Module I: Introduction: The Future Of School Psychology

ONLINE LEARNING MODULES

Module VI: School Psychology Today and Tomorrow: Next Steps?

Developed by Patti L. Harrison, The University of Alabama Jack Cummings, Indiana University

Advisory Board Rachel Brown-Chidsey, University of Southern Maine Sandra Christenson, University of Minnesota Michael Curtis, University of South Florida Peg Dawson, Seacoast Mental Health Center, New Hampshire John Desrochers, New Canaan Public Schools, Connecticut Sissy Hatzichristou, University of Athens, Greece Cathy Lines, Cherry Creek Schools, Colorado JoAnne Morgan, Graduate Student, University of Massachusetts Diane Smallwood, Philadelphia College of Osteopathic Medicine Gary Stoner, University of Massachusetts Chris Willis, Newport County Regional Special Education, Rhode Island

SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS

(a) View this document in the “Print Layout.” To change from a normal layout to a print layout, on the View menu select Print Layout. (b) Click on the hyperlinks throughout this document if you wish to proceed directly to specific sections in the module. (c) You may go to the Table of Contents at any time by clicking on the left footnote at the bottom of each page (this usually requires a triple click). (d) By default many computers require a CTRL+Click to follow hyperlinks. If you prefer to change the default and open hyperlinks by just clicking them. (a) On the Tools menu, click Options, and then click the Edit tab. (b) Clear the Use CTRL+Click to follow hyperlink check box.

Go to Table of Contents Module V1: Next Steps Page 1 (e) You may type notes, enter your responses to questions, and complete worksheets directly into this Word file. If you do so, don’t forget to save your file. You may wish to use a new file name for your personalized Word file.

Important Notices

The online learning modules were adapted from materials developed for and resulting from the 2002 Conference on the Future of School Psychology. Complete conference materials are available on the conference Internet site (http://education.indiana.edu/~futures/ ). The futures conference was co-sponsored by National Association of School Psychologists, American Psychological Association Division 16, Society for the Study of School Psychology, Council of Directors of School Psychology Programs, Trainers of School Psychologists, American Academy of School Psychology, American Board of School Psychology, and International School Psychology Association.

The online learning module materials have been made available free of charge to the public. The materials may be adapted, reproduced, reprinted, or linked to websites without specific permission. However, the integrity of the content must be maintained and proper credit must be given (Harrison, P.L., & Cummings, J. The future of school psychology online learning modules, http://education.indiana.edu/~futures/resources.html)

While every effort was made to present accurate and reliable information on the learning modules and futures website, the module developers or sponsoring associations do not endorse, approve or certify such information, nor do they guarantee the accuracy, completeness, efficacy, timeliness, or correct sequencing of such information. Use of such information is voluntary and reliance on it should only be undertaken after an independent review of its accuracy, completeness, efficacy, and timeliness. Reference to any specific commercial product, process or service by trade name, trademark, service mark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not constitute or imply endorsement, recommendation or favoring.

At certain places in the materials, live "links" to other Internet addresses can be accessed. Such external Internet addresses contain information created, published, maintained, or otherwise posted by institutions or organizations. The futures conference co-sponsors or the developers of the futures learning modules do not endorse, approve, certify, or control these external Internet addresses, and do not guarantee the accuracy, completeness, efficacy, timeliness, or correct sequencing of the information located at such addresses. Use of any information obtained from such addresses is voluntary and reliance on it should only be undertaken after an independent review of its accuracy, completeness, efficacy, and timeliness. Users of materials on these external Internet addresses must adhere to copyrights and other special instructions and requirements of these websites.

Go to Table of Contents Module V1: Next Steps Page 2 MODULE VI SCHOOL PSYCHOLOGY TODAY AND TOMORROW: NEXT STEPS? TABLE OF CONTENTS

PURPOSE AND OVERVIEW

RESOURCES FOR READING AND REVIEW

QUESTIONS FOR GROUP DISCUSSION OR INDIVIDUAL REFLECTION

ACTION PLAN REVIEW AND IMPLEMENTATION

APPENDICES a. Appendix A: Comprehensive Results of Focus Groups Held Prior to the 2002 School Psychology Future’s Conference b. Appendix B: The “National Agenda” of priority goals identified at the conclusion of the 2002 Futures Conference c. Appendix C: New Reflections from Futures Conference Participants

OPTIONAL MATERIALS  Module VI: Professional Development Activity Documentation Form

Go to Table of Contents Module V1: Next Steps Page 3 MODULE VI: SCHOOL PSYCHOLOGY TODAY AND TOMORROW: NEXT STEPS? PURPOSE AND OVERVIEW

Module VI, the final module in the series, explores the “next steps” needed to implement strategic plans for school psychology. Previous modules have focused on specific issues in our field, including personnel shortages, needs of children, improving the linkages between home and schools, and needs in schools. Module VI is designed to integrate the specific issues into broad initiatives for promoting how school psychology will address the specific issues currently….and in the future.

Module VI is the culminating module of the six module series. It is focused on translating ideas to actions. It is intended to examine the big picture by carefully examining and evaluating the work products of the previous five modules. It is a time to prioritize the action plans within the real world parameters of available time, resources, and personnel.

Module VI is divided into three major sections (Resources for Reading and Review, Questions for Group Discussion/Individual Reflection, Action Plan Review and Implementation), with associated appendices. If you are completing these modules as part of a group, your course instructor, workshop presenter, or other group leader will provide you with instruction about which of these three sections you will complete. Or, if you are completing the module for independent self-study, you may elect to complete any or all sections of this module.

