consultation in schools

Thomas J. Kampwirth Kristin M. Powers

Collaborative Consultation in the Schools

Effective Practices for Students with Learning and Behavior Problems

FIFTH EdITIon

Collaborative Consultation in the Schools

This page intentionally left blank

Collaborative Consultation in the Schools

Effective Practices for Students with Learning and Behavior Problems

F i f t h E d i t i o n

Thomas J. Kampwirth Professor Emeritus, California State University, Long Beach

Kristin M. Powers California State University, Long Beach

Boston Columbus Indianapolis New York San Francisco Upper Saddle River Amsterdam Cape Town Dubai London Madrid Milan Munich Paris Montreal Toronto

Delhi Mexico City São Paulo Sydney Hong Kong Seoul Singapore Taipei Tokyo

Vice President and Editorial Director: Jeffery W. Johnston Executive Editor: Ann Castel Davis Editorial Assistant: Janelle Criner Executive Field Marketing Manager: Krista Clark Marketing Manager: Christopher Barry Project Manager: Kerry Rubadue Program Manager: Joe Sweeney Procurement Specialist: Deidra Skahill Senior Art Director: Diane Ernsberger Cover Designer: Carie Keller

Cover Image: IllustrationSource.com Media Producer: Autumn Benson Media Project Manager: Tammy Walters Full-Service Project Management: iEnergizerAptara®, Inc., Niraj Bhatt Composition: iEnergizerAptara®, Inc. Printer: Courier Kendallville Binder: Courier Kendallville Cover Printer: Courier Kendallville Text Font: Times

Package ISBN 10: 0-13-401964-4 ISBN 13: 978-0-13-401964-2 Loose Leaf Version ISBN 10: 0-13-382713-5 ISBN 13: 978-0-13-382713-2 E-text ISBN 10: 0-13-404205-0 ISBN 13: 978-0-13-404205-3

Credits and acknowledgments for material borrowed from other sources and reproduced, with permission, in this textbook appear on the appropriate page within the text.

Copyright © 2016, 2012, 2006 by Pearson Education, Inc. or its affiliates. All Rights Reserved. Printed in the United States of America. This publication is protected by copyright, and permission should be obtained from the publisher prior to any prohibited reproduction, storage in a retrieval system, or transmission in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise. For information regarding permissions, request forms and the appropriate contacts within the Pearson Education Global Rights & Permissions department, please visit www.pearsoned.com/permissions/.

Acknowledgements of third party content appear on the appropriate page in text, which constitute an extension of this copyright page.

Unless otherwise indicated herein, any third-party trademarks that may appear in this work are the property of their respective owners and any references to third-party trademarks, logos or other trade dress are for demonstrative or descriptive purposes only. Such references are not intended to imply any sponsorship, endorsement, authorization, or promotion of Pearson’s products by the owners of such marks, or any relationship between the owner and Pearson Education, Inc. or its affiliates, authors, licensees or distributors.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Kampwirth, Thomas J. Collaborative consultation in the schools : effective practices for students with learning and behavior problems /

Thomas J. Kampwirth, Professor Emeritus, California State University, Long Beach, Kristin M. Powers, California State University, Long Beach.—Fifth edition.

pages cm Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-0-13-382713-2 (alk. paper) — ISBN 0-13-382713-5 (alk. paper) 1. Educational counseling—United States. 2. Group work in education—United States. 3. Learning disabled

children—Services for—United States. 4. Problem children—Services for—United States. 5. School management and organization—United States. I. Powers, Kristin M. II. Title.

LB1027.5.K285 2016 371.4’220973—dc23

2014035167

10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

I dedicate this text to my wife Frieda; our children, Kathy, Tom, and Ed; and our grandchildren, Alyssa, Shane, Conor, Elise, and Addie Lu,

and our great grandson, Asher.

—T.K.

I dedicate this text to my husband, Mark, and our children Jordan, Cassidy, and Felix.

—K.P.

ABouT ThE AuThorS

Thomas J. Kampwirth is Professor Emeritus in the Advanced Studies in Education and Counseling Department at California State University, Long Beach. He taught in the areas of special education and school psychology from 1971 through 2004 and was coordinator of the school psychology program for 25 years. From 1980 through 2009 he was a consulting school psychologist for the special education programs operated by the Orange County Department of Education. Dr. Kampwirth served as a special education teacher and school psychologist in numerous districts in Illinois, Arizona, and California. His research interests include aptitude– treatment interactions and consultation processes. He received his doctorate in school psychol- ogy from the University of Illinois in 1968. In 2003, he was given the Lifetime Achievement Award by the National Association of School Psychologists.

Kristin M. Powers is Professor of School Psychology and Director of the Community Clinic for Counseling and Educational Services at California State University, Long Beach. Her research on transition planning, instructional consultation, and disproportional representation in special e ducation has been published in state and national journals. She is Co-Project Director of two Office of Special Education Program (OSEP) grants focused on advanced training in instruc- tional consultation and multi-tiered systems of support. She is a founding board member of the Consortium to Promote School Psychology in Vietnam (CASP-V). She worked as a school p sychologist and administrative assistant for the Long Beach Unified School District (LBUSD). She received her doctorate in educational psychology from the University of Minnesota school psychology program in 1998.

vi

PrEFACE

Collaborative Consultation in the Schools: Effective Practices for Students with Learning and Behavior Problems was written with two different audiences in mind: university students and practitioners in the schools. University students are likely to be doing advanced work in special education, school psychology, school counseling, or educational administration. Practitioners in schools are currently employed in these professions and are being asked increasingly to help oth- ers, usually teachers or parents, solve learning and behavior problems. In this book, we present the consultation process as a collaborative, problem-solving endeavor designed to assist consult- ees in their work with students who have, or are at risk for, behavioral or learning problems. A key focus is on consultants bridging the gap between research and practice in schools. Whether it is designing an intensive academic intervention, assisting a teacher in improving his classroom management, or developing a transition plan for a student with a low incidence disability, the consultant should strive to initiate evidence-based practices whenever possible. A second key theme to this consultation text is providing interventions that are proportional to the students’ needs. Through data-based system change, schools are redistributing their resources along multi- tiered systems of support (MTSSs), so those in greatest need receive the most intensive help. MTSS (which includes response to intervention [RtI] and schoolwide positive behavior support [SWPBS]) requires collaborative consultation to be successful.

Consultation as a service delivery system in the public schools has increased in popularity since the late 1990s. Prior to 1990, most special and general educators were still expected to deal on their own with whatever problems they experienced in their teaching or management of chil- dren; indeed, those who sought help may have been regarded as unable to deal with the job of teaching and subtly, or overtly, rejected by their peers or supervisors. To a lesser extent, this iso- lationism continues today in our schools and can be a formidable barrier for school consultants. Good interpersonal, problem-solving, and communication skills; the building of trust; and a change in the school culture to be more collaborative can reduce these barriers, as we discuss at length in this text. The goal of collaborative consultation is synergism, wherein the dyad or team produce better results than if each person works in isolation. Adhering to the problem-solving process, including data-based goal setting and evaluation, is critical to achieving synergism.

Since the Education for all Handicapped Children Act of 1977, teacher assistance teams, student study teams, transition planning teams, and individualized education programming teams and a host of other formal and semiformal team arrangements have been developed to meet the needs of students who require some degree of assistance to be successful in school. Indeed, it would be surprising to find a school today that did not depend on its student study team to dis- cuss and develop interventions for students at risk of school failure. These team interactions also meet the needs of parents in their efforts to understand and support their children.

Beyond what takes place in team meetings is a real need for everyday assistance for both special education teachers, who are providing direct teaching services to students with disabili- ties, and general educators, who are charged with teaching students with disabilities in addition to a large cadre of other vulnerable and marginalized students. This text is primarily devoted to helping those who assist special and general educators and support services personnel to deal with the everyday, ongoing challenges presented by underperforming students. Most school per- sonnel are involved in problem-solving student problems case by case, whether formally or informally. Some believe that greater efficiencies and a larger impact can be made by changing how the school operates. MTSSs can happen in a school only when school personnel have learned the value of collaborative problem solving as opposed to isolated work. In an MTSS school, school personnel have a shared sense of responsibility to the students and frequently examine data and discuss how to improve student outcomes. Job descriptions and expectations have changed accordingly. Special education teachers are increasingly leaving their resource room and special day classes to consult with general education teachers. School psychologists are embracing more intervention-based assessments and are taking increased responsibility for assisting in the development and evaluation of appropriate interventions. School counselors are more likely to see if they can be of assistance with some referrals through consultation with teachers and parents in conjunction with individual or group counseling efforts. Mentor teachers,

vii

viii Preface

vice principals, and others are also seeing their roles expand to include consultation, particularly when engaged in school reform. We hope that the combination of scientifically based practices, practical advice, and case studies presented in this text will assist the reader in providing effec- tive consultation to colleagues and families.

New to this editioN

The fifth edition has been updated significantly. It includes a new chapter (Chapter 8) on transi- tion planning for students with disabilities preparing for adulthood (this chapter is co-authored by Edwin Achola). The main thrust of this revision has been to update the evidence-based prac- tices based on current research and to add video clips to the text and activities to provide addi- tional details and dimensions to the concepts. We also replaced the term response to intervention (RtI) with the more encompassing term multi-tiered systems of support (MTSS) in order to emphasize the parallels between RtI and school-wide positive behaviour support (SWPBS). The fifth edition also provides more information on serving students with autism spectrum disorder (ASD), including a detailed case-study in Chapter 10. Finally, we provide more coverage on how technology can be used in consultation and professional development.

Some additional updates include the following:

• A description and possible implications of the Common Core State Standards for consult- ants (Chapters 1 and 7)

• More information on working with paraprofessionals (Chapter 2) • A list of do’s and don’ts in using electronic communications in consultation (Chapter 4) • Tips for providing legal testimony (Chapter 5) • Information and activities on the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) and

the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPPA; Chapter 5) • Changes included in the fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental

Disorders (Chapter 6) • The theory and research on microaggressions experienced by cultural and language minor-

ities (Chapter 4) • An expanded treatment fidelity section has been included, along with a treatment fidelity

assessment observation form (Chapter 3) • An effective instruction observation/feedback form for school-based consultants (Chapter 7)

We think one of the most valuable additions to the text has been the insertion of video clips. Short, 2- to 3-minute video clips introduce the reader to important concepts. Longer clips are contained in the activities. Course instructors or staff members involved in professional devel- opment can show these clips and engage in highly nuanced, relevant discussions. Thus, the fifth edition of Collaborative Consultation in the Schools is an interactive text that prepares students for the demands of school-based consultation like no other text before. In addition, we examined the Educational Testing Services (ETS) study companions for (a) School Psychology, (b) Professional School Counselor, (c) Special Education: Core Knowledge, (d) Special Education: Core Knowledge Mild to Moderate Applications, and (e) Educational Leadership: Administration and Supervision to confirm that the content of this text, including its activities, will support students in acquiring knowledge of many of the topics covered by these exams.

22 Chapter 2 • Consultation Models and Professional Practices

To view a video of this type of negative and positive reinforcement, also known as coer- cive pain control (Rhode & Jensen, 2010) see https://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=OxdtMVww2q0. Because student’s noncompliance or work avoidance is negatively reinforced when teachers remove their demands, Rhode and Jensen (2010) recommend that teachers use precision commands in which compliance is immediately reinforced, and the stu- dent receives a punishment after failing to comply with a request that has been repeated once. Punishment is the delivery of some aversive stimulus or removal of a desired stimulus in order to decrease a behavior (Alberto & Troutman, 2013). While punishment can be effective, it should never be humiliating or painful. Reinforcing positive and competing behaviors (i.e., work completion or compliance) is often both more productive and humane than punishing undesired behaviors.

In some cases, an action designed to be reinforcing, like delivering verbal praise, could be felt as a punishment (the student does not want any attention called to her). This case raises the question, “How does one know whether an adult or peer response to a targeted behavior is reinforcing or punishing?” The answer lies only in a careful study of the data. Is the targeted behavior decreasing as a function of the consequences it elicits? If so, then these consequences are probably best interpreted as aversive or punishing. Are behaviors increasing as a result of the responses that follow these behaviors? If so, then the consequences are probably positively reinforcing the behavior.

Activity 2.3

Watch the tutorial on how to conduct an antecedent, behavior, and consequence (ABC) analysis at https://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=GxcIM8klHuY and complete the

ABC analysis found on the video clip for the target behavior: yelling in the classroom.

Activity 2.4

A teacher tells you that she is concerned about a student who is anxious. What else do you, as a behaviorally oriented consultant, want to know about the child? What are the behaviors

of anxiety? Which can be treated, the anxiety or the behaviors? How might a traditional behaviorist differ from a cognitively oriented behaviorist in his approach to this problem?

BAsic Beliefs undeRlying A BehAvioRAl APPRoAch to consultAtion The behavioral tradition focuses on behaviors that are either observable to the teacher or parent or reportable by the student; it contrasts with the medical-model approach, which focuses on pathology or sickness within the child. Hypothetical constructs and pseudo-explanatory con- cepts and labels, such as attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), conduct disorder, or others listed in the fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (American Psychiatric Association, 2013), are not regarded as constructive except for purposes of communication among professional staff members and parents. The behaviorist does not say that a student is out of her seat and running around the room because she has ADHD. Rather, the behaviorist is inclined to say that the student engages in an excessive amount of out-of-seat behavior (operationally defined and usually determined in relation to a norm for a given class- room or other setting) and will help to develop an intervention to change the behavior by changing either the antecedent (adjust difficulty of seatwork, move desk to quiet corner, etc.) and/or consequence events (provide short breaks contingent on work completion, implement a self-monitoring program with a highly desired reward for improved on-task behavior, etc.). To learn if the intervention has been successful, a behaviorist charts the occurrence and dura- tion of out-of-seat behavior or some other targeted behavior. The behaviorist’s goal is to reduce the frequency of symptoms because, as the behaviorist believes, the symptom is the disease (Ullmann & Krasner, 1965).

M02_KAMP7132_05_SE_C02.indd Page 22 08/11/14 7:44 AM Aptara /203/PH01900/9780133827132_KAMPWIRTH/KAMPWIRTH_COLLABORATIVE_CONSULTATION_IN_THE_ ...

AckNowledgmeNts

We would like to acknowledge Edwin Achola’s contributions to Chapter 8. As a co-author of this chapter, his insights and expertise on transition planning are essential to the final product. We would also like to thank the following reviewers of the fifth edition: John D. Hall, Arkansas State University, Cindy Topdemir, University of South Florida, Elena Zaretsky, University of Massachusetts, Boston.

Brief Contents

Chapter 1 Overview of School-Based Consultation 1

Chapter 2 Consultation Models and Professional Practices 19

Chapter 3 Problem-Solving Consultation in a Multi-Tiered System of Support 50

Chapter 4 Communication and Interpersonal Skills 83

Chapter 5 Legal and Ethical Issues in School Consultation 124

Chapter 6 Consulting About Students with Social, Emotional, and/or Behavioral Problems 137

Chapter 7 Consulting About Students with Academic Skill Problems 173

Chapter 8 Transition Planning 198

Chapter 9 Systems-Level Consultation: The Organization as the Target of Change 214

Chapter 10 Case Studies in Collaborative Consultation 236

Index 251

ix

This page intentionally left blank

ConTEnTS

chapter 1 overview of school-BAsed coNsultAtioN 1 Learning Outcomes 1

Consultation and Collaboration: Definitions, Distinctions, and Characteristics 1

Collaborative Consultation as an Indirect Service 2

Defining Characteristics and Expectations of Collaborative Consultation 5

The Triadic Nature of Consultation 7

The Role of Process and Content Expertise in Consultation 7

Consultation at Different Levels of Problem Severity 8

Recent Changes in Education Affecting School Consultation 9

Common Core Standards 9

No Child Left Behind 10

Individuals with Disabilities Education Act 10

Response to Intervention/Multi-Tiered System of Services 13

The Present Status of Collaborative Consultation in Schools 14

Research on the Effectiveness of School Consultation 15 Summary    16    •    References    17

chapter 2 coNsultAtioN models ANd ProfessioNAl PrActices 19 Learning Outcomes 19

A Rationale for a Model 19

Two Theoretical Traditions 20

Behavioral Paradigm 20

Mental Health Paradigm 25

Functional Consultation Models 29

Conjoint Behavioral Consultation 29

Instructional Consultation 30

Ecobehavioral Consultation 31

Consultee-Centered Consultation 31

Consultation Configurations and Settings 32

Beginning Teacher Support Consultation 32

Professional Learning Communities 33

Collaborating with Paraprofessionals 34

Coteaching for Inclusion 34

Individualized Education Program Team 35

Student Study Teams 37

Roles, Skills, and Activities of School-Based Consultants 44 Summary    47    •    References    47

chapter 3 ProBlem-solviNg coNsultAtioN iN A multi-tiered system of suPPort 50 Learning Outcomes 50

xi

Steps to Follow in the Consultation Process 51

Establish Rapport 52

Problem Identification 52

Problem Analysis 54

Intervention Development and Implementation 56

Evaluate the Effectiveness of the Interventions and Recycle If Necessary 58

Multi-Tiered System of Support 58

Tier 1: Universal Prevention 59

Tier 2: Targeted Intervention 61

Tier 3: Intensive Interventions 68

Assessment 69

Planning or Modifying Interventions 72

Treatment Integrity 74

Treatment Acceptability 75

Performance Feedback 75

Assessing Treatment Integrity 77 Summary    79    •    References    80

chapter 4 commuNicAtioN ANd iNterPersoNAl skills 83 Learning Outcomes 83

Communication Skills 84

Attending 84

Active (Reflective) Listening 84

Reframing 85

Empathy 86

Keeping a Goal Orientation 86

Asking Questions 88

Potential Difficulties in Communication 90

Evaluating Your Communication Skills 91

Communication Technologies 92

Interpersonal Skills 93

Forging Positive Relationships 94

Conveying Competence and Confidence 94

Projecting the Idea That the Situation Is Going to Improve 95

Following through with Enthusiasm 95

Developing and Maintaining Trust 96

Treating Consultees as Adults 96

Power in the Consultative Relationship 96

Referent Power 97

Expert Power 97

Informational Power 98

The Dominance Debate 99

Resistance 100

Types of Resistance 101

Causes of Resistance 102

Overcoming Resistance 107

xii Contents

Gaining and Delivering Information 111

The Interview 111

Taking Notes and Keeping Track 113

Delivering Feedback 113

Consulting with Parents and Families 114

Resistance by Parent-Consultees 117

Consultation in Culturally and Linguistically Diverse Settings 117 Summary    121    •    References    121

Chapter 5 LegaL and ethiCaL issues in sChooL ConsuLtation 124 Learning Outcomes 124

The Purpose, Sources, and Importance of Ethical Practice 124

Principles of Ethical Behavior 125

Principle 1: Competence 125

Principle 2: Protecting the Welfare of Clients 125

Principle 3: Maintaining Confidentiality 126

Principle 4: Social and Moral Responsibility 127

Principle 5: Integrity in Professional Relationships 127

Codes of Ethics and Standards for Professional Practice 127

Legal Issues 128

Providing Legal Testimony 129

The Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act and the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act 129

A Problem-Solving Model for Dealing with Legal and Ethical Issues 130

An Example 130

Areas of Potential Ethical Conflict 133

Ethical Competencies, Confrontations, and Advocacy 134 Summary    135    •    Four Scenarios for Additional Practice in Ethical  Problem Solving    135    •    References    136

Chapter 6 ConsuLting about students with soCiaL, emotionaL, and/or behavioraL ProbLems 137 Learning Outcomes 137

Introduction to Social, Emotional, and Behavioral Problems 137

Behavior Problems: Reasons and Suggested Interventions 139

Family and Community 139

Classroom and Schools 141

Within-Child Reasons for Behavior Problems 143

Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act 145

Autism Spectrum Disorder 146

Emotional Disturbance 148

Traumatic Brain Injury 149

Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity 149

Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders 149

IDEA versus the DSM-V 150

IDEA Mandates on Assessment, Intervention, and Discipline of Students with Behavior Problems 151

Contents xiii

Functional Behavioral Assessment and Analysis of Behavior 151

Functional Behavioral Assessment 151

Review of Records 153

Interviews 153

Rating Scales 157

Classroom Observations 158

Applied Behavior Analysis 159

Intervention Evaluation 161

Schoolwide Positive Behavior Support 162

Universal Behavioral Interventions 162

Targeted Behavioral Interventions 165

Intensive Behavior Interventions 168 Summary    169    •    References    169

Chapter 7 Consulting about students with aCademiC skill Problems 173 Learning Outcomes 173

Introduction 173

Universal Effective Instruction (Tier 1) 175

Qualities of Effective Instruction 175

Effective Instruction for English Language Learners 177

Effective Instruction for Culturally Diverse and Low Income Students 179

High-Poverty, High-Performing Schools and RtI/MTSS 180

High Expectations and Differentiated Instruction 180

Interventions to Improve Study Skills and Learning Strategies 181

Improving Motivation 182

Targeted Interventions for Academic Problems (Tier 2) 185

Intensive Interventions for Academic Problems (Tier 3) 187

Interventions for Intellectual Disabilities and Language Delays 187

Supporting Students with Health and Sensory Impairments 188

Interventions for Students with ADHD 189

Supporting Students with Mental Health and Behavioral Disturbances 190

Identification and Interventions for Students with Learning Disabilities 191

Data-Based Special Education Eligibility Assessment 192 Summary    195    •    References    195

Chapter 8 transition Planning 198 Learning Outcomes 198

Postsecondary Outcomes for Students with Disabilities 198

Legal Mandates 200

Transition Planning with Students and Families 202

Maximizing the Participation of Students and Families 202

The Transition Planning Process 204

Appropriate Transition Assessments 204

xiv Contents

Development of Present Levels of Academic Achievement and Functional Performance 205

Measurable Postsecondary and Annual Goals 205

Transition Services 206

Transition Outcomes 207

Collaborative Consultation with Stakeholders 208

Consultation with School Personnel 208

Consultation with Community Members 208

Collaborative Consultation Transition Planning in Action 209 Summary    211    •    References    211

chapter 9 systems-level coNsultAtioN: the orgANizAtioN As the tArget of chANge 214 Learning Outcomes 214

Why Systems-Level Consultation? 215

Macrosystemic Influences on School Innovation 215

Common Core State Standards 216

Statewide Technical Assistance 217

High-Poverty, High-Performing Schools 218

Value-Added Models of Evaluating Teacher Performance 220

Microsystemic Influences on School Innovation 221

School Characteristics 221

Leadership Characteristics 223

Who Initiates Systems Change, and Where Does It Come From? 224

Implementation Teams 224

Professional Development 225

Professional Development and Technology 226

Coaching and Mentoring 226

Data-Team Discussions 228

Professional Development to Promote and Sustain an MTSS 228

System-Change Phases: The MTSS Example 229

Determining a Need and Creating Readiness 229

Determining a Long-Term Vision and Desired Alternative Practices 230

Installation and Initial Implementation 232

Institutionalization 233

Ongoing Evolution 233 Summary    234    •    References    234

chapter 10 cAse studies iN collABorAtive coNsultAtioN 236 Learning Outcomes 236

Introduction to the Cases 236

Case One: Academic Difficulties for Maria 237 Case Two: System Change and Inclusion of Student (Don) with Autism Spectrum Disorder 242

References    249

Index 251

Contents xv

This page intentionally left blank

1

Overview of School-Based Consultation

Chapter 1

You are the newly appointed resource specialist (or school psychologist or counselor) at Whittier School, a K–6 school in the Bellflower school district. Your job includes being a consultant to teachers, parents, and others about student learning and behavior/adjustment problems. Ms. Jones, an experienced third-grade teacher, stops you in the hallway one day in early October and says, “You’ve got to do something about Johnny B. He really needs a lot of help.” How would you proceed?

Ms. Nguyen, principal of Martin Luther King Jr. High School, wants you to explain your role as a consultant to the teachers. Consider what you may include in a 5-minute presentation at the next teacher staff meeting regarding the purpose of school-based consultation.

Learning Outcomes

1.1 Define the terms consultation and collaboration.

1.2 Summarize multiple characteristics of collaborative consultation.

1.3 Recognize the unique individual roles and interactions that the consultant, consultee, and student contribute to the collaborative consultation paradigm, as well as the fluidity of the consultant/ consultee roles in schools.

1.4 Explain the need for process expertise and content expertise in the role of an effective consultant.

1.5 Distinguish among primary, secondary, and tertiary levels of intervention.

1.6 Summarize the major historical trends in education as they pertain to school-based consultation.

1.7 Describe some of the major research issues related to consultation practices.

How you proceed is a function of many variables, such as your personal philosophy of pro- fessional practice; the expectations of your supervisors and coworkers; and factors such as caseload, established precedents, your reinforcement history, and your training. We believe that a consultation-based service delivery model is, for most referrals and most constituents (that is, teachers, parents, and other consultees), an appropriate and useful approach when used with other service requirements of your position as a special education teacher, school psychologist, or school counselor.

Consultation and Collaboration: definitions, distinCtions, and CharaCteristiCs

Researchers in the field of consultation have worked to refine the definitions of collaborative consultation from the perspectives of the public schools. The definition that best reflects the focus of this text is the following: Collaborative consultation is a process in which a trained, school-based consultant, working in an egalitarian, nonhierarchical relationship with a con- sultee or as a member of a team, assists that person or team in her or their efforts to make decisions and carry out plans that will be in the best educational interests of her or their stu- dents. All the concepts in this definition are found among the definitions listed in Figure 1.1.

2 Chapter 1 • Overview of School-Based Consultation

Collaborative Consultation as an indireCt serviCe

The initial purpose of the school-based consultation is to provide improved service to a third party, the student. Through the consultation process, however, the consultee’s competence should be enhanced. Thus, consultation is a form of capacity building (Ysseldyke et al., 2012). In schools, the consultee (typically a teacher) usually does most of the in-classroom or

The terms egalitarian and nonhierarchical are important to this definition because consultees, who are usually teachers or parents, are much more likely to engage in the consultation process when they believe they have at least as much input into the planning process as the consultant (Kelleher, Riley-Tillman, & Power, 2008). This is in contrast to an expert stance, in which the consultant develops an intervention plan based on a referral and the consultee is primarily, if not solely, responsible for carrying out the recommended interventions. We do not mean to suggest that consultants and consultees engaged in collaborative consultation lack expertise. Often the consultant is well versed in consultation strategies and is knowledgeable about assessments and interventions; the consultee is often well-informed about the needs and strengths of the student in question. Through collaboration, a better intervention is developed, implemented, and maintained than if either worked in isolation (i.e., collaboration produces synergism). In schools, the roles of the consultant and consultee are not static. A special education teacher or school psychologists could find him- or herself to be a consultant in one conversation and a consultee in the next. In some cases, such as when graduate students are training to become skilled consultants, the consultant may have little knowledge about academic and behavioral assessments and interventions, but by focusing the discussion on finding solutions and documenting outcomes, the consultee arrives at a better place from which to help his or her student.

Activity 1.1

Speak to several people outside your field of  professional interest and ask them what  images or expectations come to mind when they hear the word consultant. What percentage of people use the word expert?

How often do they mention the concept of  collaboration? Also, ask people in pub- lic  schools to define consultation. What is their image of what a consultant does, or should do?

Definitions/descriptions of consultation:

Consultation is a process that “involves professionals collaborating to use information to plan academic or behavioral treatments” (Ysseldyke, Lekwa, Klingbeil, & Cormier, 2012).

Consultation “provides a means for teachers to learn strategies to deal with presenting problems” (Coffee & Kratochwill, 2013, p. 2).

Consultation is a problem-solving process that can be initiated and terminated by either the consultant or consultee . . . for the purpose of assisting consultees to develop attitudes and skills that will enable them to  function more effectively with a client, which can be an individual, group, or organization (Brown, Pryzwansky, & Schulte, 2011, p. 1).

Consultation is “procedurally operationalized through a series of well-defined stages (including problem identification, problem analysis, plan development, plan evaluation), wherein consultees develop and implement coherent, coordinated intervention plans across home and school settings” (Sheridan, Swanger-Gagné, Welch, Kwon, & Garbacz, 2009, p. 477).

Definitions/descriptions of collaboration:

“Interpersonal collaboration is a style for direct interaction between at least two coequal parties voluntarily engaged in shared decision making as they work toward a common goal” (Friend & Cook, 2009).

Collaboration is “a reciprocal relationship and training based on using equally the group leaders’ and the teachers’ knowledge, strengths, and perspectives” (Webster-Stratton, Reinke, Herman, & Newcomer, 2011, p. 509).

fiGure 1.1 Definitions and descriptions of the terms consultation and collaboration

Chapter 1 • Overview of School-Based Consultation 3

Activity 1.2

Watch this video and discuss signs that synergism is occurring for Kevin.

on-the-playground implementation, and the parent, as consultee, does most of the at-home implementation. The consultant may be involved in teaching the consultee skills so he or she is able to implement the intervention, or the consultant may collect data on how well the interventions are working or data on whether the interventions were implemented, but ulti- mately the consultee is the primary interventionist. In other words, the consultant provides indirect support to students by enhancing the capacity of the consultee, who provides the direct support. Thus, consultation is generally considered an indirect service. Collaborative teaming, such as general education and special education teachers coteaching a class or a leadership team planning the implementation of schoolwide positive behavior support (SWPBS), will involve both direct and indirect services. Yet the same core characteristics of consultation—egalitarian, data-driven, problem-solving, capacity enhancing, and evidence- based—apply to effective teams.

Collaboration refers to a very specific kind of consultation, one characterized by a recipro- cal relationship that is nonhierarchical. Defined in this way, collaboration may seem very differ- ent from forms of consultation practiced in the business, medical, or military arenas; it is not necessary in collaborative consultation that any one person is the expert. This is true because collaborative consultation takes place between or among two or more people, with the role of expert shifting periodically among the participants. For example, a student study team (SST) meeting might involve the regular education teacher as an expert in curriculum and teaching method; the counselor as an expert in explaining how a student’s approach to tasks stems from family and cultural dynamics; the psychologist or special education teacher as an expert in sug- gesting a contingency reinforcement plan, a memory-enhancing system, or a teaching approach that the teacher might use to increase content retention; the student’s mother as an expert in reviewing how she assists and encourages the student with his academic work; and the student as an expert in his interests, learning strategies, and reinforcers. As these participants collaborate with one another in understanding a problem and designing a program, they are sharing their expertise, with each party contributing a varying amount depending on the nature of the referral. A main goal of collaboration is to establish synergism in which working as a group leads to better student outcomes than if each collaborator worked in isolation.

The philosophy of seeking synergism also extends to plan implementation. Although the primary person carrying out the plan is usually either the general or special education classroom teacher, the other team members contribute their expertise in ways appropriate to their training and experience. In the SST case just described, plan implementation might involve the counse- lor working with the parents on ways to improve homework completion, the psychologist assist- ing the teacher in implementing a token economy to improve classwide compliance, the special education teacher providing a targeted reading intervention, and the student self-monitoring and helping the consultee fine-tune the classroom reinforcement system. This example demon- strates how expertise and mutual assistance are the two major components of a collaborative consultation model.

