This document provides an overview and assessment of several instruments used to measure behavioral and emotional status, including behavioral rating scales, classroom/home behavior instruments, social skills instruments, and attention deficit disorder instruments. It summarizes the purpose, technical characteristics, scores yielded, and suggested uses of various instruments such as the Achenbach System of Empirically Based Assessment, Behavior Rating Profile-2, Behavioral and Emotional Rating Scale, Attention Deficit Disorders Evaluation Scale-2, and Connors Rating Scales-Revised. In general, many of the instruments have adequate reliability and validity for screening purposes, though should not be used alone for diagnostic decisions.

1. Assessment of
Behavioral and
Emotional status
Analuz A.Fuentebella
MAED MA-SPED
MASE 414A
Submitted to: Dr. Aida S. Damian Ed D
University of Perpetual Help System Dalta
Ch
apt
er
9

2. In recent years there has been increasing interests in the
measurement of individuals Emotional and Behavioral status.
This can be trace to three specific issues. First the importance
and relevance of social Skills development has become more
relevant in the past decade. Second Autism was recognized by
the IDEA as a separate disability area. Subsequently there has
been a search for reliable methods of screening of screening and
identifying. Third although not officially noted as disability are
under IDEA; ADHD remains highly visible topic within the field of
education

3. Behavioral rating scale
Behavior-rating scales are concerned with
documenting observable behaviour. Typically, these
scales are develop for use by the classroom teacher
or some other individual who has an opportunity to
observe the examinee. BRS usually include items
grouped according to some categorical characteristic.
Although there are some similarities across the names
of categories, many of them tend to measure the
same behavioural dimensions. Theoretically, the
grouping of items leads to a profile of a student’s
behaviour patterns

4. BRS have been criticized, the technical adequacy of many scales has been
questioned. Also, the educational significance of their results is limited. It was
reviewed and reported that none met their minimum standards for interrater
reliability. However, there has been an argument that there has been increased
acceptance of behavior-rating scales and that technical advances have been made. It
was also noted that for the most part behavior-rating scales have good-to-excellent
reliability and are capable of differentiating clinical from comparison samples. That
are more difficult criterion is a scale’s ability to differentiate clinical groups from one
another. However, it is needed to obtain additional information and to rely solely on
the test scores from behaviour-rating scales because it was well documented that
two different informants rate the same child differently.

5. CLASSROOM and HOME BEHAVIOR INSTRUMENTS
Achenback System of Empirically Based Assessment-is an integrated set of forms including the
popular Child Behavior Checklist designed for parents.
Other components of ASEBA:
-teacher ratings
-direct observation
-interviews
-self respect
Description
Child Behavior Checklist and Young Adult Behavior Checklist are administered to parents to determined their
childs’s social competency and problem behaviors. There are two separate checklists.
1.) CBCL 1½ -5 age- measure six cross-informant syndromes
a) Emotionally Reactive,
b) Anxious/Depressed,
c) Somatic Complaints
d) Withdrawn
e) Attention Problems
f) Aggressive Behavior and Sleep Problems

6. 2.) CBCL 4-18 ages - has separate profiles for boys and girls and measured..
a)Anxious/Depressed
b)Withdrawn
c)Somatic Complaints
d)Social Problems
e)Thought Problems
f)Attention Problems
e)Aggressive and Delinquent
Internalizing, Externalizing, and Total Problems are also available as well as Social Competence Scales. The
Young Adult Behavior checklist (YABCL) includes scales for Aggressive Behavior, Anxious,/Depressed, Attention
Problems, Delinquent Behavior, Intrusive, Somatic Complaints, Thought Problems, and Withdrawn. Adaptive
Functioning Scales as well as Internalizing, Externalizing, and Total Problems are included
Caregiver-Teacher Report Form (1 ½-5) and Teacher Report Form (5-18) closely resembles the content of the
CBCL/1 ½ and the CBCL/4-18. However, TRF provides separate scores for Inattention and
Hyperacivity/Impulsivity.
Direct Observation Form designed for ages 5-14. It requires the evaluator to observe the child in 10-minute time
samples and then respond to 96 items that yield a behavior problem score and an on task score.
Youth Self-Report and Young Adult Self-Report reflect the first person. There are several questions and other
items that must be rated “not true” “sometimes true” or “very true”
Semi structured Clinical Interview for Children and Adolescents is designed for experienced interviewers
working with individuals ages 6-18. It includes series of questions and probes as well as forms to rate the
behaviors during the interview.