Go to Table of Contents Module V1: Next Steps Page 4 MODULE VI: SCHOOL PSYCHOLOGY TODAY AND TOMORROW: NEXT STEPS? RESOURCES FOR READING AND REVIEW

Primary Readings Based on 2002 Futures Conference:

a. Responses from national focus groups to questions about school psychology practice in 10 years (See Appendix A later in this module). b. Ehrhardt-Padgett, G. N., Hatzichristou, C., Kitson, J., Meyers, J. (2004). Awakening to a new dawn: Perspectives of the future of school psychology. School Psychology Review, 33, 105-114. If a NASP member, access this article by linking to NASP website http://www.naspwebservices.org/ OR read the article in: School Psychology Quarterly, 2003, 18, 493-496. c. Ehrhardt-Padgett, Hatzichristou, Kitson, and Meyers webcast from 2002 Futures Conference “From Chaos Comes Resolutions” and powerpoints (View individually or as a group) http://video.indiana.edu:8080/ramgen/vic/futures_20021115_1.rm d. Smallwood, Brown-Chidsey, Bischoff, Proctor, Davis, and DeMers webcast from final panel presentation at 2002 Future’s Conference “Integrative Session to Review Implementation Steps” (View individually or as a group) http://video.indiana.edu:8080/ramgen/vic/futures_20021115_1.rm e. Dawson, M., Cummings, J. A., Harrison, P. L., Short, R. J., Gorin, S., Palomares, R. (2004). The 2002 multitsite conference on the future of school psychology: Next steps. School Psychology Review, 33, 115-125. If a NASP member, access this article by linking to NASP websitehttp://www.naspwebservices.org/. OR read the article in: School Psychology Quarterly, 2003, 18, 497-509. f. The “National Agenda” of priority goals identified at the conclusion of the 2002 Futures Conference (See Appendix B later in this module) g. Harrison, P. L. (Ed.) (2003, December). Future of school psychology: Reflections of conference participants---one year later. Communique, 32(4) If a NASP member, access this article by linking to NASP website http://www.naspwebservices.org/ h. Desrochers, J. E. (Ed.) (2004, December). Reflections on the second anniversary of the conference on the future of school psychology. Communique, 33(4) If a NASP member, access this article by linking to NASP website http://www.naspwebservices.org/ i. Additional follow-up personal reflections from advisory board (See Appendix C later in this module).

Go to Table of Contents Module V1: Next Steps Page 5 MODULE VI SCHOOL PSYCHOLOGY TODAY AND TOMORROW: NEXT STEPS? QUESTIONS FOR GROUP DISCUSSION OR INDIVIDUAL REFLECTION

Consider the following focus questions and target questions in your groups or for individual reflection. Focus questions are similar to those used in focus groups prior to the 2002 Futures Conference; these brief questions promote an initial orientation and consideration of the topic. The more comprehensive target questions require your consideration of specific issues and findings from background readings and your application of the issues to your own setting.

Groups: Before group discussion, the group leader can distribute or read the questions, and allow group members to write brief responses to each question. To begin group discussion of each question, the group leader should read the question aloud and ask each group member in turn to give one response. As time allows, ask each group for a second response or discussion of frequent or related responses. A recorder can note and display responses on an easel, computer monitor, or other display.

Self-study/independent learning: Read, consider, and write brief responses to each question below.

NOTE TO ALL: For the questions below, provide responses for the level of service delivery on which you are focusing: your own individual service delivery goals, local school district goals, state goals, or national goals.

Focus question: Group discussion or individual reflection :

a. Should the practice of school psychology change in the next 10 years? How? What are the implications if it does change? If it does not change? b. In the next 10 years, should school psychology attract more professionals to the field? What are the implications if we do attract more professionals? If we do not attract more professionals? c. In the next 10 years, how can school psychology successfully meet service demands, even with our diminishing numbers of professionals? d. How will graduate education in school psychology change in the next 10 years? e. How will inservice training by school systems, professional associations, etc., change in the next 10 years? f. Look further into the future. What major characteristics do you expect to see in school psychology practice and graduate training in 2025? 2050?

Target questions based on background reading and webcasts: Group discussion or individual reflection

Go to Table of Contents Module V1: Next Steps Page 6 a. What must happen to make school psychology become more visible to parents, educators, children, and others in the public over the next 10 years? Focus your response on activities that must occur on the local level. How might the local activities be supported by state and national associations? b. The clinical model of assessing children who struggle in the regular class has been the predominant approach for school psychologists. In contrast a prevention or public health model shifts the focus from individuals to monitoring the needs of the population and implementing preventive strategies and interventions. Should school psychologists broaden their focus from primarily serving exceptional children to instead serving all school children? c. From the focus group responses (See Appendix A) and article and webcast by Ehrhardt-Padgett, Hatzichristou, Kitson, and Meyers, which comment or comments did you find to be most relevant to your own perception of the future of school psychology? d. Hatzichristou (in the article and webcast by Ehrhardt-Padgett, Hatzichristou, Kitson, and Meyers) describes a cross-cultural and cross-national perspective for school psychologists. What are common issues for children, families and schools in different countries? How do various challenges and crises worldwide affect children, families, and schools in different ways? How can school psychologists develop a truly "multicultural" professional identity and multi- national awareness, understanding and collaboration? e. Appendix B contains the “national agenda” of 15 priority goals selected for implementation at the conclusion of the 2002 futures conference. Which one or more of the 15 priority goals have been reflected in national changes in school psychology practice since the futures conference in 2002? Which of the priority goals have been reflected in your own state and local school psychology practices? f. The readings for Module VI include several personal reflections of changes or new directions that have occurred for conference participants since the 2002 futures conference. (See readings g, h, and I from the reading list above). Which comment or comments did you find to be most relevant to your own perceptions of changes or new directions that have occurred in school psychology?

