• Sarah Ramsden

    7 April 2023 at 21 h 41 min

    As with most of our evaluations, it’s about having multiple data points that point to the “characteristics associated with ADHD”. For instance, I typically include at least one observation with both qualitative and time sampling data (with random peer comparison). I also talk to the student and ask questions related to those behaviors during the interview. Rating scales completed by all stakeholders are very useful. The BASC is helpful, but I find the Conners-4 to also be great when determining the severity of the problems and impact. Observational notes from testing are also useful- particularly if you are noting inattentive or impulsive behaviors in a more controlled, one-on-one environment. I also consider academic performance in class vs home vs my testing environment. If there is very mixed data, it can be difficult to decide as a team that the characteristics are clinically significant. Often our role is explaining the data and helping the team understand what might be typical vs elevated. When most of these pieces point toward ADHD, it’s easier to determine eligibility with more confidence.