ASSESSMENT EVALUATION BEHAVIORAL 1
Assessment Evaluation: Behavioral Focus Assignment
Kristina Hastings
School of Education, Liberty University
EDUC 622 D01: Educational Assessment and Intervention
Dr. Donna Jones
April 14, 2024
ASSESSMENT EVALUATION BEHAVIORAL 2
Analysis of Autism Diagnostic Interview ()TM-Revised
Summary of Assessment
The Autism Diagnostic Interview-Revised, or ADITM-R for short, is a structured
interview format designed to diagnose and differentiate autism from other
developmental disorders. ADITM-R is a highly recognized evaluative measure for
diagnosing Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) (The Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia,
2020). It evaluates language and communication, social interaction, and repetitive
behaviors or interests (Rutter et al., 2003). The updated version of the ADITM-R includes
a unified form for its five algorithmic assessments. Interviews are conducted with
parents to enable test administrators to gain insights into the developmental history and
present behaviors of the child being assessed (The Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia,
2020).
Strengths and Weaknesses of the Assessment
Since its inception in 2003, the Autism Diagnostic Interview-Revised (ADI-R) has
established a reputation within the global research community for its robust reliability
and validity (The Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, 2020). The scoring system for the
ADITM-R has been streamlined into a single form that encompasses all five of its
algorithms, simplifying the scoring process for those administering the assessment.
However, the ADITM-R is known for being quite labor-intensive, as it necessitates
one-on-one administration and typically takes between an hour and a half to two and a
half hours to complete for each individual (Rutter et al., 2003).
ASSESSMENT EVALUATION BEHAVIORAL 3
Justification and Use of the Assessment
The Autism Diagnostic Interview-Revised is utilized to identify autism, formulate
treatment strategies, and differentiate it from other developmental conditions (The
Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, 2020). This assessment applies to a broad spectrum
of individuals, including adults and children with a mental age exceeding two years
(Rutter et al., 2003). The ADITM-R is available in 16 languages and has proven to be a
highly effective tool for over 18 years (Rutter et al., 2003).
Name of Instrument #1
Autism Diagnostic InterviewTM-Revised
Author(s) of Instrument #1
Michael Rutter, Ann LeCouteur, Catherine Lord
Date of Publication
2003
Publisher
WPS Publishing
1. Describe the subtests (e.g., learning areas).
Language/Communication, Reciprocal Social Interactions, and Repetitive Behaviors,
Interests (Rutter et al., 2003).
2. Describe the age range.
This instrument applies to adults and children with a mental age over 2-0 years of age
(Rutter et al., 2003).
ASSESSMENT EVALUATION BEHAVIORAL 4
3. State the purpose of the instrument.
This instrument determines to diagnose autism, plan treatment, and distinguish it from
other developmental disorders (Rutter et al., 2003).
4. Describe the examiner's qualifications.
Examiners are expected to have qualifications at Level C, which requires a Bachelor’s
degree in addition to a license that requires additional training, or a Master’s degree in
a required field (Rutter et al., 2003).
5. Describe the available scores.
One single form provides scores for this instrument entitled the Comprehensive
Algorithm Form. It will calculate all five (5) ADITM-R algorithms (Rutter et al., 2003).
6. Describe the instrument’s technical data provided (i.e., validity,
reliability, norms, research).
International research findings categorically support the reliability and validity of
ADITM-R results (Rutter et al., 2003).
7. Describe features of the instrument that provide well-designed and
easy-to-follow administration procedures.
This evaluation is an interview-style assessment that is designed to focus on
abnormal behaviors (Rutter et al., 2003). This assessment concludes with categorical
results as opposed to scales and norm scores. It has been shown to differentiate
autism from various other developmental and behavioral disorders (Rutter et al.,
2003).
8. State the approximate administration and scoring time.
ASSESSMENT EVALUATION BEHAVIORAL 5
Including the scoring process, the time to administer is approximately 90-150 minutes
(Rutter et al., 2003).