Go to Table of Contents Module V1: Next Steps Page 7 MODULE VI SCHOOL PSYCHOLOGY TODAY AND TOMORROW: NEXT STEPS? ACTION PLAN REVIEW AND IMPLEMENTATION

In Modules II, III, IV, and V, individuals and groups engaged in systematic problem- solving steps. Threats and opportunities were examined, critical issues were prioritized, and action plans were developed. As your last step in completion of the learning modules on the future of school psychology, you, or your group, should review the action plans generated at the conclusion of each of the following modules:

 Module II: School Psychology Personnel Shortages and Implications for Service Delivery  Module III: Children and School Psychology  Module IV: Families and School Psychology  Module V: Families and School Psychology

After reviewing the various action plans, engage in group discussion or individual reflection about them. It is important to do a reality check on the feasibility of the plans. The number of hours in a day is finite; meaning the steps in the various action plans will need to be critically reviewed to ensure a high likelihood of success. Answer the following questions about the action plans through individual reflection or in your groups:

a. The readings for Module VI include an article by Dawson, Cummings, Harrison, Short, Gorin, and Palomares, in which the futures conference co- chairs identify several caveats related to the long-term action plans generated during the 2002 conference. Consider the caveats below, along with the following questions, as they relate to the action plans developed by you, or your group, at the conclusion of Modules II, III, IV, and V:  “Strategic planning often fails to develop action plans that identify in sufficiently specific terms who will do what when.” How will you, or your group, include adequate follow through/accountability to ensure accomplishments of your action plan?  Action plans may “promote practices that can transform the field, but the day-to-day work of the school psychologist in the trenches does not change.” How can you, or your group, ensure that your action plans promote more effective daily practice of school psychologists?  “To change the way we practice, we need to ensure that appropriate training opportunities are widely available.” What implications do your, or your group’s, action plans have for the graduate training of school psychologists? What implications do your, or your group’s, action plans have for the inservice training or professional development of school psychologists currently practicing?  If the vision is too broad, there may be a “’disconnect’ between the goals identified and the actions needed to achieve the goals.” Did you, or your group, identify broad goals? If so, have you or your group translated your

Go to Table of Contents Module V1: Next Steps Page 8 broad goals into action plans that are specific enough to achieve important outcomes? b. Which of the action plans has the highest priority? Which action plans should be implemented first? c. How can those responsible for implementing the action plans shift their responsibilities to permit adequate time to accomplish the actions specified in the plan? d. School psychologists alone will not be able to achieve the same outcomes as school psychologists working in concert with other school professionals, community-based professionals, volunteers, parents, and students. Which groups of professionals or stakeholders can you recruit to help? Try to expand the resource list of those who may help accomplish the steps. e. As proponents of evidence based interventions, school psychologists are committed to empirically evaluating their efforts. Examine the action plans. Do they specify the collection of adequate evidence to determine whether the steps in the action plan are accomplished well? f. Finally, evaluate the action plans from the perspective of making tem failsafe. In high quality collaborations individuals support each other to ensure the project progresses. Are checks built into your action plans to avoid backward movement if one person fails to implement a step?

We wish you much success in meeting the needs of children, families, and schools.

Documentation Form” (see Optional Materials at the end of this module)

Go to Table of Contents Module V1: Next Steps Page 9 Appendix A: Comprehensive Results of Focus Groups Held Prior to the 2002 School Psychology Future’s Conference:

Questions Related to School Psychology Today and Tomorrow: Next Steps?

In preparation for the Futures Conference, a series of focus groups were held at the 2002 NASP convention in Chicago. School psychology practitioners, students, and trainers were asked to provide information in response to a series of targeted focus group questions. Over 100 school psychologists provided responses to the focus group questionnaire. Additionally we have collected responses from the focus group questionnaire on the Futures Conference website.

NOTE: Julia Rutely of The University of Alabama compiled and categorized the focus group data).

Focus Group Question: Do you expect the practice of school psychology to change in the next 10 years? How?

Response Category: Responses from Focus Groups Administrative & Yes...with changing legislation, it's difficult to predict, however we may be in a position to Personnel help mold that definition Definitely, I would presume the availability of practitioners will decrease and the need for provision of services by a culturally diverse practitioner pool will increase Yes, slowly, depends on what happens to LD in IDEA. We're already getting pulled into the safe schools area Yes, more battles over punishment vs. treatment of children in schools Less 1:1 direct services; hopefully, increased collaboration The practice of school psychology may change in the next ten years depending upon the impact of the reauthorizations of IDEA and the public relations, image, and marketing efforts of school psychologists. If we are not proactive and involved in local and national educational, political, mental health, and psychology efforts with children, adolescents, and schools, then we may be left out Do presentations at school board meetings, etc. Empirically validated pieces of our work exist in research; we need a way for this to get to school psychologists who cannot attend the national conferences (or even state conferences). Need summer opportunities or models for CE for school psychologists. There are many folks we are not reaching, and we need to try to reach them in a way that takes into account school psychs finances, etc. Fewer school psychologists Higher work load due to shortage. Hopefully, more "need" driven interventions as opposed to "diagnosis" driven interventions.

