Environment Scale, Third Edition (CES)

(Trickett & Moos, 1995 ), assesses perceptions of the learning

environment of middle and high school classrooms. The

instrument evaluates the effects of course content, teaching

methods, teacher personality, class composition, and

characteristics of the overall classroom environment. The

student form contains 90 true/false items and takes 20 to 30

minutes to complete. Students rate their perceptions of the

classroom climate using a 5-point scale from 1 (almost never)

to 5 (very often). There are nine subscales grouped into three

major dimensions: relationship, personal growth/goal

orientation, and system maintenance and change. The

subscales are involvement, affiliation, teacher support, task

orientation, competition, order and organization, rule clarity,

teacher control, and innovation.

The Effective School Battery (ESB) assesses school climate

and provides a portrait of the attitudes and other

characteristics of a school’s students and teachers. It

measures and reports on school safety, staff morale,

administrative leadership, fairness and clarity of school rules,

respect for students, classroom orderliness, academic climate,

school rewards, student educational expectations, attachment

to school, and other aspects of school climate as reflected in

teachers’ and students’ perceptions, behavior, and attitudes.

The School Environment Preference Survey (SEPS) measures

work-role socialization as it occurs in the traditional school.

SEPS has four scales: self-subordination, traditionalism, rule

conformity, and uncriticalness. The test is helpful in planning

instructional strategies for students or as an aid in placement

in alternative learning environments.

The Responsive Environmental Assessment for Classroom

Teaching (REACT) evaluates student perceptions of the

classroom environment. The instrument results in a single

factor score (i.e., classroom teaching environment) and six

subscale scores: positive reinforcement, instructional

presentation, goal setting, differentiated instruction, formative

feedback, and instructional enjoyment (Nelson, Demers, &

Christ, 2014 ).

Competencies in assessment and evaluation for school counselors

oA joint committee of the American School Counselor Association

(ASCA) and the Association for Assessment in Counseling (AACE;

2000 ) developed a document describing the assessment and

evaluation competencies school counselors need. This document

identifies nine competencies that school counselors should meet:

School counselors are skilled in choosing assessment

strategies.

School counselors can identify, access, and evaluate the most

commonly used assessment instruments.

School counselors are skilled in the techniques of

administration and methods of scoring assessment

instruments.

School counselors are skilled in interpreting and reporting

assessment results.

School counselors are skilled in using assessment results in

decision making.

School counselors are skilled in producing, interpreting, and

presenting statistical information about assessment results.

School counselors are skilled in conducting and interpreting

evaluations of school counseling programs and counseling-

related interventions.

School counselors are skilled in adapting and using

questionnaires, surveys, and other assessment instruments to

meet local needs.

School counselors know how to engage in professionally

responsible assessment and evaluation practices.

Assessment issues in education

oThe primary issue in school assessment today is the widespread

compulsory testing of public school students. Standardized

achievement tests have long been part of the U.S. education

system. Caldwell (2008 ) described the traditional process involved

in testing in the schools as a cycle, with days set aside for

standardized testing. Once tests were returned, usually months

later, from being scored by the publishers, it was generally too late

to make changes to classroom instruction. A frenzy of school

administration meetings and newspaper articles would occur before

things would normalize until the next cycle.

oAll this changed after the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act, passed in

2001 and signed into law in January 2002. This law contains the

most sweeping changes to the Elementary and Secondary

Education Act (ESEA) since ESEA was enacted in 1965. Emphasizing

educational accountability, NCLB required America’s schools to

describe their success in terms of what each student accomplishes

—the belief being that through accountability, schools and parents

can receive the information needed to identify and focus attention

and resources on children who need help. Thus, in order to receive

federal funding, school districts in all 50 states were required to

administer tests that measure student progress toward state

achievement standards.

oIn 2015, the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA, 2015 ) became the

new federal law. This law differs from NCLB in that NCLB used

student test scores to evaluate school performance. As you can

imagine, this placed a lot of pressure on a single data point and on

the achievement of the students. School districts subsequently

faced sanctions that left many educational systems paralyzed and

unable to keep up with the federal requirements. With ESSA, school

performance is assessed more broadly to evaluate elements of

school climate, including the mental health of students (Grapin &

Benson, 2018 ). Under ESSA, schools still engage in academic

testing of students, but the school has a more flexible accountability

system within the law. Because this chapter focuses on the

educational assessment aspect of counseling, we will look more

closely at the concept of high-stakes testing.

