Whereas traditional models of psychological assessment have emphasized the use of standardized data to inform treatment or communicate about a client, collaborative/therapeutic approaches have focused on engaging clients in a relationship based on mutuality and alliance, wherein the assessment process is experienced as accessible and beneficial – potentially acting as a therapeutic intervention in and of itself (Finn, 2007; Finn & Tonsager, 1997). Although various forms of collaborative assessment have been practiced with adults, adolescents, and children, and have shown promise clinically, research is scant regarding the efficacy of this approach in the school context. The dearth of research evaluating the use of collaborative/therapeutic assessment models in schools is a valuable area of inquiry, both because psychological assessment is practiced frequently in schools, and because, beginning in 1997, amendments to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) called for increased student involvement in special education processes (Texas Education Agency, Office of Special Education, 2004). Such increased student involvement could be facilitated through the use of collaborative/therapeutic assessment methods in schools. The present study used a multiple baseline, single-case design to explore how participation in a school-based psychological assessment utilizing elements of collaborative/therapeutic assessment would affect six Central Texas high school students. The assessment was hypothesized to be an intervention that would positively affect the youths’ perceptions of their self-determination, self-efficacy, and internal locus of control. The study also explored how the intervention affected students’ self knowledge, and feelings of therapeutic alliance with the assessor, as well as their satisfaction with the assessment. Results indicated that, following their participation in the assessment intervention, students evidenced: (1) shifts towards a more internal locus of control, (2) increased ratings of therapeutic alliance, (3) increased ratings of self knowledge, and (4) satisfaction with the assessment intervention. This study offers a promising framework for the use of collaborative/therapeutic assessment methods within the school context as a means through which to empower students receiving special education services. / text

Research has paid little attention to clients’ experience of the psychological assessment process, particularly in regard to the experiences of children and their parents. Advocates of collaborative assessment have long espoused the therapeutic benefits of providing feedback that can help clients better understand themselves and improve their lives (Finn & Tonsager, 1992; Fischer, 1970, 1985/1994). Finn, Tharinger, and colleagues (2007; 2009) have extended a semi-structured form of collaborative assessment, Therapeutic Assessment (TA), with children. One important aspect of their method, drawn from Fischer’s (1985/1994) example, is the creation of individualized fables that incorporate assessment findings into a child-friendly format. The fables are then shared with the child and parents as assessment feedback. This study evaluated whether receiving this type of individualized, developmentally appropriate feedback would affect how children and their parents report experiencing the assessment process. The assessment process, with the exception of child feedback, was standard for the setting. Participants were 32 children who underwent a neuropsychological evaluation at a private outpatient clinic, along with their parents. Multivariate and univariate statistics were used to test differences between two groups: an experimental group that received individualized fables as child-focused feedback and a control group. Children in the experimental group reported a greater sense of learning about themselves, a more positive relationship with their assessor, a greater sense of collaboration with the assessment process, and a sense that their parents learned more about them because of the assessment than did children in the control group. Parents in the experimental group reported a more positive relationship between their child and the assessor, a greater sense of collaboration with the assessment process, and higher satisfaction with clinic services compared to the control group. Limitations to the study, implications for assessment practice with children, and future directions for research are discussed. / text

Collaborative child assessment combines traditional assessment methods with techniques aimed at increasing the therapeutic benefit of assessment for children and parents. Previous studies have found high consumer satisfaction, increased self esteem, decreased symptomatic distress, and greater hopefulness following participation in collaborative assessment. However, full collaborative assessment protocols are complex, time-consuming, and thus not practical to use in many applied settings. This study investigated the practicality and potential benefits of implementing several collaborative techniques into otherwise traditional child assessments, including co-generation of assessment questions, use of a process orientation during child testing, and use of an individualized, level-based approach when providing feedback. It was hypothesized that, compared to parents participating in traditional assessments, parents participating in collaborative assessments would report greater satisfaction, greater collaboration, learning more about their child, stronger alliance with the assessor, more positive feelings about the assessment process, and more hopefulness about their child’s challenges and future. Univariate analysis of variance statistics were used to test these hypotheses, which were not statistically supported, in part due to the limited sample size obtained. However, group differences of small to moderate effect sizes were seen for most of the outcome variables, including parent-reported learning about their child, assessor-parent relationship, assessor-child relationship, collaboration, negative feelings about the assessment, general satisfaction, and negative emotions about their child’s future. The results suggest that further research in this area is warranted. Limitations of the study and suggestions for future research are discussed. / text

No description available.