Go to Table of Contents Module V1: Next Steps Page 10 Hopefully, to expand delivery of supports to address mental health needs I think this will depend on part by changes in the IDEA If we cannot address shortage issues adequately I expect to see increased #s of psychometrists or school psychologist assistant positions Need to be doing more with PTA and school board associations, who can advocate more for us at the local levels Yes, less emphasis on paper and pencil; more technology more mental health issues for kids Younger and perhaps not as well trained school psychologists who have entered through emergency certification routes Inexorable march to (equivalent of) doctoral level Mental health service provider. Fewer SP's. Be more involved in the financing of our positions, where the money comes from to fund our positions. So we will be more outcomes based. I hope so but I think it will be dependent upon location and administrative support I expect that we will see more privatization of school psychology services offered by companies rather than just private practice school psychologists. If we don't adequately address the shortage question (or respecialization) we're going to see more of contracting Be less turf oriented, and look instead at the needs of kids Testing Focus Continue to move from the test/place mode to consultation. Direct services as mental health provider-Resource on effective practices that lead to positive outcomes. Continued change in emphasis from "test and place" to increasing role as consultant and direct services provider Hopefully, less testing and more interventions and school-based psychological services including individual and group counseling. Many retirement eligible school psychologists will retire unless incentives and meaningful opportunities in the field are offered. It appears that we're moving away from assessment in the traditional term (IQ tests). If it happens-school psychologists may lose their jobs because in many systems they are there to determine eligibility for special education. A plan needs to be in place. Less testing for disability identification; more consultative and academic/behavioral support services Restriction of role back to evaluation only but expected to have more wide range of assessment tools/abilities (i.e. neuropsych, ESL) Some things in school systems tend to change very slowly. I expect some entertainment of the idea of having psychometric "testers" gain to free up school psychologists. If IDEA reauthorization change LD criteria-that could significantly impact school psychology. The IDEA Reauthorization will profoundly affect our practice-how is unclear yet. Changes in LD criteria could liven things up a great deal Lesser focus traditional assessment Yes, I expect the "testing/assessment" focus to decrease. I hope more emphasis will be placed on pre-referral and intervention at the early childhood level. (Also to provide more mental health services). Yes, if shortage continues, the possibility exists that we will go back to just testing. Less time in each school-less time to use role expansion model. Yes, in different ways in different places. Psychologist positions will be totally tied to Medicaid funding and test/place model will prevail in the short term, with long term status being unclear. Model programs in regular education could lead us out. Yes, less standardized testing Yes, sadly I expect it to become more psychometrically oriented. I would love, however, to see a substantial shift to quality provision of comprehensive mental health services to all children by fully qualified school psychologists. Role Expansion Yes. How we evaluate, and what we evaluate for, will change. Less focus on specific IQ (etc.) and more focus on broader indicators of ability, behavior, social functioning, etc.

Go to Table of Contents Module V1: Next Steps Page 11 Absolutely I feel that practitioners will provide a much broader range of services and be seen as mental health providers Assessment will be different. School psychology will be more clinical if allowed to be Education may have looked away from school psychology for the behavioral interventionist’s role Finally, role expansion on a broad scale Hope we will be more collaborative with other allied professions, especially in planning interventions, but not always delivering the interventions ourselves I hope that the bureaucratic aspects of the job are minimized and the psychological aspects of our training (e.g., process approach to assessment, consultation) are emphasized I think the answer to this is linked inextricably to changes in IDEA. If the law changes to a more continuous monitoring process (resistance to intervention) model for LD, our role could change dramatically. I think we will see a problem-solving approach to disability identification If school psychologists can find a niche, perhaps that role will result in more proactive services, prevent children’s problems In 10 years, hopefully we will be working more in regular education in addition to special education More emphasis on meeting diverse needs of students through expanded role Problem-solving model is good, but is it feasible with shortage? Perhaps we will need more consultation given shortage. School psychologists have more liaison role with other agencies, given characteristics of children in schools. Internships should provide experiences with other agencies, so they have a better sense of liaison roles. Internships should not be limited to schools only. Look at hospitals, juvenile justice, etc. Need to create good training opportunities for graduate students School psychologists have the BEST training of education personnel. Maybe we have relinquished too much to others who may not be as well trained as we are (behavior interventionists). If we could work more in the big arena of regular education, would be better. Split of evaluation and mental health provider functions. School Psychologist as a learner and more efficient profession. The greater recognition of children in crisis is the opportunity to broaden function from the traditional role with a primary focus on assessment and placement The need to focus on prevention/early intervention in reg. education. Unless the shortage is supplemented, becoming more consultative. Becoming more outcome based. The need for collaboration with other professionals. Universities should allow more flexibility We will provide even less direct service and individualized services. More assessment, administration. Yes, become more broad based with expanded roles for psychologists Yes, contracting may change practice; 2) new knowledge in empirically updated treatment may change practice; 3)Medicaid reimbursement may increasingly change funding; 4) consultation may grow as Treatment Yes, emphasis on mental health provider Yes, hopefully more role expansion Yes, In concert with changing laws, changing personnel, changing responsibilities (provision of mental health services as well as more traditional roles with special education, etc.) Yes, in some ways, I'm concerned that we have diminished our role because daily demands (testing, meetings) have precluded many of us from focusing on the bigger role we play in the schools Yes, increasing use of computer applications, changes in evaluation techniques,