A third major component of collaborative consultation is problem solving. Consultants are employed for the express purpose of solving the learning and behavior problems exhibited by schoolchildren. Generically, problem solving refers to a structured set of steps or procedures intended to assist the consultee in addressing a student academic or behavioral problem. The problem-solving steps may also be applied to identifying and implementing school improve- ment (see Chapter 8). The problem-solving process may take many forms or styles, depending on the nature of the problem, the philosophical beliefs of both consultant and consultee, the constraints or limitations of the setting, the availability of specific kinds of help, and so on. The steps in problem solving are discussed in detail in Chapter 3.

Figure 1.2 showcases the personal view of the first author (Kampwirth) regarding the collaborative consultation method.

4 Chapter 1 • Overview of School-Based Consultation

fiGure 1.2 Collaborative consultation: Rationale, limitations, and suggestions from the first author

In my way of conducting collaborative consultation, I give a lot of emphasis to the possibility that con- sultees can, and should, be strongly encouraged to think through their own ideas about how to solve the referral problems. This may not seem feasible. After all, if the consultee knew a solution to his referral question, why wouldn’t he just implement it and save time and energy? Also, if the consultee’s referral has been sent to you for your assistance, doesn’t he have a right to expect that you will have, and impart to him, expert knowledge?

My experience has taught me that consultees, both teachers and parents, when faced with relatively difficult problems in learning and/or behavior, sometimes get confused, or stuck, in their thinking. They probably have tried some solutions, and when these haven’t worked, they’ve experienced some level of doubt regarding their usually dependable problem-solving strategies, and they feel as though they don’t know what to do next. Or they have an idea but they just aren’t sure about it, and they would like to discuss their idea with someone else. This someone else becomes their consultant. It is hoped that this person acknowledges the consultee’s experience and expertise by doing at least these two things:

1. Ask the consultee to review what she has done to improve the situation so far, and how these efforts have worked.

2. Encourage the consultee to tell the consultant what she (the consultee) wants to do next. Use questions such as “Given what you’ve told me, and in light of your understanding of the problem at this time, what would you like to try next?” “You’ve tried a number of things so far. What are you thinking of doing tomorrow?” “So far you’ve felt like what you’ve tried just hasn’t been the best solution. What’s next? What do you want to try now?”

I refer to this effort at intervention development by consultees as the ACCEPT method, ACCEPT being an acro- nym that acknowledges the consultant’s philosophy about the consultee’s contributions and that stands for the following behaviors, which, to me, are at the heart of collaborative consultation:

A Acknowledging the consultee’s predominant role in carrying out the planned interventions, usually in his classroom (or home), in the context of that setting, and in his style.

C Commenting positively on the efforts the consultee has made to date in trying to solve the problem, and the effort he is expending now on behalf of the student.

C Convincing the consultee that he has good ideas to offer, and that you, the consultant, would like to hear them.

E Expecting that the consultee will take the lead in the development of ideas if encouraged to do so, and expecting that the consultee will give equal weight to the consultant’s ideas.

P Pointing out possibilities for effective interventions based on the consultee’s ideas. This involves taking his ideas and helping him think through their pros and cons and the details of implementation. In this way, you provide your content expertise in the context of his ideas. When collaborative consultation is working well, the consultant’s role is that of facilitator of the consultee’s ideas.

T Treating the consultee as an equal. One of the hallmarks of a collaborative model is that it brings adults together in an atmosphere of mutual respect. Both are equally expert, both need help from the other, and both give ideas and contribute to the final solutions.

LIMITS TO A COLLABORATIVE CONSULTATION MODEL

This model does not always work as planned. Some consultees seem bereft of ideas, or they appear to be too irritated by the problem to be able to think clearly. Some get in a punishment mode, particularly in regard to serious behavior problems, and they are not able to think positively. Some think only of ways of reacting to a referred student rather than more systemically. Some always prefer to think that someone else (e.g.,  special education, or a more restrictive setting) should take over the student and solve his problem that way. Others are simply deferential to the consultant; they cannot get over the consultant-as-expert idea. They assume it’s easier to get you to solve the problem, to determine the interventions and their implementa- tion. That way, if it doesn’t work, guess who’s to blame? Last, some are too inexperienced, or at least act that way, and they simply need more direct help.

SUGGESTIONS

Collaborative consultation sometimes seems to break down because the ideas from the consultee are inappro- priate in some way. Some teachers and parents have only a limited number of ideas for intervention. When you sense that this is true, the collaboratively oriented consultant most certainly can suggest interventions. My opinion is that it is best to come up with two or three viable interventions, based on best practice, and to ask the consultee

Chapter 1 • Overview of School-Based Consultation 5

defininG CharaCteristiCs and expeCtations of Collaborative Consultation

The following are expectations about the nature and characteristics of collaborative consultation:

1. The consultant is a trained professional. Consultants can be working in various profes- sions and can include special education teachers, general education teachers, mentor teachers, school counselors, school psychologists, administrators, and nonschool personnel. In addition to their own area of expertise, a consultant is able to engage in a problem-solving process.

2. Establishing a relationship based on mutual respect and trust is essential for successful consultation.

3. The nature of the referral problem directs the problem-solving processes. Chapter 2 lists consultants’ roles and activities; it is common for practitioners to shift among them.

4. The consultant and the consultee both must make a valid effort to engage in the problem-solving process if consultation is to occur. The ultimate power in the consultation process rests with the consultee because she or he is primarily responsible for carrying out the jointly agreed-on interventions. The consultant’s contribution is to provide an objective analy- sis of the referral problem and information useful in intervention design, monitoring, and evaluation. The consultant may use interpersonal strategies to improve the likelihood that the consultee will implement agreed-on interventions.

5. The purpose and the process of consultation interact and must be considered simultane- ously. This is especially true in a collaborative consultation approach in which nonhierarchical, egalitarian positions are occupied by both the consultee and the consultant, who are both involved in idea generation within a problem-solving context.

what she or he thinks of each intervention. Which of the ideas is the consultee attracted to? Which does the consultee seem able and willing to do? The interventions you suggest should meet at least the following criteria:

1. Treatment acceptability: If the consultee doesn’t accept an intervention as something she is willing to do, you either have to be a good salesperson and convince her of its merits through the use of social influence (Erchul & Martens, 2002), or try to modify it. The teacher may agree to try the intervention (possibly under duress), give it a half-hearted try, claim it didn’t work (it probably didn’t), and require you to think of another idea. You never know what interventions meet the criteria of treatment acceptability until you suggest them. What you do know is that, if the intervention is not acceptable to the person who is to implement it, it is not likely that it will ever be implemented as intended.

2. Treatment validity: Is there research support for the idea? Best practices are those that have at least some degree of support, either from the literature or from your own experience or knowledge base.

3. Treatment ethics: The concern here is about the appropriateness of an intervention from the standpoint of the students’ best interests; their dignity as people; probable benefits versus risks; and an orientation toward replacement of, rather than suppression of, challenging behaviors.

4. Treatment integrity (fidelity): Was the treatment implemented correctly? This, of course, won’t be known until the treatment is tried.

5. Treatment effectiveness: Is the treatment working? By what standards? Does it need to be changed? Again, these answers aren’t known until the treatment has been tried for a sufficient amount of time to determine its effectiveness.

It is also important to stick to the referral and not to wander off in other directions. It may be tempting to think that a given consultee needs help in many areas of which he may not be aware. Except in serious cases (abusive behavior toward students; chaotic, dangerous classroom management practices; personal problems that are affecting the classroom), it is best to establish well-defined goals relative to the referral problem, work toward solving them, and let other issues emerge as the consultee feels the necessity of dealing with them. Remember that change is difficult; overwhelming a consultee with your ideas about how to make the classroom or home perfect may be regarded as intrusive and perhaps overwhelming. No one wants assistance from an intrusive person who wants to tell other people what to do. Do a good job helping the consultee with his current concerns and he will get back to you later about other issues, or you can bring them up later.

Last, but nonetheless important, consider the role of family and culture. Interventions that are selected need to be sensitive to the student’s cultural and family background.

fiGure 1.2 (Continued)

6 Chapter 1 • Overview of School-Based Consultation

6. Systemic variables impinge on the consultant, consultee, and student and must be con- sidered as integral parts of the process. School consultants and consultees always operate within a larger set of conditions, including not only legal and ethical mandates but also societal expecta- tions, cultural norms, district and school-level guidelines, and family concerns. The interventions discussed, particularly at group meetings (such as SST, etc.), need to gain at least tacit approval from all constituents.

7. Consultation is governed by certain ethical guidelines that influence consultant roles as well as the process of consultation. Chapter 5 discusses ethical and advocacy issues in consulta- tion. Practical examples demonstrating the influence of these factors appear in the case studies in Chapter 9.

8. There is an emphasis on record review, observation, and interview as assessment meth- ods (rather than published norm-referenced tests of cognition, processing, and achievement).

9. Collaborative consultation seeks solutions, not labels. The goal is to identify the level of support a student needs within the least restrictive environment. While some students may need special education and related services in specialized settings to be successful, most students who manifest learning and/or behavior problems can be successful in general education with targeted interventions and ongoing consultation support. Whenever possible, it is best to solve problems in the context in which they occur.

10. School consultants must be experts in process (the “how” of consultation; see Chapter 3) but not necessarily in all possible content. For example, a newly minted school counselor with little classroom experience may still be able to assist an experienced teacher with a concern about a student. The school counselor can share her classroom observations, point out patterns in the student’s record, and engage the teacher in the problem-solving steps (described in Chapter 3); the end result should be better than if the teacher had tried to address the problem on his own. The consultant’s job is to facilitate the thinking of these primary-care providers (i.e., parents and teachers serving as consultees) so these individuals can feel empowered to carry out their ideas about how to best assist the student under the guidance and encouragement of the consultant.

11. Occasionally consultees may bring information into the discussion that is more closely related to their personal lives and problems than to the learning or behavior problems of the referred student. The consultant has to be careful not to confuse the consultative relationship by taking on the role of a counselor to the consultee. Decisions about the relevance of any particular piece of information are not always easy to make, but it is usually best to steer the conversation gently back to the appropriate work-related problem. Of course, if the consultant perceives that the consultee does have a personal problem that should be dealt with, whether it is affecting the referral problem or not, she may refer the consultee to a resource where he can get whatever help is needed. Because it is possible for a consultee to have personal issues that interfere with his ability to view the referral problem objectively, the consultant may need to mention any concerns she has to the consultee in a helpful and positive way (Caplan & Caplan, 1993).

12. The goal of collaborative consultation is to improve the functioning of the student while enhancing the capacity of the consultee. In fact, building capacity so that other children may benefit from better teaching, classroom management, and/or parenting is what makes consulta- tion efficient as well as effective.

Activity 1.3

In small groups, discuss the expectations about the nature and characteristics of collab- orative consultation presented above. Are

these essential characteristics and goals? What others might be added?

Formal consultation, in which a clearly defined consultee approaches an identified consult- ant for assistance in a specified space over a specified amount of time, is the exception rather than the rule. Consultations on the fly or via e-mail may be more common. Jacob, Decker, and Hartshorne, (2011, p. 191) wrote, “the role definition, the process of goal setting during consul- tation, the responsibilities of the consultant and consultee, and the parameters of confidentiality” should be discussed prior to offering consultation services. In our experience, however, school- based consultation is generally more informal, although it is a good idea to review the above

Chapter 1 • Overview of School-Based Consultation 7

Required Interaction

Possibly N o Interaction

Consultant

Consultee Student

C ol

la bo

ra tiv

e In

te ra

ct io

n

fiGure 1.3 The triadic nature of consultation

expectations with school staff members on an annual basis. The more serious the referral con- cern, the more formal the consultation may become. Student study team (SST), individualized education program (IEP), or transition planning or implementation team meetings are examples of where more formal consultations are likely to occur. It is important for these teams to take time periodically to examine the extent to which they are adhering to the above expectations and problem-solving processes. Busy school personnel are keen to work on and, ideally, solve stu- dent challenges, yet the importance of examining how well the consultation processes is working to determine if it could be more effective cannot be underestimated.

the triadiC nature of Consultation

The most common form of consultation in schools consists of interactions among a consultant, the consultee(s), and a student. As Figure 1.3 shows, the consultant and the consultee interact freely in a nonhierarchical, reciprocal relationship. Because the consultant may or may not have any direct interaction with the student, consultation is usually considered an indirect service. However, school-based consultants typically, at a minimum, observe the student in the classroom or other setting (playground, lunchroom, etc.). Often the consultant offers some type or degree of direct service to the student, such as modeling an instructional technique or collecting interven- tion fidelity and/or effectiveness data.

the role of proCess and Content expertise in Consultation

People generally relate the concept or practice of consultation to activities carried out by skilled businesspeople, engineers, and medical professionals, and the public tends to think of consultation in terms of expertness. In the business world, a consultant may be hired to solve a particularly tricky problem in production, merchandising, or taxation. The hiring firm expects that the consultant will have expertise in the area and will propose a solution that has a good chance of working well. For this level of expert consultation, business executives expect to pay well.

One might expect that successful consultants working in the schools with teachers and parents should also adopt a stance of expertise. We take the position that expertness should be expected in the area of process and that it is highly desirable but not sufficient in the area of content. By process, we mean the interactions that occur between the consultant and the consult- ees through which a behavior or a learning problem is approached and solved; it is concerned with how one acts as a consultant. Content refers to the actual ideas that the consultees will implement, such as a behavioral contract, cooperative learning, phonemic awareness instruction, or a token economy; it represents what people will do as a result of consultation. Collaborative

8 Chapter 1 • Overview of School-Based Consultation

consultation requires expertise in process; without such expertise, the process disintegrates, resistance increases, and consultees become dissatisfied with the consultative approach for deal- ing with their needs and the needs of their students. Consultants’ ability to engage consultees in a productive process may be determined by their interpersonal skills as well as their knowledge of consultation processes. The content consultants are expected to provide includes knowledge of empirically supported intervention. However, the consultee determines what is practical to apply given the context of the referral (Kelleher et al., 2008). As indicated by the definitions, the collaborative approach depends on a degree of mutual expertise in problem solving, resulting in content decisions that are jointly generated and approved by both the consultant and the consultee(s) within a nonhierarchical, reciprocal relationship (Friend & Cook, 2009).

Activity 1.4

Discuss the role of process versus content. Do you think a school consultant needs to have a set of interventions for every problem or issue

a teacher or parent can describe? How might you deal with a consultee who insists on your having answers for every problem?

Consultation at different levels of problem severity

Caplan (1964) described three levels of intervention: primary, secondary, and tertiary. These three levels are also referred to as universal, selective, and indicated (Frank & Kratochwill, 2009); as core, targeted, and intensive (National Association of State Directors of Special Education, 2005); and as Tier 1, Tier 2, and Tier 3 (Sugai & Horner, 2009). A multi-tiered system of support (MTSS) typically incorporates the three levels of interventions, including explicit data-based decision rules for when students need to progress from one level of support to another (Sugai & Horner, 2009). Common MTSSs include response to intervention (RtI) for addressing academic skill deficits and schoolwide positive behavior support (SWPBS) or posi- tive behavioral interventions and supports (PBIS) for addressing behavioral concerns. RtI and SWPBS/PBIS are complementary systems that are implemented, ideally, in concert with each other because behavioral problems often affect achievement, and achievement problems lead to behavioral problems for many students. MTSS is described at length in Chapter 3; however, a quick review of the types of consultation and interventions that may occur at each of the three levels is provided here.

Tier 1, or universal prevention, involves taking action to ensure that students are unlikely to develop learning or behavioral difficulties. Sufficiently sequenced curriculum, effective teaching methods, and explicit classroom rules are all part of universal prevention. Examples of interventions at this level include Success for All (Slavin, Madden, Dolan, & Wasik, 1996), Peer-Assisted Learning (U.S. Department of Education, 2013), and Safe and Civil Schools (Sprick, 2009). Professional learning communities (PLCs) are popular for consulting with teachers on improving their classroom management or teaching methods, grade-level teaming is common for improving universal services at a grade level, and implementation teams are helpful for improving schoolwide functioning. These different types of teams are discussed in greater detail in Chapter 8. Individual consultants may also attempt to improve the general education instruction through coaching or problem-solving consultation. It is not uncommon for a consult- ant who is following up on a student referral to discover that the problem lies not with an indi- vidual student but with the teacher’s poor teaching (i.e., a problem with Tier 1).

Tier 2 or targeted interventions involves actions taken when a student appears to be having difficulties adapting to behavioral or academic expectations. Small homogeneous groupings, parent conferences, in-class modifications, social skills training, and other mild forms of inter- vention are common during this stage. Targeted interventions should involve some type of sup- plemental instruction to teach directly and provide additional practice on the skills the student failed to develop in the primary/universal stage (Gersten et al., 2008). Often the consultation at Tier 2 takes place at a formal SST meeting.

The referral problems are more serious at the Tier 3 or intensive level; major steps need to be taken (e.g., one-on-one or very small group, targeted instruction; reading recovery; special education services; alternative education). Those concerned with the student’s welfare need to

Chapter 1 • Overview of School-Based Consultation 9

consult with each other and develop plans collaboratively that are in the best educational interest of the student. Typically this collaboration occurs with a schoolwide team, such as the section 504 team or an IEP team, which develops individualized, daily, and closely monitored interven- tions. Wraparound services (Eber, Nelson, & Miles, 1997) that involve out-of-school agencies such as community mental health, respite services, and social services are also examples of col- laborative efforts at the tertiary level.

In a school setting, most referrals for consultant assistance are for either Tier 2 or Tier 3 interventions, which is unfortunate. More emphasis on preventive programs, especially for stu- dents who are at risk, has been recommended for decades (Meyers & Nastasi, 1999). However, pressures to deal with current severe problems, combined with inadequate staffing ratios, have slowed the impetus to a prevention-oriented service delivery approach. Bergan (1995) observed that this may be true partly because no specific funding exists for universal prevention services, while funds do exist for placing and supporting students in special education services. Although the 2004 reauthorization of special education law now allows a portion of federal funds for spe- cial education to be used for universal prevention purposes, there is no mandate to do so.

Once plans for any of the three levels have been developed and are being implemented, the role of the collaborative consultant becomes largely one of monitor and evaluator. The teacher or parent consultee will need some assistance in implementing the intervention with integrity and collecting progress monitoring data. Ongoing evaluations of the fidelity and effectiveness of the interventions are necessary to ensure that the desired outcomes are attained.

Activity 1.5

Reflect on your experiences in schools. How were interventions for students with disabili- ties and for other at-risk students developed? Did the level of support seem to meet the level of need? Are the administrative and

support staff members proactive, or is it a  wait-to-see-who-fails model? Who moni- tored and evaluated these interventions? Did these processes seem well-structured or rather casual?

reCent ChanGes in eduCation affeCtinG sChool Consultation

Common Core standards

During the 1990s and into the 21st century, an educational movement focused on improving student outcomes through establishing rigorous standards and measuring students’ progress toward the standards became the dominant reform initiative. Known widely as standards-based reform, this movement culminated in the development of the Common Core State Standards (CCSS). This set of English language arts and mathematics standards represents learning goals for what students should know and be able to do at the end of each grade level. The goal is to have similar standards across the nation that emphasize rigorous content and critical thinking skills such as analysis, synthesis, and problem solving. At the time of this writing, 43 states have adopted the CCS and joined one of two different consortiums formed to develop large-scale tests of these standards. States, districts, and publishers are currently scrambling to develop curricu- lum to teach the CCS. Implementation of the CCS has also encouraged teachers to participate in professional development to learn instructional strategies to promote student attainment of the CCS. Thus, many educators are feeling the pressures to change their teaching practices along with learning new curriculum, which presents a unique opportunity for school-based consultants to improve Tier 1/core instruction.

Activity 1.6

Watch the video clip at https://www. youtube. com/watch?v=5s0rRk9sER0 on Common Core State Standards (CCSS). Discuss what you have

heard about the CCSS in schools and in other settings. Are people expressing excitement, trepi- dation, or a little of both?

10 Chapter 1 • Overview of School-Based Consultation

no Child left behind

In 2002, the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act, a far-reaching piece of federal legislation, was passed by Congress. It is essentially a reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965. Its requirements include annual testing in reading and math of all students in grades 3 through 8, as well as the provision of additional funds to support schools that are consistently underachieving. It has particular relevance for students with disabilities because it requires that these students participate in the high-stakes testing that is required by this act and that school and district administrators be just as responsible for the performance of students with disabilities as they are for students without disabilities. NCLB is an attempt to close the gap between the actual and expected level of student performance, particularly among the lowest achieving students (Bolt & Roach, 2009), such as students with disabilities, English language learners, and students from economically impoverished families. Educators know that lofty goals from the federal level do not necessarily lead to meaningful change at the local school level. It is still up to the local level to provide the planning and programs that meet the federal mandates. Many educators have expressed concern that the focus on students’ test scores has deleterious effects, such as narrow- ing the curriculum through the exclusion of subjects that are not included in the testing program, like art, music, and community service (Bolt & Roach, 2009) and a reduction in the educator’s autonomy in deciding what and how to teach (Meyers, Roach, & Meyers, 2009). Thus, NCLB is an influential and somewhat controversial piece of education legislation.

individuals with disabilities education act

In 2004, the U.S. Congress passed the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEA) to replace previous laws governing the provision of special education services. Laws governing special education services and funding have existed since the passage of P.L. 94-142 in 1975. These laws guarantee the rights of students with disabilities to receive a free and appro- priate public education (FAPE) in the least restrictive environment (LRE) and the rights of their parents to due process if they believe their child’s access to FAPE is limited by school personnel. The various iterations of IDEA also describe the eligibility criteria for determining whether spe- cial education services are needed and provide safeguards to ensure a student’s misconduct does not result in disciplinary actions that impinge upon his or her FAPE. The 2004 IDEA differed from previous reauthorizations in its alignment to NCLB. For example, like NCLB, IDEA 2004 emphasizes student outcomes, including performance on large-scale assessments as well as bet- ter assessment of students’ present level of performance. Both NCLB and IDEA also require teachers to be “highly qualified” and emphasize “scientific, research-based interventions,” other- wise termed evidence-based interventions (EBIs). Some IDEA requirements that are of specific interest to school consultants include the following:

• Early Intervention. IDEA 2004 promotes providing services to students at risk for aca- demic or behavioral disabilities before they are identified as disabled. Specifically, schools can apply a portion of their federal special education funding to provide EBIs to students who need extra academic and behavioral supports to succeed in the general education envi- ronment (Sec. 613(f)). This funding can be used to provide professional development, direct services, and assessment. IDEA 2004 clarifies that teachers and specialists may screen students to determine whether an intervention is needed and which intervention will be most effective without parental consent (Sec. 614(a)(1)(B)). Thus, there is support for school psychologists, special education teachers, and other specialists to (1) establish school-wide screenings (also known as universal assessment) that identify which students need supplemental instruction, (2) consult with teachers on developing evidence-based interventions, and (3) provide professional development to the teaching staff on EBIs. These activities require consulting with teachers on assessment data and generating inter- vention ideas prior to the student being referred for special education services. This type of consultation is considered primary prevention.

• Specific Learning Disabilities Eligibility. IDEA 2004 redefined evaluation for a spe- cific learning disability (SLD) to be based on the outcome of evidence-based interven- tions rather than a discrepancy between a child’s intelligence and achievement. In fact, state departments of educations can no longer require school systems to find a severe

Chapter 1 • Overview of School-Based Consultation 11

discrepancy between achievement and intellectual ability in order to qualify a student for special education due to a learning disability. The law and regulations also encourage “a process that determines if the child responds to scientific, research-based interven- tions” (Sec. 614(b)). A child who has had a lack of appropriate instruction, including scientifically supported methods for teaching reading, cannot be identified as a child with a disability. This represents a major shift in how the largest group of students with disabilities could potentially be evaluated. However, local education areas could decide to keep the cognitive-achievement discrepancy if not outlawed by the state. Further, many interpreted changes in the law as promoting a processing strength and weakness (PSW) model toward determining SLD eligibility (Learning Disabilities Association of America, 2010). Thus, depending on the state or district, three different eligibility crite- ria may be applied: (a) cognitive-achievement discrepancy, (b) the PSW model, and (c) intervention-based assessments or response-to-intervention (Hagans & Powers, 2013); in the case of California, all three are sanctioned. In fact, Zirkel and Thomas (2010) found the vast majority of state laws permit the LEA to choose between the cognitive- achievement discrepancy or the PSW model and intervention-based assessments ( formerly termed RtI), with 14 requiring some intervention component. From a consul- tation perspective, there should be greater demand for collaborative consultation around designing, implementing, and monitoring interventions and less emphasis on engaging in traditional testing, which typically requires little collaboration.

Activity 1.7

Search online for the 2010 White Paper by the Learning Disabilities Association of America on evaluation, identification, and eligibility criteria for SLD. Download and read both this paper and

the 2010 response offered by the Consortium for Evidence-Based Early Intervention Practices. Discuss the major points of contention.

• Inclusion and Least Restrictive Environment (LRE). Almost since its inception, special education law has promoted educating students with disabilities with their typically devel- oping peers to the maximum extent possible. Special education services can be provided in a continuum of settings, ranging from general education (least restrictive) to pull-out resource support, to most of the day or the full day in a special education classroom, to a special education school with a student population comprising exclusively students with disabilities (most restrictive). In Daniel R. R. v. State Board of Education (1989), the court indicated a two-part test for determining compliance with the requirement for placement in a least restrictive environment (LRE):

First, we ask whether education in the regular classroom, with the use of sup- plementary aids and services, can be achieved satisfactorily for a given child. If it cannot and the school intends to provide special education or to remove the child from regular education, we ask, second, whether the school has main- streamed the child to the maximum extent appropriate. (p. 1048)

Today, the term mainstream has been replaced by inclusion, reflecting an increased emphasis on providing accommodations and modifications in the general education pro- gram so that an even wider range of students with disabilities may experience success (Mastropieri & Scruggs, 2000; Serge, 2009). Some general educators are concerned that they are overburdened with too many issues and demands and cannot keep up with the pressures they already have. They believe that inclusion is a difficult proposition if suffi- cient time and resources are not provided; however, some see added benefits, such as being prompted to attempt new instructional methodologies (Ryan, 2009) or teaming with a spe- cial education colleague. The courts have not tended to agree with arguments that inclusion is overly burdensome to general education teachers, citing the law as having precedence over the objections of some general educators, so the inclusion movement has progressed, prompting general educators to seek ways to make it work. In-service training, workshops on curriculum modification, teaching methods, coteaching or team teaching, peer tutoring, group work, and other modifications are now common in schools that have embraced the

12 Chapter 1 • Overview of School-Based Consultation

inclusion philosophy, which necessitates individual or systemwide collaboration practices. Collaborative consultation is key to inclusion of students with disabilities in general educa- tion settings. Some benefits of full inclusion include providing positive behavior and aca- demic models to students with disabilities, increasing access to general education curriculum by teachers certified to teach that particular subject, increasing personal con- tact of typically developing students with students with disabilities, and avoiding the dis- ruptions of pull-out programs or behavioral grouping/academic tracking associated with full-day special education programs.

• Due Process. Special education students are guaranteed procedural safeguards. For exam- ple, major changes to a student’s educational services or placement cannot be made with- out parental input, and all students have a right to a free and appropriate public education (FAPE). Sometimes parents and school personnel disagree on the best course of action for a student with special needs. Under IDEA, parents have the right to an impartial due pro- cess hearing to determine whether their child is receiving FAPE and whether compensa- tory education is warranted if FAPE or the responsibility to consult with parents about their child’s educational program has been compromised (Sec. 615(f)). District personnel can invite parents to engage in mediation prior to a due process hearing in an attempt to prevent a potentially expensive and acrimonious disagreement. Collaborative consultation with parents when disagreements emerge, rather than after a complaint has been filed, may be an even more effective method than mediation for avoiding due process hearings. Roter et al. (1977, as cited in Jacob, Decker, & Hartshorne, 2011) found that medical doctors who were better at listening to their patients, laughed and told jokes more, and spent more time educating their patients were the subject of fewer malpractice suits than those who did not engage in these behaviors. This may be the case for school personnel as well; in other words, time and effort spent getting to know parents, listening to their concerns, and providing good information proactively saves district resources that would otherwise be diverted to settle a grievance. Settling a legal case can be costly and stressful; however, school personnel should not adopt an “avoid legal conflict at all cost” policy by capitulat- ing to unreasonable requests. Zirkel’s (2013) research found that districts prevail in 85% of due process hearings, particularly those involving eligibility and services for specific learning disabilities.

• Positive Behavioral Support, Functional Behavioral Assessment, and Manifestation Determination. To promote FAPE, special education law requires school personnel to con- duct a functional behavioral assessment and implement a positive behavioral support plan (i.e., a Tier 3 intervention) if a student’s behavioral disability is interfering with her ability to access curriculum and instruction. Chapter 6 provides a detailed description of this pro- cess, but needless to say, this assessment and intervention process requires considerable collaboration among many stakeholders. One of the safeguards afforded to special educa- tion students is they cannot be subjected to the same disciplinary actions applied to non- special-education students if the infraction was a manifestation of their disability. Thus, when a special education student violates a school rule, his IEP team must determine whether the violation was a result of his disability and whether appropriate behavioral sup- ports were in place prior to the infraction. If it is determined that the infraction was a manifestation of the student’s disability or a response to insufficient behavioral supports, he cannot be removed from his current educational setting through expulsion or prolonged suspension (with the exception of some very serious infractions such as possessing a weapon). Typically, a school psychologist or some other behavioral specialist conducts the manifestation determination. Due to the high stakes of the outcomes and the need to nego- tiate competing demands, such as protecting the student’s FAPE while maintaining a safe and orderly school climate, the school psychologist will need to apply the highest level of collaborative consultation competency to conducting the manifestation determination.

• Transition Planning. Special education students often require more assistance than typi- cally developing students in transitioning from preschool to elementary school, elementary to middle school, middle school to high school, and high school to adulthood. Because students with disabilities have not had the success that students without disabilities enjoy in adulthood (National Organization on Disability, 2004), IDEA requires school personnel to collaborate with students, their parents, and adult services agencies to produce a plan

Chapter 1 • Overview of School-Based Consultation 13

and provide services to improve students’ postsecondary outcomes. Collaborating with students and parents can be difficult if the parents and students disagree on what outcomes to target and how best to achieve them (Powers, Geenen, & Powers, 2009). Collaboration across agencies, such as vocational rehabilitation services, adult medical services, and institutions of higher education, remains a challenge (Johnson, Stodden, Emanuel, Luecking, & Mack, 2002). Therefore, collaborative consultation skills are essential to ful- filling the transition-planning mandate. Transition planning is typically coordinated by a special education teacher who is the student’s case carrier or transition specialist.