9. Describe features of the scoring procedures that are well-designed and
easy to follow.
There is only one form for scoring the five (5) ADITM-R algorithms (Rutter et al., 2003).
This makes scoring quite simple.
10. Explain this instrument’s adaptation for students with limited English
proficiency.
The ADTMI-R provides many language translations. These include Swedish,
Norwegian, Finnish, Dutch, Danish, French, German, Hungarian, Italian, Romanian,
Russian, Spanish, Icelandic, Japanese, Korean, and Hebrew (Rutter et al., 2003).
11. Explain the appropriateness of the instrument for use with children with
disabilities.
Since the ADITM-R is appropriate for those children who have a mental age of 2 plus
years, it is easily adaptable for children with disabilities. (Rutter et al., 2003).
12. Describe the adaptation of the instrument for use with children with
special needs.
Since the ADITM-R is appropriate for those children who have a mental age of 2 plus
years, it is easily adaptable for children with special needs (Rutter et al., 2003).
13. Describe the strengths of the instrument.
This test's reliability and validity are tremendous strengths. It is also a long-standing
test with good viability (Rutter et al., 2003).
ASSESSMENT EVALUATION BEHAVIORAL 6
14. State any weaknesses of the instrument.
The length of the test can be considered a weakness, especially for the very young
who are being evaluated (Rutter et al., 2003). Children 2-8 years of age, especially
those with disabilities, may have difficulty sitting still for 90-150 minutes.
15. Additional comments, information, and observations:
Family members (parents) or caretakers of the evaluated individual are interviewed
for background developmental history and behavior as well as current behavior for the
administrator’s knowledge and consideration of evaluation (Rutter et al., 2003).
Analysis of Beck Anxiety Inventory
Summary of Assessment
The Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI) evaluates the severity of anxiety symptoms, as
noted by Beck & Steer and referenced by Waller in 1998. It employs a self-assessment
method for individuals from the age of seventeen onwards, allowing them to quantify
their symptoms using a four-point Likert scale, as described by Dowd in 1998.
According to Dowd, this tool is straightforward and user-friendly, consisting of 21 items
where individuals assess their own symptoms ranging from severe to extremely severe.
Upon administering these 21 items, four distinct categories of symptoms were identified:
neurophysiological, subjective, panic, and autonomic symptoms, as Waller observed.
Waller also remarked that this inventory is a valuable contribution to the existing
collection of clinical anxiety assessment tools (Dowd, 1998).
ASSESSMENT EVALUATION BEHAVIORAL 7
Strengths and Weaknesses of the Assessment
The Beck Anxiety Inventory highlights many shortcomings but does not clearly
highlight its strengths. A notable shortcoming is the manual's succinctness, which may
leave some users desiring more comprehensive information (Dowd, 1998).
Furthermore, the instrument has been the subject of a limited number of studies,
resulting in a relatively modest amount of research data (Dowd, 1998). The term
"strength" is not consistently used throughout the review compared to other instruments.
Nevertheless, Dowd acknowledges a positive aspect, noting that the manual contains
clear guidelines for both administering and scoring the tool. He also observes that the
information provided on the instrument's reliability and validity is considered "adequate"
(Dowd, 1998).
Justification and Use of the Assessment
The instrument's use is supported by its established validity and reliability. Dowd
characterizes the internal consistency reliability “coefficients as uniformly excellent”
(Dowd, 1998), with values spanning from .85 to .94 (Dowd, 1998). Additionally, various
types of validity for the instrument were reported. The instrument is designed for
individuals to assess the intensity of their anxiety symptoms (Dowd, 1998).
Furthermore, the BAI can be integrated with other assessments from the same creator
to generate an extensive computer-scored interpretive report (Dowd, 1998).