7. Interpretation of Results
Interpreted through the use of the various profiles. Profiles are also interpreted as “borderline or “ clinical.” A new
feature is the Assessment Data Manager, a software program that scores the ASEBA and allows for Multisource data
comparisons.
Technical Characteristics
Review of Relevant Research
ASEBA has been used in over 3,500 research studies in 50 countries. The vast majority of these studies however, have used it as an
outcome measure and have not studied its strengths and weaknesses specifically. In general, the technical characteristics of the ASEBA
have been favorable.
Normative Sample.
The CBCL was normed on 2,368 children. Scales were devised from parents’ ratings of 4,4555 referred children. The YABCL
used 1,074 parents. reliability. Interrater reliabilities were primarily in the .90’s for the CBCL and from the .70’s to the .90’s
for Direct Observation Form. Test-Retest coefficients were in the .80’s to .90’s for the Teacher Report Form.
Validity.
Results of several validity studies are reported in the manual. These generally demonstrate moderate correlations with
other behaviour-rating scales and the instruments’ ability to identify children who have been referred for mental health
services.

8. Overview: Achenback System of Empirically Based Assessment (ASEBA)
- Age level—1 ½ to 30 years old
- Type of administration—Individual
- Technical adequacy –Generally good reliability and validity
- Scores yielded- T-scores (type of standard score); results are placed on a Behavior
Profile.
- Suggested use—Overall, the ASEBA is one of the better behaviour-rating scales
available.
It has many positive features. The ASEBA is continuously updated through ongoing
research by the author. This is advantageous, but it requires the users to keep up with the
latest versions of the latest Instruments. Overall, the ASEBA can be used confidently to
document the behavioural status of students In a variety of areas. One drawback it that
the manual is not “ user friendly”

9. BEHAVIOR RATING PROFILE-2
It is an ecological approach to assessment, meaning that the information is obtained from a number of sources.
Components:
1) student rating scale- home, school, and peer -consist of 20 items about school, home, and peers. It is completed
by the student, is presented in a true-false format.
Examples: “I can’t seem to stay at my desk in school” ( school item)
“Other children are always picking on me” ( peer item)
“I don’t listen when my parents are talking to me” ( home item)
2) teacher rating scale-can be completed by all school personnel who have significant contact with the student.
It consists of 30 items the the teacher must categorize as “ very much like the student,” “like the student”
“ not like the student” or “not at all like the student.
Examples: “doesn’t follow class rules”
“tattles on classmates”
3) parent rating scale- can be completed by one or both of the parents.
Examples: “is verbally aggressive to parents”
“wont share belongings willingly”
4) sociogram- method to get peer perceptions in the evaluation. A pair of questions is given to each student in the class.
Examples: “which of the girls and boys in your class would you most like to have as your friend?”
“which of the girls and boys in your class would least like to have as your friend?”
This allows for the evaluation of the student in a number of settings and by a number of Individuals. The test is individually
administered

10. Interpretation of Results. Results from each section can be converted to standard scores with A mean
of 10 and a standard deviation of 3. These scores can be plotted on a behavior-rating profile sheet.
Percentile ranks are also available.
Techinical Characteristics
Normative Sample-
Reliability-
Validity-
Review of Relevant Research
The instrument has potential value as screening device, although it should not be used for
diagnosis of a behaviour disorder or developing treatment plans. Among the weaknesses were the
lack of inter observer reliability, limited usage with young children and the lack of data to indicate
that the BRP-2 can discriminate between students with emotional/ behavioral disorders and
students with learning disabilities. The instrument was not sensitive to different types of behaviour
and emotional disorders such as depression, ADHD, and conduct disorders

