This is a narrative review and position paper, not a study. It has no sample and no original data. It is about school aged children and youth in general, and the measures it covers run from ages three to 18. ADHD comes up only through one cited reference.
The authors argue that psychoeducational assessment in schools mostly looks for problems, and that assessing strengths should sit alongside that work. They summarize other people's studies. Cited evidence links strengths based assessment to higher parent satisfaction, fewer missed appointments and better functioning than problem focused assessment. One cited study reported significantly better outcomes for children assessed this way. Another reported a significant drop in bullying victimization and a better classroom climate after a strength based bullying prevention program. Assessments that combine strengths with weaknesses are described as the most effective.
The paper also describes ways to put this into practice, including use across the three tiers of response to intervention and a six step process of select, advocate, plan, communicate, execute and share. It lists seven strengths based measures. One of them, the BERS-2, had retest correlations all above 0.80. Another is available in 80 languages, with good convergent but poorer discriminant validity.
This is not an empirical study, and its conclusions rest on selectively cited literature. The authors note little research on how practitioners can put it to work, along with time and training barriers. The lead author cites her own prior work.
Source: Climie E, Henley L. A renewed focus on strengths‐based assessment in schools. British Journal of Special Education (2016). doi:10.1111/1467-8578.12131