Activity 1.8

Observe this video of an IEP team meeting. What was the purpose of the meeting? Some common topics in an IEP meeting include tran- sition planning, reviewing annual goals, devel- oping a behavior plan, FAPE, and LRE. How

collaborative was the group? How much emphasis was placed on the student’s out- comes compared to the special education pro- cesses (e.g., completing all the forms and informing parents about their rights)?

response to intervention/multi-tiered system of services

Both IDEA and NCLB emphasize accountability, evidence-based practices, and integration and consistency between general and special education (Ysseldyke, Burns, & Rosenfield, 2009). A prime example of changes in practice that resulted from this merger is response to interven- tion (RtI). The term responsiveness to intervention was first proposed by Frank Gresham (2001), who suggested providing increasingly more intense interventions and monitoring for students who remained below grade-level expectations despite receiving scientifically based interven- tions. For a short period, around 2000, the term resistance to intervention was popular because it emphasized that secondary/selective/Tier 2 or tertiary/indicated/Tier 3 interventions should be applied only after primary/universal/Tier 1 prevention had been attempted and failed. For example, a student should not be considered for special education eligibility if she has not received adequate general and supplemental education instruction. The term resistance became response in order to acknowledge that many students have a positive response to intervention and thereby do not show “resistance,” but the essential premise remains. Specifically, an RtI service delivery model establishes assessment and intervention tiers that provide students with learning and behavioral difficulties services and monitoring proportional to their needs. Determining which student receives which level of service should be a widely collaborative process, particularly if all the potential resources of a school (including general and special education) are to be considered.

RtI is both an instructional model that can help to prevent reading and other learning prob- lems and a special education eligibility model (Torgeson, 2007). For reasons discussed in Chapter 3, the term RtI to describe tiers of services to address academic needs systematically has been replaced with the term multi-tiered system of services (MTSS), which is a more com- prehensive term. MTSS will be used primarily in this text to describe this type of system deliv- ery. The term intervention-based assessments will be used in this text in lieu of the term RtI for special education eligibility decision making.

Consensus on how many service tiers to offer or what exactly occurs at each tier has not been reached (Kame’enui, 2007). It is common, however, to conceptualize a three-tier model (see Gersten et al., 2008), as we describe here. Tier 1 (core) constitutes good general education instruc- tion, including high levels of academic engagement, positive classroom management, and differen- tiated instruction. Assessment at Tier 1 should involve universal screening of all students three or more times a year. Students who fail to attain grade-level benchmarks on the screening receive a predetermined intervention, such as small-group instruction on letter sounds, based on their perfor- mance on the screening. This is known as a standard protocol to assessment and intervention (Fuchs & Fuchs, 2006), and it is designed to capture students who are falling behind early before deficits become entrenched and difficult to remediate. Several good screening assessments are available, such as the Dynamic Indicator of Basic Early Literacy (Good & Kaminski, 1996) and the math, spelling, and reading assessments found online at AIMSweb. Developing the intervention

14 Chapter 1 • Overview of School-Based Consultation

protocol, which is delivered largely in general education, requires a collaborative effort among school staff members. Similarly, collaborative consultation is required to determine criteria for suc- cess or failure at each level. Specifically, how long should an intervention be implemented before it is deemed unsuccessful? What is the criterion for success or failure? If the intervention is deemed a failure, do you adjust the intervention or progress to the next tier?

A student who progresses to Tier 2 (targeted intervention) should receive a different, more intense intervention compared to Tier 1, not just more of the same. Fuchs and Fuchs (2006) described increasing the intensity of an intervention as involving one or more of the following: (a) more teacher-centered, explicit, and systematic instruction (b) for longer durations, (c) more frequently, (d) in smaller or more homogeneous groups, and (e) provided by personnel with more training or expertise. Along with a more intense intervention, assessment becomes more frequent and targeted at Tier 2. Students’ progress toward intervention goals should be monitored on a weekly basis, or once a month at a minimum, in order to make midcourse corrections to interven- tions that are not producing the desired results. An assessment technique known as brief experi- mental analysis (BEA) can be applied to determine which of myriad sound interventions best suits an individual student’s needs. BEA is an assessment practice that provides a series of short interventions to determine which intervention produces the most promising effects. Thus, BEA can assist consultants in suggesting interventions to consultees (Noell, Freeland, Witt, & Gansle, 2001). Tier 3 (intensive intervention) can involve increased individual or small-group instructional time; extended-day school; summer school; or special, alternative, or non-public- education services. In the case of special education, data gathered from the other tiers on rate of progress and intervention responsiveness can be used to guide development of the individualized education program. In fact, proponents of RtI highlight the utility of the intervention-based assessment data for designing IEPs compared to the lack of treatment utility associated with traditional cognitive/achievement discrepancy assessment methods (Reschly, 2008; Tilly, 2008). As we discuss in Chapter 8, a shift to an RtI/MTSS service delivery model will require targeted and sustained system-level consultation.

the present status of Collaborative Consultation in sChools

Whatever the specific area of concern (curriculum, behavior problems, cultural diversity, physi- cal plant use, expertise sharing, decision-making systems, materials sharing, and so on), all can be discussed in an atmosphere that encourages shared problem solving. The older top-down, hierarchical, authoritarian administrative models are mostly passé. The challenge now is for educators, including teachers, support staff members, and administrators, to realize that models of shared-governance, site-based, community-organized, and collaborative schools are not easy to develop or implement; it takes a new degree of commitment and cooperation to make these models work.

One of the reasons consultation is emerging slowly is the usual reason for the slowness of change in schools and other large-scale bureaucratic organizations: habit strength. In regard to an approach to responding to the needs of students referred for learning and/or behavior problems, many continue to prefer, or at least persist in, the long-established model of refer-test-place, which has dominated the special education–general education partnership for many years (Ysseldyke, 1986). In the refer-test-place model, a student is referred, and some degree of effort is made to resolve the problem through suggestions generated by the SST. A period of time goes by,

Activity 1.9

RtI/MTSS is a relatively new model, and imple- mentation varies widely among states, districts, and schools. Identify the major components of  MTSS, and discuss whether they are truly unique practices or simply “old wine in a new bottle.” To help identify the major compo- nents of RtI/MTSS watch one or both of the following videos:

https://www.youtube.com/watch? v=nkK1bT8ls0M

https://www.youtube.com/watch? v=IjyzTNfwdCU

What components of RtI/MTSS were highlighted in each clip? What descriptors or processes are you familiar with, and which ones do you not yet understand?

Chapter 1 • Overview of School-Based Consultation 15

during which the problem doesn’t resolve easily, and the team decides to generate an assessment plan to determine if the student is eligible for services as a student with a disability. The most likely category the student will be eligible for is learning disabilities simply because it covers approxi- mately 40% of those eligible for special education services (U.S. Department of Education, 2009); the odds are about three out of four that, if an assessment plan is generated and the assessment takes place, the student will be found eligible for such services (Ysseldyke, 1986; Ysseldyke, Vanderwood, & Shriner, 1997). The student will most likely be given services in a special education resource services program (RSP) for one or two periods a day with unpredictable results. Students with behavioral difficulties often experience punishments like office disciplinary referrals (ODRs), suspension, and expulsion meted out in response to each infraction. The behaviors are likely to worsen over time, and males and African Americans are more likely to receive harsher punish- ments, which is further indication of the ineffectiveness and inequality of this common practice.

One of the goals of collaborative consultation is to change this picture dramatically. MTSS constitutes a very different approach, one where the process of collaborative consultation assumes a much stronger role, with the goals being to forestall placements outside the general education program as often as possible and to provide positive, proactive behavioral supports. MTSS essen- tially promotes such collaborative consultation practices by focusing on students’ outcomes rather than deficits. However, simply providing a description of MTSS practices is not likely to result in change. Real change requires fostering or capitalizing on educators’ desire to change, restructur- ing the role of some school personnel, expanding the knowledge and skills of all educators through targeted professional development, and changing the way the system supports some professional practices (e.g., collaborative consultation) while discouraging others (e.g., searching for pathol- ogy within the child). A survey of urban school psychologists found participants rated consulta- tion as the most valuable practice among all of their activities; however, they engaged more frequently and felt more competent in traditional assessment activities (Stoiber & Vanderwood, 2008). The authors concluded that a “practice gap” exists between what school psy- chologists value and what they do and do well. One reason for the practice gap may be a lack of knowledge. For example, a survey of 249 California school psychologists found that many did not know how to graph progress-monitoring data or how to apply decision rules to determine if a child was responding to an intervention (Powers, Hagans, & Busse, 2008). And 1 in 10 reported that they knew very little about academic interventions, yet all of the respondents indicated they were very knowledgeable about cognitive assessments. Another example of the research-to- practice gap was found by Walsh, Glaser, and Wilcox (2006), who reviewed a random sample of 72 teacher preparation programs and concluded most teacher preparation programs are not teaching the sci- ence of reading. Specifically, they found only 11 of the 72 taught future teachers to target the five core reading skills identified by the National Reading Panel, while many emphasized exposure to literature and making lessons fun (rather than research based) as the best way to teach students to read. This finding has significant implications for the quality of Tier 1/core instruction. Thus, change may need to include modifying how training programs prepare teachers, special educators, school psychologists, counselors, administrators, and other support staff members.

There is no one way to practice consultation, so it is not clear what a person means by consultation until she describes it in some detail or you see her doing it. Current practice varies across a wide range of philosophies, roles, activities, and contexts. The different models dis- cussed in Chapter 2 indicate some of the variations currently practiced in the schools.

researCh on the effeCtiveness of sChool Consultation

There has been a plethora of research on consultation; unfortunately, much of it has relied on demonstrating effectiveness based on the consultee’s satisfaction with the process. As VanDerHeyden and Witt (2008) stated, “Like much education research, consultation research languished in the world of self-report” (p. 117). However, the legislative mandate within NCLB and IDEA 2004 to consider scientifically based interventions has sparked a number of task forces to define criteria for determining whether an approach or intervention is sufficiently sup- ported by scientific research. Division 16 of the American Psychological Association, the Research Task Force of the Council on Exceptional Children, and the Task Force on Evidence- Based Interventions in School Psychology (EBI Task Force) have all created guidelines for determining the quality and quantity of research needed to deem a particular educational strategy

16 Chapter 1 • Overview of School-Based Consultation

“evidence-based” (Gresham & Vanderwood, 2008). These specific criteria raise the issue of what consultation is (i.e., is it a skill, an intervention, or something else?) and how we measure its effectiveness. Conclusions about the effectiveness of consultation will most likely be made about the impact of specific strategies on a particular skill, setting, and population rather than a judg- ment about consultation effectiveness as a whole (VanDerHeyden & Witt, 2008).

An emerging issue within consultation research is fidelity. Researchers are interested in identifying the conditions that lead to high fidelity in both consultation processes and interven- tion plan implementation. To study the impact of consultation, one must first be able to verify through direct assessment that the consultation and the intervention occurred as planned (i.e., fidelity); second, one must be able to measure the impact of the consultation on the con- sultee’s behaviors and ultimately the student’s (client’s) outcomes. Currently, there is a dearth of research on assessing fidelity, and this lack is due to many issues, including the following: (a) some consultation behaviors may work better in some situations than others, (b) fidelity may be a function of the match between the intervention plan and the referral concern, (c) intervention fidelity instruments that are sensitive to change and demonstrate adequate reliability and validity are rare, and (d) it is not feasible to monitor the fidelity of some types of interventions (Sheridan, Swanger-Gagné, Welch, Kwon, & Garbacz, 2009). A more detailed discussion on implications of assessing and supporting treatment fidelity is provided in Chapter 3. To organize some of the many variables at work in the consultation process, Frank and Kratochwill (2009) proposed a taxonomy for consultation research based on four broad types of research (efficacy, transporta- bility, dissemination, and/or systems evaluation) with level of intervention (core, targeted, and intensive) and setting (dyad, team, or system) nested within each of the four broad categories. Within this taxonomy there are as many as 36 categories of research that could be investigated for any given consultation strategy; most of the task forces mentioned above recommend that multiple studies be conducted to verify the effectiveness of an educational practice. The edited volume Handbook of Research in School Consultation (Erchul & Sheridan, 2009) contains a thorough analysis of the gaps in the current research base as well as promising methodologies for addressing these limitations. While much work remains to be completed to advance our under- standing of the effectiveness of school consultation, the research to date is promising. Seventeen major reviews and meta-analyses have been published on the outcomes of school consultation, and the results consistently suggest improved outcomes for clients and consultees as a result of school consultation (Erchul & Sheridan, 2009).

At the systems level, there is evidence that districts that have adopted a consultation-based approach to dealing with referrals, rather than a refer-test-place model, place fewer students in separate special education classroom programs (Villa, Thousand, Nevin, & Malgeri, 1996) and reduce the overrepresentation of African Americans (Marston, Muyskens, Lau, & Canter, 2003). In one of the few long-term studies of the effects of consultation as an intermediate step in the referral process, Gutkin, Henning-Stout, and Piersel (1988) found that referred children who were not evaluated for special education rose from 21% to 61% during the four years of their study. Torgesen (2007) examined data from 318 Reading First schools in Florida that had imple- mented an RtI (i.e., MTSS service delivery model) focused on providing high-quality instruc- tion, collecting data to identify students in need of intervention, using data to adjust the intervention when indicated, and providing increasingly powerful tiers of service based on student need. He found special education identification rates and the proportion of students who had significant reading difficulties (defined as performing below the 20th percentile on reading tests) to decline dramatically over the first three years of the program.

Summary

The concept of collaborative consultation, problem solving, and MTSS were introduced. Educational policies such as IDEA, NCLB and Common Core were described as some examples of the macro-system influences that have made school-based consultation more valued than in the past. While the empirical support for specific consultation practices is building, and fidelity of consultation and intervention practices

appears to be an important linchpin, systemwide consultation- based service delivery models, such as MTSS, are associated with positive results. The next chapters will explore different contexts and roles in consultation, ethical considerations, inter- personal skills in consultation necessary to the consultation process, and academic and behavioral assessment and inter- vention ideas that comprises the content of consultations.

Chapter 1 • Overview of School-Based Consultation 17

References Bergan, J. R. (1995). Evolution of a problem-solving model

of consultation. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 6, 111–124.

Bolt, S., & Roach, A. (2009). Inclusive assessment and account- ability: A guide to accommodations for students with diverse needs. New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Brown, D., Pryzwansky, W., & Schulte, A. (2011). Psychological consultation (7th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.

Caplan, G. (1964). Principles of preventive psychiatry. New York, NY: Basic Books.

Caplan, G., & Caplan, R. B. (1993). Mental health consultation and collaboration. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Coffee, G., & Kratochwill, T.R., (2013). Examining teacher use of praise taught during behavioral consultation: Implementation and generalization considerations. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 23, 1– 35.

Daniel R. R. v. State Board of Education, 874 F. 2d. 1036 (1989). Eber, L., Nelson, C. M., & Miles, P. (1997). School-based wrapa-

round for students with emotional and behavioral challenges. Exceptional Children, 63(4), 539–555.

Erchul, W. P., & Martens, B. K. (2002). School consulta- tion: Conceptual and empirical bases of practice (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Kluwer Academic/Plenum.

Erchul, W. P., & Sheridan, S. M. (2009). Overview: The state of scientific research in school consultation. In W. P. Erchul & S. M. Sheridan (Eds.), Handbook of research in school consul- tation (pp. 3–12). New York, NY: Routledge.

Frank, J. L., & Kratochwill, T. R. (2009). Quantitative research methods and designs in consultation. In W. P. Erchul & S. M. Sheridan (Eds.) Handbook of research in school consultation (pp. 63–88). New York, NY: Routledge.

Friend, M., & Cook, L. (2009). Interactions: Collaboration skills for school professionals (6th ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

Fuchs, D., & Fuchs, L. S. (2006). Introduction to response to inter- vention: What, why and how valid is it? Reading Research Quarterly, 41, 93–99.

Gersten, R., Compton, D., Connor, C. M., Dimino, J., Santoro, L., Linan-Thompson, S., & Tilly, W. D. (2008). Assisting students struggling with reading: Response to interven- tion and multi-tier intervention for reading in the primary grades. A practice guide. (NCEE 2009-4045). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved from http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/ publications/practiceguides/

Good, R., & Kaminski, R. (1996). Dynamic indicators of basic early literacy skills. Eugene, OR: University of Oregon.

Gresham, F. (2001). Responsiveness to intervention: An alternative to the identification of learning disabilities. Paper presented at the 2001 Learning Disabilities Summit: Building a Foundation for the Future. Retrieved March 8, 2007, from http://www.air. org/ldsummit/download

Gresham, F., & Vanderwood, M. (2008). Quantitative research methods and designs in consultation. In W. P. Erchul & S. M. Sheridan (Eds.), Handbook of research in school consultation (pp. 63–88). New York, NY: Routledge

Gutkin, T. B., Henning-Stout, M., & Piersel, W. C. (1988). Impact of a district-wide behavioral consultation prereferral interven- tion service on patterns of school psychological service deliv- ery. Professional School Psychology, 3, 301–308.

Hagans, K., & Powers, K. (2013). Multi-tiered systems of support: Recommendations for the elimination of barriers to implemen- tation fidelity in California. Napa, CA: California Services for Technical Assistance and Training.

Jacob, S., Decker, D. M., & Hartshorne, T. S. (2011). Ethics and law for school psychologists. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.

Johnson, D. R., Stodden, R. A., Emanuel, E. J., Luecking, R., & Mack, M. (2002). Current challenges facing secondary educa- tion and transition services: What research tells us. Exceptional Children, 68(4), 519–531.

Kame’enui, E. (2007, May/June). A new paradigm: Responsiveness to intervention. Teaching Exceptional Children, 43, 6–7.

Kelleher, C., Riley-Tillman, T. C., & Power, T. J. (2008). An initial comparison of collaborative and expert-driven consultation on treatment integrity. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 18, 294–324.

Learning Disabilities Association of America. (2010). White paper on the evaluation, identification and eligibility criteria for stu- dents with specific learning disabilities. Pittsburg, PN: Author.

Marston, D., Muyskens, P., Lau, M., & Canter, A. (2003). Problem- solving model for decision making with high incidence dis- abilities: The Minneapolis experience. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 18, 187–200.

Mastropieri, M. A., & Scruggs, T. E. (2000). The inclusive class- room: Strategies for effective instruction. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill/Pearson.

Meyers, J., & Nastasi, B. K. (1999). Primary prevention in school settings. In C. Reynolds & T. Gutkin (Eds.), Handbook of school psychology (3rd ed., pp. 764–799). New York, NY: Wiley.

Meyers, J., Roach, A. T., & Meyers, B. (2009). Engaging in the debate: A critique of Blueprint III. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 19, 197–223.

National Association of State Directors of Special Education. (2005). Response to intervention: Policy considerations and implementation. Alexandria, VA: Author.

National Organization on Disability. (2004). Landmark disability survey finds pervasive disadvantages. Retrieved July 29, 2004, from http://www.nod.org/content.cfm?id=1537

Noell, G. H., Freeland, J. T., Witt, J. C., & Gansle, K. A. (2001). Using brief assessments to identify effective interventions for individual students. Journal of School Psychology, 39, 335–355.

Powers, K., Geenen, S., & Powers, L. (2009). Similarities and dif- ferences in the transition expectations of youth and parents. Career Development for Exceptional Individuals, 32, 132–144.

Powers, K., Hagans, K., & Busse, R. T. (2008). School psy- chologists as instructional consultants within a response-to- intervention model. California School Psychologist, 13, 41–54.

Reschly, D. (2008). School psychology paradigm shift and beyond. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology (5th ed., pp. 17–36). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.

Ryan, T. G. (2009). Inclusive attitudes: A pre-service analysis. Journal of Research in Special Education Needs, 9(3), 180–187.

Serge, T. (2009). From integration to inclusive education: Does changing the terms improve practice? International Journal of Inclusive Education, 31, 553–563.

Sheridan, S. M., Swanger-Gagné, M., Welch, G. W., Kwon, K., & Garbacz, S. A. (2009). Fidelity measurement in consultation: Psychometric issues and preliminary examina- tion. School Psychology Review, 38(4), 476–495.

18 Chapter 1 • Overview of School-Based Consultation

Slavin, R. E., Madden, N. A., Dolan, L., & Wasik, B. A. (1996). Every child, every school: Success for all. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Sprick, R. (2009). Schoolwide discipline: Can you make it work? SEEN Magazine, 11(2), 102.

Stoiber, K. C., & Vanderwood, M. L. (2008). Traditional assess- ment, consultation, and intervention practices: Urban school psychologists’ use, importance and competence ratings. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 18, 264–292.

Sugai, G., & Horner, R. H. (2009). Responsiveness-to-intervention and school-wide positive behavior supports: Integration of multi-tiered system approaches. Exceptionality, 17, 223–237.

Tilly, W. D. (2008). The evolution of school psychology to science- based practice: Problem solving and the three tiered model. In  A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology (5th ed., pp. 17–36). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.

Torgesen, J. K. (2007). Using an RtI model to guide early read- ing instruction: Effects on identification rates for students with learning disabilities. Tallahassee, FL: Florida Center for Reading Research at Florida University.

U.S. Department of Education. (2009). Thirty-first annual report to Congress on the implementation of the Individuals with Disabilities Act. Washington, DC: Author.

U.S. Department of Education. (2013). Peer assisted learning strategies. Washington, DC: Author.

VanDerHeyden, A. M., & Witt, J. C. (2008). Section com- mentary on effective consultation. In W. P. Erchul & S. M. Sheridan (Eds.), Handbook of research in school consultation (pp. 115–126). New York, NY: Routledge.

Villa, R., Thousand, J., Nevin, A., & Malgeri, C. (1996). Installing collaboration for inclusive schooling as a way of doing

business in public schools. Remedial and Special Education, 17, 169–181.

Walsh, K., Glaser, D., & Wilcox, D. D. (2006). What education schools aren’t teaching and what elementary teachers aren’t learning about reading. Washington, DC: National Council on Teacher Quality.

Webster-Stratton, C., Reinke, W. M., Herman, K. C., & Newcomer, L. S. (2011). The incredible years teacher classroom manage- ment training: The methods and principles that support fidelity of training delivery. School Psychology Review, 40, 509–529.

Ysseldyke, J. (1986). Current practice in school psychology. In S. Elliott & J. Witt (Eds.), The delivery of psychological services in the schools. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Ysseldyke, J., Burns, M. K., & Rosenfield, S. (2009). Blueprints on the future of training and practice in school psychology: What do they say about educational and psychological consultation? Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 19, 177–196.

Ysseldyke, J., Lekwa, A. J., Klingbeil, D. A., & Cormier, D. C. (2012). Assessment of ecological factors as an integral part of academic and mental health consultation. Journal of Educational & Psychological Consultation, 22, 21–43.

Ysseldyke, J. E., Vanderwood, M., & Shriner, J. (1997). Changes over the past decade in special education referral to placement probability: An incredibly reliable practice. Diagnostique, 23 (1), 193–202.

Zirkel, P. A. (2013). The legal meaning of specific learning disability for IDEA eligibility: The latest case law. Communique, 41 (5), 43–44.

Zirkel, P. A., & Thomas, L. B., (2010). State laws and guidelines for implementing RTI. Teaching Exceptional Children, 43 (1), 60–73.

19

Consultation Models and Professional Practices

José is a junior in a comprehensive high school. He has been referred to the counselor numer- ous times over the past two years because of low achievement, poor academic productivity, and general disinterest in school. Yet José shows considerable promise when engaged in mathemat- ics, a subject he enjoys. You (the school counselor) would like to collaborate with José’s parents and teacher to develop a plan to increase José’s academic engagement. How might you begin? What is a reasonable goal to strive for with José?

Elise, a ninth-grade student with learning disabilities in reading and writing, is in danger of failing her general education classes in English and social studies. Elise has a difficult time reading the texts for these courses. You are the special education teacher consultant in this school. What are some ways of assisting Elise and her general education teachers with this situation?

Learning Outcomes

2.1 Describe the questions a consultant faces in settling on a conceptual model.

2.2 Distinguish between two theoretical traditions of consultation: behavioral and mental health.

2.3 Give examples of a number of functional consultation models.

2.4 Compare and contrast various consultation configurations (i.e., individual, conjoint, team-based, and systemswide consultation).

2.5 Describe various contexts in which school-based consultation may take place, with particular focus on the student study team (SST).

A RAtionAle foR A Model

A model is a way of conceptualizing or approaching a problem. A consultant is always, if only unwittingly, following a model. Consider the following questions as possible indicators of the type of model that may best encapsulate your approach to consultation:

1. Where is the origin of an academic or behavioral problem likely to reside, within the stu- dent, her family, teacher, peers, classroom, school, or some combination?

2. Is the goal of consultation to solve the student’s problem or increase the capacity of the consultee, or both?

3. Do you want to diagnosis and prescribe an intervention or are you interested in trying dif- ferent interventions until you find one that works?

4. Are parents important partners in addressing students’ needs, or is it better for them to stand aside while the professionals get to work?

5. Is the consultant the expert, like the wise man on the mountain who provides a definitive answer to a problem when approached by the consultee, or is the consultant part of a team in motion adjusting strategies as interventions are attempted, or somewhere in between?

Chapter 2

20 Chapter 2 • Consultation Models and Professional Practices

6. Is it better to solve one student’s problem at a time or is it better to look for ways to improve the system?

7. Can students change? Can teachers and support staff members change? Can systems change?

This chapter reviews two theoretical traditions: behavioral and mental health. They are regarded as theoretical because they derive from well-established theories of human behavior. Also reviewed are some consultation models that can be applied easily in school settings.

two theoReticAl tRAditions

Behavioral Paradigm

The behavioral model is built on the theories of learning that have been adapted by behav- iorists such as Skinner, Bandura, and Meichenbaum (Conoley & Conoley, 1992) and made specific in the area of consultation by Bergan (1977) and Kratochwill and Bergan (1990). Essentially, a behaviorist believes that behaviors are a function of the contingencies that control them (i.e., their antecedents and consequences), and the functional relationships between behaviors and their environmental and cognitive (i.e., self-talk) contexts. Thus, a consultant trying to understand why a student is exhibiting a problem behavior in the class- room would search for potential triggers or reinforcing events in the classroom. A basic tenet of behaviorsim is that all behavior is meaningful because it serves some function. The function of a behavior may not be apparent initially, but it exists.

Behaviorism has progressed in many ways over the 70 years of its existence. During the 1980s and 1990s, for example, there was an increasing interest in what is known as cognitive behavior therapy, which differs from more traditional behaviorism in its empha- sis on internal, cognitive events. Traditional behaviorism was not concerned with internal events primarily because they could not be observed and counted. Now, however, it is widely recognized that ignoring internal mediating events leaves a gap in behaviorists’ ability to understand the source of human behavior (Alberto & Troutman, 2013; Schloss & Smith, 1998). Another major influence on current applications of behaviorism is the work of Bandura (1977), who hypothesized that social learning, or learning by observing models, is a major force in one’s learning history. Using role models and rehearsing specific behav- iors under conditions of positive reinforcement are two of the behavior change techniques suggested by Bandura’s work.

BAsic concePts in BehAvioRAl consultAtion Behavioral consultation involves providing indirect services in which the consultant collabo- rates with a consultee in order to improve the behavior of a client by following a four-stage interview (Hagermoser, Sanetti, & Kratochwill, 2008). The emphasis is on identifying and analyzing the client’s problems in order to design and evaluation interventions. Following the behavioral tradition, the student’s problem is defined in operational terms (i.e., very specific, overt, and measurable behaviors). Conditions that instigate or sustain the behaviors are identi- fied, and an intervention plan that includes some type of modification to the contingencies that support the behavior is developed. The target behavior is measured repeatedly over time to determine if the behavior improves compared to preintervention (baseline) performance. Because of the emphasis on analyzing a behavior and the context in which it occurs, the term applied behavior analysis has replaced the former term behavior modification (Alberto & Troutman, 2013).

The basic paradigm for analyzing behaviors is to consider the antecedents, behaviors, and consequences. Antecedents are events that precede and are believed to be functionally connected to the target behavior. Antecedents can be either external or internal. Examples of external antecedents are a teacher’s direction to a student to do something, the behavior of the child sitting next to a target student, the difficulty of an assignment, and a fire-drill alarm. Internal antecedents may include hunger, one’s emotional state, and self-talk. Antecedents can be both proximal (occurring close in time to the actual behavior) or distal

Chapter 2 • Consultation Models and Professional Practices 21

(occurring much sooner, possibly even in a different setting, than the target behavior). As with most variables that exist on a continuum, it is not always easy or practical to make the distinction between identifying any given antecedent as distal or proximal. In spite of this, the distinction is valuable because it reminds observers that any behavior may be a function of antecedents that occurred days earlier rather than simply those events that are currently happening. Distal antecedents include child-rearing practices, loss of a parent, events seen on television, habit strength, memories of a situation similar to a current situation, and so on. In fact, what often appears to be the immediate cause (proximal antecedent) of a child’s misbehavior may not be the main reason for the observed behavior. By knowing a child’s history and, when possible, something of the child’s inner life through counseling or reflec- tive listening techniques, one may come to understand the distal antecedents of that child’s behavior. Gutkin (2012) has emphasized this point, suggesting that behavioral consultation needs to attend more seriously to distal antecedents by becoming “ecobehavioral,” by looking at the larger picture of a student’s life and history rather than just at immediate prompting events.

Activity 2.1

List, either by yourself or in a class group, all the antecedent reasons you can think of for classroom misbehavior (however defined).

In other words, what prompts misbehavior in school? Determine which antecedents are distal and which are proximal.

Activity 2.2

Repeat Activity 2.1, this time focusing on academic learning problems. What are some reasons for poor academic performance?

Which seem to be within the child and which are environmental?

Consequences (defined here as the effects of a behavior on the student) are ordinarily regarded as the events that follow a behavior. These events can be reinforcing, neutral, or aver- sive. It is the effect on a student that determines whether a consequence is reinforcing, neutral, or aversive, not the intention of the person who delivers the consequence. The student determines the effect, which might be the opposite of the effect that the person delivering the consequence intended. For example, teachers (and parents) often warn children not to tip their chairs back because they might fall. If they do fall, the effect may be reinforcing from the point of view of the adult because it validates the adult’s ability to predict events. Or it may be aversive if the child is hurt and the adult feels regret for not doing more to stop the child from falling. From a child’s point of view, the effect may be punishing if he gets hurt, or it may be reinforcing if he obtains some sort of pleasure from disrupting the classroom or obtaining approval from his peers, even if he does get hurt.

Alberto and Troutman (2013) describe consequences that increase the likelihood of a behavior occurring as positive and negative reinforcement. Positive reinforcement is receiving a desired object, activity, or communication contingent on performing the desired behavior. For example, a teacher may award a token or verbal praise to a student for completing his seatwork assignment. If the student desired the token or praise, and if everything remains the same, he will be more likely next time to complete his work. Negative reinforcement is removal of an aversive stimulus contingent on a behavior. The classic example is the harried mother in the grocery store who initially refuses to buy her child a treat but relents after the child has a temper tantrum. By relenting, the mother actually reinforces the tantrum behavior (making it more likely to hap- pen next time), and her own acquiescing was negatively reinforced by the removal or cessation of the tantrum.

22 Chapter 2 • Consultation Models and Professional Practices

To view a video of this type of negative and positive reinforcement, also known as coer- cive pain control (Rhode & Jenson, 2010) see https://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=OxdtMVww2q0. Because student’s noncompliance or work avoidance is negatively reinforced when teachers remove their demands, Rhode and Jenson, (2010) recommend that teachers use precision commands in which compliance is immediately reinforced, and the stu- dent receives a punishment after failing to comply with a request that has been repeated once. Punishment is the delivery of some aversive stimulus or removal of a desired stimulus in order to decrease a behavior (Alberto & Troutman, 2013). While punishment can be effective, it should never be humiliating or painful. Reinforcing positive and competing behaviors (i.e., work completion or compliance) is often both more productive and humane than punishing undesired behaviors.