11. Overview: Behavior Rating Profile-2
A. Age level—6 to 18 ½ yearsl old
B. Type of administration– Individual (except for sociogram) small group possible
C. Technical characteristic s—Adequate reliability (except for grades 1 and 2 and for
student form)
D. questionable validity.
E. Scores yielded—Standard scores, percentile ranks.
F. Suggested use– measures a students behaviour in a number of settings and with
information from a number of individuals. This yields information that for instance, will
help to determine if a student’s behavior problem occurs only at home or only at
school. Unfortunately, it is difficult to determine whether a difference in behaviour is
really a difference or only the way in which the behaviour is perceived, because more
than one person is rating. In summary, the BRP-2 is a potentially useful Tool to
determine how a student behaves in different settings and how different individuals
perceive That behaviour. However, definitive diagnostic decisions should not be based
solely on the BRP-2. Clearly Research should be conducted on the BRP-2

12. In addition to the instruments just described several others are worthy of note. Those include The
Behavioral and Emotional Rating Scale, a relatively new addition, the Behavior Evaluation Scale-2, a
revision of a quickly administered instrument, the Emotional or Behavior Disorder Scale, designed
to measure emotional and behaviour problems based on the most recent definition, and the
Revised Problem Behavior Checklist, based on Quay’s classification system. Finally, the Walker
Problem Behavior Identification Checklist has received a lot of use, primarily as a screening test.
Behavioral and Emotional Rating Scale
A. Age level—5 through 18
B. Type of administration—Individual
C. Technical adequacy—Good standardization and reliability (for Total Score); adequate
validity
D. Suggested use—The Behavioral and Emotional Rating Scale is considered a “strength
based” system that focuses on student’s personal strengths The fifty-two items yield
scores in five areas: interpersonal strengths, involvement with family, intrapersonal
strengths school functioning and affective strength. An overall test score is also
available. The BERS takes only about ten minutes to complete. It seems appropriate for
screening and identifying general behavioural and emotional gaols. It has been shown to
differentiate students with emotional and behavioural disorders from those without.
ADDITIONAL CLASSROOM/HOME BEHAVIOR INSTRUMENT

13. The Behaviour Evaluation Scale-2
A. Age level—Kindergarten through grade 12
B. Type of administration—Individual
C. Technical adequacy—Adequate standardization, reliability, and
D. Scores yielded—Standard scores for subscales and total,
E. Suggested use—The Behavior Evaluation Scale-2 can be
approximately fifteen to twenty minutes. It includes seventy-six
broken down into the areas of learning problems ,interpersonal
difficulties, inappropriate behaviors, unhappiness/depression,
symptoms/fears and a total score. It should be used in
other instruments to make important decisions Although it is
for screening purposes. It is also easy for classroom use.

14. The Emotional or Behavior Disorders Scale
A. Age level—4 ½ to 21 years old.
B. Type of administration—Individual
C. Technical adequacy—Good normative sample, adequate reliability and validity
D. Scores yielded—Standard scores, percentiles
E. Suggested use—The Emotional or Behavior Disorder Scale was designed to
meet the criteria Specified in the new behaviour disorder definition by the
same name. The subscales include Are Academic Progress, Social
Relationships, Personal Adjustment, and Vocational, although The vocational
component of the EBDS is sold separately and designed for use for students
Age 15 or older. School and home versions of the scale each can administered
in approximately Fifteen to twenty minutes. One nice feature of the EBDS is an
intervention manual that includes More than 400 strategies, goals, and
objectives for students with EBD.

15. Social Skills Instruments
One criticism of many behaviour-rating scales is that they focus more on maladaptive or
Problem bahaviors instead of prosocial behaviors. With the knowledge importance of social
Skill deficits in children with disabilities. It is not surprising that instruments have been
Developed that focus more on social competence and social skills.
ADHD Instruments
Although not recognized as a separate disability area in the Individuals with Disabilities
Education Act, Attention Deficit-Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) has been receiving increasing
Interest. ADHD can either predominantly inattentive (previously termed ADD) predominantly
Hyperactive/impulsive, or combined. Similarly, in recent years new instruments designed to
measure these areas have been published. Attention deficit, disorder Evaluation Scale, the
ADD-H Comprehensive Teacher’s Rating Scale, The attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder
Test, the Children’s Attention and Adjustments Survey and the Diagnostic Assessment Scales
for Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder. In addition, the Connors Rating Scales-Revised,
originally Developed to measure hyperactivity, have also received new attention.

