Assessing Emotional and Behavioral Disorders in Schools
This paper examines the importance of identifying and assessing emotional and behavioral disorders (EBD) in school settings. It outlines why early screening matters for improving student outcomes, describes the two primary EBD categories — internalizing and externalizing behaviors — and explains best practices for conducting assessments. The paper reviews three formal assessment instruments used in school districts: the Behavior Assessment System for Children, Second Edition (BASC-2), the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ), and the Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL). It also addresses Individualized Education Program (IEP) development and offers recommendations on which tools are most appropriate for school-based use.
- Introduction: Why EBD Assessment Matters in Schools: Rationale for early EBD identification and screening
- How Assessments Should Be Conducted: Steps and best practices for EBD assessment
- Individualized Education Program (IEP) Development: Using assessment data to build student IEPs
- Three Formal Assessment Instruments Used in Schools: Overview of BASC-2, SDQ, and CBCL tools
- Recommendations Regarding Assessment Tools: Strengths, limits, and recommended uses of each tool
- Conclusion: SDQ advantages and value of combined assessment approaches
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- The paper grounds its argument in practical necessity, showing how early identification directly improves student outcomes before behaviors become unmanageable.
- It systematically compares three distinct assessment instruments, weighing each tool's strengths and limitations rather than simply listing them.
- The inclusion of a concrete IEP development section connects assessment theory to real-world educational planning, strengthening the paper's applied focus.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper effectively uses comparative analysis across assessment instruments. By presenting the BASC-2, SDQ, and CBCL side by side — with explicit advantages and disadvantages for each — the author demonstrates evaluative thinking rather than simple description. This technique is reinforced in the conclusion, where the SDQ is argued to complement rather than replace the CBCL, modeling nuanced professional judgment.
Structure breakdown
The paper follows a logical problem-to-solution structure: it opens by establishing why EBD identification matters, defines the two behavioral categories (internalizing and externalizing), explains assessment procedures and IEP planning, then presents and evaluates specific tools before offering recommendations. This moves from conceptual framing to applied practice in a clear sequence suited to an education or school psychology audience at the undergraduate level.
Introduction: Why EBD Assessment Matters in Schools
Identifying and assessing emotional and behavioral disorders (EBD) in schools helps identify and address a number of risky behaviors among young people in a timely manner. Students with EBD experience difficulties learning, struggle with social relationships, face depression and anxiety, and exhibit inappropriate behaviors. School administrators are typically aware of these students, as they require a great deal of support and various resources to function within a school environment (Davis, Young, Hardman & Winters, 2011).
Early identification of problem behaviors helps school administrators provide the necessary support students need before the situation becomes unmanageable. Even though students at risk of EBD display less severe characteristics and lower frequency than those already diagnosed, early identification is crucial for improving educational outcomes (Davis, Young, Hardman & Winters, 2011).
Individuals with EBD tend to experience instability in the workplace or face mental health challenges after high school. The social alienation experienced by many of these students is related to anxiety, conduct problems, and depression. Students with EBD often come across as sad, unlikable, lacking social competence, and provocative. These traits can make it difficult to cope and integrate into social environments at school or at home. Such characteristics can be minimized — if not eliminated — through targeted interventions following identification (Davis, Young, Hardman & Winters, 2011).
EBD is categorized into two types: internalizing and externalizing. Internalizing behaviors involve internal problematic feelings such as over-sensitivity, anxiety, sadness, and withdrawal. Externalizing behaviors, by contrast, manifest as unruliness, aggression, forcefulness, and oppositional conduct. In some cases, students may exhibit both characteristics — for example, experiencing both anxiety and aggression simultaneously — though most students are primarily identified with either internalizing or externalizing tendencies (Davis, Young, Hardman & Winters, 2011).
It is important to screen students for both categories of EBD to avoid overlooking any individual. Students with internalizing problems are often ignored because they do not present disciplinary issues and may earn good grades, although some may have attendance problems. Teachers can identify students who appear withdrawn, anxious, fearful, or unassertive and report these concerns to relevant authorities for intervention. The assessment and identification process must be effective, efficient, practical, and evidence-based. Unfortunately, few measures have been implemented to identify and reduce these risks in secondary students with respect to both externalizing and internalizing behaviors (Davis, Young, Hardman & Winters, 2011).
Create your account
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.