In some cases, an action designed to be reinforcing, like delivering verbal praise, could be felt as a punishment (the student does not want any attention called to her). This case raises the question, “How does one know whether an adult or peer response to a targeted behavior is reinforcing or punishing?” The answer lies only in a careful study of the data. Is the targeted behavior decreasing as a function of the consequences it elicits? If so, then these consequences are probably best interpreted as aversive or punishing. Are behaviors increasing as a result of the responses that follow these behaviors? If so, then the consequences are probably positively reinforcing the behavior.

Activity 2.3

Watch the tutorial on how to conduct an antecedent, behavior, and consequence (ABC) analysis at https://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=GxcIM8klHuY and complete the

ABC analysis found on the video clip for the target behavior: yelling in the classroom.

Activity 2.4

A teacher tells you that she is concerned about a student who is anxious. What else do you, as a behaviorally oriented consultant, want to know about the child? What are the behaviors

of anxiety? Which can be treated, the anxiety or the behaviors? How might a traditional behaviorist differ from a cognitively oriented behaviorist in his approach to this problem?

BAsic Beliefs undeRlying A BehAvioRAl APPRoAch to consultAtion The behavioral tradition focuses on behaviors that are either observable to the teacher or parent or reportable by the student; it contrasts with the medical-model approach, which focuses on pathology or sickness within the child. Hypothetical constructs and pseudo-explanatory con- cepts and labels, such as attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), conduct disorder, or others listed in the fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (American Psychiatric Association, 2013), are not regarded as constructive except for purposes of communication among professional staff members and parents. The behaviorist does not say that a student is out of her seat and running around the room because she has ADHD. Rather, the behaviorist is inclined to say that the student engages in an excessive amount of out-of-seat behavior (operationally defined and usually determined in relation to a norm for a given class- room or other setting) and will help to develop an intervention to change the behavior by changing either the antecedent (adjust difficulty of seatwork, move desk to quiet corner, etc.) and/or consequence events (provide short breaks contingent on work completion, implement a self-monitoring program with a highly desired reward for improved on-task behavior, etc.). To learn if the intervention has been successful, a behaviorist charts the occurrence and dura- tion of out-of-seat behavior or some other targeted behavior. The behaviorist’s goal is to reduce the frequency of symptoms because, as the behaviorist believes, the symptom is the disease (Ullmann & Krasner, 1965).

Chapter 2 • Consultation Models and Professional Practices 23

stAges in the BehAvioRAl consultAtion Model Bergan (1977) and Bergan and Kratochwill (1990) have delineated four stages that form the structure of the behavioral consultation model: problem identification, problem analysis, plan implementation, and plan evaluation. Ideally, these stages occur over the course of three separate interviews, each on one of the following: problem identification, problem analysis and plan development, and problem evaluation (Martens & DiGennaro, 2009). In our experi- ence, however, problem identification and problem analysis often occur together in schools in order to expedite the process. The trade-off of moving more quickly to plan development and implementation is associated with an increased risk of selecting the wrong behavior to target or incorrectly interpreting the function of the behavior. The following is a description of the activities carried on during these stages and an indication of some of the objectives that under- lie each stage.

In problem identification, the consultant receives and discusses a referral with the con- sultee and attempts to clarify its nature. Is it primarily a behavior problem or a learning problem? How might the behavior be described operationally? The objectives of this stage are to assess the nature of the consultee’s concerns; prioritize problems; select target behavior(s); make an initial estimate of the problem’s seriousness; decide on tentative goals; discuss possible antecedents, sequences, and consequences (i.e., how the behavior unfolds in time); discuss possible data- collection ideas; and set a date for the next meeting. A consultee’s description of a problem may often seem overwhelming and confusing initially, particularly if the consultee’s descriptions are clouded by anger, frustration, or the intermixing of facts and opinions. Many students do not have just one problem and the temptation to try anything and everything at once in order to get immediate relief must be resisted for a more measured and precise problem analysis.

Activity 2.5

Watch the video clip at https://www. youtube.com/watch?v=TsUP76Ek2RQ and discuss how the consultant helps the consultee operationalize and prioritize the behavioral

concerns. What further data are needed to define the behavior in observable and measur- able terms?

Activity 2.6

Watch the video of a portion of a behavioral consultation interview at https://www. youtube.com/watch?v=RVfNZciZROI . Discuss whether the function of the target behavior (i.e., disruptive and poor task comple- tion) is avoiding a task avoidance, attention

seeking, or both. What might you look for in a classroom observation to confirm the function served by the behavior? How would the inter- ventions differ depending on the results of the behavioral analysis?

In problem analysis, the consultant delves further into the nature of the problem, usually by observing it directly, conducting a functional assessment if appropriate (see Chapter 6) to determine the function that the behavior serves, clarifying issues with the consultee, and brainstorming possible interventions. Other activities at this stage are to examine the data for patterns; solidify goals; verify antecedents, behavioral sequences, and consequences; determine the strengths and assets of the student; research school resources that can be incorporated into the planning; and design and get agreement about the intervention plan. If the behavioral consultation is being conducted in the collabora- tive mode, the consultee makes the final determination about what to implement and how to do it, with the guidance and facilitation of the consultant. Both parties discuss ongoing data-collection methods and treatment integrity checks, and schedule the next interview and/or observation.

24 Chapter 2 • Consultation Models and Professional Practices

Activity 2.7

Form teams of two (dyads). One person thinks of a social relationship problem she has experienced. The other person acts as a consultant and tries to get functional informa- tion about the problem from the consultee.

The consultant asks for a behavioral definition of the social relationship problem and gets information about the antecedents and conse- quences, frequency of occurrence, durations, intensities, and so on. Then reverse roles.

In plan implementation, the consultee proceeds with the appropriate interventions. The consultant’s main objectives at this stage are to monitor what the consultee is doing (to ensure treatment integrity), suggest modifications as appropriate, and reinforce the consultee for her efforts. The consultant may also collect progress-monitoring data on the student to verify that the interventions are working.

For plan evaluation, Bergan (1977) suggests three steps: evaluating goal attainment, evaluating plan effectiveness, and planning postimplementation. The goals should have been established during the problem identification stage and should have flowed naturally from the nature of the problem. The primary objective of this stage is to determine how well the goals have been met. Continuation, modification, or termination of the plan is determined at this stage. A plan may look elegant and may have worked elsewhere, but the consultant and the consultee have to determine how well it has worked in the present case, which is always different in important, if subtle, ways from all other instances of similar problems.

Postimplementation planning refers to a discussion of how to proceed after the cur- rent consultative relationship is terminated. What steps should be taken to ensure that the problem won’t recur? Should data continue to be kept? In school consultation, consultants should learn to expect recurrence of problems from certain students and from certain teach- ers. Some cases resurface continually due to students’ home conditions, serious learning disabilities, or other biophysical or classroom ecological influences. Sometimes postim- plementation simply means putting a partially successful case on the back burner while attending to more pressing cases, with the plan to return to the partially successful case at a later time.

cuRRent thinking ABout the BehAvioRAl Model Bergan (1995) has updated the behavioral model of consultation since its inception in 1977. He points to a widening literature base that supports this highly structured approach and indicates how it has assisted consultants and consultees in defining problems that can be operationalized and solved. He specifically indicates a problem-centered approach, which is not always evident in approaches taken by consultants who follow other theoretical or functional models. This approach avoids the focus on a referred student’s negative behavior and instead asks questions that focus on a program of possible skill development. For example, instead of asking, “What’s wrong with Johnny?” the consultant asks, “What skills does Johnny need to develop to be more successful?” While it is likely that referral ques- tions may contain some explication of what a student is doing wrong (such as variations on “He won’t behave or do his work”), this is not necessarily the problem the consultant works on. Rather, it is more appropriate to stress the teaching goal for the student (such as “What social or academic skills does the student need to work on, and how can we arrange the environment, broadly defined, to see that this happens?”). Thus, “problems” are reframed in terms of a goal for improved performance and a series of steps or interventions to achieve the goal. This is the underlying assumption to problem-solving consultation, which is described in detail in Chapter 3.

The behavioral approach has considerable surface appeal in addition to a solid track record of empirical validation. Nevertheless, many teachers do not use behavioral approaches. Indeed, some teachers and administrators want nothing to do with them. Axelrod, Moyer, and Berry (1990) point to a number of reasons for this avoidance. Some teachers balk at this approach because data have to be kept, a teacher may have to change her own behavior, and

Chapter 2 • Consultation Models and Professional Practices 25

programs need to be individualized. Also, reinforcement is often misinterpreted as bribery. Some teachers believe in the Protestant ethic, by which they mean that students should do work because they are told to; thus, “bribing” them is unnecessary, even immoral. Such teach- ers believe that this behavioral approach may be all right for rats and pigeons, but not for people. Alberto and Troutman (2013) identified the main challenges to behaviorism in schools: (1) It requires a lot more effort on the part of the teacher than more indirect or avoidant meth- ods and (2) educators’ philosophical beliefs often include the idea that learning should be child-directed and intrinsically motivating.

Most teachers have not been trained in behavioral techniques, and a behaviorist enthusiast may turn them off by conveying a superior attitude. Given the rich database that supports the behavioral approach, it is not surprising that those who have studied and applied it successfully might be evangelistic in their efforts to get others to use behavioristic methods. Astute behavio- rally oriented school consultants need to guard against this attitude or impression. They need to remember that teachers usually don’t read the Journal of Applied Behavioral Analysis; may not be at all impressed with studies done under controlled conditions (which classrooms are not); and are primarily concerned with the students in their classrooms, not with others who seem to live in laboratories somewhere else.

suMMARy of the BehAvioRAl Model This brief overview of the behavioral model presents a foundation for understanding and appreciating the contributions of this model to the consultation process. There is considerable overlap between what has been presented here as the behavioral model and what is presented later in Chapter 3 as a problem-solving model of consultation because behavioral consultation serves as a foundation for problem-solving consultation in the schools.

Mental health Paradigm

The mental health tradition is based on psychodynamic theories of human interaction (Conoley & Conoley, 1992; Erchul, 1993). It was developed primarily Gerald Caplan. His seminal text, The  Theory and Practice of Mental Health Consultation (Caplan, 1970), reviews the many intricacies of this complex model. In 1993 and again in 1999, Gerald Caplan and Ruth Caplan authored an updated text on the mental health model, which added the word collaboration to the title: Mental Health Consultation and Collaboration (Caplan & Caplan, 1993).

In strong contrast to the behavioral model, which emphasizes contingencies of reinforce- ment, modeling, and self-reinforcement, the mental health model stresses intrapsychic feel- ings and their effects on interpersonal relationships. Although the primary distinguishing factor in mental health consultation is its emphasis on intra- and interpersonal variables, it does not ignore environmental influences. Caplan makes many references to the importance of the ecological context in which behavior unfolds, such as communication patterns between the client and the consultee, and organizational and community influences on the behavior of both clients and caregiver-consultees. Mental health consultation also differs from behavioral con- sultation in its focus on the consultee rather than the client. The main goal of mental health consultation is to increase the capacity of the consultees. As such, researchers of mental health models of consultation often collect data on changes in the attitude or behavior of the consultee rather than the outcome of the client (Knotek, Kaniuka, & Ellingsen, 2009). For example, a research review by Brennan, Bradley, Allen, and Perry (2008) found sizable support for the effectiveness of mental health consultation on improving early childhood providers’ sensitiv- ity, self-efficacy, confidence, job satisfaction, and observed and self-reported competency. Note, however, that the effect of mental health consultation on the young students’ outcomes was not a factor in the study.

Every school-based consultant needs to be sensitive to one of Caplan’s discoveries: When outsiders (consultants) enter the world of insiders (consultees), they need to understand that they are entering a world different from their own, one that has its own norms, beliefs, habits, and ways of doing things. No matter how expert a consultant may be, the consultee is largely respon- sible for the way in which an intervention is finally put into effect. Therefore, Caplan and Caplan (1993) stress the need for a collaborative approach to consultation. They discuss the

26 Chapter 2 • Consultation Models and Professional Practices

problems that arise when the consultant attempts to take over a case and assume the expert role. This stance may reduce the consultee’s involvement in the case and his subsequent willingness to generate or follow through on solutions to the referral problems.

key concePts of the MentAl heAlth Model Caplan and Caplan (1993, pp. 21–23) list 14 basic characteristics of their mental health model. The following list adapts five of these characteristics as they apply to school consultation:

1. The relationship between the consultant and the consultee is coordinate and nonhierarchical. Throughout this text, we emphasize this basic tenet of the collaborative model. Even though the consultee has referred the problem to the consultant and might therefore be thought of as the dependent person in the dyad, the working relationship established in the collaborative model soon clarifies an equal-partners dyad.

2. Consultation is usually conducted as a short series of interviews. In public schools, there is not a lot of time for lengthy sessions between a consultant and a consultee. While it may be true in extreme cases that weekly meetings occur for some months, the usual case involves between two and five meetings, some of which may be brief phone or e-mail conversations.

3. The consultant does not get involved in the personal problems of the consultee. If it is clear that the consultee is undergoing some sort of emotional conflict that impedes her ability to carry out a consultation plan, the consultant should make an appropriate referral to another source for counseling.

4. A long-term goal of all consultation is to improve the on-the-job functioning of the consultee. Toward that goal, the consultant attempts to give the consultee skills, knowledge, confidence, and a sense of objectivity that the consultee may be lacking. These points will be useful in the consultee’s future cases.

5. The Caplans intend their model to be used primarily for mental health problems. However, the ideas discussed in their work can apply to any behavior or learning problem that a student is experiencing.

tyPes of MentAl heAlth consultAtion Caplan and Caplan (1993) discuss four types of consultation: client-centered case, consultee- centered case, program-centered administrative, and consultee-centered administrative. The first two types concern individual client (or small-group) issues, and the latter two are system- oriented. Another way to divide the four types is in terms of focus: on the consultee or on the client (or the program in the case of the program-centered administrative type).

• In client-centered case consultation, the consultant deals directly with a client (student) in order to provide some service (such as assessment or treatment) or to develop ideas that a consultee can use when working with the client. The consultant has little direct interaction with the consultee.

School-based example: A teacher refers a student to the reading specialist because of the student’s significant reading delay. This specialist takes the student from the general education classroom, does some assessment work, and writes a report for the teacher telling him what he should do to help the student.

• In consultee-centered case consultation, the consultant deals directly with the consultee in order to assist the consultee in formulating a plan for dealing with the client. The consult- ant has little or no direct interaction with the client.

School-based example: The reading specialist meets with the general education teacher, assists her in making a plan for helping the student, and monitors the plan as it unfolds. In this situation, the consultant may never meet directly with the student.

Chapter 2 • Consultation Models and Professional Practices 27

• In program-centered administrative consultation, the consultant evaluates a policy or pro- gram and develops a plan for improving it.

School-based example: A reading expert, possibly from outside the district, is brought in to evaluate a school’s reading pro- gram and to develop a set of guidelines for improving it.

• In consultee-centered administrative consultation, the consultant works with a group of consultees to help them develop better ways of managing their program.

School-based example: The consultant meets with members of the school’s leadership team to review their universal and targeted reading programs and results. The consultant then helps them improve the programs in order to have fewer students below reading benchmarks than they do currently.

Each of these four types is commonly used in the schools. Most of this text is devoted to individual or small-group consultation work; Chapter 9 focuses on the last two (administrative) types of consultation.

the fouR “lAcks” of consultees Caplan and Caplan (1993) point out four “lacks” that may explain why a consultee has diffi- culty dealing with a client: knowledge, skill, confidence, and objectivity. In a situation in which knowledge is lacking, the consultee needs to know more about a targeted student or about techniques that can be used to assist the student. In school-based consultation, this lack occurs frequently. Some teachers do not know much about a student’s background or about cultural factors that may be influential. The consultee may be knowledgeable about one approach to teaching reading (whole language) but may lack knowledge of alternative approaches to try when her approach fails for some students. In this approach, the school consultant’s goal is to impart information to the consultee in order to help her deal more effec- tively with the student, hoping that these facts or insights will be used with other students as appropriate. Many topics designed to increase the knowledge base of consultees can be delivered in staff development in-services, which are discussed in Chapter 10. However, as discussed in Chapter 3, the likelihood of the consultee implementing the suggestions is very low unless coaching, performance feedback, and even test-driving intervention options accom- pany the imparted knowledge.

A lack of skill is diagnosed when the consultee has the requisite knowledge but doesn’t seem to know how to apply it successfully. The best way to diagnose this condition is to watch the consultee apply his knowledge to solve a particular problem. The consultant may observe that the consultee knows what to do but not how to do it. An example might be the use of contingency contracts. The consultee has written a good contract but does not enforce it consistently or tries to demand more than the contract calls for before delivering the speci- fied reinforcer.

The third lack is confidence. Some teachers and parents simply lack confidence to try things they know how to do or could easily learn. They may have tried specific tactics in the past and believed they were not successful, or they may be currently dealing with what appears to be a more difficult or threatening situation and are fearful of trying something and possibly failing. Consider a successful teacher who takes on a new challenge of teaching a class for emotionally disturbed students. The behaviors of these students frighten the teacher. During the first few weeks, the teacher seems reluctant to implement the behavior management techniques that have always worked in the past and were part of the reason he was nominated for this position. He would benefit from having someone observe the interac- tions in the class and assist him in gaining more confidence in his ability to redirect these students. Gutkin (2012) wrote that a major problem with the medical model is its potential to “disempower the most important and accessible caregivers in the lives of children and

28 Chapter 2 • Consultation Models and Professional Practices

adolescents, namely, parents and teachers” (p. 5). If the consultant is the expert in the psy- chosocial causes of a student’s failure, then the consultees may feel they lack the efficacy to assist their child or student, and low self-efficacy leads to ineffective and less persistent problem-solving.

According to Caplan and Caplan (1993), the fourth lack, objectivity, is the most common “in a well-organized institution or agency” (p. 107). If consultees have the knowledge, skill, and confidence it takes to deal with their work-related problems but are still having difficulty, they may be letting subjective perceptions and judgments impair their ability to deal with issues involving students who present with difficult problems. Specifically, a consultant may be unable to perceive the student’s difficulties objectively due to (a) direct personal involvement, (b) simple identification, (c) transference, (d) character distortion, and/or (e) theme interference (Erchul & Martens, 2010).

A theme interference occurs when a previously unresolved problem affects the consultee’s expectations for solving the current problem. In general, these psychodynamic concepts explain a consultee’s ineffectiveness with his student in terms of some conscious or unconscious misrepresentation of the student. The consultant’s role in these situations is to help the teacher (or parent or administrator) to see the case in more objective terms, to reassess the behaviors of concern, and to point out that the student does not represent some class of people or perhaps some type of disability that shares common potential difficulties for the consultee.

Activity 2.9

Select one of the Caplans’ four lacks. Discuss the way in which that lack may manifests itself among a group of teacher consultees.

Do the lacks interact, or are they independent of each other?

Activity 2.10

List some common themes among school- based consultants that may interfere with their

abilities to deal objectively and compassion- ately with students or consultees.

It is interesting to note that the Caplans refer to objectivity as a possible lack on the part of consultees. Although the Caplans don’t discuss the lack of objectivity within the consultant in depth, it certainly may be a lack on the part of a school consultant in objectivity or any of the other three lacks. All consultants need to look continually at their own behavior and question themselves about the possibility that the plans they suggest might be the result of their own lack of objectivity in understanding either the consultee, the student, or both. There is no doubt that each of us has personal biases, beliefs that may not be appropriate, specific ideas that we like even though they may not be the most appropriate for any given situation, and so on. Sometimes we learn about this from our consultees, who question our ideas based on the objec- tive facts. Self-reflection can guard against this possibility, as can reviewing your work with other competent practitioners in the schools.

Activity 2.8

A teacher consultee tells you that he expects the student to be loud and sarcastic because he has seen many children from similar home backgrounds “and they all act like that.” How would you, as a consultant, help this consultee

understand that this line of reasoning may lead to a self-fulfilling prophecy? How might you help the consultee to be more objective in deal- ing with the student?

Chapter 2 • Consultation Models and Professional Practices 29

cuRRent APPRoAches to the MentAl heAlth Model Caplan, Caplan, and Erchul (1995) presented their views on the importance of the shift to a col- laborative model for school consultants who want to use a mental health approach. The Caplans wrote that the term consultant should refer to an outside expert who has psychological distance from the consultee and the situation. However, schools have embraced the idea that internal staff (counselors, special education teachers, school psychologists, curriculum specialists, mentor teachers, etc.) should engage in consultation. Mental health consultation has thus evolved to be more collaborative and less psychodynamically oriented than originally conceptualized by the Caplans (Knotek et al., 2009).

suMMARy of the MentAl heAlth tRAdition The mental health model espoused by the Caplans, along with its consultee-centered consulta- tion (CCC) offshoot, is less commonly used in the schools than the behavioral model. The men- tal health model is important because it emphasizes aspects of interpersonal and intrapersonal relationship factors that are not regarded as important in the behavioral model.

functionAl consultAtion Models

The process of consultation in the schools is continually evolving. However, most models applied in school settings have a strong base in the behavioral consultation tradition. Problem solving is present in most models of school consultation. The mental health emphasis on increasing the capacity of the consultee is also present in most contemporary models. All the models recognize the importance of collaboration, interpersonal skills, and knowledge of assessment and interventions. Thus, many of the models have a lot in common and can be distinguished by the particular component of consultation partnership or process that is emphasized.

conjoint Behavioral consultation

Recognition of the central role of family-centered contingencies in the lives of children has prompted behaviorists, such as Kramer (1990) and Sheridan and Kratochwill (1992), to expand their ideas about behavioral applications to working with families. Referred to as conjoint behav- ioral consultation (CBC), it is defined as “an indirect service-delivery model that builds on positive parent-teacher relationships, integrates structured data-based problem solving and col- laboration, and implements evidence-based interventions across home and school settings” (Sheridan et al., 2012, p. 24). In this system, both parents and teachers serve as consultees to prioritize simultaneously and jointly the need, identify resources in the child’s environment, develop and implement the most acceptable interventions, and determine the success of the inter- vention (Ysseldyke, Lekwa, Klingbeil, & Cormier, 2012). Ideally the increased complexity of the consultant’s data-gathering and communication efforts across two contexts is offset by syner- gism that emerges from parents and teachers working together to solve problems. Sheridan, Clarke, and Burt (2009) described CBC as progressing through three phases: (a) needs identifi- cation/needs analysis (building on strengths), (b) plan development and implementation, and (c) plan evaluation (checking and reconnecting). These phases closely parallel the four stages of problem-solving/behavioral consultation.

In a study of 52 students with disabilities, Sheridan, Clarke, and Burt (2009) found CBC to lead to sizable changes in behavior, based on repeated direct observations, with an average effect size of 1.08 for home-based interventions and 1.11 for school-based interventions. According to Cohen (1988), effect sizes over .80 are consider large. In addition, indirect measures of CBC effectiveness found parents and teachers to rate the consultation as highly acceptable, and 100% of the parents and 94% of the teachers indicated that the student had met or partially met his or her intervention goal. In another study, Garbacz and colleagues (2008) found a partnership-centered approach to CBC to be associated with teachers’ acceptability and satisfaction with the process. Their definition of a partnership orientation included a focus on strengths; on promoting skill development and teaming; on effective communication; and on presenting as an encouraging, sensitive, and responsive partner. While the extent to which different consultants employed partnership-promoting strategies was not found to be associated

30 Chapter 2 • Consultation Models and Professional Practices

with parents’ acceptability and satisfaction with the CBC, the authors conclude that CBC as a whole is an effective process for engaging families.

More recent research found that the quality of the family–school partnership mediates the effectiveness of CBC. In the only large-scale, randomized trial of the efficacy of CBC published to date (Sheridan et al., 2012), teachers in the CBC group reported significantly more positive rela- tionships with parents compared to teachers in the control group (i.e., business as usual; Sheridan et al., 2012). Students in the CBC group demonstrated greater improvements in social skills, as reported by both parents and teachers, and more improved adaptive skills, as rated by their teachers, compared to students in the control group. Students in both groups were selected to participate in the study based on teacher referral for disruptive classroom behaviors. Over the course of an 8-week intervention, the teacher, the consultant, and the parents of two to three students met for four or five CBC sessions. Across the 113 students in the CBC group, the consultants made an average of one home visit to help the parents integrate the intervention into their daily routines. Clearly, this study illustrates that CBC is not simply inviting parents to a meeting. Rather, CBC involves multiple meetings with an emphasis on relationship building and supporting not only teachers in their class- rooms but parents in their homes as well. The authors conclude that “CBC proactively structures continuity through the establishment of relationships and partnerships between home and school, exemplified through practices promoting shared ownership, mutual goals setting, joint planning and cooperative plan implementation” (Sheridan et al., 2012, p. 40).

Instructional Consultation

Rosenfield, Silva, and Gravois (2009) describe instructional consultation (IC) as having a dual focus: on both content and process. The content imparted includes assessment meth- ods that can guide instruction, evidence-based academic and behavioral interventions, fidelity assessments, and decision-making rules. The important processes include the problem- solving steps, developing a consultee-centered working relationship, and an emphasis on collaboration. Like the other models, the intent of IC is to improve students’ performance by improving the capacity of their teachers. The distinguishing feature of IC is a focus on improving student outcomes in order to reduce inappropriate referrals or eli- gibility for special education (Rosenfield et al., 2009). The heavy emphasis on effective instruction assumes that many students, particularly those who are designated as learning disabled, are actually curricular or instructional casualties rather than disabled. IC consult- ants are trained to identify and support a variety of instructional interventions that seek to improve the match between the developing capabilities of the student and curricular demands in order to improve student academic engaged time, a major contributor to academic success. IC manuals such as the Instructional Consultation Teams Training Manual (Gravois, Rosenfield, & Vail, 2002, as cited in Rosenfield et al., 2009) promote the portability of  this set of practices. The Level of Implementation Scale–Revised (LOI-R) can be used to assess how well school personnel implement IC, including the collaborative consultation process and the tiered service delivery system, in order to direct further professional development (Rosenfield et al., 2009).

IC is often described as being delivered by a schoolwide team (see the description of stu- dent support teams later in this chapter), but it also involves consultation within a dyadic relationship because a case manager is assigned to consult with the consultee prior to and after the IC team meeting (McKenna, Rosenfield, & Gravois, 2009). The IC stages, as described by Rosenfield, Silva, and Gravois (2009), are:

• Contracting—discussion of the collaborative consultation relationship, problem-solving process, and teacher’s expectations in order to ensure that the teacher is committed to this type of problem solving.

• Problem identification and analysis—prioritize a target behavior; develop an operational definition of the behavioral concern; collect baseline data on the behavior; and set short- term, interim, and long-term performance goals.

• Intervention design—a detailed, evidence-based intervention plan is developed, including who will conduct which parts of the plan and how and when the effectiveness of the inter- vention will be monitored.

Chapter 2 • Consultation Models and Professional Practices 31

• Intervention implantation and evaluation—ongoing progress-monitoring data are col- lected and graphed, and changes to the intervention are made if a lack of growth over baseline is apparent.

• Closure—plans for maintaining the student’s improved progress are discussed, and the case is summarized in writing and formally concluded.

Program evaluation studies indicate that IC is effective in reducing inappropriate referrals to special education, including curbing the disproportional placement of culturally and linguistically diverse students into special education, and results in a large proportion of students meeting their intervention goals (Rosenfield et al., 2009). Rosenfield and col- leagues also report that teachers are overwhelmingly satisfied with the process, which is a very positive outcome given that many students who were referred to the IC team did not end up in special education (which is often the teacher’s desired result behind the initial referral).

ecobehavioral consultation

As the name implies, this consultation model combines ecological systems theory with behaviorism. Urie Bronfenbrenner (1979) proposed understanding development, including ways to influence a developing child, by examining her changing environment. In this model, development is viewed as a series of mutual accommodations or transactions between the child and her environment, including settings that are far removed from the actual child, such as federal legislation on special education services or a district-level policy on retention standards. A  student’s difficulty is conceptualized in terms of a mis- match between the developing capabilities of the child and the demands of the system in which the problem occurs (e.g., Spanish class; Ysseldyke et al., 2012). Sources of support for addressing the problem may be found in other contexts in which the child is engaged (e.g., algebra class, home, church, soccer team). Ecological systems theory also stresses focusing on conditions that can be modified (number of books in the home, number of min- utes spent reading with parents) rather than a child’s social address (nationality, ethnicity, class, neighborhood), which is generally immutable (Bronfenbrenner, 1989). Ecobehavioral consultants often attempt to intervene in multiple contexts, including the internal function- ing of the child (Bonner, 2005). Unlike behaviorism’s narrow focus on observable behav- iors, ecobehaviorism does consider the child’s cognition, motivation, prior learning, and attributions in identifying ways to help (Bonner, 2005). Ecological models of consultation are also more focused on systemwide prevention efforts compared to strictly behavioral or mental health traditions. Waiting to intervene once a problem has become serious or entrenched is ineffective and inefficient, as evident by the large number of students with mental health and educational problems and the relatively low success rate of special education, counseling, and psychotherapy (Gutkin, 2012).

consultee-centered consultation

Consultee-centered consultation (CCC), a current mental health model, is more similar to the behavioral tradition because it embraces a problem-solving process and addresses a wider range of problems beyond mental illness (i.e., academic concerns, behavioral excesses, profes- sional development; Knotek et al., 2009) and uses more behavioral techniques (modeling, coaching, and performance feedback in addition to psychodynamic techniques; Erchul & Martens, 2010). The key components of the CCC model are shared decision making and an emphasis on mutuality in all stages of the process. CCC emphasizes the consultant–consultee relationship as the primary vehicle by which problem solving occurs. Problem solving in CCC is less prescriptive than in behavioral models because the consultant and consultee together modify the conceptualization of the problem throughout the process (Newman, Ingraham, & Shriberg, 2014). The goal is to reconceptualize the problem (referral) in a new way so the con- sultee’s skills are expanded and the professional relationship between the consultee and the client is improved (Newman et al., 2014). Some ways to reconceptualize a problem are (a) brainstorm other possible explanations for the behavior; (b) refocus on what the client can do rather than the child’s deficits; (c) selectively, skillfully, and gently challenging a consultee

32 Chapter 2 • Consultation Models and Professional Practices

when needed; and (d) acknowledge the consultee’s strengths and knowledge through onedown- manship (Newman et al., 2014). A consultant employs onedownmanship by appearing less knowledgeable or experienced than he actually is, that is, by asking a naïve question that is easy for the consultee to answer or making a comment to the effect that what the consultee can do is amazing.

Activity 2.11

Some people can understand models better if  they are pictured rather than defined with  words only. Select two or more of the  models or traditions described in this chapter and draw a Venn diagram in which

assumptions, activities, or emphases that are shared between or among the models are listed in the overlap between the circles, and those that differ are listed in the nonoverlap- ping parts of the circles.

consultAtion configuRAtions And settings

School consultants work with individual consultees (in a formal meeting or quick conversation in the hallway or lunchroom) and with teams of other consultants and consultees, including con- joint consultation with parents and teachers, student study teams, individualized education pro- gram teams, and transition teams. Many chapters in this book present information about individual consultee work, in which the consultant accepts a referral from the consultee, meets individually with him, and together they work out a plan for understanding and dealing with the referral. Although there are variations in this scenario (such as two consultants or consultees, more than one client, and teaming), generally this one-on-one model remains the most common form of school consultation. It is popular and practical mainly because it involves the least number of individuals. Excessive reliance on team-based meetings is often regarded as impracti- cal and/or frustrating in schools because of the conflicting demands and time limits on team members. In addition, large teams (exceeding six or more individuals) may be associated with diminishing returns. It is widely recognized, however, that individual consultation by itself has serious limitations. The IC model combines individual and team consultation by having the IC team dispatch an IC team member to consult with the referring teacher (McKenna, Rosenfield, & Gravois, 2009).