Go to Table of Contents Module V1: Next Steps Page 12 changes in definition of special ed./disabilities (especially LD), shift to flexible service delivery/intervention-based assessment by some-others to cross-battery, etc. Yes, more based on interventions and consultation. Move away from evaluation Yes, more counseling/involvement in direct service in mental health Yes, more ethnic and culturally diverse clientele. The number of culturally and ethnically diverse school psychologists will remain the same. The mental health needs of children and families will increase. Yes, more indirect service delivery model, more problem-solving model; major changes in how we assess student needs and progress Yes, shortages-if there are not enough school psychologists to do current role, duties will be assigned to others-we need to shape-control this Yes, we will move back to a more traditional model to get done what we must rather than what we might Yes. More generalized services versus specialized services Yes. More role expansion-hopefully, better able to meet the needs of students. Yes-greater clarity for the field and the professionals Yes-role expansion. I would hate to think all the efforts would go without change. Large potential for burnout with the large number of roles we have Yes, changing demographics of school populations and need for intervention-focused practice Yes, less testing, more mental health focused School psychology is not a discrete thing…they are generalists, but find that they must be specialists too (elementary, crisis, etc.). There are so many possibilities, so encourage graduate students to go into jobs that they like---they have a choice. Find a niche. Provision of the multidimensional role of school psychologist to all children not just special education students With reauthorization of IDEA and hopefully focus more on intervention. So we will do more intervention and less assessment for eligibility. Our clients will continue becoming more ethnically and linguistically diverse. I worry that some of the more simplistic notions in ed reform will make some teachers, administrators, and community members less tolerant of students with disabilities, particularly those with behavioral and cognitive disabilities.

Go to Table of Contents Module V1: Next Steps Page 13 Appendix B: The “National Agenda” of Priority Goals Identified at the Conclusion of the 2002 School Psychology Futures Conference

The 2002 Future’s Conference resulted in 54 specific goals for action plans related to issues for children, families, and schools. All 54 goals specific goals are presented in Module III: Children; Module IV: Families; and Module V: Schools.

The eight associations that sponsored the futures conference selected 15 of the goals, in addition to the original guiding principles for the conference, to form a “national agenda,” to guide collaborative national efforts for the next few years. The national agenda is presented below:

GUIDING PRINCIPLES

. Currently, and for the foreseeable future, we are faced with a shortage of school psychologists that threatens our capacity to meet the needs of children in schools. While the profession must increase efforts to recruit and retain professionals in our field, such strategies alone will be insufficient and inadequate to increase our capacity to meet the imminent needs of children, families, and schools. . As a result, changes in school psychology practices and service delivery will be required to use the resources we have to maximize the benefits to the children and schools that we serve.  Prevention and early intervention will be necessary to achieve positive outcomes for children, families, and schools.  Evidence-based practices will be necessary to achieve positive outcomes for children, families, and schools.  In order to be effective, school psychological services must demonstrate respect for and understanding of diversity factors for children, families and schools, including factors related to cultural, individual, and role differences (e.g., age, gender or gender identity, cognitive capabilities, developmental level, race, ethnicity, culture, national origin, religion, sexual orientation, disability, language, and socioeconomic status).  Change will be facilitated by using electronic tools for communication. High quality resources may be collaboratively developed and disseminated.

CRITICAL ISSUES/OUTCOMES

Outcome 1: Improved academic competence and school success for all children.

Advocacy & Public Policy Goal A: Advocate for universal early prevention and intervention programs that emphasize language, cognitive, and social-emotional development and are placed in the context of ethnicity, SES, gender, and language.

Go to Table of Contents Module V1: Next Steps Page 14 Practice Goal B: Ensure that assessment practices of school psychologists are empirically-linked to strategies to improve academic performance, and that those assessment practices account for the influence of ethnicity, SES, gender, and language on learning outcomes. Pre-service & In-service Training Goal C: Develop and implement pre-service and in-service training for school psychologists related to universal early prevention and intervention programs.

Outcome 2: Improved social-emotional functioning for all children.

Advocacy & Public Policy Goal A: Promote the availability of comprehensive range of services, from supportive and inclusive placements through interim alternative placements, for students with severe emotional and behavioral disorders. Collaboration & Communication Goal B: Educate all stakeholders about the importance of social-emotional competence for children. Practice Goal C: Ensure that school psychologists develop a systematic plan in all schools to reduce social/emotional barriers to learning.

Outcome 3: Enhanced family-school partnerships and parental involvement in schools.

Research & Knowledge Base Goal A: Identify evidence-based models of effective family- school partnerships. Practice Goal B: Ensure that school psychologists engage in activities to change the culture of schooling to ensure that families are integral partners in the educational process of children. Pre-service Training Goal C: Change pre-service education and training of school psychologist candidates to infuse a focus on families as integral partners in the educational process.

Outcome 4: More effective education and instruction for all learners.

Research & Knowledge Base Goal A: Identify key components of effective instruction of all learners, including evidence- based approaches to prevention and early intervention for learning problems. In-service Training Goal B: Provide in-service training for school psychologists in the use of a data-based problem solving model to implement evidence-based instruction and interventions. In-service Training Goal C: Implement a national pre-service and in-service training initiative for school psychologists regarding effective instruction.

Go to Table of Contents Module V1: Next Steps Page 15 Outcome 5: Increased child and family services in schools that promote health and mental health and are integrated with community services

Practice Goal A: Define and promote population-based service delivery in schools and school psychology. In-service Training Goal B: Prepare current practitioners to implement a public health model. Pre-service Training Goal C: Prepare future practitioners to implement a public health model.