16. Social skills Instrument

17. Attention Deficit Disorders Evaluation Scale-2
A. Age level—4 ½ to 20 years
B. Type of administration—Individual
C. Technical adequacy—Good formative sample (school version), adequate normative
version), good reliability, adequate validity.
D. Score yielded—Standard scores and percentile ranks; a profile analysis is also available
E. Suggested use—It was developed to help identify individuals with attention deficit
without hyperactivity). The scale was designed based on the American Psychiatric
Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM-IV) criteria. Subsequently, three subscales
impulsiveness, and hyperactivity. Both a school version and a home version are available,
be completed in approximately fifteen to twenty minutes. In addition to the scale itself,
Deficit Disorders Intervention Manual also coincides with the behaviors noted in the
the test. A parent guide to Attention deficit disorders provides suggestions for
the behaviour noted in the home version. A Computerized program is also available for
and intervention manual. In a review of the original ADDES, Silverthorne (1994) Noted
features, including the ease of administration and scoring and its construction on the
criteria established by the APA. She also pointed out that factor analytic studies have
presence of only Two factors—inattention-disorganization and motor hyperactivity-

18. ADD-H Comprehensive Teacher’s Rating Scale (Second Edition)
A. Age level—Kindergarten through grade 8
B. Type of administration—Individual
C. Technical adequacy—Adequate normative sample, adequate reliability,
questionable validity
D. Scores yielded—Percentile ranks and a visual profile
E. Suggested use—The ADD-H Comprehensive Teacher’s Rating Scale is a brief
checklist of Twenty-four items that measures the areas of attention,
hyperactivity, social skills, and Oppositional behaviour. The authors recommend
that the scale be administered by teachers Because the majority of the items on
the scale would be demonstrated in the classroom. The ACTeRS is probably used
as a quick screening device although it might be used with other Information to
help identify a student as having ADHD. Computerized scoring is also available For
the ACTeRS.

19. Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder Test
A. Age level—3 to 23 years old
B. Type of administration—Individual
C. Technical adequacy—Good normative sample, good reliability, adequate validity
D. Scores yielded—Standard score and percentile ranks.
E. Suggested use—The items were selected based on the diagnostic criteria for ADHD
found In the DSM-IV. The ADHDT contains thirty-six items measuring the areas of
hyperactivity, Impulsivity, and inattention. The instrument is basically used as a
screening measure and can be completed by teachers, parents, as well as others who
are knowledgeable about the child. The ADHDT is the first instrument to provide
national norms based on ADHD subjects.
The Children’s Attention and Adjustment Survey
A. Age level—5 to 13 years old
B. Type of administration—Individual
C. Technical adequacy—adequate normative sample, reliability, and validity
D. Scores yielded—Standard scores and percentile ranks.
E. Suggested use— The CAAS; is a short checklist of behaviors related to attention
problems and hyperactivity. Specifically, the CAAS provides information regarding four
areas: inattentiveness Impulsivity, hyperactivity, and conduct problems and

20. Connors Rating Scales-Revised
• Age level—3 through 17 years old
• Type of administration—Individual
• Technical adequacy—Varied, depending on type and form of scale used; in
general, the long forms are preferable to the short forms.
• Scores yielded—Empirical percentile, T-scores.
• Suggested use—It is more up to date version of the original Conners Scales
that were used Initially to identify children with hyperactivity.
Diagnostic Assessment Scales for Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder
• Age level—5 through 18 years old
• Type of administration—Individual
• Technical adequacy—Good standardization, good reliability, and validity
• Scores yielded—A four point Likert scale.
• Suggested use— Designed using the ADHD rater found in the DSM-IV. In
addition, the American Academy of Pediatrics Practice Guidelines for the
Diagnosis and Evaluation of ADHD were used.