Name of Instrument #2
Beck Anxiety Inventory
ASSESSMENT EVALUATION BEHAVIORAL 8
Author(s) of Instrument #2
Aaron Beck and Robert Steer
Date of Publication
1987-1993
Publisher
Pearson
1. Describe the subtests (e.g., learning areas).
This instrument does not contain any subtests; however, it has 21 items rated based
on severity (Dowd, 1998). There have been four “symptom clusters” identified based
on the 21 items referenced. These include the following: (1) autonomic symptoms,
(2) subjective, (3) panic, and (4) neurophysiological (Waller, 1998).
2. Describe the age range.
This instrument is designed for those over the age of 17 as well as adults (Dowd,
1998).
3. State the purpose of the instrument.
The purpose of this assessment instrument is a self-reporting scale designed “‘to
measure symptoms of anxiety which are minimally shared with those of depression’”
(Beck & Steer as cited in Waller, 1998).
4. Describe the examiner's qualifications.
Potentially, due to the simplistic nature of this assessment, no examiner qualifications
are mentioned in the review.
5. Describe the available scores.
ASSESSMENT EVALUATION BEHAVIORAL 9
The reviewer notes that the computer scoring package offers three different methods
for administering tests and generating interpretive profiles for the Beck Depression
Inventory, the Beck Hopelessness Scale, the Beck Anxiety Inventory, and the Beck
Scale for Suicide Ideation, either separately or in combination (Dowd, 1998).
Furthermore, Dowd mentions that the profile provides clinical group comparisons and
records the patient's historical scores from past administrations and additional data
from that test (Dowd, 1998).
6. Describe the instrument’s technical data provided (i.e., validity,
reliability, norms, research).
Concerning the consistency of the test results over time, Dowd reports that the
internal consistency reliability coefficients are consistently high, with values between
.85 and .94. Additionally, retest reliability data from Beck et al. (1988) indicate a
coefficient of .75 over one week (Dowd, 1998). In terms of the test's validity, Dowd
comments that the validity measures are extensive and cover a range of types,
including content, concurrent, construct, discriminant, and factorial validity. Overall,
the data demonstrate strong validity, even when addressing the complex issue of
differentiating between anxiety and depression (Dowd, 1998).
7. Describe features of the instrument that provide well-designed and
easy-to-follow administration procedures.
The reviewer notes that the assessment is concise and straightforward. It consists of
21 items rated on a scale from 0 to 3, ranging from "not at all” (0 points)to "I can
barely stand it” (3 points) (Waller, 1998).
8. State the approximate administration and scoring time.
This assessment and scoring only take about 5-10 minutes (Waller, 1998).
9. Describe features of the scoring procedures that are well-designed
and easy to follow.
ASSESSMENT EVALUATION BEHAVIORAL 10
One simple aspect of the scoring procedures is that computer scoring and
interpretation are available (Dowd, 1998). Assessment scores are simply the sum of
each item tallied for the total (Dowd, 1998).
10. Explain this instrument’s adaptation for students with limited English
proficiency.
Dowd notes that the manual's authors appropriately warn that the instrument was
designed for a psychiatric population and should be used with caution when
interpreting results for nonclinical individuals. Additionally, a Spanish version of the
test is available (Dowd, 1998).
11. Explain the appropriateness of the instrument for use with children with
disabilities.
“The BAI was originally developed from a sample of 810 outpatients of mixed
diagnostic categories (predominantly mood and anxiety disorders)” (Dowd, 1998).
Dowd does mention that the manual's authors rightly advise that the instrument was
created with a psychiatric patient population in mind, and its results should be
interpreted with care when applied to individuals who are not clinical patients (Dowd,
1998).
12. Describe the adaptation of the instrument for use with children with
special needs.
The reviews of the instrument did not specifically address its suitability for students
with special needs. However, Dowd does point out that the manual's authors
correctly advise that the instrument was originally designed for a psychiatric
population, and its application should be approached with caution for those who are
not clinical patients (Dowd, 1998).
