SPED 311 Assessment Review Project

Name: Sarah Emmott

Date: December 1, 2015
How does this project contribute to your knowledge about assessment?
This project has shown me many things about the assessment process. First, there
is an exorbitant amount of work and time that goes into knowing exactly how an
assessment test works. Rather than being able to use these tests at any given time, there
needs to be a great deal of work put into selecting the right assessment, finding the proper
administration method, and interpreting the results. The second thing I learned is how
many different types of tests there are. Originally, I assumed that every test was
diagnostic. However, the CDI 2 has shown me that a test can be used in congruency with
diagnostic tests in order to determine key factors in a childs specific situation. Finally, I
discovered that the testing process not only requires the student, but their direct authority
figures as well. It makes perfect sense to me now, but I never would have guessed that
observations made about a child could lead to such a drastic change in information
gained. This research has made me appreciate the process of assessment, and Ive found
yet another reason to exercise care and caution when dealing with the mental health of a
child.
On my honor, as an Aggie, I have neither given nor received
unauthorized aid on this academic work.

Signature____________________________________________

Test Review- Childrens Depression Inventory 2

Practical Evaluation
Practical Evaluation
Basic Information:
The Childrens Depression Inventory (CDI 2), published by Multi-Health Systems
(MHS), is an assessment tool developed for children from 7 to 17 years old. The CDI 2 is
a psychological assessment that rates the severity of symptoms related to depression
and/or dysthymic disorder in children and adolescents. Dr. Maria Kovacs is the author of
the CDI 2, which is available for $289.00. Additional response forms are available in
packages of 25 for $55.00, which allows administrators to give additional tests. This test
was designed to be used alongside interviews with the child and observations of their
daily behavior. The CDI 2 should not be used as the sole measuring stick to determine
whether or not a child is depressed. Alternately, the test can be administrated over a long
period of time to monitor a childs progress, or as a way to sift through a large group of
children who may be depressed. The latter is usually one of the first steps in determining
a larger problem, which aids administrators in knowing which children need further
diagnoses.
Description of test manuals:
The test manual is presented in a very user-friendly fashion. The test manual is a
paperback book, containing a plethora of useful information. The manual gives a brief
description of depression, as well as a concise history of childhood depression. The
manual is written at a second grade reading level to ensure everyone taking part in the
test is able to comprehend the directions. However, the author goes to great lengths to

ensure that hand grading can be done effectively. This means that there are extensive
instructions for each step, as well as verbose descriptions for each possible outcome of
the test. While this is an excellent, easy to use tool in the hands of an administrator, a
large amount of time needs to be dedicated to ensure that valid test results are achieved.
Description of test materials:
The test materials include three reports: a self-report for the student to complete, a
parent report, and a teacher report. This allows the testing to be conducted in multiple
places at multiple times. There is also a shortened version of the self-report available.
This cuts the administration time down to about half, which makes it even easier to give
during school (when necessary). The reports can also be administered online to allow
participants to send in their reports via email. The reports are printed on thin, pressure
sensitive paper made for a one-time use only. These reports have been proven to gain
effectiveness with each additional test. Since the test tries to gauge a students temporary
characteristics, it can show changes to the overall score without affecting the accuracy of
the test itself. Given all of these factors, the CDI 2 has an enormous appeal.
Administrators can give the test nearly anytime and anywhere, even including in-class or
at home options. The biggest downside to the test materials is their durability. Since they
are printed on thin paper and are intended to be used once per test, the cost of the
materials has to be considered, especially when testing a student over a period of time.
Description of test protocols:
The test protocols are very clear and presented in the test manual. The teacher,
students and parent(s) will all complete their respective report form. Scores can be
generated in many different ways. If the test is completed by hand, the scores will be

filled out on the provided carbon paper. However, if the test is completed online using the
CDI 2 Software, scores will be generated immediately. The student form consists of 28
checklist questions concerning their personal feelings and perspective of themselves. The
student rates each answer on a scale from 0 to 2, depending on how strongly they feel.
The teacher and parent forms are both measured on a scale from 0 to 3, depending on the
frequency or severity of the answer. While the parent form has 17 questions, whereas the
teacher form only has 12. Additionally, the short form has 12 questions. The test manual
provides instructions on how to administer the test verbally if the child or parents are not
able to clearly understand the questions. The CDI 2s protocols have been simplified to
amplify their ease of handling. Most of the work done by the administrator is simply
guiding the person answering the questions, in order to ensure quality. It seems as though
those administering the tests will determine their durability. If the tests are done by hand,
a specific file should be dedicated to storing each round of tests for each child. This
means that, although possible, keeping the results for long period may take up a large
amount of space. However, with the use of the online test, the results of each round will
be stored electronically, meaning they can be kept for as long as necessary.
Description of test items:
Depending on which method is chosen, the test items will vary. If the test is to be
administered by hand, the overseer will need to have the student, parent or teacher form,
a pen, and a surface to write on. If the test is conducted using the online format, the
administrator will need access to a computer with the Internet and the CDI 2 software. In
either scenario, it is necessary to have the test manual and a private area to conduct the
CDI 2. Due to the relatively low demand for external materials, the test is quite easy to