21. Autism Instruments
With the passage of IDEA, autism became a new category of disability. The result has
been an increase in the number of assessment instruments designed to identify
individuals who have autism.
Autism Screening Instrument for Educational Planning-2
A. Age level- 18 months through adulthood
B. Type of administration—Individual
C. Technical adequacy—Adequate normative sample, reliability, and validity
D. Scores yielded—Standard scores and percentiles; summary booklet profile
E. Suggested used—It is a revision of popular autism screening instrument that
includes subtests measuring five areas. Those five areas are a sample of vocal
behaviour, assessment of interaction, assessment of communication,
determination of learning rate, and a behavioural checklist measuring sensory,
relating, body concept, language, and social self-help skills.

22. Childhood Autism Rating Scale
A. Age level– 2 years and up
B. Type of administration—Individual
C. Technical adequacy—Adequate normative sample, reliability, and validity.
D. Scores yielded—A diagnostic categorization system is provided based on the individual’s
raw score on the fifteen items.
E. Suggested usd—The Childhood Autism Rating Scale was originally developed as a means
of evaluating children for a statewide program called Treatment and Education of Autistic
and Related Communication Handicapped Children (TEACCH).
Gilliam Autism Rating Scale
A. Age level—3 through 22 years
B. Type of administration—Individual
C. Technical adequacy—Adequate normative sample, good reliability and validity
D. Scores yielded—Standard scores and percentiles
E. Suggested use—It was designed for use by teachers, parents, and other professionals. The
GARS was based on the information on autism provided, in part, from the DSM-IV manual
of the American Psychiatric Association and by the Autism Society of America.

23. MEASUREMENT OF EMOTIONAL STATUS
Ironically, many examiners try to infer a child’s emotional state by “analysing”
the observable behavior. For instance, “Because Susan is sitting alone in the
back of the classroom, she has a poor self-concept”; or “Because Billy hit his
sister, he is having problems with sibling rivalry.” Inferences of this type should
be avoided; they usually result in some kind of misinterpretation.
Projective Methods
They grew our of psychoanalytic and Gestalt psychology. The concept is
simple. When presented with an ambiguous stimulus, an individual will “project”
his or her “ way of seeing life, his meanings, significances, patterns and
especially his feelings”

24. The following is a brief discussion of several projective
tests
• Rorschach Ink Blot Test (Rorschach,1932). Is the test the typically
comes to mind when the term projective test is mentioned. Exmines
what they see in inkblot.
• Thematic Apperception Test (Murray 1943). Is the test uses a series
of thirty-one pictures as stimuli to elicit projected stories.
• Childrens Apperception(Bellak & Bellak, 1974). As in the TAT, cards
with pictures on them are used to stimuli. The CAT consists of two
sets of cards. One set of ten cards has picture of animals involved in
a variety of situations. The other set of pictures has the picture of
humans. This set can be used with older children.

25. Inkblot test Thematic Apperception Test
Children’s Apperception test

26. • Education Apperception Test(Thompson &Sones 1973)-
consists of 18 pictures of children engaged in school related
It measures child emotion in four areas: learning, authority,
relations, and home attitude toward school.
• Task of Emotional Development(cohen and Weil 1971)-
consist of 13 pictures that are associated with specific areas
emotional dev. In children and adolescent.
– Socialization within the group
– Establishment of trust with people
– Acceptance and control of aggressive feelings towards peers
– Establishment of positive attitudes toward academic learning
– Establishment of conscience with respect to the property of
– Separation from the mother figure
– Identification with the same sex parent
– Acceptance of siblings
– Acceptance of limits from adults
– Acceptance of affection between parents
– Establishment of positive attitude toward orderliness and
– Establishment of positive self concept.
– Establishment of positive heterosexual socialization

27. • Hutt adaptation bender gestalt test (Hutt,1977)- types
of errors made and the approach taken in the copying
forms are interpreted in terms of personality
• Human figure drawing test(Koppitz,1968)- designed to
use a childs drawing of a human figure as a projective
• Kinetic drawing system for family and school(Knoff&
Prout 1985)- combination of the older kinetic family
drawing and the kinetic school drawing. Ages 5-10.
• Self report and projective inventory(ziffer& Shapiro
1995)- designed for children 5-12 combines self report
and projective components.
• Draw a person- interpretation on a childs drawing of a
man, woman and him or herself.