13. Describe the strengths of the instrument.
Dowd observes that the instructions for administering and scoring the test are
sufficiently detailed, and the information regarding the test's reliability and validity is
ASSESSMENT EVALUATION BEHAVIORAL 11
also satisfactory (Dowd, 1998). Computer and scoring interpretation are available for
this instrument (Dowd, 1998).
14. State any weaknesses of the instrument.
The manual is considered too concise, and some may prefer more comprehensive
information (Dowd, 1998). Additionally, the number of studies conducted on the
instrument could be improved, but the result is a relatively small data pool (Dowd,
1998). Finally, according to Waller (1998), the validity component has a high
discriminant value.
15. Additional comments, information, and observations:
The data on reliability and validity are comprehensive, yet they stem from a limited
number of only three studies (Dowd, 1998).
Analysis of the Behavior Disorder Identification Scale, Second Edition
Summary of Assessment
The Behavior Disorders Identification Scale (BDIS-2) serves as a tool for
recognizing and suggesting interventions for behavioral and emotional issues in
individuals, as well as extreme emotional disturbance in children, as outlined in the
guidelines by IDEA (Oehler & Stein, 2005). It comprises five distinct subtests, evaluating
interpersonal relationships, signs of depression or general unhappiness, and physical
manifestations of distress and providing a comprehensive overview of what the person
may be going through (Oehler & Stein, 2005). This evaluation can be conducted online
by either a parent or a teacher, making it readily available to a broad audience. It is
ASSESSMENT EVALUATION BEHAVIORAL 12
available in two distinct formats, one for use in the home and another for application
within school settings (Oehler & Stein, 2005).
Strengths and Weaknesses of the Assessment
This evaluation tool is designed for the assessment and evaluation of students
who may be experiencing any type of disorder or emotional instability. It can be
administered in both home and school settings, which allows for the observation of a
range of behaviors in different contexts (Oehler & Stein, 2005). A limitation of this tool is
the potential for administrators to influence the results to reflect a preferred outcome,
which could compromise the assessment's reliability (Oehler & Stein, 2005). The
assessment relies on observations, which are subject to being overlooked or
misinterpreted, potentially affecting the scoring process. Additionally, a further limitation
is the lack of clarity in some of the scoring instructions, which could lead to
inconsistencies in the evaluation results (Oehler & Stein, 2005). Another shortcoming of
this evaluation is that it does not require the person conducting or grading the test to be
formally trained, which could potentially compromise the dependability of the outcomes
(Oehler & Stein, 2005).
Justification and Use of the Assessment
The BDIS-2 was created to develop a rating scale that gathers information from
various sources. Its purpose is to efficiently and reliably capture individual observations
of behavior frequencies(Oehler & Stein, 2005). The components and subcomponents of
the scale are intended to align with the current definitions established in special
education legislation. Although the creation of this tool was based on practical
ASSESSMENT EVALUATION BEHAVIORAL 13
considerations, it may not be without its limitations (Oehler & Stein, 2005). Possessing
the capability to conduct psychometric research and present individual small-scale
studies would yield sufficient proof of consistency and accuracy (Oehler & Stein, 2005).
This evaluation is instrumental in identifying behavioral and emotional issues in
students, providing valuable insights. It enables the categorization of a student's internal
experiences, which enhances the ability of educators and healthcare professionals to
diagnose and manage these cases more effectively (Oehler & Stein, 2005). Moreover,
the test is readily available to individuals with disabilities or special needs, facilitating the
acquisition of a broader set of data (Oehler & Stein, 2005).
