Abstract
Introduction
This book was designed to provide guidance and models for professional report writing. The text also provides an emphasis on comprehensive and theoretically based assessments. The editors accomplish this by providing case reports documenting comprehensive assessments as well as brief section overviews describing any issues that might arise in a given assessment situation.
Content and Structure
Each chapter within the text offers an example of a clinical report produced from a comprehensive evaluation. There are 58 chapters (therefore 58 reports), with a wide range of topics. Some chapters refer to assessment issues for specific disability types (e.g., ADHD, autism, learning disabilities, etc.). Others refer to assessment concerns for a specific population (e.g., gifted children, preschoolers, English-language learners, etc.). And still other chapters refer to the interpretation of specific test instruments (e.g., DAS-II, WJ-III: ACH, SB-5, etc.). In addition to these chapters, the foreword and introduction also review the need for diagnostic assessments, and appendices at the end of the book provide additional guidelines on reports and report writing.
The editors have chosen experts in the field to write many of the chapters and reports, including individuals from different backgrounds: test authors, proponents of different theories/methods, and practitioners. For example, Elliot provides examples with the use of the DAS-II, Naglieri with the CAS, Kamphaus with the BASC-II, and Roid with the SB-5. Examples of experts who provide a specific theoretical framework include: Flanagan and Alfonso’s learning disability theories, Ortiz’s guidelines for English-language learners, and Fiorello’s neuropsychological approach. Representing the respected practitioners in the field are Wright, who provides reports from a school psychologist’s perspective; Logerquist, whose reports are from the view of a clinical psychologist; and Bailey, who writes from the role of a speech-language pathologist.
Given the length of this text, I will use one sample chapter to illustrate the format and layout that applies to most of the other chapters, rather than discuss these characteristics of each chapter individually. The sample chapter selected by this reviewer for discussion was by Fletcher-Janzen, “Differential Diagnosis: Emotional Disturbance or Conduct Disorder.” Within the first page, Fletcher-Janzen describes the underlying issues surrounding the emotional disturbance versus conduct disorder diagnostic dilemma. Her discussion includes the nature of school-based diagnostic decision making, specific systems issues for consideration, and legal/professional issues. These latter issues include the differences represented between the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV; American Psychiatric Association, 1994) and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEA, 2004). A report in the form of a Psychological Assessment begins at the bottom of the first page and provides all of the general categories frequently seen in most reports (e.g., identifying information, reason for referral, history, observation, tests administered, test interpretation, summary, and recommendations). The report provides all of the information needed to make a diagnosis even though no diagnosis is provided. This is common for school-based assessments as the eligibility team determines the diagnosis and not the school psychologist.
Most of the chapters are formatted similarly, devoting 1 to 2 pages to the research on a specific issue (e.g., neurological assessment, ADHD assessment, etc.) with the remainder of the pages in that chapter covering an example of an assessment report on an individual with that issue. Each chapter is approximately 10 to 15 pages in length; therefore, the focus of the text is on these report-writing examples.
Philosophy of the text
An evaluation of the philosophy of the text was conducted by examining the Foreword (by John Willis) and the Introduction (by the editors). The information provided in these sections sets the tone for the rest of the book. John Willis describes the need for assessment in order to understand the “why” of a client’s difficulty so that intervention specialists will know the “how” to ensure success. He states that an accurate and comprehensive assessment is needed to provide data to determine the “how” and “why,” even within a Response to Intervention (RtI) framework. In addition, he describes parsimony (in reports as well as assessment selection) to be a significant problem and barrier to obtaining a complete picture of a client’s issues. In this, the value of providing all required data to complete a diagnostic analysis outweighs the value of simplicity.