oIn high-stakes testing, the stakes and consequences of assessment

are important considerations. The term stakes refers to the impact

that test results may have on a student, group, or organization

(AERA et al., 2014 ). High-stakes tests can directly affect a student’s

educational paths or choices, such as whether a student is

promoted or retained at a grade level, graduated, or admitted into a

desired program. Low-stakes tests, on the other hand, are used for

monitoring and providing feedback to students, teachers, and

parents on student progress. High-stakes testing also involves

judging schools according to their students’ test performance. For

example, high-performing schools may receive financial rewards

such as bonuses or merit pay, whereas low-performing schools may

receive sanctions, which can include developing/implementing

improvement plans, being placed on probation, losing accreditation,

losing funding, relocating children to better-performing schools, and

even closing the school. Schools are generally ranked (i.e., school

report card) according to their students’ test scores with the

implication that a school’s ranking reflects the effectiveness or

quality of teaching.

oProponents of NCLB believe that testing assists in identifying and

providing resources for children who need help, holds schools

accountable for student progress, and provides parents with choices

when their school ranking falls to unacceptable levels. Additionally,

in 2006, the U.S. Department of Education reported that that since

NCLB’s inception, student achievement has risen across America.

However, many critics believe the act is failing; they identify the

following concerns (Adrianzen, 2010 ; Frey, Mandlawitz, & Alvarez,

2012 ; Kieffer, Lesaux, & Snow, 2008 ; Ott, 2008 ; VanCise, 2014 ):

School curriculum has narrowed to basic reading, writing, and

arithmetic, excluding subjects (e.g., art, music, social

sciences, physical education, etc.) that are not tested.

Schools with children from diverse backgrounds or who have

diverse learning skills are being penalized.

High-stakes testing has created an atmosphere of greed, fear,

and stress in schools, none of which contribute to learning.

Extremely high stakes encourage schools to cheat and to urge

low-achieving students to drop out.

School counselors spend more time coordinating achievement

test administration, reducing their ability to provide services

to students, teachers, and administrators.

There is no consistency among states as to which

standardized achievement tests are used, which means there

is no way to compare the performance of students from state

to state.

Test preparation and performance

oCoaching

Coaching is a method used by administrators, teachers, and

counselors to help test takers improve their test performance.

Although there is no universally accepted definition for

coaching, the term is popularly used to mean training test

takers to answer specific types of questions and provide the

information required by a specific test (Hardison & Sackett,

2008 ). Coaching programs usually focus on test

familiarization, drill and practice on sample test items, or

subject matter review. Coaching programs are provided

through classes offered in public schools; private classes;

private tutors; and test books, software programs or videos.

Probably the best example of a coaching program is an SAT

prep class. Thousands of high school students take SAT prep

courses each year, hoping to increase their scores on the

college entrance exam. The results from a recent nationwide

study showed that students who took private SAT prep classes

scored an average of 60 points higher on their SAT tests

compared to students who didn’t take the classes.

Of significance are concerns about the social, philosophical,

and ethical aspects of coaching. Research studies have found

that students from less-advantaged families—those with lower

family incomes and with parents who have less education and

lower level jobs—are less likely to use any form of test

preparation program.

oTest-wiseness

Test-wiseness refers to an individual’s ability to utilize the

characteristics and formats of a test to receive a high score.

Test-wiseness is independent of the student’s knowledge of

the subject matter that the test is designed to measure. Skills

involved in test-wiseness include strategies for time use, error

avoidance, guessing, and use of deductive reasoning.

Strategies to increase test-wiseness include becoming familiar

with the test before test day. It is always best to know as

much as possible about what to expect before arriving at the

test center. Once students know what to expect on the test,

they should practice taking the test. In general, test takers

feel more knowledgeable and have less anxiety when they

receive instructions about how to take a test. This reduces

errors caused by unfamiliarity with test procedures and leads

to scores that better reflect an examinee’s knowledge and

abilities.