administer. Most of the items required will either be included in the purchase of the CDI
2 or can be easily found in a home or school setting. Time will be the largest constraint
taken into consideration, but the test has a shortened alternative to help alleviate those
concerns. Also, due to the extensive description of possible outcomes given in the test
manual, the scoring is practically built into the test itself. The computer variant will
automatically score the results and give an assessment, whereas the carbon paper is
designed to help tally the scores provided. Using these scores, an administrator can easily
search the test manual for the corresponding results and gain the author of the CDIs
insight into the possible meanings linked to each. The test breaks down the results into
two specific categories: emotional problems and functional problems. These categories
are further dissected into two parts. Under emotional problems are negative
mood/physical symptoms and negative self-esteem. Functional problems are categorized
as either ineffectiveness or interpersonal problems. Since the test measures four separate
fields across two categories, the items are designed to garner appropriate results based on
the individual child. Keeping in mind that this test is to be used as a guideline rather than
as a diagnostic tool, the test items are an effectively brief manifestation of an intricate
concept. That being said, the test in and of itself may not be appropriate to all audiences.
Proper care needs to be taken to assure that a child truly needs the CDI 2, instead of an
alternative test that gauges what is specifically causing a child to feel or act the way they
do.
Technical Evaluation
Norms:

The normative sample varied based on who was filling out the form. The norm for
both self-reports was 1,100 students, all ranging from ages 7-17. Each age group
contained 50 boys and 50 girls, in order to maintain accuracy in their results. The
developers of the CDI 2 had over 1,500 viable candidates, so the selection process
focused on ethnicity and location. There were 62% white students, 16.1% African
American students, 14.5% Hispanic students, and 3.3% students of Asian descent. Their
goal was to closely match the 2000 United States Census results based on race.
Additionally, since 50 boys and 50 girls were used in each age range, an effort was made
to select students from every major region of the United States. This helps maintain
appropriateness for each student that takes the CDI 2. The norms for the parent forms
were based on 800 applicable parents, carefully considering ethnic trends in the 2000
United States census. No information was provided for the ethnicities of the teachers
used, although the norm was constructed from 600 instructors. The CDI 2 recreated these
norms, independent from the CDI, due to a skew in favor of whites. These problems have
certainly been rectified in the self- and parent forms.
Although the norms are excellent when considering the United States as a whole,
Texas may have been less represented than expected. The ratio of Hispanics in Texas is
nearly twice what it is in the United States as a whole, so the Latino population is
diminished in the CDI 2. In addition, the census results were from 2000. A great deal has
changed in the country over the last 15 years, so these statistics should be updated.
Unfortunately, no information was provided as to the mental state or degree of education
for the students or parents. This means that there is no way of knowing how these results
would translate to a student with disabilities or a parent that did not graduate high school.

All things considered, Texans are about as well represented in the CDI 2 as inhabitants of
any other state, albeit using outdated results. No indication was made that students with
disabilities were represented; therefore a great deal of caution should be used if they are
being given the test.
Reliability:
This test uses a few methods of reliability. The CDI 2 had the Cronbahchs alpha
values from .67 to .91 for each category of the test (total, emotional problems, and
functional problems), which shows a moderate to high level of reliability. Also, the testretest reliability was tested on 79 children with a mean age just older than 12 years old
and slightly more than half being male. All cases had between 2 to 4 weeks of testing and
all showed only slight variations throughout the allotted course, showing proficient shortterm reliability.
Validity:
The validity of this test is shown in terms of convergent validity. 266 children
were administered either Conners Comprehensive Behavior Rating Scale or the Beck
Depression Inventory Youth. 214 of these students were in the normalization test,
whereas the other 52 were in clinical screenings. The children then took the CDI 2, and
the results of the two given tests were compared. Not only did the CDI 2 have
meaningful, statistical increases, it also allowed for more depth to be explored due to the
subcategories it tests for.
Professional Resources
Journal article:

In Baes (2011) review of the CDI 2, many of the tests strengths are highlighted.
In contrast, Bae also captures a few changes that should be implemented into the CDI 2
to ensure reliability. First, Bae explains the importance of testing on multiple scales. By
going past the surface into multiple types of depressive traits, it helps further screen the
children receiving the test. In addition, she points to the extensive lengths the authors of
the test went to ensure validity. The matched the children in the standardizing test by
race, age, gender, and even geographical location. Bae points to the CDI, which is
available in over 40 different languages, to show the CDI 2 could be used in a much
wider spectrum if more translations became available.
MMY review:
Both Atlas and Tobin (2014) reviewed the CDI 2 for the Mental Measurement
Yearbook. Both authors found positives and negatives in the test. Atlas found it
instrumental that the CDI 2 includes a brief history of diagnosing children with
depression. Whats more, in his opinion, is that the history lesson comes from one of the
foremost researchers in childhood depression. He did not understand, however, why the
CDI focused so much on depression in children from the United States. Given the success
of the CDI in multiple countries around the world, he felt the standardization sample
should not have been limited to one country. Tobin praised the format of the CDI 2,
noting its ease of use and maneuverability. She would have liked to have seen
socioeconomic status of the parents play a role in the calibration of the test, although this
was not present in the original CDI either.

References
Atlas, J. & Tobin, R. Children's Depression Inventory 2nd Edition By: Kovacs, Maria,
MHS Staff, 20110101, Vol. 19. Mental Measurements Yearbook, Nineteenth Edition, 2014
Bae, Y. Test Review: Kovacs, M. "Children's Depression Inventory 2 (CDI 2) (2nd ed.).
Journal Of Psychoeducational Assessment, 30(3), 304-308, 2012
Kovacs, M. Childrens Depression Inventory 2 (CDI 2) (2nd ed.). North Tonawanda, NY:
Multi-Health Systems Inc, 2011