Under a tiered service delivery model, such as multi-tiered system of support (MTSS), consultation may progress from the one-on-one microlevel to a team approach in order to bring more resources to designing a targeted or intensive intervention. Some potential bene- fits of the team approach include a wider diversity of ideas about how to solve the problem (Cramer, 1998; DeBoer, 1995), more possibilities for change within a context of ownership and empowerment (Basham, Appleton, & Dykeman, 2000; Maeroff, 1993; Sarason, 1990), and ideas generated in a team spread throughout the team and often beyond in a ripple effect that has a potential impact on the larger environment of the school or district (Thomas, Correa, & Morsink, 1995). Whether consulting occurs in a dyad or team, school personnel meet routinely to discuss and problem-solve on behalf of students. Some of the most common consultation configurations are described next. Chapter 10 is devoted to issues of system- level improvement through consultation with teams of constituents at the local school or district level.

Beginning teacher support consultation

Almost a quarter of public school teachers leave their schools within the first five years of teach- ing, and among high-poverty, low-performing schools, up to one-third to one-half of teachers leave within their first five years (Shernoff, Mariñez-Lora, Frazier, Jakobsons, Atkins, & Bonner, 2011). The high turnover makes schoolwide improvement difficult. To improve new teachers’ effectiveness and curb high rates of attrition among novice teachers, some states and districts have implemented support programs. For example, the state of California has funded the Beginning Teacher Support and Assessment (BTSA) program since 1992. The three major

Chapter 2 • Consultation Models and Professional Practices 33

components of this program are collegial reflection with a veteran teacher, professional devel- opment in the form of in-services offered by the district, and formative assessment of the new teacher’s teaching practices (Lovo, Cavazos, & Simmons, 2006).

Formal programs to induct new teachers into the teaching profession are believed to offer many benefits, including retention of new and veteran teachers, improved teaching effective- ness among beginning teachers, and improved job satisfaction and leadership skills among veteran teachers (Joftus & Maddox-Dolan, 2002). Whether as part of a formal induction pro- gram or an informal mentoring relationship, experienced teachers or related support staff members can assist new teachers by modeling effective teaching practices, observing and pro- viding feedback on the new teacher’s practices, sharing or jointly developing lesson plans, collecting and discussing student data, and generally boosting the new teacher’s confidence. In this type of collaboration, the “client” is the class or classes taught by the new teacher. As the consultant in this situation, you might ask the beginning teacher to identify three students— one performing above average, one performing at an average level, and one performing below average—to discuss each time you meet. This will give you an opportunity to talk about ways to differentiate instruction.

Shernoff and colleagues (2011) combined peer-nominated mentors, coaches, and pro- fessional learning communities (PLCs) to support beginning urban teachers. The coach and mentor intentionally targeted the three strongest predictors of teacher attrition: (1) poor classroom management skills, (2) failure to engage students, and (3) feelings of isolation. The coaches were selected based on their teaching experience. The mentors were selected by their peers because they were seen as influential and socially connected. The mentor was vital to helping the beginning teacher establish social relationships that are the founda- tion of teacher retention. The coaches, mentors, and PLCs helped the beginning teachers realize that there are multiple pathways to teaching effectiveness. Any beginning teacher support program should be adapted to the individual teacher’s context and not be overly burdensome. For example, the beginning teachers in Shernoff’s program found it difficult to complete fidelity checklists after each weekly coaching contact. However, they were able to complete fidelity checks once a month.

Professional learning communities

Professional learning communities (PLCs) are groups of educators who meet routinely to iden- tify and scale up instructional practices that are deemed effective based on student data, observa- tion, and reflection. PLCs may employ a variety of structures and processes. For example, a PLC may be formed based on sharing the same grade-level or content area. PLCs may be developed to support beginning teachers or teachers whose students perform below expectations on the state test or universal screeners. A PLC could be a group of like-minded educators who want to improve their teaching. PLC participants can include general and special education teachers as well as support staff and administrators. A defining feature of a PLC is engagement in a continu- ous improvement cycle. Thus, participants examine student data to identify groups of students or specific learning outcomes to target for improvement.

Kevin Feldman (2013) wrote that “to significantly improve teacher instruction, the PLC process must move beyond simply talking about various forms of student data, brainstorming possible teaching strategies and the like to concretely demonstrating/observing/modeling the actual teaching that is producing the data being discussed.” Accordingly, PLCs may use video- recorded or live observations of its members engaged in teaching. Feldman (2011) describes the Learning Walk, in which the PLC team uses a structured observation form to note effective teacher practices and strategies in need of improvement, debriefs immediately after the obser- vation with the teacher, and then engages in a longer reflection at the end of the day. The Learning Walk discussions begin with affirmations and validations of the teacher’s practices followed by nonjudgmental questions (e.g., I wonder what would have happen if . . . ?) and concludes with a few goals for the teacher to work toward. A facilitator can maintain a clear focus on students’ observable responses to instruction while (ideally) conveying sensitivity and trustworthiness. Understandably, a teacher may be reluctant to put himself before the scrutiny of his peers. However, building a culture of trust and continuous improvement, in which all staff members engage in shared inquiry and problem solving for the benefit of the students,

34 Chapter 2 • Consultation Models and Professional Practices

facilitates implementation of Learning Walks. One way to foster teachers’ willingness to par- ticipate in Learning Walks may be to begin with modeling lessons or discussing students’ work in the PLC. By delivering, not just describing, a lesson to her peers, a teacher may find the feedback helpful and nonthreatening (Feldman, 2013).

collaborating with Paraprofessionals

The No Child Left Behind Act defines a paraprofessional as a school setting employee “under the supervision of a certified or licensed teacher” in a variety of learning environments. This vague designation encompasses well over 1 million individuals who take on a variety of classroom responsibilities, including instructional support, clerical assistance, student super- vision, tutoring, managing classroom materials, and providing accommodations to students with disabilities in general education classrooms (Ashbaker & Morgan, 2013). Names for these professionals can vary from place to place, such as teacher aide, instructional assistant, or teaching assistant, but the responsibilities are analogous. Ashbaker and Morgan note that, while teachers and paraprofessionals collaborate in the education of students, teachers have more training and responsibilities, including the responsibility to supervise the paraprofes- sional. In some instances, role confusion occurs and the paraprofessional undertakes the teacher’s responsibilities to communicate with parents and plan instruction. This is most likely to occur when paraprofessionals are assigned to assist one student (i.e., one-on-one; Giangreco, Suter, & Doyle, 2010). Clear communication between teachers and their assigned paraprofes- sional enhances the efficiency of their collaborations, as well as their satisfaction with the working arrangement. The job duties for paraprofessionals vary; thus, it is important for the teacher to set the tone for the working relationship by clearly communicating expectations, and the paraprofessional should seek out mentoring and training opportunities in the absence of clear supervision.

Paraprofessionals, like all other staff members at a school, are a valuable resource. They can be an integral part of an MTSS by assisting with universal screening, circulating praise or tokens to students who are on-task during whole-group and independent seatwork, and pro- viding targeted instruction in small group. Paraprofessionals are often underutilized or used inappropriately due to lack of training, high turnover, educators who undervalue their potential contributions, and educators who do not know how to supervise paraprofessionals effectively (Giangreco et al., 2010). For example, a paraprofessional might be relegated to exclusively mak- ing copies and posting artwork on the bulletin board. Some of the following strategies can be used to support paraprofessionals and reduce turnover:

1. Acknowledge their contributions. 2. Ask them about their ideas for improving the classroom or a student’s performance, and

really listen to them. 3. Provide written plans for their daily or weekly activities. 4. Set aside some uninterrupted time to consult about the plans and how things are going. 5. Provide ongoing professional training. 6. Entrust them with important activities (small-group or one-on-one instruction) once suffi-

cient training has been provided. 7. Discuss their career goals with them; many paraprofessionals have the potential to become

wonderful teachers, school psychologists, or counselors if the career path could be made more tangible.

8. Advocate for them to get livable wages and benefits.

coteaching for inclusion

For many years, the special education resource specialist in the public schools was expected to set up a classroom designed to provide special education services on a pull-out basis. Students would leave their general education classrooms for part of their school day to be given special assistance in these resource rooms. Over the past 20 years or so, this model has changed from an emphasis on pull-out to one that emphasizes inclusion and push-in, in which the resource specialist teacher provides specialized assistance to students and consults with general educa- tion teachers about modifications and accommodations for students with disabilities, as well as

Chapter 2 • Consultation Models and Professional Practices 35

others, and even coteaches the class. Similarly, special education students, who would tradi- tionally be educated in a self-contained classroom of all special education students, are being included more and more often in general education, often with the support of their special education teacher. Coteaching, which occurs most frequently between special and general edu- cators, is an excellent opportunity to provide teachers with a colleague with whom to reflect and problem-solve.

Coteaching can take many different forms. The most common is called the one teach, one assist model in which the general education teacher provides whole-group instruction while the special education teacher circulates through the room redirecting students’ atten- tion and offering assistance (Solis, Vaughn, Swanson, & McCulley, 2012). A limitation of this model is that the special education teacher is relegated to the position of an aide, which doesn’t take full advantage of his skills and expertise. Other, more equitable models include forming two homogeneous or heterogeneous groups to be taught by each teacher, setting up centers, and coteaching a whole class. Researchers have consistently found students with and without disabilities to benefit socially from inclusion supported by coteaching (Scruggs, Mastropieri, & McDuffie, 2007; Solis et al., 2012). However, the impact on student achieve- ment is less certain. Coteaching models that emphasize explicit instruction, formative assessment, and individualized instruction on basic skills appear to produce the best results (Solis et al., 2012).

Effective and accepted coteaching requires considerable collaboration. Prior to engag- ing in coteaching, the teachers should discuss their expectations, roles, goals, and demands of the setting (Solis et al., 2012). As illustrated in the video at https://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=_pnxst7dkLk, the relationship between the two teachers is paramount to the suc- cess of the coteaching experience. As the teachers in the video suggest, coteaching requires ongoing negotiating and planning. One of the most common complaints about coteaching is not having enough time to plan (Solis et al., 2012). School consultants can help coteachers find the time to plan by taking over their class for an hour a week. School consultants can facilitate the planning and negotiating by offering structure to the discussion (i.e., problem- solving process), emphasizing interpersonal skills that promote coteaching (e.g., active lis- tening, acceptance, assertiveness, willingness to take feedback), and helping to gather needed resources.

Meyers, Gelzheiser, and Yelich (1991) compared the quality and quantity of consultation between resource specialists and general education teachers in pull-out and inclusion programs. They found consultation in the inclusion program to occur more frequently and to be more focused on instructional issues such as lesson planning, and they found the pull-out consultation to focus more on individual student progress and need. The general education teachers in the inclusion program learned more instructional strategies from the consultation than those in the traditional pull-out program.

individualized education Program team

A student’s special and general education teachers are required to meet with the student’s parents and related support staff members at least once per year to discuss the student’s progress and set goals for the upcoming year. Individualized education program (IEP) teams must determine the level of support the student will require to meet these goals, including specific instructional, cur- ricular, and/or testing accommodations (Bolt & Roach, 2009). For a good overview of IEPs, see the short video at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QMctXPmG7bc&list=PLnLrBBRID LZyx7QcNivdXGlUaAdCeWRrv.

Typically the case manager for the student, often a special education teacher, acts as the consultant by arranging and facilitating the IEP meeting. The overall goal of the IEP team is to ensure that the student with a disability is provided a free and appropriate public education (FAPE) in the least restricted environment (LRE). Clearly, these are rather broad terms, and team members may not always agree that the IEP meets these federal mandates. Contention can arise about whether a student qualifies for special education, whether a student is receiving suf- ficient services and supports, and the extent to which the student participates in general educa- tion programs. To qualify, a student must (a) meet one of 13 disability categories and (b) need special education services to access general education curriculum and instruction, and (c) the

36 Chapter 2 • Consultation Models and Professional Practices

identified disability cannot be due cultural or language differences, poor instruction, or exces- sive absences (i.e., these are exclusionary categories). The emphasis on need is due to a common misunderstanding that if a child meets the definition of a disability, such as demonstrating a cognitive/achievement discrepancy or having a medical diagnosis of ADHD, the child auto- matically qualifies for special education. If there is evidence that a student is relatively success- ful in the general education curriculum, such as average or above average grades, state test scores, and so on, the school does not need to assess for special education. The consultant should be sure to examine multiple indicators of the student’s functioning, including interview- ing the person who made the referral to special education, before determining whether testing is necessary. Parents and teachers may make inappropriate referrals for special education services because they are unaware of other sources of support or they have an exaggerated view of the student’s problems. The consultant should always respond to a referral from a collaborative problem-solving approach.

IEP teams also require considerable consultation skills because many different peo- ple from different disciplines may be involved. Depending on the student’s needs, speech and language therapists, occupational therapists, physical therapists, nurses, administra- tors, vocational rehabilitation workers, counselors, school psychologists, assistive technol- ogy experts, and/or transition specialists, in addition to the student, his family, and his teachers, can be involved. Scheduling is one of the challenges to collaborating with so many different specialists to provide the best program. The case manager should balance the needs for these services with the disruption they may have on the student’s schedule. The case manager should also consider if the skills and knowledge of some of the special- ists are being underutilized. The IRIS Center at Vanderbilt University has prepared some online modules on working with nurses, assistive technology specialists, and counselors to provide quality programming to students with disabilities. Consultants should stay focused on developing an IEP that enhances the educational outcomes of the student and meets all legal due process mandates.

At least once every three years, the students’ special education program must be reex- amined to determine whether the program is working and to plan for the future. Whether the student continues to qualify for special education is a focus of the triennial only in the event that members of the team suspect that the student either no longer needs the services or additional services are required to sustain progress (National Association of School Psychologists, 2004). However, it is common, though unnecessary, to administer a battery of tests to reestablish the existence of a disability for special education qualification. Data from multiple sources, gathered through a variety of methods, should be considered in these triennial evaluations.

tRAnsition PlAnning teAMs Since 1990, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) has required IEP teams to engage in transition planning for students with disabilities over the age of 15 to prepare them for adulthood. Thus, the IEP team not only discusses what programs, services, and accommodations a student needs for the next year, they also discuss how these services should be implemented in order to meet the students’ future goals. Transition planning should occur in the following areas, if needed: postsecondary education, vocational train- ing, integrated employment, housing, community participation, and recreation/leisure. Transition planning is complex, not just because of the multitude of contexts and develop- mental changes to be consider but because of the variety of professionals involved. Transition planning requires sharing information, joint planning within and across agencies, and respecting each person’s roles (Michaels & Lopez, 2005). Collaborative consultation skills, such as active listening, outcomes-oriented discussions, valuing other’s perspec- tives, effective communication, and follow-through, are essential to effective transition planning. Michaels and Ferrera (2005) suggest employing person-centered planning (PCP), which promotes student and family involvement and self-determination, to have more collaboration in transition planning. PCPs and family-centered planning are described in more detail in Chapter 10.

Chapter 2 • Consultation Models and Professional Practices 37

student study teams

The student study team (SST) is essentially a general education (Tier 2) procedure to assist stu- dents in solving academic and behavior problems that arise even with good instruction and class- room management (Burns, Wiley, & Viglietta, 2008; Safran & Safran, 1996). Within an MTSS, an SST would be held after universal interventions have been attempted and failed.

Activity 2.12

Consultation can be very formal (e.g., IEP that involves legal counsel) or informal (e.g., a quick hallway discussion with a colleague

between passing periods). Discuss some of the pros and cons to both formal and informal consultation.

sst MeMBeRs The members of an SST are usually consists the referring teacher; general and special education teachers; administrators; support service providers (school counselor, school psychologists, nurse, etc.); the parents; and, in some cases, the student. Because of a long-standing tendency to view the SST meeting as a procedural necessity to qualify a student for special education ser- vices, it may be wise to limit special education staff involvement until the purpose of the team is clearly established as being to develop interventions, not to begin the special education eligibility process (Powers, 2001). Given the large caseloads of many support service providers, it is sug- gested that specialists attend only when the referral relates to their particular area of expertise. Thus, the nurse would attend SSTs only when there is a health concern, and the speech patholo- gist would assist when a language or articulation problem appears evident. Of course, any of the support service providers should attend and perhaps even facilitate the SST if they have expertise in problem-solving consultation. For secondary students with multiple teachers, it is not always necessary to have all six or eight teachers attend. Rather, it might be more efficient to gather information from all the teachers in the form of a progress report and then invite the teachers who have the most and least success with the student to the meeting. This way, the teachers who have experienced some success can share strategies with the teacher(s) who is(are) struggling to meet the student’s needs. Parental participation in the SST is essential. Parents can provide informa- tion that no one else can provide about the student. They can also be part of the interventions. To increase parental participation, the school consultant can contact the parents by phone or e-mail to prepare them for the meeting by explaining the purpose of the meeting and what it will look like. One school prepared a video and posted it on video for parents to watch (see https:// www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z5tjAFtQreQ). We found that having the teacher, rather than the consultant, make the initial contact by inviting the parents to the SST was associated with improved parental attendance at the SST (Powers, 2001).

The makeup of an SST varies considerably across districts, as do the power relationships of members. Designated school consultants need to study the dynamics of these teams (as well as IEP teams) to be as effective as possible. The SST member roles include a facilitator or leader (who may or may not be a school administrator), a recorder (someone assigned to keep notes on the procedures), the referring teacher(s), and a timekeeper. A survey of SST members across Ohio found that school psychologists (24%) led the team most often, followed by the principal (18%) and a rotating chair (14%; McNamara, Rashee, & Delamatre, 2008).

PuRPose of the student study teAM SSTs are defined differently throughout the country. There is no one format or approach that defines the activities of these teams. Indeed, they can have different approaches and styles in different schools within a district. What they do share is a common philosophy and common purposes: to work together to solve learning and behavior/adjustment problems of students, and to try to solve these problems within the context of general education. SSTs have general educa- tion functions and are intended primarily to be sources of assistance for general education teach- ers. The SSTs should have at least the following goals:

38 Chapter 2 • Consultation Models and Professional Practices

1. Help students at risk for school failure and their teachers by providing alternatives in terms of teaching and behavior management strategies.

2. Curb learning and behavioral problems and unnecessary placement in special education. 3. Operationalize and prioritize the target behavior, including measuring baseline (preinter-

vention levels), and set a goal for short-term (6 to 8 weeks) improvement. 4. Redirect resources through teamwork and brainstorming to apply evidence-based interven-

tions and to monitor progress toward the goal. 5. From an administrative standpoint, provide a method for tracking cases, coordinating

services, collecting treatment fidelity, and meeting again to determine the outcome.

To meet these goals, the SST usually meets on a weekly basis for about 25 minutes (longer if translation to a second language is needed). Students referred to SST, either prior to or following referral to a school-based consultant, are considered to have achievement or social-personal-behavioral issues that are serious enough to prompt the teacher to seek assistance from others. The purpose of the SST is to review the teacher’s or parent’s con- cerns about a student, to study the classroom or wider school issues associated with the student’s difficulties, and to recommend specific interventions designed to ameliorate the difficulties. Ideally, the SST will follow the problem-solving consultation steps detailed in Chapter 3. Only after a serious effort is made to deal with the problems at the general edu- cation classroom level, including robust, targeted, and monitored interventions, should the SST consider a referral for assessment for possible special education consideration. Within an MTSS service delivery model, students are referred to the SST only after universal interventions, including high-quality and differentiated instruction, have failed to produce the desired results.

School consultants need to be aware of the dynamics of multidisciplinary teams in the schools. Most teams take their job seriously and try to develop interventions that are appropri- ate for the general education setting. Sometimes team members have agendas that, for various reasons, may not be in the best interest of the referred student. Part of the consultant’s job is to keep the meeting focused on the relevant facts and the available data by following the problem- solving consultation process. Kovaleski, Gickling, Morrow, and Swank (1999) found SSTs that failed to implement the problem-solving practices fully were no more successful at increasing students’ academic learning time than schools that had no such team in place; conversely, teams that fully engaged in the instructional-consultation-team model produced significantly greater effects in terms of student academic learning time. In some schools, there may be a feeling that if the teacher has referred a student, that is reason enough to go immediately to the assessment for special education phase. If this happens, the case takes on a whole new perspec- tive: Does the student have a disability that meets federal and state criteria? Unfortunately, this new emphasis may detract from the efforts of educators to continue to assist the student in general education. Because students who are assessed for special education and related services are usually found to be eligible for such services (Ysseldyke, Vanderwood, & Shriner, 1997), some teachers may assume that a student will soon be receiving special education services once a referral for assessment is made and may discontinue general education interventions for that student.

Despite the best intentions, a plan developed by the SST will fail on occasion. The SST needs to determine whether to revise and retry an intervention package or to refer the student for a special education assessment. The SST will need to consider whether the interventions were sufficiently robust and intense to suggest general education alone cannot meet the student’s needs. In the case of academic deficits, these modifications should include providing supplemental instruction that is more targeted (focused on a narrow set of specific skills) and explicit (teacher- centered), and in a smaller grouping (to allow for higher response rate and corrective feedback), than is common instructional or classroom management practices. Documentation should include the frequency and duration of this supplemental instruction as well as how well it adhered to a plan based on the student’s individualized needs and evidence-based practices (i.e., intervention integrity). The student’s response in terms of progress-monitoring data should be analyzed. These and other concepts are discussed in detail in Chapter 3. When a teacher or par- ent makes a referral to the SST, what he or she typically really wants is assistance so that he or she can keep the student in the general education program. In fact, a survey of 123 educators

Chapter 2 • Consultation Models and Professional Practices 39

found that over 60% do not expect the outcome of an SST to be referral to special education (Lee-Tarver, 2006).

The essential purpose of an SST is to do group problem solving. This implies that the members of the group agree, at least to some extent, on the nature of the problem, the kinds of data that are needed to understand the problem, and how to develop appropriate interventions. Just how any SST goes about this is a function of the style of the formal or informal group leader. The formal leader is often an administrator or a designee. An informal leader may be appointed or may simply emerge based on a variety of factors. Sometimes, one of the student’s parents may emerge as the informal SST leader by virtue of her or his forceful personality. Although school personnel are always nominally in charge, a parent may be the person who most strongly influences whatever decisions are made. In any event, the group leader may find that the process bogs down for a variety of reasons, such as disagreement about the nature of the problem, what should be done about it, or the role of the regular educator in the interven- tion process.

Meyers, Valentino, Meyers, Boretti, and Brent (1996) found that SSTs vary consider- ably in their approach to group problem solving. There are no federal government require- ments or guidelines for the conduct of these meetings, so each state is allowed to implement its use as it sees fit. Some states have no regulations or guidelines; hence, implementation becomes a local district or area issue, which obviously leads to diversity in processes, goals, and outcomes. Three potential areas of difference across teams are their varied perspectives about seeing problems as student deficits (focus on presumed intra-child weaknesses) or student assets (focus on student strengths), teacher skills (focus on how the teacher can bring his skills to bear on concerns about a referred student) or teacher deficits (focus on subtle or serious mistakes the teacher is making), and student needs (focus on one student at a time) or system needs (focus on how a whole school or district can change its approaches). Influential groups such as the National Association of State Directors of Special Education (2005) and the National Association of School Psychologists (2009) have explained essential components to response to intervention (RtI)/MTSS that can guide and somewhat standardize the SST process. For example, the National Association of State Directors of Special Education (NASDE) and the National Association of School Psychologists (NASP), as well as other organizations, suggest that SSTs function as prob- lem-solving teams by (a) defining the problem, (b) analyzing the problem, (c) developing and implementing a plan, and (d) evaluating whether the plan worked. In fact, most SST models that have empirical support, including the IC teams described previously, rely to some extent on engaging in problem-solving consultation.

sst stRAtegies Several strategies, many of which are used extensively in business, can be used in group prob- lem solving. Brainstorming, or divergent thinking, allows the free development and expres- sion of ideas in order to develop creative solutions. Some school personnel may be uncomfortable with brainstorming if it seems to be taking participants too far afield or con- suming precious time. For those wishing to try brainstorming, Parsons and Meyers (1984) suggest following some explicit steps to ensure that the process does not deteriorate into chaos. First, clarify and agree on the general topic. Second, establish a time limit; they recom- mend 5 minutes. Third, try a warm-up activity, possibly brainstorming about an irrelevant topic or deliberately coming up with ridiculous ideas. Fourth, have the consultant act as recorder. Fifth, have participants list ideas: Censor nothing; record them all. Sixth, after the time limit has elapsed, evaluate, clarify, and elaborate on ideas. If a group seems reluctant to participate in brainstorming out loud, they may feel more comfortable writing their ideas on cards, not signing the cards, and then having all the ideas read and recorded without reference to the ideas’ originators. People who haven’t tried brainstorming are often amazed at the results and are often eager to try it again.

Exploring alternate explanations is the attempt to view a problem from a completely different perspective. Attempts to fix a problem often fail because the root of the problem is mis- understood. For example, it is common to conceptualize a student’s acting-out behavior as atten- tion seeking and lack of achievement motivation, when the actual cause may be that the work is too difficult. In general, educators tend to focus more on the consequences (seeking attention)

40 Chapter 2 • Consultation Models and Professional Practices

rather than the antecedents (difficult task). So it is a productive endeavor for the members of the team to try to reconceptualize the problem in a new way.

Intervention resources are readily available from Web sites like Intervention Central and books such as Burns, Riley-Tillman, and VanDerHeyden’s (2012) RTI Applications: Academic and Behavioral Interventions. Academic and behavioral interventions are also described in Chapters 6 and 7 of this book and in the case studies in Chapter 10. There is no need to re-create the wheel when it comes to designing interventions. However, just because an intervention appears in a book or Web site does not necessarily mean has been scientifically tested. The What Works Clearinghouse is a good resource for examining whether an intervention is empirically supported. Keep in mind, however, that an intervention that is empirically supported may not work for a particular student or context. Thus, it is critically important that the intervention fidel- ity and the student’s response to the intervention be closely monitored. A different, empirically supported intervention should be attempted if the original intervention package was either not implemented or ineffective.

Districts and local educational agencies have developed myriad forms for SSTs to use to keep track of the referrals, proceedings, data, and plans that the SSTs discuss or develop. Figure 2.1 gives an example of one such referral form. Figure 2.2 is a form used for organizing the initial and follow-up SST meetings. It delineates the major areas to be discussed by a team, as does the agenda in Figure 2.3, which discusses problem-solving consultation.

After the team meets and discusses the areas listed in Figures 2.2 and 2.3, and action is taken, the team meets again on the date listed as the follow-up date unless some contingency sug- gests the need for an earlier meeting. Note that it is extremely important to reconvene to deter- mine whether the interventions were implemented as planned and their effects. During the initial meeting, team members may make overly heroic offers of help, only to find later that they cannot follow through. If the integrity of the intervention is not assessed and documented at the follow- up meeting, someone in the future may erroneously assume the student failed to respond to a rigorous intervention that was, in fact, never implemented. At the next and subsequent meetings, the team again discusses the target student, discussing how well the interventions were imple- mented and comparing the student’s current performance to the baseline data. The SST then makes a data-based decision to modify, continue, or discontinue the interventions. If the inter- vention has failed or it required considerably more resources than could be sustained in general education, the team may elect to pursue a different, more intense intervention, such as special or alternative education.

A copy of each form containing the information gathered and decisions made should be sent to each participant and all others mentioned on the forms, and always including the student’s parents. In the interests of economy, a single copy of the forms intended for use by all involved school personnel may be kept in a confidential place within the school. School personnel will be informed of this procedure. Obviously, whoever is the recorder will need to be given time to put his notes in good order for appropriate distribution. The recorder may also consider using a lap- top and projector while compiling the notes in order to allow the entire team to see the notes as the meeting progresses.

Student: Date: Referring teacher:

Age: Grade: Parent(s):

Reason for referral:

Specific definition of the target behavior(s), including frequency, accuracy, or duration:

Brief history (family, health, school):

Student assets or strengths:

Interventions tried, with results to date:

Questions to be answered:

Possible solutions (include resources needed, personnel involved, time commitment, locations of services, timelines):

figuRe 2.1 SST initial referral form

Chapter 2 • Consultation Models and Professional Practices 41

PROBLEM-SOLVING INTERVENTION SUMMARY Initial Date _______

Page 1 Meeting Number _______

Student: ____________________________ Grade: ____________________________

TEAM MEMBERS:

Student strengths:

Identify the most significant concern (be very specific):

Current level of performance (frequency, accuracy, or duration):

INTERVENTION PLAN: Start date: ___________

Acceptable level of performance (long-term goal):

Intervention goal:

figuRe 2.2 Problem-solving intervention summary form

Who will implement plan? Method to measure performance:

Who will consult/assess intervention fidelity? Who will measure performance?

How often? How often?

Follow-up date: _______________

42 Chapter 2 • Consultation Models and Professional Practices

PROBLEM-SOLVING INTERVENTION SUMMARY

Page 2

figuRe 2.2 (Continued)

Intervention goal:

Student: ___________________________

Intervention 1: Person(s) who will im plement:

Outcome:

New action:

Intervention 2: Person(s) who will implement:

Outcome:

New action:

Intervention 3: Person(s) who will implement:

Outcome:

New action:

Current level of performance: Intervention integrity:

Goal met? Y N The discrepancy between student performance and the intervention goal was:

_____ reduced ______ maintained ______ increased

Decision: Discontinue, goal achieved ❒

Continue intervention ❒ Follow-up date: _________

Modify intervention ❒ Follow-up date: _________

Refer to special education ❒

Refer to other program ❒

Develop 504 plan ❒

Chapter 2 • Consultation Models and Professional Practices 43

figuRe 2.3 SST agenda

Introduction: Purpose of meeting, roles (3 minutes).

Problem identification: Strengths, concerns, current and past performance, prioritize, define baseline, set intervention goal (7 minutes).

Problem analysis: Why does it happen (5 minutes)?

Plan intervention: Who, what, where, how for intervention, progress monitoring, consultation and intervention integrity assessment (10 minutes).

Close: Set follow-up date and reiterate how important the work is to the success of the student (2 minutes).

the iMPoRtAnce of stRuctuRe SST members have generally come to understand the need for providing a good deal of struc- ture in these team meetings. Poorly organized meetings tend to be inefficient and unproduc- tive; busy teachers and others resent having to attend them. Elements of structure include having a set schedule for when the team will be meeting and who will be on it, with at least a week’s notice given to expected attendees, along with the names of the students to be dis- cussed. At least a week is needed to inform parents so that they can make arrangements if they plan to attend. In addition, the referring teacher and others who have information to contribute need time to prepare themselves and gather relevant data. Conversely, SSTs should not allow too much time to lapse between the referral and the team’s or team member’s response. If the SST’s schedule is full, a team member may be dispatched to consult with the referring teacher or parent to begin the problem-solving process and offer some relief until the meeting can be scheduled.