Special strategies apply to each type of item format. For

example, on multiple-choice tests, test takers should examine

carefully all of the options or responses before attempting to

choose the correct answer. If the student stops when she sees

a correct answer—say, option A—she could miss reading

options B, C, D, and E, which might also be correct. Some

options on multiple-choice items may be similar and vary only

slightly; usually these options can be eliminated. The

examinee has a better chance of getting a higher score if

options known to be incorrect can be eliminated and the

choice is made from among the remaining alternatives.

Sometimes an option resembles the stem—it uses the same

names, words, or phrases; usually such options should be

selected. Correct answers are often longer and perhaps stated

more precisely or specifically than the other alternatives.

Simmonds et al. (1989 ) designed the SPLASH test-taking

strategy for multiple-choice tests. SPLASH is an acronym that

stands for the following:

Skim the Test Skim the entire test to get a general

idea of the number of items, the types of questions, and

areas of proficiency and deficiency.

Plan Your Strategy This includes knowing time

constraints of the test and where to begin.

Leave Out Difficult Questions Students should leave

difficult questions for the end.

Attack Questions You Know Students should first

answer all questions they are sure of.

Systematically Guess After completing all questions

they know, students should make their best guess on

the questions they don’t know.

House Cleaning A few minutes should be left prior to

the end of the exam to fill in all answers, double-check

forms, and clean up erasures.

oTest anxiety

With the increased use of high-stakes tests throughout K–12

education, test anxiety has become a common issue

confronted by school counselors. Test anxiety is the general

feeling of uneasiness, tension, or foreboding that some

individuals experience in testing situations. Test anxiety can

cause a host of problems in students, such as upset stomach,

headache, loss of concentration, fear, irritability, anger, and

even depression. Students with test anxiety typically worry

about not doing well on a test. This mind-set inhibits their

ability to absorb, retain, and recall information. Students with

low test anxiety, on the other hand, do not worry and are able

to focus on their test performance. There are some

controversies about test anxiety. Some researchers debate

the idea that anxiety interferes with test performance. In

other words, there is some belief that those with lesser ability

would have higher incidence of anxiety and that deficits in

test performance are based on skill rather than anxiety.

Sommer and Arendasy (2014 ) concluded that test anxiety is

a situation-specific trait based on existing deficits.

There are few published inventories with strong psychometric

properties that assess test anxiety. Only one specific

instrument, the Test Anxiety Profile, is reviewed in the Mental

Measurements Yearbook, and the reviews suggest extreme

caution in using this instrument. Other instruments such as

the Test Anxiety Inventory (TAI) and the Test Anxiety Scale for

Children (TASC) are available from various publishers, but we

also suggest caution in using these inventories. The TAI

consists of 20 items in which respondents are asked to report

how frequently they experience specific symptoms of anxiety

before, during, and after examinations using a 4-point scale

from 1 (almost never) to 4 (almost always). The TASC is a 30-

item instrument that assesses test anxiety, remote school

concerns, poor self-evaluation, and somatic signs of anxiety.

Students should be motivated to do their best on tests but

should not be made anxious. Sometimes, however, pressure

comes not from the counselor or teacher but from the

parents. Currently in our educational system, tests have

assumed too much importance in some states. They are used

as the sole criterion to judge whether a student should be

promoted to the next grade or allowed to move from one level

to another. Counselors should consider these strategies in test

administration:

Make sure students understand test instructions—check

with them, asking whether they understand. In a group

test, circulate around the room to see if students are

following directions and recording their answers

properly.

Establish rapport and an environment that is as relaxed

and stress-free as possible. Before the test, create a

learning-oriented environment. Students may need to

be taught more effective study habits and may need

more time to prepare for tests. Tests can be an

interesting learning experience as well as a motivational

one. At test time, be friendly and positive but follow

standardized procedures. Ensure that students have the

proper physical facilities, space to work, proper lighting,

adequate ventilation, and so on.

To remove some of the pressure from major tests and

exams, conduct group or class sessions on how to take

a test, give the students practice tests, and provide a

list of guidebooks and study guides that are available

for an upcoming test.

Students also viewed