Therapeutic Assessment (TA) is a semi-structured hybrid of assessment and intervention methods that aims to promote positive change in clients through collaboration. Studies have shown it to be an effective therapeutic intervention, but few studies have focused on adolescents. This comparative study examines the effects of TA, compared with assessment as usual, with an adolescent population. Dependent measures include symptom reduction and components of the assessment experience, specifically self-knowledge, feeling understood by the assessor, positive relationship with the assessor, and negative feelings about the assessment. A repeated measure ANOVA will examine the group effects on symptom reduction, while a MANOVA will be used to determine the effects of TA on the variables of assessment experience. / text

This dissertation investigated the effects of infusing therapeutic assessment practices into school-based psychological assessments on parent experience. Fourteen assessment professionals from a medium sized public school district in central Texas were assigned to one of two groups based upon previous exposure to Finn’s Therapeutic Assessment (2003) model. Those in the Therapeutic Assessment-infused (TA-I) group were trained on collaborative assessment concepts, while those in the standard practice group were asked to conduct assessments as usual, while being required to conduct initial and feedback meetings with parents. Outcomes were measured using the Parent Experience of Assessment Survey – I (PEAS-I), Parents’ Positive and Negative Emotions (PPNE), the Experience of School Investment and Collaboration Scale (ESICS), and post-interviews with parents and assessors. Parent ratings from both groups were compared using a MANOVA. It was hypothesized that parents in the TA-I group would report having learned more, more positive parent/assessor and child/assessor relationships, more collaboration with the assessor, less negative emotion related to the assessment, and a higher perception of family involvement in their child’s problems. Parents in the TA-I group were also hypothesized to report a greater sense of home-school collaboration and school investment in their child. Finally, it was proposed that parents in the TA-I group would report feeling more positive and less negative about their child’s future. The group difference was not statistically significant, due in part to limited sample size. However, small to medium effect sizes were achieved for several outcome scales, including parents’ positive emotions following participation, positive parent-assessor relationship, and parental sense of collaboration throughout the assessment. An exploratory measure indicated a significantly greater sense of future collaboration with their child’s school for parents in the TA-I group. Post-participation interviews indicated clear appreciations of the TA-I model. Parents experiencing standard practice assessments, however, also expressed high satisfaction, though the requirement of two face-to-face parent meetings may have contributed to a notable departure from standard practice. Results suggest that infusing TA-I practices into school assessments may be effective in increasing parental satisfaction and home-school collaboration. Further research is warranted, and discussion of potential improvements for future research is provided. / text