Name of Instrument #3
Behavior Disorders Identification Scale, Second
Edition
Author(s) of Instrument #3
Stephen B. McCarney, Tamara J. Arthaud, Kathy
Cummins Wunderlich
Date of Publication
1988-2000
Publisher
Hawthorne Educational Services
1. Describe the subtests (e.g., learning areas).
This evaluation is a behavioral assessment tool aimed at recognizing and
suggesting interventions for children and adolescents with behavioral and
emotional issues. It specifically targets the identification of children with Serious
Emotional Disturbance (SED) as defined by the criteria of the Individuals with
Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). SED encompasses difficulties in learning
ASSESSMENT EVALUATION BEHAVIORAL 14
relationships, emotional or behavioral regulation, as well as symptoms of
depression and physical manifestations (Oehler & Stein, 2005).
2. Describe the age range.
This tool is designed for individuals between 4.5 and 21 years (Oehler & Stein,
2005).
3. State the purpose of the instrument.
The objective of this tool is to record and verify behaviors that align with the
standards for classifying students as having behavioral disorders (Oehler & Stein,
2005).
4. Describe the examiner's qualifications.
No specific qualifications are required for the person scoring and interpreting the
results (Oehler & Stein, 2005).
5. Describe the available scores.
The version designed for educational settings includes 83 questions, while the
home version comprises 73 questions, both employing a seven-level scale. Each
level on this scale represents the frequency with which the observer noticed the
behavior in question (Oehler & Stein, 2005).
6. Describe the instrument’s technical data provided (i.e., validity,
reliability, norms, research).
The technical manuals for the assessment do not include norms for cooperating
school districts. The content validity of the evaluation was established through a
systematic process that involved generating a pool of potential items from a
review of relevant literature and input from professionals and parents of students
with Serious Emotional Disturbance/Behavioral Disorders (SED/BD). The internal
consistency coefficients, which measure the reliability of the assessment, are
ASSESSMENT EVALUATION BEHAVIORAL 15
reported to range from .82 to .97 for the school version and .75 to .94 for the
home version. Overall, the reliability of the evaluation is considered good, with
test-retest reliability scores of .91 for the school version and .82 for the home
version. Additionally, the interrater reliability, which assesses the agreement
between different raters, is .57 for the school version and .81 for the home
version (Oehler & Stein, 2005).
7. Describe features of the instrument that provide well-designed and
easy-to-follow administration procedures.
The instructions for administering the test are included in the testing materials.
Multiple raters are encouraged. The guidelines for filling out each form and
detailing the test units are straightforward. Although the scoring guidelines are
explicit, it is ambiguous whether clustering items for each scale on the protocol
affects the responses reported by participants (Oehler & Stein, 2005).
8. State the approximate administration and scoring time.
The time required to conduct and score this evaluation ranges from a minimum of
15 minutes for the home version to approximately 20 minutes for the school
version (Oehler & Stein, 2005).
9. Describe features of the scoring procedures that are well-designed
and easy to follow.
The guidelines for scoring are straightforward, although it is uncertain if placing
items from each scale in clusters on the form affects how participants report. This
method of scoring could lead to a negative bias in responses, even though the
rater is directed to estimate the frequency of observed behaviors. Many
behaviors might not be obvious. Additionally, if a rater intends to portray the
individual as having difficulties, they could potentially exaggerate the scores
(Oehler & Stein, 2005).
10. Explain this instrument’s adaptation for students with limited
English proficiency.
ASSESSMENT EVALUATION BEHAVIORAL 16
For students who are not fluent in English, the assessment is offered in Spanish.
Additionally, the material is designed to be understood at a reading level
equivalent to the fifth grade to facilitate understanding, which would benefit older
English learners (Oehler & Stein, 2005).
11. Explain the appropriateness of the instrument for use with children
with disabilities.
This evaluation tool was created for the appraisal of students with disabilities and
can be modified to guarantee a suitable evaluation of the student. Given that
either a parent or teacher can administer the assessment, it is appropriate (and
designed for) use with students with disabilities (Oehler & Stein, 2005).
12. Describe the adaptation of the instrument for use with children with
special needs.