It is highly recommended that the referral process and scheduling be conducted in as transparent a manner as possible. In some schools, the SST coordinator acts as a gatekeeper by picking and choosing which students to bring before the SST. This approach is not recom- mended because it can give the SST a reputation of being arbitrary and capricious and thus breed hostility among your colleagues. Rather, an open schedule whereby anyone can sign up for an available time slot allows your colleagues to feel that they have equal access to the SST. If one teacher is referring too many students, someone from the team may want to consult with him individually to provide some core instructional support, such as improving his classroom management skills.

Consideration needs to be given to how long the team will meet and how much time will be devoted to each student. Although it is possible to spend 1 full hour on one student, this is rarely necessary. By displaying an agenda with time limits, like the one in Figure 2.3, and designating a timekeeper to move the discussion along, the SST can move through the problem-solving stages efficiently and avoid getting bogged down in the problem iden- tification phase. Spending more than a few minutes on problem identification places the team at risk for getting stuck in admiring, rather than solving, the problem. A suggested length for the SST is between 25 and 35 minutes, or 50 to 70 minutes if the SST is being translated into a language other than English to accommodate the parents. Devoting less than 25 minutes to problem solving on behalf of a student who has failed to respond to universal interventions is unlikely to result in systematic and collaborative interventions (Powers, 2001). Conversely, holding lengthy meetings is likely to decrease the team’s future agility in responding to a failed plan because members become less willing to con- tinue to problem-solve a case in which they have already devoted extensive time (Sprick, 1999). It may be unduly rigid to impose time limits because some students have a much more involved history and present with many more challenges than do others. Different teachers may have tried many interesting interventions before coming to SST, and these take time to be discussed. The development of plans in some cases is more involved than it is in others. All of these reasons, in addition to not wanting to rush parents who probably are not used to such a structured situation, suggest some flexibility may be beneficial. A

44 Chapter 2 • Consultation Models and Professional Practices

total time limit, however, is recommended to ensure that the SST can address all the stu- dents on the schedule. An example SST schedule for one day is presented in Figure 2.4.

A survey of 113 teachers from five schools found that teachers identify two keys to an effective SST: sufficient time to meet, and adequate number and sufficiently trained SST mem- bers (Yetter & Doll, 2007). SSTs that are task-focused, have suitable decorum (i.e., members arrive on time and stay for the entire length of the meeting), and avoid disenfranchising mem- bers through noncollaborative or antagonistic interactions or lack of follow-through were viewed by educators to be more acceptable and effective (McNamara et al., 2008). The behav- ioral dimensions and indicators of the IC team described by McKenna, Rosenfield, and Gravois (2009) and the SST self-study guide checklists provided by Powers (2001) and Burns et al. (2008) may be helpful resources for forming or improving upon an existing SST. Additional details about SSTs appear in Chapter 3, with the description of how the SST can contribute to MTSS through problem-solving consultation.

For October 12—Martin Luther King School

7:30—Sammy Wilson (initial meeting). Persill (teacher); Jordan (speech pathologist), and Kirsch (reading specialist); parent invited

8:00—Shawna Cutrell (follow-up number3).Zill (teacher); House (RSP teacher); parent invited

2:30—Bill Loftus (follow-up number 1). Simpson (teacher); Alverez (nurse); parent invited

figuRe 2.4 Sample SST schedule

Activity 2.13

Research the similarities and differences between a problem-solving SST and a prerefer- ral to special education SST. Which one is

intervention focused? Which one is within- child deficit focused? What are the advantages and disadvantages of both?

Roles, skills, and Activities of school-Based consultants

The primary role of a school-based consultant is to provide assistance to other school personnel and parents to improve a student’s learning and/or behavior. As previously indicated, this primary role requires skills in communication, interpersonal effectiveness, and problem solving. This section delineates additional roles of school-based consultants, the skills they need to be effective in these roles, and some of the numerous activities they engage in while carrying out these roles.

Roles The word roles refers to the perceived purposes or reasons for the existence of an activity. People are employed, generally, to engage in role-specific behavior, which is often spelled out in a job description provided to a prospective employee. Job descriptions for special education teachers, school counselors, and school psychologists often refer to consulta- tion as an expected role. In some states, this expectation is spelled out in laws or regula- tions. For example, in its Education Code, the state of California defines the role of resource teachers in part as the “ provision of consultation, resource information, and material regarding individuals with exceptional needs to their parents and to regular staff members” (California Education Code 30 EC 56362). It is important that consultants establish their roles with consultees so role confusion does not happen. Two possible role confusions are (a) the consultee assumes the consultant will step in an “fix the client,” possibly by removing the child from the classroom or providing some direct service like counseling or reading interventions; and (b) the consultee thinks the consultant will “fix the consultee” by acting as the consultee’s therapist. The consultant should ensure that the consultee understands her role by establishing goals, a timeline, and individual responsi- bilities for collaboration while maintaining professional boundaries (Jacob, Decker & Hartshorne, 2011).

Chapter 2 • Consultation Models and Professional Practices 45

The following are some of the services that have been found appropriate for school-based consultation:

1. Information delivery. The consultant gives consultees information, ideas, facts, and opinions, about students’ learning and behavior/adjustment problems. For example, consultants may provide an explanation, in practical terms; peer-assisted learning to improve academic engagement; review of methods of teaching sight vocabulary to students who are not profiting from whatever methods are currently being used; or assistance to a teacher in the development of a contingency contract.

2. Coordination/facilitation/coaching. The consultant develops collaborative ways of facilitating planning for targeted students. An example is organizing a structured meet- ing of the regular education teachers to discuss a targeted student and ways to differentiate instruction. Consultants need to think of themselves as habit-change coordinators—persons who recognize that, to change the behavior of targeted students, the adults who control antecedents, contingencies, and activities need to change the way they respond to these students. This involves changing the behaviors (habits) of the adults who provide direct services (teaching, parenting) to students. One way to change the consultee’s behavior may be to provide demonstration lessons in general or special education classrooms in an effort to show, for example, how to provide accommodations and modifications for students with disabilities and other at-risk students. Instructional coaching and professional learning communities (discussed at length in Chapter 10) have been found to change teachers’ behaviors. Likewise, treatment fidelity checks add a measure of accountability that can tip a teacher toward trying something new.

3. Indirect service provision. The school-based consultant acts indirectly in the ser- vice of students by working directly with teachers and parents, who in turn (for the most part) are the direct service providers to the students. The chapter-opening vignettes illustrate the need for this type of service. Although some part of the program developed for a student may involve direct services on the part of the consultant (such as counseling or specific skill development, or coteaching activities), it is generally understood that the primary service providers are the general or special education teacher, the parents, special- ist, or an outside agency.

4. Assessment. School-based consultants can conduct observations; review records; and interview the teacher, student, and parent to help define the problem. A good defini- tion of the target behavior is key to setting goals and measuring improvement (or lack of improvement), which in turn improves intervention effectiveness. It is difficult for a teacher to observe a student systematically while teaching. The consultant can assist with collecting baseline, progress, and treatment integrity data. A consultant’s primary interac- tion with the student may now be through observation, usually in the consultee’s class- room or on the playground, but his or her contributions to the student’s progress can be significant.

skills/knowledge To carry out the roles we have described, the school consultant needs to be skillful in a number of areas. Here is a sample of the skills crucial to the practice of school-based consultation:

1. Communication. Consultants spend much of their time simply talking and listening. Teachers, parents, bus drivers, administrators, and others need someone to talk to when they are unable to solve the puzzles created by students who aren’t being successful in school. Because this is such a key role for the consultant, there is an expanded discussion of communication skills in Chapter 4.

2. Problem solving. The consultant engages consultees in the process of problem defini- tion, analysis, plan implementation, and plan evaluation. He interprets and breaks down barriers, encourages participation in the collaborative problem-solving process, facilitates the develop- ment of plans, and monitors implementation of these activities. An expanded look at the process of problem solving through an MTSS appears in Chapter 3.

3. Knowledge of reliable, valid, and repeatable assessments and evidence-based inter- ventions. Closely related to facilitative problem solving is the expectation that the consultant will be able to assist with the actual development of an intervention plan, follow through with some

46 Chapter 2 • Consultation Models and Professional Practices

degree of implementation monitoring, and assist with ongoing evaluation of the intervention. Some of the skills used in these activities include the following:

• Prioritizing and defining the problem. • Evaluating factors contributing to the problem. • Interpreting data and analyzing the forces related to nonproductive student and teacher

behaviors. • Identifying relevant evidence-based interventions and reliable, valid, and repeatable

assessments. • Monitoring the implementation of these plans. • Evaluating the success of the plans.

4. Interpersonal effectiveness. A basic question that should be asked following an initial consultation session is “If I have met once with a consultee, will he or she want to meet with me again?” A large part of the answer is determined by the degree to which the consultant mani- fested the skills previously listed, in addition to her interpersonal skills. Because this set of skills is so important, we have given detailed attention to it in Chapter 4. The following is a brief list:

• Convincing people that consulting with them will be productive. • Negotiating an intervention plan through a nonhierarchical relationship. • Reinforcing both the consultees and the client’s effort. • Projecting a positive can-do attitude and celebrating success.

Activity 2.14

Discuss which of the above sets of skills are most important to the consultation process

and outcome. How do you develop and con- tinue to improve these skill sets?

Activities To describe how consultation actually appears, we provide the following sample of the major activities of consultants, many of which have been alluded to in the discussion of roles and skills:

Conducting interviews or facilitating discussions. This is the primary activity of consult- ants, and Chapter 4 devotes considerable space to it. Group-oriented interview procedures, such as those found in SST and IEP meetings, are discussed in this chapter and in Chapter 3.

Observing interactions. It is quite common for a consultant to provide a fresh perspective by observing a student or the interactions of a number of students, or classroom or play- ground dynamics. The observations may be informal or naturalistic, resulting in a general impression and possibly a narrative description of the ecological influences on the stu- dents’ learning. The observations may be more formal, such as counting the number of times a student produces an accurate academic response in 10 minutes. Problem-solving consultation requires some type of baseline (preintervention student functioning) by which the intervention goal and results are determined. Consultants’ observational data may be an important source of baseline data. These activities are discussed in Chapters 3 and 6 (for behavior-related issues) and Chapter 7 (for teaching-learning issues).

Reviewing records. Taking time to review a student’s records to determine what others have said and done on her behalf is essential. If you review the student’s records before meeting with a consultee, he will be favorably impressed by your diligence. Further, you can begin the problem-solving process by identifying from the records, or possi- bly by examining some of the student’s classwork, a couple of behaviors to target for intervention.

Coordinating services. Teachers are more likely to implement interventions if someone else figures out the schedule and gathers the material. Whenever there are more than two people involved in an intervention, someone must take charge of the process to see that all parties fulfill their roles. Otherwise, plans can go awry and confusion can develop. A con- sultant may be involved in face-to-face interactions, phone calls, faxes, e-mail, in-house memos, and so on.

Chapter 2 • Consultation Models and Professional Practices 47

Summary Two consultation traditions that are relatively well known and well respected (behavioral and mental health) are sum- marized in this chapter, as are other functional models, roles, skills, and activities used by consultants. The behavioral problem-solving model is the more common of the two tradi- tions and has a much stronger research base. We make numerous references to this model in the chapters that follow,

particularly in Chapter 3, where the problem-solving steps are described within a larger multi-tiered system of support (MTSS) service delivery model. Although the problem- solving model is currently dominant, the Caplans’ ideas ( contained in the mental health model), especially about con- sultee lacks, add another dimension to the dynamics of the consultation process.

Keeping accurate records. When a consultant meets with a teacher, a parent, or an administrator about a student, she should keep a written record of that interaction and provide a copy of it to the consultee or place it in a central location where others can see it, such as a running log of events that may be filed in the student’s school records. Consultation records document what has been discussed and planned and keep partici- pants aware of progress toward their goals. In complex cases especially, it is important to leave a paper trail attesting to everyone’s efforts. Special education due process hearings, mediations, and court cases are sometimes won or lost on the strength of a district’s docu- mentation of its efforts (Prasse, 2008). Forms for keeping accurate records are presented in Chapters 3 and 4.

Coordinating or presenting in-service staff development activities. Because this activity is so important and involves so much detail, a portion of Chapter 10 is devoted to it.

References Alberto, P. A., & Troutman, A. C. (2013). Applied behavioral

analysis for teachers. Boston, MA: Pearson. American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and

statistical manual of mental disorders (5th ed.). Washington, DC: Author.

Ashbaker, B. Y. & Morgan, J. (2013). Paraprofessionals in the classroom: A survival guide (2nd ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.

Axelrod, S., Moyer, L., & Berry, B. (1990). Why teachers do not use behavior modification procedures. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 1(4), 309–320.

Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Basham, A., Appleton, V., & Dykeman, C. (2000). Team building in education: A how-to guidebook. Denver, CO: Love.

Bergan, J. R. (1977). Behavioral consultation. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill/Pearson.

Bergan, J. R. (1995). Evolution of a problem-solving model of consultation. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 6(2), 11–124.

Bergan, J. R., & Kratochwill, T. R. (1990). Behavioral consulta- tion and therapy. New York, NY: Plenum Press.

Bolt, S., & Roach, A. (2009). Inclusive assessment and account- ability: A guide to accommodations for students with diverse needs. New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Bonner, M. (2005). Consultation: Ecobehavioral. In S. W. Lee (Ed.), Encyclopedia of school psychology (pp. 113–115). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Brennan, E. M., Bradley, J. R., Allen, M. D., & Perry, D. F. (2008). The evidence base for mental health consultation in early childhood settings: Research synthesis addressing staff

and program outcomes. Early Education and Development, 19, 982–1022.

Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development: Experiments by nature and design. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Bronfenbrenner, U. (1989). Ecological systems theory, Annals of Child Development, 6, 187–249.

Burns, M. K., Riley-Tillman, T. C., & VanDerHeyden, A. M. (2012). RTI applications: Academic and behavioral interven- tions. New York, NY: Guilford.

Burns, M. K., Wiley, H. I., & Viglietta, E. (2008). Best practices in implementing effective problem-solving teams. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology (5th ed., pp. 1633–1644). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.

Caplan, G. (1970). The theory and practice of mental health con- sultation. New York, NY: Basic Books.

Caplan, G., & Caplan, R. (1993). Mental health consultation and collaboration. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Caplan, G., Caplan, R., & Erchul, W. (1995). A contemporary view of mental health consultation: Comments on “types of men- tal health consultation” by Gerald Caplan (1963). Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 6(1), 23–30.

Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sci- ences. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Conoley, J. C., & Conoley, C. W. (1992). School consultation: A guide to practice and training (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill/Pearson.

Cramer, S. F. (1998). Collaboration. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon. DeBoer, A. (1995). Working together. Longmont, CO: Sopris West.

48 Chapter 2 • Consultation Models and Professional Practices

Erchul, W. P. (1993). Consultation in community, school, and organizational practice: Gerald Caplan’s contributions to professional psychology. Washington, DC: Taylor & Francis.

Erchul, W. P., & Martens B. K. (2010). School Consultation: Conceptual and empirical bases of practice. New York, NY: Springer.

Feldman, K. (2011). Learning the walk: The basic game plan. Unpublished manuscript.

Feldman, K. (2013). Structures and formats for instructional feedback: Connecting the “Talk to the Walk.” Unpublished man- uscript.

Garbacz, S. A., Woods, K. E., Swanger-Gagné, M. S., Taylor, A. M., Black, K. A., & Sheridan, S. M. (2008). The effectiveness of a partnership-centered approach in conjoint behavioral con- sultation. School Psychology Quarterly, 23, 313–326.

Giangreco, M. F., Suter, J. C., & Doyle, M. B. (2010). Paraprofessionals in inclusive schools: A review of recent research. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 20, 41–57.

Gutkin, T. B. (2012). Ecological psychology: Replacing the medical model paradigm for school-based psychological and psychoe- ducational services. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 22, 1–20.

Hagermoser Sanetti, L. M., & Kratochwill, T. R. (2008).Treatment integrity in behavioral consultation: Measurement, promotion, out- come. International Journal of Behavioral Consultation, 4, 95–114.

Jacob, S., Decker, D. M., & Hartshorne, T. S. (2011). Ethics and law for school psychologists (6th ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

Joftus, S., & Maddox-Dolan, B. (2002). New teacher excellence: Retaining our best. Washington, DC: Alliance of Educational Excellence.

Knotek, S., Kaniuka, M., & Ellingsen, K. (2009). Mental health con- sultation and consultee-centered approaches. In W. P. Erchul & S. M. Sheridan (Eds.), Handbook of research in school consultation (pp. 127–145). New York, NY: Routledge.

Kovaleski, J. F., Gickling, E. E., Morrow, H., & Swank, P. R. (1999). High versus low implementation of instructional support teams. Remedial and Special Education, 20(3), 170–183.

Kramer, J. J. (1990). Training parents as behavior change agents: Successes, failures and suggestions for school psychologists. In T. B. Gutkin & C. R. Reynolds (Eds.), Handbook of school psy- chology (2nd ed., pp. 685–702). New York, NY: Wiley.

Kratochwill, T. R., & Bergan, J. R. (1990). Behavioral consultation in applied settings: An individual guide. New York, NY: Plenum Press.

Lee-Tarver, A. (2006). A survey of teacher’s perceptions of the func- tion and purpose of student success teams. Education, 126(3), 525–533.

Lovo, P., Cavazos, L., & Simmons, D. (2006). From BTSA to induction: The changing role of school districts in teacher credentialing. Issues in Teacher Education, 15, 53–68.

Maeroff, G. I. (1993). Building teams to rebuild school. Phi Delta Kappan, 75, 512–519.

Martens, B. K., & DiGennaro, F. (2009). Behavioral consulta- tion. In W. P. Erchul & S. M. Sheridan (Eds.), Handbook of research in school consultation (pp. 147–170). New York, NY: Routledge.

McKenna, S. A., Rosenfield, S., & Gravois, T. A. (2009). Measuring the behavioral indicators of instructional consultation:A prelimi- nary validity study. School Psychology Review, 38, 496–509.

McNamara, K., Rashee, H., & Delamatre, J. (2008). A statewide study of school-based intervention teams: Characteristics,

member perceptions and outcomes. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 18, 5–30.

Meyers, J., Gelzheiser, L. M., & Yelich, G. (1991). Do pull-out programs foster teacher collaboration? Remedial and Special Education, 12, 7–15.

Meyers, B., Valentino, C. T., Meyers, J., Boretti, M., & Brent, D. (1996). Implementing prereferral intervention teams as an approach to school-based consultation in an urban school system. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 7, 119–149.

Michaels, C. A., & Ferrera, D. L. (2005). Promoting post-school success for all: The role of collaboration in person-centered transition planning. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 16, 287–313.

Michaels, C. A., & Lopez, E. C. (2005). Collaboration and consulta- tion in transition planning: Introduction to the mini-theme. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation 16, 255–261.

National Association of School Psychologists. (2004). Periodic reevaluations (Position statement). Bethesda, MD: Author.

National Association of School Psychologists. (2009). Appropriate behavioral, social and emotional supports to support the needs of all children. (Position Statement). Bethesda, MD: Author.

National Association of State Directors of Special Education. (2005). Response to intervention policy considerations and implementation. Alexandria, VA: Author.

Newman, D., Ingraham, C., & Shriberg, D. (2014). Consultee- centered consultation in contemporary schools. Communique, 42(6), 14–16.

Parsons, R. D., & Meyers, J. (1984). Developing consultation skills. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Powers, K. (2001). Problem solving student support teams. California School Psychologist, 6, 19–30.

Prasse, D. P. (2008). Best practices in school psychology and the law. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology (Vol. 6, pp. 1903–1920). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.

Rhode, G., & Jenson, W. R. (2010). The tough kid book: Practical strategies in classroom management (2nd ed). Eugene, OR: Pacific Northwest Publishing.

Rosenfield, S. A., Silva, A., & Gravois, T. A. (2009). Bringing instructional consultation to scale: Research and development of IC and IC teams. In W. P. Erchul & S. M. Sheridan (Eds.), Handbook of research in school consultation (pp. 203–223). New York, NY: Routledge.

Safran, S. P., & Safran, J. S. (1996). Intervention assistance programs and prereferral teams. Remedial and Special Education, 17(6), 363–369.

Sarason, S. B. (1990). The predictable failure of school reform: Can we change before it’s too late? San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Schloss, P., & Smith, M. (1998). Applied behavioral analysis. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

Scruggs, T. E., Mastropieri, M. A., & McDuffie, K. A. (2007). Co-teaching in inclusive classrooms: A metasynthesis of qualita- tive research. Exceptional Children, 73, 392–416.

Sheridan, S. M., Bovaird, J. A., Glover, T. A., Garbacz, S. A., Witte, A., & Kwon, K. (2012). Randomized trial examining the effects of conjoint behavioral consultation and the mediat- ing role of the parent-teacher relationship. School Psychology Review, 41, 23–46.

Sheridan, S. M., Clarke, B. L., & Burt, J. (2009). Conjoint behav- ioral consultation: What do we know and what do we need to

Chapter 2 • Consultation Models and Professional Practices 49

know? In W. P. Erchul & S. M. Sheridan (Eds.), Handbook of research in school consultation (pp. 171–202). New York, NY: Routledge.

Sheridan, S. M., & Kratochwill, T. R. (1992). Behavioral parent- teacher consultation: Conceptual and research considerations. Journal of School Psychology, 30, 117–139.

Shernoff, E. S., Mariñez-Lora, A. M., Frazier, S. L., Jakobsons, L. J., Atkins, M. S., & Bonner, D. (2011). Teachers supporting teachers in urban schools: What iterative research designs can teach us. School Psychology Review, 40, 465–485.

Solis, M., Vaughn, S., Swanson, E., & McCulley, L. (2012). Collaborative models of instruction: The empirical foundations of inclusion and co-teaching. Psychology in the Schools, 49, 498–510.

Sprick, R. (1999). The 25-minute planning process: A video pro- gram for teacher-to-teacher problem-solving. Longmont, CO: Sopris West.

Thomas, C. C., Correa, V. I., & Morsink, C. V. (1995). Interactive teaming: Consultation and collaboration in special programs. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

Ullmann, L., & Krasner, L. (1965). Case studies in behavior modifi- cation. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.

Yetter, G., & Doll, B. (2007). The impact of logistical resources on prereferral team acceptability. School Psychology Quarterly, 22, 340–357.

Ysseldyke, J., Lekwa, A. J., Klingbeil, D. A., & Cormier, D. C. (2012). Assessment of ecological factors as an integral part of academic and mental health consultation. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 22, 21–43.

Ysseldyke, J., Vanderwood, M., & Shriner, J. (1997). Changes over the past decade in special education referral to placement prob- ability: An incredibly reliable practice. Diagnostique, 23(1), 193–202.

Problem-Solving Consultation in a Multi- Tiered System of Support

Chapter 3

You are a special education teacher who has taken a strong interest in doing more consultation with members of the general education staff regarding both inclusion and underachieving stu- dents. You have read the material in the preceding chapters but aren’t yet sure what process or steps to follow. Is there a systematic way of proceeding in consultation, or should you let events dictate what steps you follow?

You have been hired as a response-to-intervention (RtI) specialist in a district that wants to provide a multi-tiered system of support (MTSS). The district has increased the amount of con- sultation that special education teachers and ancillary staff do, but staff members seem to be consulting, as the director of special services puts it, “by the seat of their pants.” The director wants you to teach them how to structure their consultations and intervention activities. What process should they follow?

Learning Outcomes

3.1 Describe in detail the sequential steps of the problem-solving consultation process.

3.2 Analyze problem-solving consultation at various levels in a multi-tiered system of support.

3.3 Understand the importance of treatment integrity and ways to assess and support consultation and intervention integrity.

Activity 3.1

Many of you reading this text have already engaged in some form of consultation activ- ity, either as a consultant or a consultee. Recall the steps or stages you went through

in the consultation process. Did they seem purposeful or random? Did you feel they made sense in light of the problem(s) you were trying to solve?

As these vignettes indicate, how you go about consulting with others may be even more impor- tant than the actual content of the consultative activities. In this chapter, we examine a highly structured approach known as problem-solving consultation, which includes all the important steps a consultant needs to consider for effective consultation to take place.

The problem-solving process that occurs in school consultation consists of the activities engaged in by both the consultant and the consultee(s) as they work together to solve achieve- ment or social/behavior problems or to improve teaching practices. In this chapter, we focus on how you conduct your work as an internal consultant, someone who is employed on a (usually) full-time basis by a district or other educational entity, and whose title is not ordinarily that of consultant but who is more likely to be a special education teacher, a school psychologist, a counselor, a mentor teacher, or an administrator. Almost all internal consultants have other

50

Chapter 3 • Problem-Solving Consultation in a Multi-Tiered System of Support 51

responsibilities (e.g., teaching, assessing, counseling, or engaging in administrative activities). Their consultation work has become an increasingly important part of what they do.

StepS to Follow in the ConSultation proCeSS

Numerous researchers in the consultation field have described the consultation process. Terms such as stages, steps, activities, and sequences of consultation have been used synonymously with the more generic term process.

The best-known set of steps—(1) problem identification, (2) problem analysis, (3) plan implementation, and (4) plan evaluation—was initially presented by Bergan (1977). These are the steps used in behavioral consultation and are associated most strongly with Bergan and Kratochwill (1990). There are many variations on the behavioral/problem-solving consultation model, but at its core, it is a results-oriented, data-driven, dynamic procedure with an established sequence of steps that is repeated until the desired outcomes are attained. These steps, listed in Figure 3.1, are described in detail next.

Figure 3.1 Problem-solving consultation steps and major activities

1. Problem identification

(a) Prioritize and identify target behavior.

(b) Define target behavior (frequency, accuracy, duration, intensity, latency) operationally, which may include discussion of what behaviors are and are not examples of the target behavior.

(c) Collect baseline data.

(d) Establish intervention and long-term goals.

2. Problem analysis

(a) Through functional observations and interviews (behavioral concern), examine possible antecedent and consequent events that maintain the behavior.

(b) Conduct brief experimental analysis to determine if the student has a performance or skills deficit and whether the student needs to learn (acquisition), practice (fluency), generalize (apply in a new setting), or maintain (use over time) the skills.

(c) Look for patterns in errors or behavioral disruptions.

(d) Generate a hypothesis about why the problem is occurring (which environmental demand[s] is[are] greater than what developing skill?).

3. Intervention development and implementation

(a) Brainstorm interventions that are related to the target behavior and are consistent with hypothesis.

(b) Select the interventions that are feasible, evidence-based, and indicated by the problem behavior.

(c) Delineate who will provide what intervention, and describe the intervention in enough detail to monitor, including what will occur, how often it will occur, and what resources are needed.

(d) Identify the method and person for conducting intervention integrity checks.

(e) Identify the method and person for collecting progress-monitoring data.

(f) Establish a date and a time for the follow-up meeting.

4. Intervention evaluation

(a) Examine intervention integrity data.

(b) Examine progress-monitoring data relative to the intervention goal.

(c) Apply a decision-making rule to determine whether to discontinue, continue, or modify the intervention.

(d) If necessary, schedule a follow-up meeting.

Activity 3.2

Recall what you have learned about the sci- entific method. Describe a science project you conducted where you tested different

hypotheses. How might the scientific method be applied to assisting students with behav- ioral or academic difficulties?

52 Chapter 3 • Problem-Solving Consultation in a Multi-Tiered System of Support

establish rapport

Before launching into the problem-solving process, you should identify the key stakeholders and establish rapport through methods described in Chapter 4, including getting stakeholders agree- ment to engage in collaborative problem-solving consultation. Sometimes consultants proceed to problem solving prematurely. For example, a teacher in the lunchroom sharing her story of a rough morning may need empathy more than problem solving, particularly at that moment. Cultural standards for interpersonal engagement may also necessitate spending more time on establishing rapport. For example, after the second author (Powers) held her first phone confer- ence with faculty members from five Vietnamese universities, a colleague, who is bilingual and bicultural, advised her to allow much more time for introductions, including descriptions of each person’s credentials, rank, and accomplishments, before proceeding to action items. Thus, a sensitive consultant is able to gauge how much time and how many interactions are required to establish a good working relationship with individual consultees.

problem identification

One of the most frequently cited references in the consultation literature is the Bergan and Kratochwill (1990) book that documents the significance of the problem identification stage of consultation. It is generally agreed that if this stage is successful, a positive outcome is more likely. Their study indicated that about 60% of the variance in plan implementation was accounted for by the effectiveness of problem identification. Poor problem identification results in chaos because the consultant and the consultee(s) are working on the wrong problem or two separate problems. This is not as unlikely as it may sound (Cleven & Gutkin, 1988). One reason that con- sultees may have difficulty specifying a problem is that the student has more than one deficit. Behavioral excesses and achievement deficits often coexist, and it is difficult to discern which one to target. In these cases, one option is to identify the problem as insufficient academic engagement because targeting academic engagement will address both behavioral and academic concerns. It is difficult to misbehave if one is doing one’s schoolwork because these behaviors are competing, or incompatible. For students with a myriad of problems, the consultant should assist the consultee in prioritizing which problem to target first. A shotgun approach to interven- tion is unlikely to work, so a teacher or parent will have to pick the one or two behaviors of gravest concern to him. Two teachers might select two different problems to target in the identi- cal student, but this situation is not problematic because it follows logically that allowing the consultee to identify the most pressing problem increases her commitment to the problem- solving process.

Once the target behavior is identified, it must be defined in observable and measurable terms. Developing this operational definition of the target behavior is essential to establishing intervention goals and monitoring the student’s response to the intervention. Some activities, like internal mental activities, cannot be observed, so they are difficult to measure. The overt mani- festation of internal processes, like feelings of aggression, can be measured (i.e., number of aggressive displays per day). The target behavior must be defined precisely, including, in some cases, identifying examples (striking another child with the intent of doing harm, taunting a child by name-calling or making unfavorable comparisons) and nonexamples (accidentally making contact with another child, playing a silly game with a peer). As this discussion shows, even when time and consideration are applied to defining the target behavior, determining whether it occurs in a specific instance is sometimes a judgment call. Generally, academic behaviors are easier to define; measures such as the number of words read correctly in a third-grade-level text or the number of correct vocabulary matches on a 30-item social studies test are easily determined.

Activity 3.3

Watch the video on rapport building at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v= QqjpgH4Z-0Q. Discuss how some of these

strategies have worked for you in the past. Are these strategies effective cross-culturally?

Chapter 3 • Problem-Solving Consultation in a Multi-Tiered System of Support 53

Figure 3.2 contains some dimensions of behavior to consider in defining the target behavior. Chapters 6 and 7 contain more information about how to develop an operational definition for an academic or behavior problem.

After defining the target behavior, preintervention (i.e., baseline) data on the frequency, accuracy, duration, intensity, and/or latency of the behavior are collected (see the definitions and examples of these terms in Figure 3.2). Ideally, baseline data are collected until there is little variation from one day to the next. However, this could take an unacceptably long time. The recommended practice is to collect three baseline data points on three different days and to use the median data point as the starting point from which to establish an intervention goal. For example, the median of 3 days of data collection found that a child engaged in aggressive behaviors, on average, nine times per day. In consultation with the teacher, the goal of engaging in aggressive behaviors only one time per day within 6 weeks of interven- tion was established, primarily because this would represent a notable improvement and because the teacher indicated she could tolerate one disruption per day. Establishing a “good” intervention goal is important for monitoring the effects of the intervention and for creating a situation where success can be celebrated, thereby reinforcing the work of the intervention- ists (that is, the teacher, parent, and/or specialist). Some qualities of “good” goals include the following:

• Observable—Internal processes, such as emotions, motivations, and even attention, are difficult to observe; therefore, it is difficult to record reliably whether they occurred or not. A consultant may need to assist the consultee in reconceptualizing internal processes in terms of their overt appearances.

