Last week in Chicago, school psychologists, clinicians, and education leaders gathered at the NASP Annual Convention to exchange ideas, debate best practices, and explore the tools shaping the future of student support. Among the many conversations happening across sessions and hallways was a shared reality: the complexity of student needs continues to grow, and the systems we use to evaluate and support them must evolve as well.
At our session, AI. Measures: An Integrated Neurobehavioral Assessment Platform – From Evaluation to Instructional Impact, presenters Tom Frazier, Ph.D., Chief Clinical Officer at CentralReach and founder of AI. Measures, and Ben Knaebel, M.A., NCSP, Clinical Product Specialist at CentralReach and former school psychologist, explored how assessment workflows are changing and why the field is moving toward more integrated, data-informed approaches. Drawing on their combined backgrounds in clinical research, psychometrics, and school psychology practice, the discussion brought together practitioners, clinicians, and researchers focused on improving how we measure and monitor neurobehavioral development.
The Reality of Today’s Assessment Workflow
For many school psychologists, the evaluation process can feel fragmented. Multiple rating scales across different platforms, coordination with teachers and caregivers, and the pressure of large caseloads all add friction to a process that is already time intensive.
During the session, this challenge resonated strongly with the audience.
“As school psychologists, we’re doing lots of rating scales… six rating scales isn’t just six—it’s often twelve or more when you include multiple teachers and informants.”
The room nodded in recognition. Practitioners described a familiar cycle: selecting measures, managing multiple logins and platforms, chasing down incomplete forms, and ultimately stitching together insights across separate reports.
The issue isn’t just efficiency. When assessments happen in silos, important patterns across domains can be missed.
Why Comprehensive Assessment Matters More Than Ever
Another key theme from the discussion was the high level of comorbidity across neurobehavioral conditions. Students rarely present with challenges in just one domain.
“It’s very rare that you see a patient that only has one neurobehavioral domain that is impacted.”
That reality is pushing the field toward broader, multi-domain assessments that can capture overlapping challenges in areas like executive functioning, social communication, behavior, sleep, and adaptive skills.
Equally important is the ability to track change over time. Traditional scoring methods often show whether a student is performing relative to age norms, but they can miss meaningful improvement.
One of the most engaging moments in the session highlighted the difference between standard scores and growth-based tracking:
“Standard scores may stay flat over time, but growth scores show the real improvement in a child’s abilities.”
For practitioners working with families and school teams, being able to demonstrate meaningful progress, not just relative standing, can make a critical difference in decision-making.
Bridging The Gap Between Assessment and Intervention
Another conversation thread focused on something school psychologists have long advocated for: assessment should lead directly to action.
Too often, evaluation results are documented in reports but disconnected from day-to-day intervention planning. Attendees emphasized the importance of tools and workflows that support a true assessment-to-intervention pipeline, helping teams move more efficiently from identifying needs to building targeted support plans.
In practice, that means:
- Linking evaluation data to intervention targets
- Translating findings into measurable goals
- Tracking progress over time with reliable indicators
When these pieces work together, assessment becomes less about checking a compliance box and more about informing ongoing student support.
Where AI. Measures Fits
Toward the end of the session, we briefly demonstrated how newer assessment platforms aim to address these challenges.
AI.Measures, part of theCentralReacheducation ecosystem, was designed to support a comprehensive, multi-informant neurobehavioral assessment workflow, covering domains such as autism, ADHD, executive functioning, adaptive skills, and quality of life.
The goal is not just to digitize existing rating scales, but to help teams:
- Collect data from parents, teachers, and clinicians in one place
- Interpret results using modern norming methods
- Translate findings directly into intervention targets and goals
- Monitor change over time
In other words, to help teams move from Assess → Interpret → Plan → Monitor in a more connected way.
Looking Ahead
The conversations at NASP reinforced something many practitioners already know: the future of assessment isn’t just about better tests; it’s about better systems for understanding and supporting the whole child.
As student needs become more complex, the tools and workflows we use must keep pace. That means integrated data, clearer insights, and a stronger bridge between evaluation and intervention.
Because ultimately, the goal of assessment isn’t the report. It’s the impact that comes afterward.
Posted in Review
Unlock potential for next-level care
You may also like...
Related information and stories
Autism Assessments vs Autism Screening – What’s the Difference?
Autism screenings and autism assessments are equally important tools in the diagnostic process. Screenings are used to quickly identify children who demonstrate traits consistent with autism, serving as an initial…
How Do Assessments Help in Developing Individualized Education Programs (IEPs)?
Crafting an Individualized Education Program (IEP) that incorporates learners’ unique strengths while addressing their challenges requires care and precision. Assessment for students with autism is critical in identifying students’ diverse…