Go to Table of Contents Module V1: Next Steps Page 16 Appendix C: Reflections of Futures Conference Participants: Next Steps

(Members of the advisory board for these learning modules prepared the following comments in 2005-2006 for use in the learning modules. The comments include reflections on several topics addressed in the learning modules, including personnel shortages in school psychology and issues facing children, families, and schools).

John Desrochers, School Psychologist, New Canaan Public Schools, New Canaan, CT

We lost a part-time school psychologist in my school this year. That position is not coming back; instead, the position was replaced with a social worker. Part of the reason for this was the shortage of high quality school psychologist candidates to fill the vacancy. The evaluation work previously done by that school psychologist is now given to me, reducing the time I have available to provide other services. In a tiny way, my situation provides a preview of what I believe could happen all over the country during the next several years.

Three years after the Multisite Conference on the Future of School Psychology, my views regarding the shortage of school psychologists are no different than they were then except that maybe I am beginning to feel its effects more personally. I notice the gray heads at our psychology department meetings and wonder how many of the positions now held by veteran practitioners will be filled by social workers – once we all begin to retire. I know that under the present system my colleagues who are left will be increasingly specialized and marginalized in an evaluation role. I am reminded of why I was so impressed at the Futures Conference with Michael Curtis’ presentation showing the inexorable effects of an increasing demand for our services combined with a decreasing supply of providers – the demonstrated reality of this trend seemed as sobering as it was inescapable. At a time when school psychology is at its strongest and most mature technically and philosophically, we are at our weakest in terms of our ability to deliver the number of professionals needed to meet the demands of a public that has finally begun to appreciate our potential contributions.

I still believe that the shortage cannot be overcome by attempts to increase the supply of school psychologists. The only hope of adequately addressing this issue is to (1) stabilize the demand for school psychologists as presently defined and (2) change the job description of school psychologists from providers of one-to-one service to designers, integrators, and coordinators of services to larger systems.

I think that to some extent school psychologists do appreciate the impact that the shortage will have on the future of the profession. The efforts of national and state school psychology associations to publicize the results of the Futures Conference have

Go to Table of Contents Module V1: Next Steps Page 17 accomplished that. At the same time, a form of collective denial regarding the stunning implications of that shortage seems to exist that prevents us from addressing these implications head on and with vigor. Perhaps we realize that reform will involve loss of some cherished roles in addition to not-yet-defined gains, and this gives us pause. There are ideas – respecialization of allied professionals, adoption of a public health model, creation of school psychologist assistants, increased use of technology in assessment and tele-services, reduced use of routine intelligence test batteries, and so forth – discussed in fits and starts by various groups of people, but what is needed is a broad-based, analytical, problem-solving discussion of these issues leading to acceptance of some and rejection of others, culminating in a clear national program for reform. I know there is a process to change, and perhaps I am impatient with its pace, but then again, Dr. Curtis’s data keep popping up in my mind reminding me that this problem isn’t going to wait for us.

Rachel Brown-Chidsey, Associate Professor of School Psychology, University of Southern Maine

Since the November 2002 Future of School Psychology conference two major national policies have begun to play a big role in shaping the future of school psychology. First, the implications of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) of 2001 have become more fully recognized. Second, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEIA) of 2004 has been passed. Each of these federal policies includes provisions likely to play a major role in future school psychology practices. NCLB includes requirements for school districts to document the annual progress of their students. Referred to by some as “accountability,” the reporting requirements of NCLB are designed to foster better academic outcomes for all students.

Improved academic outcomes for all students was also a major strand of the Futures conference and many of the initiatives now being implemented as part of NCLB correspond with the goals drafted by the Futures group. For example, as part of NCLB, the U. S. Department of Education launched a web site known as the “What Works Clearinghouse” to provide information about scientifically-validated instructional materials. The Futures workgroup on academic outcomes suggested that school psychologists disseminate information about effective instructional practices. Related to identification of students struggling in school, the Futures workgroup suggested that there be more supports for problem-solving-based assessment practices. Since then, an edited volume entitled Assessment for Intervention: A Problem-Solving Approach has been published. This book includes chapters by many Futures conference participants about how school psychologists can assist in the process of supporting students who are struggling in school.

IDEIA 2004 includes components even more strongly aligned with ideas generated at the Futures conference. Specifically, IDEIA 2004 allows the use of response to intervention (RTI) as part of the process of determining whether a student has a learning disability (LD). Although the term RTI was not included in the goals statements

Go to Table of Contents Module V1: Next Steps Page 18 of the Futures participants, several workgroups included goals specifically related to universal prevention and early intervention practices. RTI includes three tiers of intervention for students in general education, with the first tier being universal scientifically-based general education instruction and assessment. The language of the Futures conferees foreshadowed language that has since appeared in federal legislation. Also present in the Futures statement was emphasis on the importance of ensuring cultural, linguistic, and racial, and ethnic representation in all instructional activities. Such an emphasis is also found in both NCLB and IDEIA 2004 which note the underachievement of many students from minority backgrounds. Still needed are more resources that identify the specific barriers to school success for students from diverse backgrounds. Once these barriers are defined, instructional programs that overcome such barriers and which include dynamic and frequent assessment documenting student progress need to be implemented.

