General description

Due to the incipient development towards inclusive education, the German school system is facing severe changes. With respect to the inclusion debate there was a subsequent focus on multitiered intervention models, such as response to intervention or schoolwide positive behavior supports. In context of this discussion a change in diagnostic methods and strategies has been postulated by many authors (Deno, Fal, 2003; Fuchs, Fuchs & Stecker, 2010; Fuchs, 2004; Strathmann & Klauer, 2010). A change from labeling students by diagnostics to a more developmental approach of diagnostics is a core postulation in this topic. Whereas the current debate has succeeded in numerous instruments for a curriculum based measurement of skills in reading, spelling and mathematics, the development of feasible instruments to monitor students’ social behavior is just about to begin (Christ, Riley Tillman & Chafouleas, 2009). However, Direct Behavior Rating (DBR) is a promising method of social behavior assessment. DBR is a method of social–emotional and behavior assessment that combines the immediacy of systematic direct observation and the efficiency of behavior rating scales. The direct component in DBR means that the observation and rating occur nearly at the time that behavior occurs (Christ et al., 2009). In practical application the time interval between observation and rating could span from second to hours. This study is focussing on an evaluation of DBR with regard to two primary areas: (1) variance of ratings with two varied scales (anchoring: percent of time and quality of behaviour) and (2) two-week test–retest reliability. According to Riley Tillman, Christ, Chafouleas, Boice Mallach, Christina H. und Briesch (2011) is hypothesized that variance of ratings is acceptable and test-retest reliability is above r_tt = .7. Furthermore it was expected that results for a proportional rating show lower variance of ratings and a higher test-retest-reliability.

Christ, T. J., Riley Tillman, T. C. & Chafouleas, S. M. (Sep, 2009). Foundation for the development and use of Direct Behavior Rating (DBR) to assess and evaluate student behavior. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 34 (4), 201–213. Deno, S. L. (Fal, 2003). Developments in curriculum-based measurement. The Journal of Special Education, 37 (3), 184–192. Fuchs, D., Fuchs, L. S. & Stecker, P. M. (2010). The "Blurring" of Special Education in a New Continuum of General Education Placements and Services. Exceptional Children, 76 (3), 301–323. Fuchs, L. S. (2004). The Past, Present, and Future of Curriculum-Based Measurement Research. School Psychology Review, 33 (2), 188–192. Riley Tillman, T. C., Christ, T. J., Chafouleas, S. M., Boice Mallach, Christina H. & Briesch, A. (Apr, 2011). The impact of observation duration on the accuracy of data obtained from direct behavior rating (DBR). Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 13 (2), 119–128. Strathmann, A. M. & Klauer, K. J. (2010). Lernverlaufsdiagnostik: Ein Ansatz zur längerfristigen Lernfortschrittsmessung. Zeitschrift für Entwicklungspsychologie und Pädagogische Psychologie, 42 (2), 111–122.