• Measurable—In Chapters 6 and 7, we review existing measures of academic and soci- oemotional behaviors that lend themselves to establishing a baseline, setting goals, and monitoring progress. One caveat that consultants, even those who are well versed in good progress-monitoring tools, will encounter is aptly described in a quote attributed to Einstein: “Not everything that counts can be measured. Not everything that can be meas- ured counts.” Sometimes the consultant and consultee need to settle on targeting a behav- ior that is somehow less than the perceived problem because a psychometrically sound measurement system exists to monitor that behavior. However, behavior that can be meas- ured (but maybe isn’t the most pertinent behavior) is hoped to have a concomitant benefi- cial effect on those behaviors that can’t be measured easily.

• Attainable and Ambitious—Identifying a goal that reflects both of these qualities is at the heart of good goal setting and has implications for subsequent stages of problem-solving consultation. Clearly, a balance must be struck that considers typical growth, intensity of the intervention, and perceived effects of alterable conditions (versus unalterable ones like

Figure 3.2 Measureable dimensions of behavior for problem identification

Frequency is a measure of how often a behavior occurs; it can be recorded by an event- or time-sampling (momentary, partial, or whole interval) procedure. Some examples include percentage of time that the student is on task, the number of outbursts in a day, and words read correctly per minute (WRCPM).

Duration is the length of time a behavior occurs, such as the number of minutes that a student engaged in self-stimulation, the amount of time a student worked independently, and the number of minutes a child sustained eye contact with another person. Typically, duration is determined by the use of a stopwatch that is started and stopped throughout the day to measure the cumulative amount of time the student was engaged in the behavior (Skinner, Rhymer, & McDaniel, 2000).

Latency refers to the amount of time between a stimulus and a behavior, for example, the length of time it takes for a student to comply with a teacher’s request.

Intensity is strength or power of a behavior, such as how angry a student appears or how loud a classroom becomes. Typically the observer rates the intensity, and her judgments may become inconsistent over time (Skinner et al., 2000).

Accuracy is an indicator of how closely the behavior is approximating the desired result, for example, the percentage correct on a math fact quiz, the number of times a student complies with a request relative to the number of requests, or the number of discrete steps completed in a specific task.

54 Chapter 3 • Problem-Solving Consultation in a Multi-Tiered System of Support

a student’s birth history). Even one’s tendency toward optimism or pessimism may play into this discussion. Consultees may reference research on expected rate of progress and benchmarks that, if achieved, mean the student has a high probability of continued success (these rates and benchmarks are established for only a limited number of behaviors, e.g., oral reading fluency), or they may use national or local norms (Shapiro, 2011) to determine what might be both attainable and ambitious. Knowing where the student is starting from (i.e., baseline) is essential to striking a balance between attainable and ambitious.

• Meaningful—As noted above, a consultee may be more motivated to change his prac- tices if it will evoke a change that he very much desires in his student’s or child’s behavior. A famous quote by the financier Bernard Baruch—“If all you have is a ham- mer, everything looks like a nail”—applies to consultants who have an overly narrow repertoire of assessment and intervention strategies. For example, a consultant who is adept at measuring oral reading fluency should avoid the temptation of setting goals for every referral for intervention in terms of oral reading fluency. Conversely, a good understanding of the unique needs of the referred student will lead to more meaningful practices.

• Outcome—An outcome is not an intervention. Based on our years as consultants in the schools, particularly as members of student study teams (SSTs) and individualized education program (IEP) teams, we have frequently observed the common mistake of confusing intervention for outcome. For example, reading three decodable books per week is an intervention; reading at a rate of 32 correct words per minute is an outcome. Likewise, attending eight social skills sessions is an intervention; complying with 72% of requests is an outcome. If one considers the benefits of jogging 3 miles every week (followed by a high-caloric latte and chocolate chip scone) compared to losing 2 pounds a week, the distinction between intervention (jogging) and outcome (weight loss) is apparent.

Learning how to elicit information from consultees to clarify problems and to set appropriate intervention goals takes time and practice. These skills are essential to effective consultation and should not be taken for granted. Thus, it is recommended that inexperi- enced consultants seek feedback from more experienced consultants. A common mistake at the end of this step (other than incorrect problem identification) is to rush to solutions. Inexperienced consultants may feel pressured by the consultee’s desire for a quick solution to the problem. The consultee may expect the consultant to devise a plan for solving the problem before it has been well defined or analyzed. Even though most consultees would not expect nor want their physicians to apply quick solutions to a medical problem without some study of the problem, some of them expect school-based consultants to provide solu- tions on the basis of minimal information. Consultants have to guard against the problem of premature strategy selection while at the same time avoiding another common misstep in the problem identification phase—admiring the problem. It is tempting to get stuck in detailing all the bad deeds or deficiencies displayed by a student, but doing so reinforces the notion that the problem is inherent within the child and that the teachers and other adults have done all that is humanly possible to help that child. In fact, the longer the list of mis- deeds reviewed in the problem identification stage, the more intractable the problem begins to appears. Therefore, the consultant should limit the problem identification stage in time (10 minutes, with 20 to 30 minutes remaining for the next steps) and scope (discuss only conditions the team can address; prenatal exposure to drugs is unfortunate but there is noth- ing the team can do about it), and include a discussion about conditions in which the student does better.

problem analysis

In problem analysis, the consultant looks at the ecology of the student’s life and the classroom to gather information about the problem, possible sources of the problem, and the interrela- tionships within the context of classroom expectations. Following the reciprocal determinism ideas of Bandura (1978), which consist of an analysis of the relationships among the person, the behaviors of concern, and the environment, the consultant looks at the referred student’s

Chapter 3 • Problem-Solving Consultation in a Multi-Tiered System of Support 55

history and behavior as well as at the behavior of the teacher, the possible influence of the student’s parents, the classroom situation, the curriculum, sociocultural phenomena, and any other sources of influence that could be related to the behavior(s) of concern. The Functional Assessment of Academic Behaviors (FAAB) is one example of an ecological assessment sys- tem (Ysseldyke & Christenson, 2002). The goal of ecological assessment is to further define the problem in terms of a gap between the student’s developing capabilities and the demands of the environment. Once the discrepancy between what is expected and what is observed is defined, problem analysis is applied to identify the conditions that cause and maintain this discrepancy (Christ, 2008). To identify the cause and potential solution to the problem, logical hypotheses are generated, and they are either confirmed or rejected based on the ecological data. More information on problem analyses for academic and behavioral problems is presented in Chapters 6 and 7.

Using the scientific method, the consultant and consultee generate hypotheses such as (a) the student is reinforced by peer attention when he fights, (b) the student misinterprets neu- tral interactions with peers as hostile, and/or (c) the student lacks age-appropriate coping skills to deal with frustration. Then each hypothesis is evaluated. Whenever possible, the hypotheses should actually be tested through short-run empiricism in which each hypothesis is systemati- cally and sequentially examined by altering the appropriate conditions. One way to test differ- ent hypotheses is analog assessment, in which situations are simulated through role plays or enactments (Hintze, Stoner, & Bull, 2000). A classic example is setting up a scenario in which peers in a social skills group role-play applying pressure on one of the members to break a school rule. The target student’s ability to withstand peer pressure would be examined from the standpoint of a skill (able or unable to apply assertive language) or a motive (unwilling or will- ing to resist peer pressure). Another is to teach a skill related to the hypothesized deficit and examine the results (e.g., brief experimental analysis [BEA]). Some behaviors do not lend themselves to this technique, however, because the effect of one intervention cannot be reversed to test a second intervention. For example, the benefits of learning a set of coping skills will carry over to a test of the effects of peer attention on triggering aggressive behavior. In these cases, the consultant relies on direct observation and interview data (in the case of infrequent behavior, an interview may be the only option) to identify the potential antecedents (events that precede the behavior) and consequent conditions (events that follow the behavior) that support the target behavior.

One possible way that a problem may be poorly understood is the specification of the antecedents. A teacher may want to focus only on immediate (proximal) antecedents, while the real source of a student’s behavioral or learning difficulties may result from more distal antecedents (e.g., teacher tolerance, gang pressures, inadequate earlier schooling, complex risk factors arising from poverty; Walker & Shinn, 2002). Another common mistake is to assume that lack of student motivation is at the root of underperformance. In some cases, this is true, but in others the student has a skill deficit, and offering all the incentives in the world will not result in suddenly improved functioning. BEA can help to determine whether a stu- dent has a skill or performance (motivation) deficit (Daly, Andersen, Gortmaker, & Turner, 2006). BEA consists of collecting data under one or more brief interventions and comparing these data to a baseline. To examine the effect of motivation on a student’s performance, the student would be offered an incentive to improve his behavior. Similarly, to examine the effects of modeling, corrective feedback, and repeated practice, each intervention would be attempted in succession, and the intervention that proves most effective would be considered for the intervention plan. BEA can be adapted to assess a range of interventions for social and academic problems and is consistent with data-based consultation practices (Noell, Freeland, Witt, & Gansle, 2001).

Another source of information for analyzing the problem is to look for patterns in the student’s errors or behavioral deficits. For example, by examining the 12 double-digit multi- plication probes administered to collect baseline data on a student, you notice that she is mak- ing errors in regrouping and multiples of 8s and 7s. For another student, you notice that his aggressive behavior tends to occur most often on Monday mornings and after lunchtime. The consultant shares these observations with the consultees to identify the hypothesis or hypoth- eses that are most consistent with these data. Often we will never know with certainty what

56 Chapter 3 • Problem-Solving Consultation in a Multi-Tiered System of Support

caused the problem, but we will have an informed guess to guide our intervention develop- ment. If the intervention fails, one possibility is that our hypothesis about the reason the prob- lem occurred was wrong.

intervention Development and implementation

The next part of the discussion is focused on identifying interventions in terms of environ- mental modifications and skills to teach. First, the team brainstorms alternative strategies. Because the problem and its ecology are defined and understood, at least for the present, the consultant and the consultee(s) should discuss some possible strategies to implement. Brainstorming as a method of freeing the mind to think of diverse possibilities is recom- mended, with the caution that this process has to be governed to some extent so that the participants don’t waste time with ideas of no practical value. Here are four basic rules for the process of brainstorming are:

• Do not evaluate strategies as they are being generated. • Generate as many interventions as possible. • Consider redistributions of resources. • Creativity and novelty are at a premium when generating a list of possible interventions.

If there is concern that some participants may be reluctant to share their ideas publicly, all par- ticipants can be asked to write their ideas on 5- by 7-inch cards without attaching their names to their ideas. When this is done, the ideas have a better chance of being evaluated on their merits rather than on the basis of who generated the ideas.

Once all the ideas have been discussed, modified as appropriate, and agreed upon, the group has a collection of ideas, collaboratively derived, that form the basis for the next step: evaluate and choose among alternative strategies. Strategies for which there is empirical support should be considered over unproven suggestions. It is important to remember that the consultee should be the final judge of which strategy to select among those that seem most promising because the consultee will do most of the implementation. In doing this, the consultant is hoping to capitalize on treatment acceptability, which is associated with treat- ment adoption and integrity (Frank & Kratochwill, 2009). Without the teacher’s (or parent’s) acceptance of the intervention, it may very well not be implemented with the rigor required, or at all.

In complex problems, a number of strategies may be selected at once, either for simulta- neous implementation or to use as a quick substitute for the first strategy in the event of its obvi- ous failure (for example, a plan to use extinction that results in an intolerable increase in the target behavior is revised to include direct instruction in a social skill). The three critical com- ponents to selecting an intervention are (a) it has some empirical support in the research litera- ture (i.e., evidence-based interventions are preferred); (b) it relates to the target behavior and hypothesized cause of the problem; and (c) it is feasible to implement given the current setting, supplies, and people.

After the interventions are identified, the “wh” questions—who, what, when, where (and how)—come into play. Specifically, the consultant’s and consultee’s responsibilities for implementing each strategy and collecting treatment-integrity and progress-monitoring data must be detailed. Consultation is much more likely to be successful when the consultant and the consultee settle these questions before implementing the intervention plan or shortly thereafter. The partners have to agree on responsibilities, or chaos may ensue. In an expert model, it is likely that the consultant decides these issues, but in a collaborative model, the consultant and the consultee(s) need to work together and agree on details. In almost every situation, the consultant may be responsible for implementing at least part of the intervention plan (e.g., running a social skills group, modeling a self-monitoring intervention, or collect- ing data on the effectiveness of the intervention). Some questions and details that may be negotiated here include the following: What data-gathering system will be used, the more comprehensive one suggested by the consultant or the simpler one preferred by the consultee? What are realistic expectations for intervention implementation in any given situation? How might the consultee get feedback and assistance on implementing the interventions? Figures 2.2 and 2.3

Chapter 3 • Problem-Solving Consultation in a Multi-Tiered System of Support 57

in Chapter 2 give examples of how an intervention plan is developed (i.e., problem-solving SST agenda) and documented (problem-solving intervention summary form). The cases in Chapter 10 give examples of how this process works and what a consultant should do if it begins to falter.

If the process has worked well up to this point, the consultee should be eager to begin implementing the intervention(s). If it were always as simple as that, consultants could skip to the next step, but it doesn’t always work that way for a number of possible reasons: (1) The problem itself shifts in focus somehow, and a revision is needed before the plan gets off the ground; (2) the consultee finds he doesn’t have some material he needs to implement the plan, and he and the consultant are embarrassed that neither one thought of it earlier; (3) the con- sultee finds that he either doesn’t want to do or can’t really do the new behavior expected of him; or (4) the student reacts in some unanticipated way, and the consultee needs to return to an earlier step in the process. Consultees may agree to an overly ambitious intervention plan because they are temporarily buoyed by the responsiveness of the consultant, or they have a desire to appear like a hero and then find that it is beyond their skill level or demands too much attention and time. Implementation is the moment of truth in consultation. With imple- mentation, any previous weaknesses in the process come to light, and the strength of the consultant– consultee relationship is tested. Some of the types of resistance, which are dis- cussed in Chapter 4 (e.g., habit strength, “too much work,” lack of skills) are also most likely to surface at this step.

Implementation may involve multiple students and consultees. Other children in the class, parents, additional teachers, and counselors all may have a part to play. The more people that are involved, the more important it is that each person understands his or her role. Equally important is the consultant’s concern about the skill levels of all participants. The primary roles of the consultant in plan development and implementation are to ensure that each of the par- ticipants has the skills to carry out the plan and that they are carrying out the interventions faith- fully (with integrity). This cannot be taken for granted. Consultants often find that what they thought was a simple plan to implement (for example, smile at or otherwise acknowledge the student when he gives you eye contact) may be something the consultee is not used to doing or doesn’t do easily. The best way to know if the skill levels are in place is to ask the consultees (and students, when appropriate) if they feel comfortable doing what the plan requires of them, and then watch them doing it. In this way, the consultant works to ensure both treatment accept- ability and integrity, which are essential if a plan is to be successful (Frank & Kratochwill, 2009; Noell, 2009).

To identify and modify ineffective plans, a progress-monitoring system, based on the target behavior and intervention goal, should be established. Progress monitoring is the pro- cess that enables all parties to have current information about the student’s response to the interventions, including whether he is on track to meet his intervention goal (Deno, Espin, & Fuchs, 2002). Progress-monitoring data must consist of repeated measures of the same behav- ior over time in order to detect changes in the target behavior. When measuring academic skills, multiple forms of equally difficult probes must be used to ensure that changes in students’ performance are due to improved skill rather than easier probes. Likewise, monitor- ing the occurrence of a target behavior should involve repeated observations of the same set- ting for the same duration of time in order to attribute changes in the data to real changes in the behavior.

Perhaps the consultee isn’t willing or able to carry out the plan as prescribed. The student may change his behavior in an unanticipated way, which may be either positive or negative. It is also possible that the hypothesis about why the problem occurred is wrong and the interven- tion is poorly matched to the student need. Ongoing progress-monitoring data provide the consultant with sufficient time to react to and consult with the various consultees involved and to make changes when needed. The frequency of the progress monitoring, like the intensity of the intervention, varies with the severity of the student need. However, the progress-monitoring system, including who will gather the data, in what way, and how frequently, should be estab- lished before the intervention is under way in order to provide both ongoing and postinterven- tion implementation comparisons and to be as closely linked to the intervention and intervention goal as possible. Given the considerable caseloads of many school-based consultants, it may be unreasonable to expect the consultant to collect the progress-monitoring data in every case.

58 Chapter 3 • Problem-Solving Consultation in a Multi-Tiered System of Support

Consultees may be more responsive to modifying their intervention behaviors if they are rou- tinely collecting the data themselves. Teachers, parents, and other consultees may need some assistance in collecting these data. The consultant may need to demonstrate how to collect and graph these data.

Consultants should be knowledgeable about what qualities make a measure effective for progress monitoring and have on hand a number of different monitoring tools. Fuchs and Fuchs (1999) suggested that progress-monitoring measures meet the following criteria: (a) sufficient evidence of reliability and validity, (b) capacity to model growth (i.e., multiple alternate forms that allow comparison across administration with items that are neither too difficult nor too easy in order to avoid floor and ceiling effects), (c) identified benchmarks for expected growth, (d) sensitivity to small gains in skill, (e) capacity to inform teaching, (f) independence from a specific instructional strategy or curriculum, and (g) feasibility (i.e., easy to administer; takes a short amount of time to administer, score, and interpret). Progress-monitoring measures that meet these criteria are discussed in depth in Chapters 6 and 7.

evaluate the effectiveness of the interventions and recycle if necessary

It is possible that the chosen and implemented strategy has worked very well and that the prob- lem has been solved with no modifications needed, however, this is unlikely. More likely is the possibility that modifications—mild, moderate, or extreme—are needed. The consultant’s role at this point is mainly twofold: monitoring the consultee’s actions (intervention integrity) and the student’s reactions (through ongoing progress monitoring) by assisting in collecting data that will serve as the basis for evaluating the intervention and intervention modifications. Intervention integrity data, which indicate whether the intervention is implemented as planned, are discussed in more detail at the end of this chapter.

Eventually, one of the following or a variation will occur: (1) The intervention package is a success, and you will present it as a triumph at your next staff meeting; (2) the interven- tion has some positive outcomes but still needs further work before both the consultant and the consultee are satisfied; (3) the intervention is minimally successful and requires a com- plete recycling through the sequence just described; or (4) the intervention is unsuccessful, and both the consultant and the consultee need to think about the reasons for the lack of suc- cess and possibly consider moving to the next level of intervention. Within an MTSS, clear criteria for making decisions about whether to continue or move on to the next level of inten- sity are developed in advance and applied as systematically as possible to all students who struggle in school.

Activity 3.4

Role-play a problem-solving consultation SST for Bart Simpson. Assign roles such as Principal Skinner, Homer and Marge Simpson, Mrs. Krabapple (Bart’s teacher), a school psy- chologist, and a school counselor. Designate

someone to facilitate the meeting and some- one else to take notes. Follow the problem- solving stages described above and detailed in Figure 3.1. Apply the agenda and problem-solving intervention summary found in Chapter 2.

Multi-tiereD SySteM oF Support

Multi-tiered system of support (MTSS) is an umbrella term for organizing school resources to provide empirically supported prevention and intervention programs proportional to student need. Sugai and Horner (2009, p. 226) identified the following defining features of MTSS:

1. Interventions supported by scientifically based research 2. Interventions organized along a tiered continuum that increases in intensity (e.g., fre-

quency, duration, individualization, specialized supports, etc.) 3. Standardized problem-solving protocol for assessment and instructional decision making 4. Explicit data-based decision rules for assessing student progress and making instructional

and intervention adjustments

Chapter 3 • Problem-Solving Consultation in a Multi-Tiered System of Support 59

5. Emphasis on assessing and ensuring implementation integrity 6. Regular and systematic screening for early identification of students whose performance is

not responsive to instruction

Two types of MTSS are response to intervention (RtI) and schoolwide positive behavior sup- port (SWPBS). RtI is better known and possibly the better misunderstood of the two. RtI was originally conceptualized as a problem-solving alternative to the traditional cognitive- achievement discrepancy criteria for learning disability (LD). However, its application expanded rapidly to become a systematic assessment and intervention method to meet the needs of all students (Erchul, 2011). Unfortunately, RtI’s popularity is in some ways its down- fall because schools and districts adopted incomplete RtI practices that fail to meet many of the characteristics listed above. Having an RtI teacher or class, screening all kindergarten students three times a year but doing nothing productive with the data, and adding curricu- lum-based measures to the standard LD battery of tests fall short of implementing RtI as a whole system of delivering services. As these examples illustrate, RtI is most often discussed in terms of assisting students facing academic challenges even though a solid Tier 1 (i.e., effective general education instruction) is the foundation of the system. Conversely, SWPBS implementation seems to have adopted a more proactive approach, with teams often spending a year or more developing the rules, routines, and rewards that prevent behavior problems. While RtI is associated with academic interventions and SWPBS is considered the behavioral complement of RtI, both can be implemented simultaneously in an MTSS (Gamm et al., 2012). MTSS also has the potential to assist school personnel in implementing instruction and curriculum and thus help students to achieve the Common Core and next-generation standards (Gamm et al., 2012; Hagans & Powers, 2013).

MTSS and school consultation are closely aligned; both involve problem solving and emphasize prevention, evidence-based interventions, and treatment integrity (Erchul, 2011). In fact, it is hard to imagine implementing MTSS without a good deal of collaborative consultation. In MTSS, problem-solving consultation occurs at each of the three levels, or tiers, with the amount of resources, consideration, and time devoted to the consultation, assessment, and inter- vention processes increasing with each tier. Many are familiar with the picture of a pyramid split neatly into three levels to represent a three-tiered system. In reality, demarcation between the tiers is rather blurry, with Tier 1 and Tier 3 instruction and services more easily defined and described than the catchall Tier 2 category that “runs the gamut from students with minor to sig- nificant needs” (Herman, Riley-Tillman, & Reinke, 2012, p. 309). School personnel should refrain from referring to students as Tier 1, Tier 2, or Tier 3 students (Burns, Riley-Tillman & VanDerHeyden, 2012). MTSS should be fluid and data-based, where students move in and out of interventions based on their academic and behavioral functioning. Consider a student who needs more support in one area (reading) for a period of time but is profiting from general instruction in all other areas (math, writing, compliance, academic engagement, etc.). Labeling him a Tier 2 student would be inaccurate and counterproductive.

tier 1: universal prevention

MTSS is a proactive approach to preventing learning and behavioral difficulties by providing quality curriculum, instruction, and classroom management. Accordingly, researchers are examining existing curricula to determine which are most effective, particularly for students at risk for school failure. For example, Crowe, Connor, and Petscher (2009) compared the effectiveness of six common reading curricula on students’ oral reading fluency and found Reading Mastery, a highly explicit curriculum that relies on direct instruction, to produce the greatest growth, particularly among first- and second-grade students. A member of or consult- ant to the curriculum team can examine both the existing research literature and schoolwide data to determine whether a curriculum change is in order. Similarly, behavior management programs based on positive behavior support techniques, such as Safe and Civil Schools, show promise for preventing behavior problems (Sprick, 2009). Not all students respond equally to universal, evidence-based prevention programs. Collecting benchmarks on all the students in a school three to four times per year alerts school personnel to students with potential problems. For example, Deno and colleagues (2008) implemented a schoolwide

60 Chapter 3 • Problem-Solving Consultation in a Multi-Tiered System of Support

progress-monitoring program in which brief reading comprehension probes were adminis- tered to all students three times a year (fall, winter, and spring). The students who performed in the bottom 20th percent of any given class received biweekly oral reading fluency probes for progress monitoring and some type of empirically based supplemental instruction, which was routinely adjusted based on these progress-monitoring data. As illustrated in this exam- ple, a major tenet of MTSS is providing students at risk for developing a skill deficit with specialized instruction before learning or behavioral problems becoming entrenched (Murawski & Hughes, 2009).

A consultant can assist each teacher in developing the specialized instruction for his students by following the problem-solving steps detailed earlier. In this case, the consultant is consulting for an entire class of students and not necessarily an individual student. For example, consider the data presented in Figure 3.3, which were collected from a seventh- grade prealgebra class using the Algebra Assessment and Instruction Meeting Standards (AAIMS; Project AAIMS,  2007). In this case, all of Ms. Tudor’s students completed a 5-minute probe on basic algebra skills. The consultant collected these data and created the graph in Figure 3.3 by plotting the number of students compared to the score they received (i.e., 1 student received a score of 1, 5 students received a score of 9, 2 students earned the top score of 24, etc.). She then discussed with Ms. Tudor some natural groupings, such as the four students who scored between 1 and 5 might make up one group and the eight students who scored between 7 and 9 might make up a second group. Next, the specific skill to target for each group (problem identification) and the strategy that might work the best based on error analysis or direct observation of the antecedents and consequences that sustain or inhibit the behavior (problem analysis) are discussed, and an intervention plan for the whole class, by group, is developed, including a way to measure students’ progress and teacher intervention integrity.

6 October

Number of students 5

4

3

2

1

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24

Figure 3.3 AAIMS data for Ms. Tudor’s class

Activity 3.5

Graph the oral reading fluency data in Figure 3.4 in terms of the number of students in Ms. Jones’s class who received each score. Based on how the scores cluster, what might be some good reading groups? Given the Dynamic Indicators

of Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS) benchmark goal of 23 words correct per minute (WCPM) by the middle of first grade, which group(s) should be targeted for supplemental instruc- tion and progress monitoring?

Christ (2008) observed that consultants cannot spend time analyzing problems on the indi- vidual level for all the students in a school. Rather, he suggests an 80–15–5 rule of thumb in which 80% of the students are supported by general instructional and curricular practices; 15% are provided group-level support; and 5% receive more intensive, individual-level problem- solving support and monitoring. If much larger numbers of students fail to meet benchmarks, schoolwide problem solving in the form of system change (see Chapter 8) may be necessary. Consultants can assist in ensuring that the instruction and interventions provided in general edu- cation are based on current educational effectiveness research and are delivered in a manner that maximizes students’ academic engagement.

Chapter 3 • Problem-Solving Consultation in a Multi-Tiered System of Support 61

Sage = 34 Tommy = 24 Quetzal = 29 Cassidy = 22 Jordan = 20

Felix =16 Marcelo = 38 Paloma = 31 Elena = 35 Shanti = 38

Sam = 29 Sean = 33 Brian = 25 Kyle = 31 Cory = 29

Mary = 29 Katlin = 31 Nichole = 33 Julie = 18 Hector = 14

Sanju = 24 Tim = 31 Johnny = 29 Madison = 24 Tamika = 38

Figure 3.4 Oral reading-fluency winter benchmark data for Ms. Jones’s first-grade class

tier 2: targeted intervention

An essential component to MTSS is a decision-making process that determines when a student should progress from one level to the next level of support. For example, the intervention or school leadership team could decide that any student who remains in the bottom 15% or 20% of his class for two consecutive benchmark periods, despite receiving some type of small-group, supplemental instruction (i.e., a standard protocol) should be considered for a Tier 2 targeted intervention. However, if universal benchmarking is not in place, or a student is struggling in an area that is not routinely benchmarked, an individual teacher or parent typically brings a referral to the student study team (SST) because the SST is often the practical choice for initiating a Tier 2 problem-solving consultation. Burns, Wiley, and Viglietta (2008) recommend that four events be part of the Tier 2 intervention: (a) initial consultation, (b) problem-solving team conference, (c) follow-up consultation, and (d) follow-up conference. These events are described in greater detail next.

initial reFerral to the StuDent StuDy teaM The referral typically begins when a teacher fills out and sends in a referral form to a school consultant or the coordinator of the SST (see Figure 2.1 in Chapter 2). Many districts also require that the referring teacher have contacted the student’s parents to discuss the teacher’s concerns and, if possible, remediate the referral problem through a collaborative process with the parents. If the parent conference is not sufficiently helpful, the consultant or SST coordinator reads the referral and forms an immediate impression based on at least the following:

• Is this referral regarding a student with a behavior problem or a learning problem, or both? • Do I know this student or her family? If so, what does my prior knowledge tell me about

this referral? • Who is the teacher, and what does my knowledge of the teacher tell me about this referral? • Should I send this referral to SST, review the referral with the teacher, or call the parents?

Depending on the nature of the case, any of these questions might be answered or dealt with first. Other initial thoughts involve priority (for example, responding immediately to sus- pected child abuse, hints of suicidal behavior, or behavior that threatens the safety of others); history of this student, if known; curricular and other classroom ecology factors; and, realisti- cally, other time pressures.

Additional Areas of Inquiry, Next Steps to Take, or Possible Solutions: At this time, it is too soon to be generating specific solutions. However, the following should be considered, just based on the nature of the referral:

• Given this teacher, this grade level, and other general considerations about the ecology of the situation, what general or specific ideas come to mind?

• Should we take the time of the whole SST to discuss this referral, or would it be better to send it to an individual consultant to see if she can resolve it with the teacher and parent alone?

• Has this student been referred previously? If so, what file information do we have? What interventions were tried, and with what degree of success? If she is referred

62 Chapter 3 • Problem-Solving Consultation in a Multi-Tiered System of Support

because she is in the bottom fifth of her class on two benchmark assessments, did the teacher provide supplemental instruction and ongoing progress monitoring? Do we have any treatment-integrity data on the supplemental instruction? Perhaps one of the previously successful interventions should be tried again if the current situation is com- patible with that intervention.

initial DiSCuSSion with the teaCher(S) Generally, it is best to visit with the referring teacher prior to the SST for a number of reasons related to building rapport: (1) to verify receipt of the referral, (2) to acknowledge your con- cern about it, and (3) to inform the teacher (in case he is someone with whom you have not previously worked) about your collaborative style of doing consultation and to discuss matters of confidentiality. In addition, this meeting can begin the problem-solving process because important data related to problem identification and analyses may be gathered. Skills that the consultees may need help with are listening and reflecting skills; data keeping; operationally defining behaviors; applying basic behavioral concepts, such as modifying antecedents and consequences by reacting in certain specified ways (for example, extinction); contingency con- tract development; and instructional modifications. The role of the consultant is to assist the consultee (and students, when appropriate) in the development of the skills necessary to begin some initial interventions. The FAAB (Ysseldyke & Christenson, 2002) provides an excellent structured parent, teacher, and student interview for an academic referral, and Steege and Watson (2009) provide detailed information on conducting interviews in response to behavio- ral referrals.

This initial meeting, as well as subsequent meetings, should take place during the referring teacher’s natural break times rather than during an instructional period. With few exceptions, usually due to time pressures, it is best not to interrupt the teaching process to confer with teach- ers because teaching is the most important thing that happens in schools. You want to spend an uninterrupted 10 to 20 minutes or so gathering information that will help you understand the problem and plan your strategy.