A ciência é uma organização social: grupos de colaboração independentes trabalham para gerar conhecimento como um bem público. A credibilidade dos trabalhos científicos está enraizada nas evidências que os suportam, as quais incluem a metodologia aplicada, os dados adquiridos e os processos para execução dos experimentos, da análise de dados e da interpretação dos resultados obtidos. O dilúvio de dados sob o qual a atual ciência está inserida revoluciona a forma como as pesquisas são realizadas, resultando em um novo paradigma de ciência baseada em dados. Sob tal paradigma, novas atividades são inseridas no método científico de modo a organizar o processo de geração, curadoria e publicação de dados, beneficiando a comunidade científica com o reuso de conjuntos de dados científicos e a reprodutibilidade de experimentos. Nesse contexto, novas abordagens para a resolução de problemas estão sendo apresentadas, obtendo resultados que antes eram considerados de relevante dificuldade, bem como possibilitando a geração de novos conhecimentos. Diversos portais estão disponibilizando conjuntos de dados resultantes de pesquisas científicas. Todavia, tais portais pouco abordam o contexto sobre os quais os conjuntos de dados foram criados, dificultando a compreensão sobre os dados e abrindo espaço para o uso indevido ou uma interpretação errônea. Poucas são as literaturas que abordam essa problemática, deixando o foco para outros temas que lidam com o volume, a variedade e a velocidade dos dados. Essa pesquisa objetivou definir um modelo de avaliação de conjuntos de dados científicos, por meio da construção de um perfil de aplicação, o qual padroniza a descrição de conjuntos de dados científicos. Essa padronização da descrição é baseada no conceito de dimensão de Veracidade dos dados, definido ao longo da pesquisa, e permite o desenvolvimento de métricas que formam o índice de veracidade de conjuntos de dados científicos. Tal índice busca refletir o nível de detalhamento de um conjunto de dados, com base no uso dos elementos de descrição, que facilitarão o reuso dos dados e a reprodutibilidade dos experimentos científicos. O índice possui duas dimensões: a dimensão intrínseca aos dados, a qual pode ser utilizada como critério de admissão de conjunto de dados em portais de publicação de dados; e a dimensão social, mensurando a adequabilidade de um conjunto de dados para uso em uma área de pesquisa ou de aplicação, por meio da avaliação da comunidade científica. Para o modelo de avaliação proposto, um estudo de caso foi desenvolvido, descrevendo um conjunto de dados proveniente de um projeto científico internacional, o projeto GoAmazon, de modo a validar o modelo proposto entre os pares, demonstrando o potencial da solução no apoio ao reuso dos dados, podendo ser incorporado em portais de dados científicos. / Science is a social organization: independent collaboration groups work to generate knowledge as a public good. The credibility of the scientific work is entrenched in the evidence that supports it, which includes the applied methodology, the acquired data, the processes to execute the experiments, the data analysis, and the interpretation of the obtained results. The flood of data under which current science is embedded revolutionizes the way surveys are conducted, resulting in a new paradigm of data-driven science. Under such a paradigm, new activities are inserted into the scientific method to organize the process of generation, curation, and publication of data, benefiting the scientific community with the reuse and reproducibility of scientific datasets. In this context, new approaches to problem solving are being presented, obtaining results that previously were considered of relevant difficulty, as well as making possible the generation of new knowledge. Several portals are providing datasets resulting from scientific research. However, such portals do little to address the context upon which datasets are created, making it difficult to understand the data and opening up space for misuse or misinterpretation. In the Big Data area, the dimension that proposes to deal with this aspect is called Veracity. Few studies in the literature approach such a theme, focusing on other dimensions, such as volume, variety, and velocity of data. This research aimed to define a of scientific datasets, through the establishment of an application profile, which standardizes the description of scientific datasets. This standardization of the description is based on the veracity dimension concept, which is defined throughout the research and allows the development of metrics that form the Veracity Index of scientific datasets. This index seeks to reflect the level of detail of a dataset based on the use of the descriptive elements, which will facilitate the reuse and reproducibility of the data. The index is weighted by the evaluation of the scientific community in a collaborative sense, which assess the level of description, comprehension capacity, and suitability of the dataset for a given research or application area. For the proposed collaborative evaluation model, a case study was developed that described a dataset from an international scientific project, the GoAmazon project, in order to validate the proposed model among the peers, demonstrating the potential of the solution in the reuse and reproducibility of datasets, showing that such an index can be incorporated into scientific data portals.

