Directions: Read The Following Student Post And Respo 309622

Directions Read The Following Student Post And Respond Cite Referenc

Directions Read The Following Student Post And Respond Cite Referenc

Read the following student posts and respond, citing references using APA format.

Paper For Above instruction

The Response to Student Posts on RTI Model and Autism Assessment Tools

The two student submissions provide insightful perspectives into critical aspects of educational assessment and intervention, specifically focusing on the Response to Intervention (RTI) model and the Childhood Autism Rating Scale (CARS). Both contributions highlight essential considerations in educational psychology, including the implementation challenges of RTI and the practical and theoretical limitations of autism assessment tools.

The first student, Cynthia Wager, discusses the RTI model as a multilevel prevention framework aimed at maximizing student achievement through data-driven decision-making. Wager emphasizes concerns surrounding the criteria for progressing students between tiers, the validity of assessment tools, and the roles of involved personnel. She correctly notes that diagnostic assessments, although useful for identifying deficits, do not always clarify the root causes of learning difficulties (Cohen, Swerdlik, & Sturman, 2013). This underscores a significant challenge in educational psychology: the need for comprehensive assessment strategies that go beyond standardized tests, including psychological and medical evaluations, to develop an accurate understanding of a student's needs. Wager also discusses curriculum-based measurement (CBM), which is acclaimed for its utility in monitoring student progress and adjusting instruction (Shinn, 2008). Furthermore, she notes the usefulness of tools like the Woodcock Reading Mastery Tests and the Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children in tracking literacy development and cognitive strengths, respectively. Her synthesis encapsulates the multifaceted approach necessary in RTI implementation, emphasizing evidence-based assessments, ongoing monitoring, and individualized interventions (Fuchs & Fuchs, 2006).

The second student, Dayane De Leon, explores the application and limitations of the Childhood Autism Rating Scale (CARS) in diagnosing autism spectrum disorder (ASD). She accurately depicts CARS as an observation-based tool that classifies autism severity through measurable ratings, which are relatively straightforward to administer (WPS, 2017). However, De Leon expresses difficulty in finding detailed information about the test's fairness, accommodations, modifications, and the procedures used in its development to ensure cultural and linguistic appropriateness. This critique reflects a broader concern in test psychology: the necessity for transparency and research validation regarding test fairness across diverse populations (AERA, APA, & NCME, 2014). Her lament highlights the gap between available peer-reviewed validation studies and the practical information needed for clinicians and educators to make equitable accommodations, especially for children requiring language or cultural adaptations. The simplicity of the CARS format, while advantageous in clinical settings, may limit its utility for diverse populations or in contexts requiring linguistic accommodations, an issue that warrants further research and development.

Both posts underscore the importance of employing assessments thoughtfully within an educational or clinical context. Wager’s discussion of RTI underscores the importance of comprehensive, multi-method evaluations and ongoing progress monitoring to inform instruction. Similarly, De Leon’s critique of CARS points to the ongoing need for assessment tools that are adaptable, culturally sensitive, and transparent in their development and validation processes. Together, these insights highlight the necessity for ongoing research, the development of equitable assessment practices, and the importance of integrating multiple data sources to inform educational interventions and clinical diagnoses effectively. Future research should focus on enhancing the cultural fairness of assessments like CARS and establishing clear guidelines for their appropriate modifications and use, ensuring practitioners can reliably serve diverse populations.

References

  • American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education. (2014). Standards for educational and psychological testing. American Educational Research Association.
  • Fuchs, D., & Fuchs, L. S. (2006). A national plan for research on response to intervention. School Psychology Review, 35(4), 549–555.
  • Shinn, M. R. (2008). Curriculum-based measurement: A manual for teachers. Guilford Press.
  • Cohen, R. J., Swerdlik, M. E., & Sturman, E. D. (2013). Psychological testing and assessment (8th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education.
  • WPS. (2017). Childhood Autism Rating Scale, Second Edition (CARS-2). From WPS Publishing.
  • Lord, C., Elsabbagh, M., Baird, G., & Veenstra-VanderWeele, J. (2018). Autism spectrum disorder. The Lancet, 392(10146), 508-520.
  • National Research Council. (2001). Educating children with autism. National Academies Press.
  • Antshel, K. M., & Russo, N. (2019). Cognitive assessment and diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder. Current Psychiatry Reports, 21(6), 29.
  • Lord, C., et al. (2012). Autism diagnostic observation schedule (ADOS-2). Western Psychological Services.
  • Gresham, F. M., & Elliott, S. N. (2008). Social skills improvement system (SSIS) rating scales. Pearson Assessments.

Related Assignments