In the time since the 2002 Futures conference federal and state initiatives have been put in place to improve academic outcomes for all students. Some of these programs have shown exciting promise. School psychologists have, and will continue to play, an important role in facilitating school success for all children. Through knowledge of effective instructional methods, application of appropriate assessment procedures, participation in district-wide universal prevention and early intervention activities, and thorough diagnostic evaluations when needed, school psychologists offer important knowledge and skills necessary to promote effective school outcomes for all students.

Cathy Lines, Mental Health Specialist, Cherry Creek Schools, Colorado

In Colorado, we’ve followed up our futures activities by trying to provide more specifics for consumers to access in action and staff development planning. This has included surveying psychologists in the state as to “retooling” needs and providing regional trainings, funded by a state grant. Specifically, the futures initiative has sponsored state- wide workshops in RTI and targeted/intensive behavior interventions.

A specific example of “futures-related” staff development is that our district (Cherry Creek Schools) is finding a true role for school psychologists in supporting teachers/administrators in understanding research around the importance of family partnerships and gaining skills in truly “partnering” versus just “involvement.” In addition, we are bringing in parent education training for our school psychology staff so that we can offer a “multi-tiered” model of parent opportunities. Parent-school partnerships are a key ingredient of the district RTI model. Below is a list of additional resources that we have used in our district to guide our Parent-School Partnership initiative. These resources tend to be “educator” friendly in consulting with staff:

 Colorado Department of Education (2004). Strengthening parent involvement: A toolkit. Available at: www.cde.state.co.us/cdeunified/download/pi_toolkit.pdf  Including Every Parent by the Project for School Innovation and Patrick O’Hearn Elementary School, 2003.

Go to Table of Contents Module V1: Next Steps Page 19  Lueder, D.C. (2000). Creating partnerships with parents: An educator’s guide. Lanham, Maryland: Scarecrow Press.  Patrikakou, E.N. et al. (2005). School-family partnerships for children’s success. New York: Teacher’s College Press.

Also, we are watching Colorado school psychologists begin to meet the challenge of shifting from primary “eligibility” roles to early intervening with children/parents and RTI. School psychologists are needing and wanting knowledge and training in multi-tiered research-based interventions – so websites, pilots, university examples which can be researched etc. help in action planning. We are finding the following websites and resources helpful:

Academic

 Colorado Literacy Connections: http://www.cde.state.co.us/literacy/index.htm  Dissemination Center for Children with Disabilities – funded by U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP): www.nichcy.org  National Center on Progress Monitoring: http://www.studentprogress.org

Behavioral

 Center for Effective Collaboration and Practice (CECP): http://cecp.air.org  Center for the Study and Prevention of Violence (CSPV): Blueprints for Violence Prevention: http://www.colorado.edu/cspv/blueprints/index.html  The Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning (CASEL): www.casel.org  The Council for Excellence in Government – Coalition for Evidence-Based Policy: Social Programs That Work: http://www.excelgov.org/displayContent.asp? Keyword=prppcSocial  National Institute of Drug Abuse (NIDA): http://www.nida.nih.gov/prevention/prevopen.html  OSEP Technical Assistance Center on Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS): http://pbis.org/english/default.htm  The Promising Practices Network on Children, Families, and Communities: http://www.promisingpractices.net  SAMHSA Model Programs: Effective Substance Abuse and Mental Health Programs for Every Community: http://www.modelprograms.samhsa.gov  Society for Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, Division 53, American Psychological Association: www.clinicalchildpsychology.org  Strengthening America’s Families: Effective Family Programs for Prevention of Delinquency: http://www.strengtheningfamilies.org/  U.S. Department of Education Safe, Disciplined, and Drug-Free Schools Expert Panel: Safe, Disciplined, and Drug-Free Schools Programs:  http://www.ed.gov/admins/lead/safety/exemplary01/index.html

Go to Table of Contents Module V1: Next Steps Page 20  Youth Violence Report of the Surgeon General: http://www.surgeongeneral.gov/library/youthviolence/report.html

Academic and Behavioral

 The Campbell Collaboration – What Helps? What Harms? Based on What Evidence?: http://campbellcollaboration.org/Fralibrary.html  Intervention Central: http://www.interventioncentral.org  Southwestern Educational Development Laboratory (SEDL): http://www.sedl.org  US Department of Education System of Expert Panels: http://www.ed.gov/offices/OERI/ORAD/KAD/expert_panel/index.html  What Works Clearinghouse: http://www.whatworks.ed.gov/

Finally, the Colorado Society of School Psychology prepared a brochure to provide public relations about how school psychologists are implementing the goals of the futures conference in state activities.

Sandra L.Christenson, Professor, University of Minnesoa

Since the 2002 Invitational Conference: The Future of School Psychology, the urgency to partner with families to foster children’s learning outcomes has increased. Too many schools carry the feared designator of ‘ayp,” and the achievement for targeted groups of students, while often improving, is still below acceptable standards. No Child Left Behind (NCLB) underscores school accountability at the expense of not acknowledging the effect of out-of-school time on students’ in-school academic, social, or behavioral performance. Irrespective of the focus of NCLB, establishing partnerships defined as shared goals + contributions + accountability (Fantuzzo, Tighe, & Childs, 2000), is a viable way to address discrepancies in children’s learning outcomes. Adopting systemic-based assessment and intervention practices is warranted, especially to enhance the goals of NCLB.

Adopting a systemic perspective to addressing children’s learning outcomes is supported by data. Out-of-school time and home support for learning have been found by different researchers (e.g., Rutter, Maughan, Mortimore, & Ouston, 1979; Wahlberg, 1984) to account for 60-70-% of the variance in student achievement. Maximizing student learning outcomes points then to the essential nature of the family. In fact, school psychologists would be wise to heed the recommendation for defining our services within the child/family system, a system that interacts with the school system (Pianta & Walsh, 1996).