The assessment comes in two versions and is designed to be flexible, allowing
for evaluating students with special needs. As the assessment can be conducted
by either a parent or an educator, it is deemed suitable for students with special
needs (Oehler & Stein, 2005).
13. Describe the strengths of the instrument.
The advantages of this tool are its well-developed content, user-friendliness
(such as its appropriate reading level), straightforward instructions, and the
assessment’s diagnostic capabilities. One of the advantages of this tool is that it
is available for administration via the Internet, allowing for swift and
straightforward scoring (Oehler & Stein, 2005).
14. State any weaknesses of the instrument.
One potential shortcoming of this assessment is the variability in interrater
reliability scores. This broad spectrum and the possibility of lower scores may
arise from the challenges an examiner faces in aligning their observations with
the established rating scale. A potential shortcoming of the instrument is that its
ASSESSMENT EVALUATION BEHAVIORAL 17
results depend exclusively on the teacher's or parent's interactions and
experiences with the child (Oehler & Stein, 2005).
15. Additional comments, information, and observations:
Analysis of Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales, Third Edition
Summary of Assessment
The Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales (Vineland-3) is a tool for evaluating
individual adaptive behavior (Carey & Sullivan, 2021). It offers four versions, accessible
both digitally and in print, which include forms for interviews, parent/caregiver input, and
teacher assessments (Stein & Widaman, 2010). The data for this evaluation is gathered
from secondary sources, as the subject of the assessment does not directly participate.
The purpose of this assessment is to detect behavioral and emotional issues,
encompassing a range of subtests such as Communication, Daily Living Skills,
Socialization, Motor Skills, as well as maladaptive and problematic behaviors (Stein &
Widaman, 2010). The Vineland-3 offers a thorough and meticulously crafted set of
forms for interviews and ratings aimed at evaluating the adaptive capabilities of
individuals from birth to 90 years of age (Stein & Widaman, 2010). It includes two
distinct survey forms: one for teachers to use with individuals aged 3-22 and an
expanded version suitable for the full age range of 0-90 years (Stein & Widaman, 2010).
ASSESSMENT EVALUATION BEHAVIORAL 18
Strengths and Weaknesses of the Assessment
The merits of this assessment tool include its well-crafted content and
user-friendly nature, complemented by straightforward guidance. The purpose of this
assessment is to detect behavioral and emotional issues, encompassing a range of
subtests such as Communication, Daily Living Skills, Socialization, Motor Skills, as well
as maladaptive and problematic behaviors (Stein & Widaman, 2010). It also boasts an
extensive age range, enabling its application across an individual's lifetime and
facilitating the tracking of their development. It includes two distinct survey forms: one
for teachers to use with individuals aged 3-22 years and an expanded version suitable
for the full age range of 0-90 years (Stein & Widaman, 2010). Vineland-3 administration
and scoring is available as an online option, which is also a benefit, especially for
efficiency (Stein & Widaman, 2010). However, a limitation of this tool is the variability in
interrater reliability scores, which can span a broad spectrum. The lower end of these
scores may reflect the challenges faced by examiners in aligning their observations with
the established criteria of the rating scale (Stein & Widaman, 2010).
Justification and Use of the Assessment
This evaluation serves as a categorization framework and is instrumental in
emphasizing the role of adaptive behavior in the diagnosis of intellectual disabilities.
Vineland-3 plays a significant role in the assessment and ongoing observation of
individuals with disabilities and special needs, offering a comprehensive array of data
(Stein & Widaman, 2010). The market lacks a wide array of modern, norm-referenced
tools for measuring adaptive behaviors that are accessible to professionals (Stein &
ASSESSMENT EVALUATION BEHAVIORAL 19
Widaman, 2010). For school psychologists, clinical psychologists, and developmental
pediatricians tasked with evaluating adaptive behavior in the context of intellectual and
developmental disabilities, this assessment is a crucial resource (Vineland Adaptive
Behavior Scales, 2016). The Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales are highly regarded
and frequently utilized tools for evaluating adaptive behaviors, ranking as some of the
top instruments in the field currently in use (Stein & Widaman, 2010).