28. hutt adaptation bender gestalt test Draw a person test

29. Self Concept Measures
One area that assessed frequently is a student
self-concept. Because this is a difficult
construct to define, most of the instrument in
this area are of questionable validity. Other
self-concept scales is non-verbal and still
others are completed by someone other than
the subject. One problem with most self-
concept scales is that the positive or negative
intent of the items is fairly obvious. Many
children will answer the way they think others
will expect them to respond.

30. Several measures of self-concept
• Age level-Grades 4 to 12
• Areas measured-Behavior, Intellectual and School
Status, Physical Appearance and Attributes, Anxiety,
Popularity, Happiness and Satisfaction, and Lie Scale
• Administraion and Scoring-The Pierres-Harris Self-
Concept Scale. The subject must read each
statement and score it “yes” or “no”
• Reading required-yes
• Technical Adequacy-Adequate reliability, limited
validity

31. Self-Esteem Index
• Age level-7 to 18 years
• Areas measured-Academic competence, family
acceptance, peer popularity, personal security
• Administraion and Scoring- Administered to
individuals or group. It includes a self-report
format using a four-point LIkert scale
• Reading required-yes
• Technical Adequacy-Adequate reliability,
limited validity

32. Student Self-Concept Scale
• Age level-Grades 3 to 12
• Areas measured-Academic, Social, Self Image, and
Lie Scale. Note: The first three self- concept areas
are measured along three dimensions: self–
confidence, importance, and outcome confidence
• Administraion and Scoring- Uses a self-report rating
format and is based on Bandura’s theory of self-
efficacy. It can either administered by individual or
by a group and consists of 72 items
• Reading required-yes
• Technical Adequacy-Adequate reliability, limited
validity

33. Tenesse Self-Concept Scale: Second Edition
• Age level-7 and older
• Areas measured-
• Counseling form- Self criticism; self esteem
• Clinical and Research form-Above areas; plus 15 others including
response bias, net conflict, total conflict, empirical scales, and
deviant signs.
• Administration and Scoring- It has 100 items.
The subject must reach each item on a scale of
1 (false) to 5 (true)
• Reading required-yes
• Technical Adequacy-Adequate reliability, limited
validity

34. Inventories and Questionnaires
The intent of inventories and questionnaires is to measure objectively the
emotional and personality characteristics of individuals. Most of these
instruments are designed for adolescents and adults. One notable exception is
the Personality Inventory for Children-2. Another is Beck Youth Inventories
which are used primarily for screening depression, anxiety, depression,
disruptive behaviour, and self-concept. Inventories and questionnaires usually
include a large number of items that purportedly measure several personality
traits or characteristics (A group of items referring to a given trait is usually
referred to as a scale for that trait.) Many times, these items are in the form of
a behavioral description (“such as I sometimes hear strange voices”) That the
examinee must label as true or false. This self-report techniques is used in
majority of these instruments, although some of them require a familiar
person (such as parent) to complete the items about the examinee.
In addition to the personality scales themselves, these instruments usually
includes some type of validity scale to help determine if the examinee is “
telling the truth”. In general, however, both of the reliability and the validity of
these instruments have been questioned. Many inventories have also been
criticized because the various areas identified for a profile analysis overlap in
content. For these and several other reasons, the use of these instruments as
tools in the process of education is limited.

35. Other popular personality inventories
Personality Inventory for Children-2- One of the few
inventories designed to include children in its age range. It
can be used with individuals from age 5 to 19. There are
both Response and Validity Scales (to determine the
truthfulness of the answers) and Adjustment Scales. There
are 275 item that can be administered in approximately
40 minutes. A shorten version can be done in 15 minutes.
The PIC-2 is one of the few available personality
inventories designed for children. One must be aware of
the possible bias of the respondents. The test is more
clinical than educational; the result will be used for more
for eligibility purposes than educational programming.

37. Instrument or technique