In the Introduction, the editors are more explicit about the role they feel that RtI plays in diagnostic assessments. They describe RtI as more of a set of pre-referral strategies than a diagnostic model. This goes against some of the literature published by RtI purists (e.g., Gresham, 2002). The editors of the text argue against these purists saying that RtI methods are insufficient as the sole assessment system for diagnosing a learning disability. They add that a comprehensive assessment is necessary to identify problems and establish interventions. They advocate for comprehensive evaluations as a routine part of any diagnostic assessment. This concept comprises the primary reason for their perceived need for a book such as this. In their words,
The purposes of this book are therefore twofold: (a) to provide models of psychological and educational reports using a variety of different tests and approaches, and (b) to illustrate the value of comprehensive evaluations for understanding an individual’s unique learning abilities and disabilities. (Mather & Jaffe, 2011, p. xxvi)
Critique
Comparison with other texts
There are several books available that provide examples of psychological assessment reports. Many of them are “how-to” guides for novices to learn report writing (e.g., Braaten, 2007; Goldfinger & Pomerantz, 2009). Although not the main focus, these guides often include case report examples to support the reader’s understanding of the text. Unlike these “how-to” guides, other books provide case study examples (e.g., Gibbon, Spitzer, & Skodol, 1994; Oltmanns, Martin, Neale, & Davison, 2011); however, these are mostly based on DSM-IV diagnostic categories with little or no educational/school focus. In fact, no recent texts provide as extensive a list of psychoeducational assessment data as can be found in the Comprehensive Evaluations text.
One of the editors, Mather, is a coauthor of another book, Essentials of Assessment Report Writing (Lichtenberger, Mather, & Kaufman, 2004), which fits more into the category of a “how-to” guide for report writing. The same publisher as the Comprehensive Evaluations text produces the Essentials book, and both of Mather’s coauthors of the Essentials book provide chapters in the Comprehensive Evaluations text. Thus, although the Comprehensive Evaluations text is not designed to be a sequel to the Essentials text, the two could partner each other within a training program. The Essentials text would be of benefit to new students learning the foundational skills of report writing, and the Comprehensive Evaluations text would be helpful to any interns, practicum students, or recent graduates who need help refining their skills. In addition, the Comprehensive Evaluations text could be a foundational text for any experienced practitioner in the field.
Critique of the text
The Comprehensive Evaluations text is an excellent resource for any experienced individual providing assessments within an educational setting; I will happily add it to my list of required texts for students in practicum and internship classes. This is the kind of book that clarifies difficult topics and assessment issues in an easy-to-read and easy-to-use format. In addition, the selection of authors was smart and informed, reading like a “who’s who” of assessment specialists. The individuals writing these chapters are well respected and extremely knowledgeable about the field of diagnostic assessments. In addition, the formatting of this text makes it an excellent resource guide in which the reader can quickly access desired information.
Although I provide a favorable review, I have some concerns about the text. First, I am somewhat concerned about the RtI stance taken by the editors of the text. The editors state in the introduction that RtI is not a substitution for a comprehensive assessment, which is counter to the beliefs of others in the field (e.g., Gresham, 2002). However, the real issue is that even if the editors do not feel that RtI reports should be the main focus of assessments, practitioners in the field still require solid examples of how to write reports using this technique. For the most part, the reports in the text do not model RtI reports that I have seen in practice. When presenting RtI data, the chapter authors tend to place it in the background information or previous testing sections of the report. They often provide only a brief discussion of progress monitoring data (and an even briefer discussion of the intervention provided). One exception to this was Shultz’s chapter (which does not have RtI in the title). This chapter provides an example of RtI procedures and data similar to reports that I have seen in the field. This example is rich with easy-to-read analyses more in line with what many practitioners are expected to provide in the schools. It should be noted that the editors were clear to point out that this book is designed for many types of educational professionals and not just school psychologists (e.g., clinical psychologists, special educators, and speech-language therapists). This may account for a lack of RtI focus within the text. Even with this caveat, this text may not be the first choice for programs with a strong RtI focus.
My second concern is more of a caution than a problem. The book should not be used as an introductory text or primer for students new to assessment. There are plenty of other texts that are available to meet that need. Advanced interns or experienced professionals will benefit greatly from this text, but basic trainees may find it overwhelming. I have seen this in my own classes. I passed a copy of the text around to my practicum students, who mostly ignored it. My advanced internship students, on the other hand, devoured it; many did not want to let it go!
Overall, this text should be seen as an excellent resource for diagnostic reports, case conceptualizations, and test interpretations. For programs with a strong assessment focus, this textbook is a must-have for students and professors alike. Other such texts have become outdated (House, 2002; Raim, 1982), so I hope the editors choose to keep this text updated with many new editions in the years to come. In such new editions, I look forward to seeing more comprehensive, RtI-based examples. As far as the current edition is concerned, I am thrilled to have it on my bookshelf. This is an excellent resource for both my students and for me.