A ciência é uma organização social: grupos de colaboração independentes trabalham para gerar conhecimento como um bem público. A credibilidade dos trabalhos científicos está enraizada nas evidências que os suportam, as quais incluem a metodologia aplicada, os dados adquiridos e os processos para execução dos experimentos, da análise de dados e da interpretação dos resultados obtidos. O dilúvio de dados sob o qual a atual ciência está inserida revoluciona a forma como as pesquisas são realizadas, resultando em um novo paradigma de ciência baseada em dados. Sob tal paradigma, novas atividades são inseridas no método científico de modo a organizar o processo de geração, curadoria e publicação de dados, beneficiando a comunidade científica com o reuso de conjuntos de dados científicos e a reprodutibilidade de experimentos. Nesse contexto, novas abordagens para a resolução de problemas estão sendo apresentadas, obtendo resultados que antes eram considerados de relevante dificuldade, bem como possibilitando a geração de novos conhecimentos. Diversos portais estão disponibilizando conjuntos de dados resultantes de pesquisas científicas. Todavia, tais portais pouco abordam o contexto sobre os quais os conjuntos de dados foram criados, dificultando a compreensão sobre os dados e abrindo espaço para o uso indevido ou uma interpretação errônea. Poucas são as literaturas que abordam essa problemática, deixando o foco para outros temas que lidam com o volume, a variedade e a velocidade dos dados. Essa pesquisa objetivou definir um modelo de avaliação de conjuntos de dados científicos, por meio da construção de um perfil de aplicação, o qual padroniza a descrição de conjuntos de dados científicos. Essa padronização da descrição é baseada no conceito de dimensão de Veracidade dos dados, definido ao longo da pesquisa, e permite o desenvolvimento de métricas que formam o índice de veracidade de conjuntos de dados científicos. Tal índice busca refletir o nível de detalhamento de um conjunto de dados, com base no uso dos elementos de descrição, que facilitarão o reuso dos dados e a reprodutibilidade dos experimentos científicos. O índice possui duas dimensões: a dimensão intrínseca aos dados, a qual pode ser utilizada como critério de admissão de conjunto de dados em portais de publicação de dados; e a dimensão social, mensurando a adequabilidade de um conjunto de dados para uso em uma área de pesquisa ou de aplicação, por meio da avaliação da comunidade científica. Para o modelo de avaliação proposto, um estudo de caso foi desenvolvido, descrevendo um conjunto de dados proveniente de um projeto científico internacional, o projeto GoAmazon, de modo a validar o modelo proposto entre os pares, demonstrando o potencial da solução no apoio ao reuso dos dados, podendo ser incorporado em portais de dados científicos. / Science is a social organization: independent collaboration groups work to generate knowledge as a public good. The credibility of the scientific work is entrenched in the evidence that supports it, which includes the applied methodology, the acquired data, the processes to execute the experiments, the data analysis, and the interpretation of the obtained results. The flood of data under which current science is embedded revolutionizes the way surveys are conducted, resulting in a new paradigm of data-driven science. Under such a paradigm, new activities are inserted into the scientific method to organize the process of generation, curation, and publication of data, benefiting the scientific community with the reuse and reproducibility of scientific datasets. In this context, new approaches to problem solving are being presented, obtaining results that previously were considered of relevant difficulty, as well as making possible the generation of new knowledge. Several portals are providing datasets resulting from scientific research. However, such portals do little to address the context upon which datasets are created, making it difficult to understand the data and opening up space for misuse or misinterpretation. In the Big Data area, the dimension that proposes to deal with this aspect is called Veracity. Few studies in the literature approach such a theme, focusing on other dimensions, such as volume, variety, and velocity of data. This research aimed to define a of scientific datasets, through the establishment of an application profile, which standardizes the description of scientific datasets. This standardization of the description is based on the veracity dimension concept, which is defined throughout the research and allows the development of metrics that form the Veracity Index of scientific datasets. This index seeks to reflect the level of detail of a dataset based on the use of the descriptive elements, which will facilitate the reuse and reproducibility of the data. The index is weighted by the evaluation of the scientific community in a collaborative sense, which assess the level of description, comprehension capacity, and suitability of the dataset for a given research or application area. For the proposed collaborative evaluation model, a case study was developed that described a dataset from an international scientific project, the GoAmazon project, in order to validate the proposed model among the peers, demonstrating the potential of the solution in the reuse and reproducibility of datasets, showing that such an index can be incorporated into scientific data portals.

This dissertation examined students‘ experience with school assessment infused with Therapeutic Assessment (TA) techniques. Nine assessors from the school district were assigned to one of two groups, TA-infused group and the assessment-as-usual group. Those in the TA-infused group were trained in collaborative assessment practices based on Finn‘s model of TA with children (TA-C), specifically collaborative interviews, extended inquiries, and collaborative oral and written feedback (Finn, 2007). Thirty-three students from a medium sized public school district in central Texas completed the study in its entirety. It was hypothesized that those in the TA-infused group, compared with the assessment-as-usual group, would report learning more about themselves, experiencing a more positive relationship with the assessor, feeling more positive about the assessment process, feeling more collaborated with, and having greater perceptions of parental understanding. It was also hypothesized that those in the TA-infused group would report an increase in positive feelings and a decrease negative in feelings about themselves and their challenge when compared with the assessment-as-usual group. Additionally, it was hypothesized that those in the TA-infused group would report an increase in positive attitudes toward school after the intervention when compared with the assessment-as-usual group. Outcomes were measured by the Child‘s Experience of Assessment Survey (CEAS), the Children‘s Positive and Negative Affect Scale (CPNE-S), and the Attitude to School (ATS) subtest of the BASC-2-SRP. A descriptive discriminate analysis was conducted using the five subscales of the CEAS to measure the first hypotheses. RM ANOVAs were run on the CPNE-S and the ATS to analyze the second and third hypotheses. Additionally, a qualitative interview was conducted with participants. Analyses yielded no statistically significant results between the groups. Qualitative interviews indicated that both groups were satisfied with the assessment process. Additionally, those in the TA-infused group all reported positive reactions to the collaborative written feedback. Specifically, those that received a fable reported liking the fable and feeling that it related to their lives. Those that received a letter reported learning more about themselves, appreciating a written record of the feedback, and feeling positively about their relationship with the assessor. Further research is needed to understand the effects of collaborative techniques within school assessments, particularly the effects of the different forms of written feedback. / text