Name of Instrument #4
Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales (Vineland-3)
Author(s) of Instrument #4
Sara S. Sparrow, Domenic V. Cicchetti, Celine A.
Saulnier
Date of Publication
1935-2016
Publisher
Pearson
1. Describe the subtests (e.g., learning areas).
This evaluation measures subtest competencies in the areas of Communication,
Daily Living Skills, and Socialization. Additionally, it offers the option to assess
motor abilities, both fine and gross, as well as evaluate problematic behaviors
(maladaptive behaviors) (Stein & Widaman, 2010).
2. Describe the age range.
The instrument is applicable to individuals from newborns through to those over
90 years old (Carey & Sullivan, 2021).
3. State the purpose of the instrument.
ASSESSMENT EVALUATION BEHAVIORAL 20
The objective of this tool is to evaluate adaptive behaviors, including the
execution of everyday tasks necessary for personal and social adequacy
throughout an individual's life (birth through age 90) (Carey & Sullivan, 2021).
Additionally, this assessment stands as one of the premier tools for measuring
adaptive behavior and is instrumental in diagnosing mental retardation and other
developmental disabilities within that age range (Stein & Widaman, 2010).
4. Describe the examiner's qualifications.
The individual administering the test should possess a bachelor's degree and
have experience in administering tests (Stein & Widaman, 2010). If the examiner
is a novice, a professional development course is suggested (Stein & Widaman,
2010).
5. Describe the available scores.
The TRF and Survey forms utilize a scoring system with three points, including
options such as Never, Sometimes, or Partially, and Usually, while the Expanded
Form employs a five-point scale that ranges from Almost Always, Often,
Sometimes, Rarely, to Never (Stein & Widaman, 2010). The subdomain scores
are translated into T-scale scores that span from 1-24, with an average score of
15 and a standard deviation of 3. The composite score for overall adaptive
behavior is expressed in standard scores with an average of 100 and a standard
deviation of 15. Domain scores have a potential range from 20 to 140 (Stein &
Widaman, 2010).
6. Describe the instrument’s technical data provided (i.e., validity,
reliability, norms, research).
The Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales assessment is characterized by intense
internal consistency and test-retest reliability. The assessment is regularly
updated, ensuring the reliability of its scores is maintained due to consistent
internal consistency (Stein & Widaman, 2010). The Vineland-3 interview and
parent/caregiver forms were normed on a sample of 2,560 individuals ranging
from newborns to those over 90 years old, reflecting the demographic distribution
of the United States across four major regions: West, North Central, Northeast,
and South. The sample included data from 1,415 students aged 3 to 18. The
adaptive behavior composite scores for the parent/caregiver form varied from .83
to .98, with reliability coefficients ranging from .90 to .99. The teacher form
showed reliability coefficients from .87 to .99. Test-retest reliability was also
ASSESSMENT EVALUATION BEHAVIORAL 21
measured, yielding coefficients from .56 to .92 on the interview form and from .60
to .94 on the parent/caregiver form. The teacher form had test-retest reliability
coefficients ranging from .62 to .93. Interrater reliability coefficients varied, with
the parent/caregiver form ranging from .38 to .94 and the teacher form from .22
to .91 (Stein & Widaman, 2010).
7. Describe features of the instrument that provide well-designed and
easy-to-follow administration procedures.
This evaluation tool has undergone thorough scrutiny to guarantee that the
manual provides ample clarity for use by parents, caregivers, and educators
(Stein & Widaman, 2010). The evaluation comes with a manual that includes
detailed instructions, guidelines for interpreting scores, and case studies for
reference. The person conducting the assessment will distribute the forms to the
teacher, parent, or caregiver, who will then document their observations about
the specific student (Stein & Widaman, 2010).
