Differences between Students with Emotional Disturbance, Learning Disabilities, and without Disabilities on the Five Dimensions of Emotional Disturbance

The present study investigated evidence of the construct validity of scores from the Scales for Assessing Emotional Disturbance Rating Scale (SAED-3 RS), which is designed to help identify emotional disturbance (ED) as defined by U.S. law and regulations. The purpose of this research was to evaluate...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of applied school psychology 2022-01, Vol.38 (1), p.58-73
Main Authors: Lambert, Matthew C., Cullinan, Douglas, Epstein, Michael H., Martin, Jodie
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
assessment
Construct Validity
Differences
Elementary School Students
Elementary Secondary Education
Emotional disturbance
Emotional Disturbances
Learning
Learning Disabilities
Rating Scales
Regulation
scales for assessing emotional disturbance
Scores
Secondary School Students
Students
Students with Disabilities
Validation studies
validity
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:The present study investigated evidence of the construct validity of scores from the Scales for Assessing Emotional Disturbance Rating Scale (SAED-3 RS), which is designed to help identify emotional disturbance (ED) as defined by U.S. law and regulations. The purpose of this research was to evaluate the degree to which SAED-3 RS scores differed between students with school-identified ED, students with school-identified learning disabilities (LD), and students without disabilities. The sample consisted of 2,193 K-12 students from throughout the U.S. The findings supported three hypotheses related to evidence of construct validity: (1) students with ED would differ from students without disabilities on all five dimensions of the SAED-3 RS; (2) students with ED would differ from students with LD on all dimensions of the SAED-3 RS except for the Inability to Learn dimensions; and (3) students with LD would differ from students without disabilities on all five dimensions of the SAED-3 RS, but that these differences would be smaller than the differences between students with ED and students without disabilities. Implications for practice and directions for future research are also discussed.
ISSN:1537-7903
1537-7911
DOI:10.1080/15377903.2021.1895399