Two movements have taken on greater predominance since the conference. First, there is a need to organize our services across the levels of school-wide (universal) and individualized (selected or indicated). Many universal partnering strategies exist,

Go to Table of Contents Module V1: Next Steps Page 21 enabling us to reach approximately 80% of parents. Many of these strategies will be based in the dissemination of information (e.g., print and nonprint, curriculum nights, workshops, home-school interventions for reading) as to how parents can assist their children’s learning. The focus is squarely on children’s learning progress. Students and families needing supplemental support will require an individualized focus on attention to unique needs of the family (e.g., need for learning resources, parent consultation), with the smallest percentage of parents needing information, attention to circumstantial family needs, and ongoing support for the parents to be engaged more actively. Second, the role played by motivation and the value toward learning that is espoused by the family is emerging as a prime area for involvement by school psychologists. We would be wise to foster both academic and motivational home support for learning. In particular, finding ways for families to encourage children’s persistence in the face of academic challenge has taken on greater concern – a welcome concern - in the context of school dropout.

What has not changed in the past 3 years is the seminal role of school-family relationships for children’s learning. Our reason for partnering with families is to improve child outcomes. To accomplish this, and in our role as learning specialists, we must consider the value of informing, inviting, and including parents in our assessment and intervention practices. In that vein, the response-to-intervention approach, if implemented systemically, offers much promise to foster strong school-family partnerships for struggling learners.

References

Fantuzzo, J., Tighe, E., & Childs, S. (2000). Family involvement questionnaire: A multivariate assessment of family participation in early childhood education. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92(2), 367-376.

Pianta, R., & Walsh, D.B. (1996). High-risk children in schools: Constructing sustaining relationships. NY: Routledge.

Rutter, M., Maughan, B., Mortimore, P., & Ouston, J. (1979). Fifteen thousand hours: Secondary schools and their effects on children. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Walberg, H.J. (1984). Families as partners in educational productivity. Phi Delta Kappan, 65, 397-400.

Go to Table of Contents Module V1: Next Steps Page 22 Module VI: SCHOOLS AND SCHOOL PSYCHOLOGY

PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITY DOCUMENTATION FORM

NOTE: This form may be modified as needed.

The form below may be used by coordinators of group activities (e.g., workshops, inservices, courses, etc.) or those engaging in independent self-study to document professional development activity for participants. Record the dates and number of hours spent in each individual activity in which you engaged.

Participant Name: ______

Dates of Professional Development Activity: ______

Title of Workshop/Inservice/Course if applicable: ______

Signature of Coordinator of Workshop/Inservice/Course if applicable ______

Select one Worksho Self- p or Date(s study group ) of hour contact ACTIVITY Activity s hours RESOURCES FOR READING AND REVIEW a. Responses from national focus groups to questions about school psychology practice in 10 years (See Appendix A later in this module).

b. Ehrhardt-Padgett, G. N., Hatzichristou, C., Kitson, J., Meyers, J. (2004). Awakening to a new dawn: Perspectives of the future of school psychology. School Psychology Review, 33, 105-114. OR School Psychology Quarterly, 2003, 18, 493-496. c. Ehrhardt-Padgett, Hatzichristou, Kitson, and Meyers webcast from 2002 Futures Conference “From Chaos Comes Resolutions” and powerpoints (View individually or as a group) http://video.indiana.edu:8080/ramgen/vic/futures_20021115_1.rm d. Smallwood, Brown-Chidsey, Bischoff, Proctor, Davis, and DeMers webcast from final panel presentation at 2002 Future’s Conference “Integrative Session to Review Implementation Steps” (View

Go to Table of Contents Module V1: Next Steps Page 23 individually or as a group) http://video.indiana.edu:8080/ramgen/vic/futures_20021115_1.rm e. Dawson, M., Cummings, J. A., Harrison, P. L., Short, R. J., Gorin, S., Palomares, R. (2004). The 2002 multitsite conference on the future of school psychology: Next steps. School Psychology Review, 33, 115- 125. OR School Psychology Quarterly, 2003, 18, 497-509. f. The “National Agenda” of priority goals identified at the conclusion of the 2002 Futures Conference (See Appendix B later in this module) g. Harrison, P. L. (Ed.) (2003, December). Future of school psychology: Reflections of conference participants---one year later. Communique, 32(4) h. Desrochers, J. E. (Ed.) (2004, December). Reflections on the second anniversary of the conference on the future of school psychology. Communique, 33(4) i. Additional follow-up personal reflections from advisory board (See Appendix C later in this module).

j. Additional readings: list optional readings as applicable:

QUESTIONS FOR GROUP DISCUSSION OR INDIVIDUAL REFLECTION

ACTION PLAN REVIEW AND IMPLEMENTATION

I participated in a total of _____ clock hours of independent self-study activity.

I participated in a total of _____ clock hours of workshop/inservice/course or other group learning activity.

Important note about use of this form for continuing education requirements for credential renewal (state certificate, state license, NCSP, etc.): Users of this form should apply the above professional development hours only as specified by the credentialing agency.

I affirm that the activities and hours documented above are those in which I actually participated.

Participant’s Signature Date

Go to Table of Contents Module V1: Next Steps Page 24 Go to Table of Contents Module V1: Next Steps Page 25