School Psychologists Use of Evidence-Based Assessment Practices for the Examination of Autism Spectrum Disorder

Background: Within the United States, public school assessments first identify a significant portion of children with ASD (Pettygrove et al., 2013). While the use of Evidence-Based Assessment (EBA) practices for the examination of ASD are widely accepted and endorsed by leadership organizations such as the National Association of School Psychologists (NASP) (Falkmer, Anderson, Falkmer, Horlin, 2013; Esler, & Ruble, 2015), emerging research examining the practices of school psychologists in the assessment of ASD indicates disparate practices (Aiello, Ruble, & Eslerc, 2017).

Objectives: This study examined the number of school psychologists’ who utilize comprehensive, evidence-based assessment (EBA) practices for ASD, which was defined as assessments including an interview, cognitive/developmental measure, adaptive measure, and the Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule, Second Edition (ADOS-2). Additionally, the use of the ADOS-2 was of particular interest. Use of the ADOS-2 across geographical locations, school district population size, evaluator training level, and evaluator years of experience was considered.

Methods: The survey created for this research study was developed by a team of clinicians and researchers in order to collect demographic information and school psychologists’ assessment procedures for students with ASD. The survey was emailed to 557 school psychologists in Georgia. The response rate was 61%. IDEA Section 618 data records indicate in 2013 there were 720 school psychologists, indicating the respondents represent approximately 47% of school psychologists in Georgia.

Results: Thirteen respondents (3.82%) reported adherence to EBA. Related to the ADOS-2, 71 respondents reported regular use. There was a significant effect of the geographical location on the use of the ADOS-2 [F(2, 287) = 6.70, p = 0.001, d = 1.843]. There was a significant difference for participants located in suburban (M=2.55, SD=1.448) and rural areas (M=1.89, SD=1.298).

There was a significant effect of the student population size on the use of the ADOS-2 at the p<0.05 level [F(5, 284) = 4.61, p = 0.000, d = 0.972]. There was a significant difference for a student population size of 75,001-100,000 (M=3.35, SD=1.496) from a population of less than 10,000 (M=1.88, SD=1.333), 25,001-50,000 (M=2.11, SD=1.319), and of over 100,000 (M=2.19, SD=1.210).

There was not a significant effect of evaluator level of training or evaluator years of experience on the use of the ADOS-2 (p = 0.514; p = 0.618).

Conclusions: Few respondents indicated adherence to EBA, suggesting further investigation into the barriers impacting use, need for professional development, and practicality of current EBA in the school setting. Specifically, use of the ADOS-2 appears to differ slightly in Georgia across geographical locations and population size, while evaluator level of training and years of experience did not influence the use of the ADOS-2. Evaluators in larger, suburban districts tended to use the ADOS-2 more frequently where there may be more financial resources. Results suggest barriers may be present at the systems-level that impact the likelihood of regular use. Professional development and consultation with leadership personnel regarding the use of the ADOS-2 as part of EBA may be warranted.