8. State the approximate administration and scoring time.
The duration for completing and evaluating this assessment ranges from a
minimum of 10 minutes to a maximum of 60 minutes, depending on the age of
the examinee and the subtests opted for (Stein & Widaman, 2010). The form for
parents or caregivers also requires 30 to 60 minutes to complete. The duration
needed to score the test varies based on the individual conducting it (Stein &
Widaman, 2010).
9. Describe features of the scoring procedures that are well-designed
and easy to follow.
The scoring process is straightforward and user-friendly due to the provision of a
manual that offers clear instructions to those administering the test (Stein &
Widaman, 2010). The assessment includes prompting procedures that are
simple and intuitive to implement (Stein & Widaman, 2010).
10. Explain this instrument’s adaptation for students with limited
English proficiency.
A version of the assessment in Spanish is provided for individuals who are not
proficient in English. The evaluation is also designed to be understood at a
ASSESSMENT EVALUATION BEHAVIORAL 22
fifth-grade reading level to facilitate comprehension, which is suitable for younger
students.(Stein & Widaman, 2010).
11. Explain the appropriateness of the instrument for use with children
with disabilities.
The Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales assessment is suitable for evaluating
children with special needs and disabilities. It is the responsibility of the
administrator to complete the forms in the correct environment for the child (Stein
& Widaman, 2010).
12. Describe the adaptation of the instrument for use with children with
special needs.
The assessment comes with two versions of forms and is designed to be flexible,
allowing for the evaluation of students with special needs.(Stein & Widaman,
2010).
13. Describe the strengths of the instrument.
The strengths of this instrument lie in its well-developed content,
user-friendliness (such as its appropriate reading level), straightforward
instructions, and its diagnostic capabilities (Stein & Widaman, 2010). Vineland-3
also offers multiple formats for convenience and accessibility, and it
encompasses a broad spectrum of ages and disabilities (Stein & Widaman,
2010).
14. State any weaknesses of the instrument.
One potential shortcoming of this assessment is the variability in interrater
reliability scores. This broad spectrum and the possibility of lower scores may
arise from the challenges an examiner faces in aligning their observations with
the established rating scale (Stein & Widaman, 2010). Also, there are
irregularities in the scoring range, and the scores also differ with the age of the
individuals, complicating the comparison of behavioral skills (Stein & Widaman,
2010).
ASSESSMENT EVALUATION BEHAVIORAL 23
15. Additional comments, information, and observations:
ASSESSMENT EVALUATION BEHAVIORAL 24
References
Carey, K.T., & Sullivan, J.R. (2021). Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales--Third Edition.
The twenty-first mental measurements yearbook.
Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia (CHOP), Roberts Center for Pediatric Research.
(2020). (ADITM--R) Autism diagnostic interview-revised.
https://www.research.chop.edu/car-autism-roadmap/autism-diagnostic-interview-r
evised-adi-r
Dowd T. (1998). [Review of Beck Anxiety Inventory, 1993 Edition]. The thirteenth mental
measurements yearbook.http://www.unl.edu/buros/
Oehler Fountain, J., & Stein, S. (2005). [Review of the Behavior Disorders Identification
Scale--Second Edition]. The sixteenth mental measurements yearbook.
https://web.p.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail/detail?vid=6&sid=4a5775b6-18a1-4d2c
-8be8-a2476b561217%40redis&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZSZzY29wZT1
zaXRl#AN=test.2368&db=mmt
Rutter, M., LeCouteur, A, and Lord, C. (2021). [Review of (ADITM--R) Autism Diagnostic
Interview--Revised]. WPS Publishing.
https://www.wpspublish.com/adi-r-autism-diagnostic-interviewrevised.html
Waller N. (1998). [Review of Beck Anxiety Inventory, 1993 Edition]. In The thirteenth
mental measurements yearbook. http://www.unl.edu/buros/