In the case of behavior problems, you want to get some basics, such as potential ante- cedents (i.e., likely causes), severity, form, frequency, timing, and potential consequences of the behaviors of concern. In the case of academic learning problems, you should determine the areas of strength and weakness. For either type of referral, you want to know what the consultee has done up to this point. Also, you will be forming a tentative hypothesis about the causes and possible solutions to the referral and, again, what steps you and the consultee should take next. It is important at this point to avoid the rush to solutions that is so tempting and that some consultees will want you to do. Teachers often rely on anecdotal information to establish the need for an SST. In preparation for goal setting and progress monitoring, you may suggest some more empirically based data collection method. Collecting repeated struc- tured observations or multiple oral reading-fluency probes prior to the SST will help to define the problem at the start of the SST as well as provide potential baseline data for pro- gress monitoring.

The consultant should take notes during the initial and subsequent meetings. These notes have a number of purposes. First, they indicate to the consultee that what he says is important enough to record accurately. Second, your notes help you remember details. Given the large number of cases with which the average consultant is concerned, you will find it best to keep accurate data and to record it as soon as possible after it becomes known to you. Consultees don’t like to have to repeat facts every time you consult with them. Your reference to accurate notes tells them that you are well organized and efficient. Taking notes helps both the consultant and consultee keep track of what was discussed: both the facts of the case and the plans that you have made during each consultation.

Two sessions may be necessary just to cover the information under problem identification and problem analysis listed in Figure 3.1. Given teachers’ myriad activities, the consultant has to learn to be efficient. She has to come to a meeting prepared with a structured set of questions and must not give the impression that she’s wasting or filling time. A good rule to follow is that the consultant should not ask any questions that are not related in some form to solutions or interven- tion development.

Chapter 3 • Problem-Solving Consultation in a Multi-Tiered System of Support 63

Additional Areas of Inquiry, Next Steps to Take, or Possible Solutions:

• Having gained a good idea of the teacher’s perceptions of the referral and the possible rea- sons for the student’s difficulties, you can refine your thinking about the primary needs and concerns. This should give more focus to your beginning conceptualizations about the nature of the problems, possibilities for interventions, and probabilities for the success of some of these interventions.

• The most general type of solution at this time is to be supportive to the teacher or parent. He has come to you because the targeted student presents with challenges that are beyond his usual scope of interventions. He needs to be helped through his feelings of discomfort, stress, and possibly even anger. The communication and interpersonal skills discussed in Chapter 4 will prove most useful to you at these early stages of the consul- tation process.

• What types and degrees of support will this student and this teacher need? Is this a situa- tion you can deal with in consultation with the consultee and the parents, or should it go to SST at this time?

• Begin to think about the most general categories of interventions that may be appropriate here. Suggestions for behavior problem interventions are given in Chapter 6, while academic-learning-problem interventions are presented in Chapter 7.

ClaSSrooM (eCologiCal) obServation Best practice is to visit the class to inform the problem analysis stage, if time permits. The purposes of observing are to verify the referral, get an impression of the ecological dynam- ics that may be contributing to the referral, study the teacher’s style and methods, and deter- mine points of leverage where interventions may be useful. Ecological assessment focuses on classroom and playground dynamics: what these environments look like, what teachers do, what the expectations are, what the formal and unwritten rules are, and how all of these factors influence behavior and learning. How students act is in some part attributable to how others around them act. The consultant needs to be aware that a classroom (ecological) observation is just that: an observation of what is going on in the classroom as a whole that could be affecting the behavior of the targeted student(s). In addition to these general impres- sions, a more formal assessment of the child’s behavior can be conducted by recording the frequency or duration of a behavior that you can report as a ratio, such as the percentage of time on task or the percentage of compliance within 10 seconds of a teacher’s first request.

In the case of learning problem referrals, a classroom observation may be less essential, especially if you know that the teacher is a highly effective educator. When observing, do so at a time when the teacher believes you would have the best view of the academic referral problem. Examine some work samples and compare them to those produced by the other students in the class. How much does the referred student’s work differ from her peers? If an academic learning referral is accompanied by a behavior problem (for example, distractibility, aggression, or non- compliance), an observation should always be done.

You have to be very careful to be supportive of the teacher. You must avoid giving the impression that you don’t believe or trust the teacher or that you are going into his classroom with some hidden agenda. You must show the teachers in your schools that you are functioning like any scientist: You need to observe firsthand the nature of the problem or situation. Most teachers have no objection; in fact, they may be surprised if you don’t ask to observe. In our experience, nearly all teachers ask when the consultant will be coming in to observe, particularly if the referral is regarding a student with a behavior problem.

Perhaps the referral may best be resolved by having the teacher deal with the referred stu- dent in a different way and by using different methods, materials, or general classroom manage- ment tactics. You’ll have a better sense of this after an observation.

The consultant has a choice of a wide variety of formal and informal observation methods, which are selected based on the particular classroom, teacher, type of referral problem, and time avail- ability. At a minimum, the following questions need to be considered before starting an observation:

1. What time should the observation be done and for how long? 2. Exactly what information will be gathered and in what form?

64 Chapter 3 • Problem-Solving Consultation in a Multi-Tiered System of Support

3. While observing, should the consultant interact with the other students and the teacher, or should he avoid this type of interaction? Because the consultant is a guest in the teacher’s classroom, he should ask the teacher for her preferences in this regard.

4. What should the teacher tell the students, if anything, about the consultant and the reason for his presence in the room? Most classes are visited frequently, and the students are used to guests. In this case, the teacher does not need to announce your arrival to the class. In some classes, the arrival of an observer is an anomaly and therefore should be addressed to avoid becoming a distraction.

5. In addition to the targeted behaviors, should the consultant record more general pieces of information, such as on-task versus off-task time?

6. To what extent should the teacher’s behavior be noted? 7. Should the behavior of other students also be noted for purposes of contrast with the tar-

geted student?

Chapter 6 contains a more detailed treatment of classroom observation and recording methods for behavior problem referrals, and Chapter 7 does the same for learning/achievement problem referrals.

Additional Areas of Inquiry, Next Steps to Take, or Possible Solutions:

What have you learned about this classroom (or playground) that can help you in building interventions? It is best practice to talk to the teacher after every ecological observation. In this conversation, discuss at least the following points:

1. Indicate something positive about what you observed. Without being unduly flat- tering, point out some of the teacher’s strengths. In planning to do this, you will be expanding on your ability to observe an individual’s strengths, which is an excel- lent characteristic of effective collaborative consultants.

2. Report facts and possible needs rather than diagnoses and deficits. Rather than say- ing, “Well, Arturo’s ADHD [attention deficit hyperactivity disorder] was really in full flower, wasn’t it?” try this: “Arturo seemed not to be attending as well as most of the others I observed. What might be helpful in getting a better level of attending from him?”

3. Verify that what you observed is the same as what the teacher observed. It is impor- tant that you and the teacher can find some level of agreement about what is hap- pening in the classroom. Recall from the discussion of the mental health model in Chapter 2 that there was mention of a lack of objectivity as being one of the four consultee “lacks” discussed by Caplan and Caplan (1993). This postobservation discussion can give you an estimate of the teacher’s objectivity in interpretation of classroom events. Be sure, of course, that you are also objective in your interpreta- tion of the events you observed!

4. Assuming you have observed the targeted behavior(s), you will also have observed the antecedents and consequences of these behaviors. Review these with the teacher. Again, verify with the teacher to see if his observations of these events is similar to yours.

In the continued refinement of the exact nature of the problem, and as a result of the classroom observation, you may want to think in terms of supports needed by both the referred student and the teacher. Possible supports for the teacher would include simply taking time to talk to someone like yourself who can reinforce his efforts; lower his stress level about the situation; review what he has done up to this time about the problem; dis- cuss the results of the classroom observation(s); and, of course, begin the process of developing interventions.

uSing parentS aS allieS in the ConSultation proCeSS The previous discussion regarding the first three steps has centered around referrals from teachers. Obviously referrals can also come directly from parents. In either event, the consult- ant will want to get parental input regarding the nature of the referral and the parents’ perception of it. The consultant has some choices to make about when a conference with the student’s parents (or guardians) should take place, but there is no choice about whether or not such

Chapter 3 • Problem-Solving Consultation in a Multi-Tiered System of Support 65

conferences should occur because they must occur. Remember that the parent is usually the person who is most concerned about the student. Indeed, the parent may be considered the primary client in consultative services, depending on the situation and one’s philosophical approach to service delivery.

A positive home–school partnership is almost always the basis for improvement in behav- ior and learning problems, and this is true from preschool through adolescence (Christenson & Cleary, 1990; Christenson & Conoley, 1992; Esler, Godber, & Christenson, 2008). In addition to this commonsense reason, the 2004 revisions to IDEA (P.L. 108-446), as well as the legislation preceding IDEA, mandate parent involvement in all situations involving students with disabili- ties and those suspected of having disabilities.

In regard to when parents should be contacted, most school districts have adopted policies about the steps that must be taken before a teacher fills out a referral form. These steps often require the teacher to contact the parent to see if intervention at the parent–teacher level might be sufficient (Tier 1). Assuming the need for intervention beyond this level, the parent should also be told that the teacher is planning to ask for the assistance of the school-based consultant. In this way, the parent is already informed about the process and should be expecting some contact with the consultant in a timely manner.

In general, the consultant should have a fairly good understanding of the problem and some of the classroom dynamics before talking to the parent. Parents expect consultants to have a clear idea about what is going on at school and in the classroom, in addition to having a plan for studying the problem. It is important to remember that some parents are not going to welcome a phone call from the referring teacher or from the consultant. Nobody likes bad news. Even though we try to develop the idea that our intervention with parents and their child are intended to be helpful, it may not be interpreted as such. How each person perceives the problem often determines her reaction to it. If the parent believes her child is innocent of wrongdoing or would learn very well if the school would just treat him fairly, then her per- ception of this offer to help will probably be negative. Similarly, if the parent believes that the school is generally a hostile place, possibly because of her own remembered experiences of schools and teachers, she may project blame for the problem onto the school. An older sibling may have also had difficulty that the parent believes was due to a faulty approach by the school, so the parent greets this present referral as a likely repetition of that bad experi- ence. This recollection of a historical event may need to be worked through with some par- ents before they are willing to join school staff members in a collaborative approach to the present problem.

In addition to problems of perception, there may be other issues based on realities that may be difficult to overcome. Dettmer, Dyck, and Thurston (1999) list 24 of these reasons, of which the following are not uncommon: the parent is ill; the parent works, perhaps two jobs; the parents are intimidated by the process; the parent cannot read or write; the parent has no transportation; the parent is emotionally unable to deal with perceived stress; and the parent believes the school should deal with the problem with no assistance from the home. A conjoint behavioral consultation (CBC) model, in which both parents and teachers jointly problem- solve, may be preferable to the typical “conference” model, in which the parents are passive recipients of information on their child (Sheridan, Bovaird, Glover, Garbacz, Witte, & Kwon, 2012).

Additional Areas of Inquiry, Next Steps to Take, or Possible Solutions: Now that you have talked with the parents and obtained their perspectives on the refer- ral issues, it’s a good time to put together the material gathered so far from the referral itself, the teacher interview, the classroom observation, and the parent interview to develop a fairly well-rounded picture of how relevant adults see the issues. The remaining piece of the puzzle may come from assessments of the student (see Chapters 6 and 7). Try these questions to help you structure your knowledge up to this point:

What are the behaviors of concern? Which seems to be a top priority? Do you have baseline data? If not, how will you gather baseline prior to the SST meeting? What have people tried? What evidence is there to verify it was attempted as planned (i.e., treatment integrity)?

66 Chapter 3 • Problem-Solving Consultation in a Multi-Tiered System of Support

How has the student responded to these interventions? What do the teacher and parent(s) believe would be the best intervention(s) to try at this point? What are hypotheses about the cause of the behavior? How consistent is your hypothe- sis with the interventions suggested by the parent(s) and/or teacher? What supports and strategies for all constituents are emerging from these discussions? What ecological effects will any of these possible interventions have? What barriers or resistance may occur if any of these proposed interventions are tried? How can you increase the degree of cooperation and effort from teachers and parents in the development and implementation of interventions?

the FirSt SSt Meeting At this point, you need to make a choice. Are you ready for, or do you need, an SST meeting? Does your system (local school or district) require an SST meeting, or does it leave that decision up to the individual to whom the referral was made? If your district’s policy is to have the SST meeting early in the process, that meeting may occur before the consultant has observed in the classroom or talked with the teacher or the parent.

The structure, purposes, and methods of SSTs were discussed in Chapter 2. The informa- tion here is designed to show how the SST process aligns with the problem-solving steps, and to elucidate some specifics about how the SST contributes to case management for the consultant. As indicated in Chapter 2, SST philosophies and activities vary considerably across the nation. Burns et al. (2008) make a distinction between SSTs that act as prereferral intervention teams (PITs), which are primarily concerned with making decisions about pursuing special education eligibility, and problem-solving teams (PSTs), which are focused on interventions and resource allocation. Given the emphasis of federal law on scientifically based interventions for improving student outcomes and determining eligibility, we recommend the PST with the understanding that one of the many resources that may be considered, when other resources have failed, is spe- cial education services (i.e., Tier 3).

As illustrated by the example SST form (Figure 2.2) in Chapter 2, the SST can begin by discussing the student’s strengths. This puts the group in a positive frame of mind about the student. Second, relevant information about the student’s school background, family composi- tion, health, and current performance levels is reviewed. Third, modifications that have been tried are noted. Fourth, the team’s concerns are prioritized and a discrete goal is established. Typical concerns include oral reading fluency, reading comprehension, mathematics computa- tion, vocabulary, work completion, compliance, attendance, and so on. Fifth, the group lists questions regarding the hypothesized reason for the problem. Sixth, the group brainstorms ideas for action. In steps seven and eight, the best of these are selected, and assignments are made in terms of who will do what and when it will be done. In designing an intervention plan, the team should consider (a) how the interventions differ from current practices (we would not expect improved student outcomes from just more of the same) and (b) what resources will be applied, such as personnel with specialized training to deliver the intervention. The interven- tions should diverge from typical instruction by providing supplemental instruction in smaller groups, providing such instruction more frequently, and targeting one to two specific skills, possibly by a teacher with more expertise in teaching students with academic or behavioral difficulties. The results of the intervention should be monitored closely; data on progress toward the intervention goal should be collected at least once per week. At subsequent meetings, usually within 6 to 8 weeks, this information is reviewed and modified as appropriate. It is a very good idea to schedule the follow-up meeting at the conclusion of the first SST meeting. Scheduling the next meeting makes it more likely the interventions will happen and it increases accountability because everyone knows they will reconvene to examine the outcomes of the interventions.

The general purposes of the first meeting are to generate hypotheses about why a problem exists, what should be done about it, and who will do it. Given the tight agenda often followed by SSTs, it is common for a consultant to want to ask for more details but to feel constrained by those time limits. These questions should be asked either before or after the SST meeting,

Chapter 3 • Problem-Solving Consultation in a Multi-Tiered System of Support 67

sometimes privately to the parent in person or over the phone, and sometimes to the teacher at the next convenient time.

Additional Areas of Inquiry, Next Steps to Take, or Possible Solutions:

Once the SST is held and the team has agreed on an intervention plan, the consultee should now feel that the referral issue has been given serious consideration and that viable inter- ventions that can be utilized in the general education setting have been developed. The consultant will want to review these possibilities with the consultee as soon as possible after the SST meeting to ensure the following:

Has the consultee understood the proposed interventions? Does he agree with them? Is he able to implement them? What will be needed (training, materials, supports) to ensure treatment acceptability and integrity? What are some possible implications for the ecology of the classroom?

Following the SST meeting there is often a feeling of elation or relief because the team, including the consultee(s), has come to believe that progress has been made, if only at the conceptual level (i.e., practical ideas that have not yet been implemented). If this initial enthusiasm is not followed by personal consultation with the consultee, several outcomes are possible:

• The consultee immediately gets busy with the ordinary rigors of teaching (or parenting) and does not utilize the interventions quickly.

• Habit strength operates as a barrier to rapid change of a teacher’s or parent’s response style.

• The consultee finds that he really did not understand the full requirements or implications of the proposed interventions, and unless someone (consultant) follows up with him, he puts off implementing them.

• The consultee starts to have second thoughts about the proposed interventions and may decide not to implement them, or to do so in a fashion with somewhat less treatment integrity than the SST members had in mind.

• Some combination of the various types of resistance (discussed further in Chapter 4) begins to appear.

All of these possibilities point to the necessity of monitoring the intervention program closely. Therefore, the consultant’s primary activities are to support the consultee and monitor treatment integrity (discussed in more detail below). As previously mentioned, the time for the consultee(s) to implement the interventions is the moment of truth in consultation. The consultant should be available and helpful at this stage, or the whole process may disintegrate.

the Follow-up SSt Meeting At the follow-up meeting, the student’s progress relative to the preintervention data and the intervention goal is discussed. If the student failed to make sufficient progress and the inter- ventions were implemented as designed, the team may choose either to modify the interven- tions or to refer to special education (Tier 3). The team may consider the following in making this decision:

• Was the intervention robust, targeted, and intense enough to result logically in improved performance? In other words, was the intervention proportional to the students’ need?

• Was the instrument used to measure progress toward the intervention goal sensitive to small gains in performance? Some instruments, such as published norm-referenced tests (PNRTs) of achievement, are not sensitive to small improvements. It could take 6 months of intense intervention before a student’s performance on the Woodcock-Johnson Test of Achievement–III (Woodcock, McGrew, & Mather, 2001) noticeably improves. Such PNRTs are not designed to detect small changes or even to be administered more than once

68 Chapter 3 • Problem-Solving Consultation in a Multi-Tiered System of Support

per year (Shinn & Bamonto, 1998). In short, the team members should discuss whether the assessment they used would reasonably detect improved performance that may be made in a relatively short time period (6 to 8 weeks).

• Is it possible that your hypothesis about why the problem occurred is incorrect and is resulting in ineffective interventions? For example, a student’s off-task behavior was theo- rized to be driven by a desire to avoid difficult work, so his independent seatwork assign- ments were modified to be easier for him, but actually he was off-task because he was seeking attention. Thus, modifying his work would not improve his behavior. Similarly, the team may have hypothesized that a student’s reading difficulty was due to insufficient practice reading grade-level material, and so an intervention involving oral reading at home and at school was implemented. It failed because the actual cause was insufficient decoding skills. Additional assessment, such as a functional analysis of behavior (described in Chapter 6) or a brief experimental analysis (described in Chapter 7) may be conducted to explore this possibility.

If any of the above considerations call into question the appropriateness of the intervention or progress-monitoring assessment, or if the intervention integrity was low, the SST can revise the intervention plan and attempt another targeted intervention.

tier 3: intensive interventions

For approximately 5% of students, targeted interventions will not produce sufficient results, and an intensive intervention, such as special education, is warranted. There are no empiri- cally supported criteria for determining how many interventions or how long the interven- tions must be attempted before being considered insufficient. Supplemental instruction sessions should not exceed 30 minutes to minimize time away from core curriculum. Fuchs, Fuchs, and Stecker (2010) suggest delivering a minimum of 30 minutes of highly structured supplemental instruction 4 days per week for 8 to 10 weeks. They argue that providing long- term Tier 2 interventions may in itself indicate Tier 3 interventions are required, even if the student eventually responds satisfactorily. There are also no clear criteria for determining whether the data indicate a “failure” to respond. For some skills, namely, oral reading flu- ency, expected growth rates exist that can be used to set intervention goals and to determine success (Shapiro, 2011). For example, an average second-grade student gains about one-and- a-half words read correctly each week (Fuchs, Fuchs, Hamlett, Walz, & Germann, 1993, as cited in Shapiro, 2011). Consultants may want to gather growth rate data on the students in their school to use as a local comparison group. “Success” or “failure” can also be deter- mined by benchmarks established based on predictions about future school outcomes. For example, Good and Kaminski (2002), the authors of the Dynamic Indicator of Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS), found that kindergarten students who can segment 35 phonemes per minute by the end of kindergarten have a 90% chance of having proficient decoding skills (as measured by nonsense word fluency) by the middle of first grade. Thus, failure to segment 35 phonemes per minute by the end of kindergarten despite robust, targeted inter- ventions may indicate a need for more intensive interventions. The DIBELS oral reading fluency benchmark for the end of first grade is 40 correct words per minute. Data collected by first-grade teacher Ms. Jones in the middle of the year identified five students scoring below the benchmark of 23 words correct per minute (see Figure 3.4). Of these students, Hector is below the at-risk cut-off score of 16 and may be in need of an intensive intervention if robust targeted interventions have already been attempted with integrity. Unfortunately, growth rates and benchmarks are not as well established in the other content areas or behav- iors. Again, school personnel may want to gather data from their school site to construct local norms.

Fuchs and Fuchs (1998) proposed a dual discrepancy rule in which a student would qualify for indicated interventions if her relative standing and rate of learning are below the level and rate of her classmates given quality general and supplemental instruction. In Figure 3.5, Julie may meet this criteria because she showed very little improvement in oral reading fluency despite supplemental instruction, and her oral reading fluency (ORF), as measured by the number of words read correctly per minute, remains below the DIBELS cut-off score for the middle of first grade. There is some evidence of the construct and social

Chapter 3 • Problem-Solving Consultation in a Multi-Tiered System of Support 69

40

35

30

25

20

15

10

5

0 Week 1 Week 2 Week 3 Week 4 Week 5 Week 6 Week 7 Week 8

DIBELS benchmark

Jordan

Julie

Hector

Cassidy

Felix

Figure 3.5 Oral reading fluency for five students receiving targeted interventions

Activity 3.6

Examine Ms. Jones’s progress-monitoring data on five students selected for intervention in Figure 3.5. Assuming all five students received an adequately intensive, structured, and explicit reading intervention from a qualified teacher, which student(s), if any, would you consider for

special education? What other information would your need to determine whether special education services are appropriate? Do you think cognitive, linguistic, or perceptual assess- ment information would lead to better decision making?

validity of the dual discrepancy model (Case, Speece, & Molloy, 2003); however, others argue for collecting and considering cognitive, perceptual, and/or linguistic assessment data in determining special education eligibility (Flanagan, Ortiz, & Alfonso, 2008). The latter perspective, sometimes termed the pattern of strengths and weaknesses (PSW) model, is based on the assumption that a student’s inability to profit from instruction and intervention is due to a cognitive processing deficit. Unfortunately, interventions based on the data col- lected from these measures rarely lead to more effective instruction (Gresham, Restori, & Cook, 2008), which is the purpose of Tier 3. In fact, there is little empirical support for inter- ventions designed to improve cognitive processing (Kearns & Fuchs, 2013). Rather, data col- lected on how the student responded to various interventions, including how quickly the student learned new skills and which skills the student still needs to master, are logically much more useful than tests of cognition and processing for designing the individualized education program (IEP) (Powers, Hagans, & Busse, 2008).

assessment

The consultant is always engaged in some degree of assessment while engaging in problem solving within an MTSS. Some of the general areas of assessment are described below, and a detailed discussion of the assessment process is contained in Chapter 6 (for behavior/social/ interpersonal issues) and in Chapter 7 (for learning/achievement problems). A crucial con- sideration for selecting what areas to assess, and how to assess them, is whether the assess- ment directly addresses the referral questions. Schools are busy places, and school personnel have a lot of demands made of them. Gathering information that doesn’t relate or only tan- gentially addresses the behavior of concern is a waste of time and effort. Similarly, assess- ment data that can suggest what types of interventions to implement or whether an intervention is working are more useful than data that simply confirm there is a problem. Further, assessments that provide very functional information and require a low level of

70 Chapter 3 • Problem-Solving Consultation in a Multi-Tiered System of Support

inference are preferred over those that are more theoretically based. Christ (2008) made this distinction when he wrote:

A high inference approach to problem analysis will typically rely on theoretical within-person constructs, such as personality, psychopathology or aptitude pro- files. From a high inference perspective, direct observations of behavior are inter- preted as symptoms of an internal trait or theoretical construct. This requires a number of assumptions whose veracity is unknown. In contrast, a low inference approach will rely on explicit behaviors and environmental events that can be observed directly. (p. 161)

In addition, assessments that can be repeated easily are preferred to those that are administered infrequently because they allow the consultant and consultee to measure change in the student’s behavior. Likewise, assessments that compare the student’s behavior or academic functioning to his past behavior and/or academic functioning (idiographic data) are more useful for determining how well an intervention is working than assessments that generate scores based on a compari- son to a national norm group (nomothetic). Finally, multiple methods should be used to collect data for problem identification and problem analysis. The first author (Kampwirth) coined the acronym RIOT (review records, interview, observe, test) many years ago to remind his students that assessment does not equate to “testing” but encompasses many other, often less intrusive and more functional, methods.

aSSeSSMent in an MtSS One defining feature of MTSS is “explicit data-based decision rules for assessing student pro- gress and making instructional and intervention adjustments” (Sugai & Horner, 2009, p.226). Universal screenings to identify students who are exhibiting academic or behavioral problems early is central to MTSS (Shapiro & Gebhardt, 2012). Typically, a grade-level screener, like the AIMSweb Oral Reading Fluency and Maze benchmarks, is administered to every student in an MTSS school in the fall, winter, and spring. By collecting and analyzing data on all stu- dents, consultants and intervention teams can determine the level of need and how to direct resources best. For example, Burns, Riley-Tillman, and VanDerHeyden (2012) suggest that if more than half the students in a class fail to achieve benchmark, there is a classwide problem, and if more than half the classes at a given grade level meet the definition of a classwide prob- lem, there is a gradewide problem. In these instances, the core curriculum and instructional delivery are discussed, including the answers to the following questions: (1) Does the curricu- lum target the skills on the screener? (2) Is the curriculum being delivered? (3) Are students academically engaged? (4) Are there pre-requisite skills the students have not yet mastered? (5) Do the students who perform below benchmark share some commonality, such as being English language learners?

MTSS is designed to reduce the number of classwide and gradewide problems by mak- ing continuous curricular and instructional improvements based on assessment data. When implemented with fidelity, MTSS is a proactive systems approach to improving student learning and outcomes (Gutkin, 2012). However, universal screenings take time and resources to collect and analyze. It is not unusual for school personnel to get overwhelmed by the data collection or to fail to use it in a meaningful manner. Investing in universal and progress-monitoring assessment programs, for example, AIMSweb, DIBELS, Formative Assessments System for Teachers (FAST), and STAR (Renaissance Learning), which can generate charts useful for instructional decision making, may increase the utility of the data and improve problem solving. FAST and STAR are computer-administered, which reduces the amount of time that teachers need to spend administering the screener. FAST and STAR are also computer-enabled, which means the test refines which items are presented based on the student’s performance; thus, these assessments can take less time to administer and pro- vide better diagnostic information than the typical curriculum-based measurement (CBM; Shapiro & Gebhardt, 2012).

Another advantage to using AIMSweb, DIBELS, FAST, or STAR is they meet most or all psychometric standards for progress-monitoring measures. The National Center on Response to Intervention routinely rates progress-monitoring tools based on existing research on a measure’s reliability and validity. It is tempting to develop in-house screening and

Chapter 3 • Problem-Solving Consultation in a Multi-Tiered System of Support 71

progress-monitoring assessments because the costs are much lower; however, it takes a lot of money to develop high-quality assessments. District- or teacher-developed assessments may also be favored because they are more reflective of local learning standards. Ysseldyke (2009) wrote that there are three kinds of assessments: assessments that matter but are technically inadequate, assessments that are technically adequate but do not matter, and assessments that are technically adequate and do matter. Technically inadequate assessments lead to a “garbage in, garbage out” scenario. Even costly published assessment may be technically inadequate. For example, the widely used Fountas and Pinnell leveled books have a diagnostic accuracy around 50%, which is the same as flipping a coin to determine which second- and third-grade students need intervention (Pulles, Maki, Hodgson, & Kanive, 2014). Universal screenings of students’ behaviors can be accomplished with the Behavioral and Emotional Screening System (Kamphaus, DiStefano, Dowdy, Eklund, & Dunn, 2010) or AIMSweb Behavior, which can be customized to monitor adherence to schoolwide behavioral expectations (Tier 1) or response to behavioral interventions (Tier 2 and Tier 3). The School-Wide Information System (SWIS) is a Web-based, schoolwide, data-collection systems that allows school personnel to track office discipline referral (ODRs) in order to improve the school climate and prevent behavioral disruptions.

inStruCtional/aChieveMent aSSeSSMent Intervention-based academic assessments may still occur in the absences of a fully imple- mented MTSS (Hagans & Powers, 2013). Progress-monitoring data should be collected between SST meetings and considered when determining whether more intensive and/or fre- quent and/or specialized interventions are warranted. In addition, the team should examine treatment-integrity data (described later in this chapter), observed versus expected growth rates, functional assessment of academic achievement (i.e., task and error analyses, response to different interventions, etc.), and the instructional ecology. Further, exclusionary condi- tions, such as limited opportunity to learn the material due to excessive absences or inability to profit fully from instruction due to limited English proficiency, should be considered whenever special education eligibility is on the table. The depth of the evaluation depends on the severity of the problem and whether there is a referral for formal assessment for possible special-education-eligibility determination.

FunCtional behavioral aSSeSSMent/analySiS Typically, functional behavioral assessment is conducted by a specialist (e.g., school psycholo- gist, counselor, behavioral therapist, or special education teacher). However, the teacher and parent may be asked to collect some of the data, particularly when the behavior of concern occurs so infrequently it is unlikely that the specialist will actually observe it. These activities, which are of central importance in the assessment of behavior/social/interpersonal-adjustment referrals, are discussed at length in Chapter 6.

biophySiCal probleMS This area of assessment is best monitored by the school nurse, with referral to medical practitioners as appropriate. Issues include poor health, inadequate vision and hearing, poor nutrition, or any of a host of other internal physical factors that could be causing a child to behave or learn in a less-than-expected manner. School nurses serve a range of functions, including providing medication (e.g., prescription medication for attention deficit hyperac- tivity disorder [ADHD]); managing chronic conditions (e.g., asthma); caring for and monitoring students with intravenous medication, feeding tubes, tracheostomies, and venti- lators; helping students, such as those in wheelchairs, to use urinary catheters; and routine vision screenings.

pSyChoeDuCational aSSeSSMent Psychoeducational assessments are conducted primarily by school psychologists or by out- side agencies or practitioners who are usually clinical psychologists or psychiatrists. School counselors may also have a role in psychological assessment based on their counseling skills.

72 Chapter 3 • Problem-Solving Consultation in a Multi-Tiered System of Support

Psycholeducational assessments may include tests of cognition (intelligence), processing (e.g.,  memory, visual, and auditory processing), personality (projectives, rating scales), behavior (checklists and observations), and achievement. Information from intelligence tests is primarily helpful for diagnosing cognitive exceptionalities, such as intellectual disabilities (formerly termed mental retardation) and gifted/talented. Processing and personality tests rarely incorporate behaviors expected of youth in school settings; thus, the application of the results to students’ school functioning requires a lot of extrapolation (i.e., a high level of inference). In addition, school psychologists, counselors, or other mental health providers may conduct psychosocial assessments, such as threat assessments, if mental stress or illness is suspected.

SpeCialiStS’ aSSeSSMentS In addition to the broad areas described above, and based on the needs of the child, assessments may be conducted by specialists. Examples include occupational therapists, who assess fine motor skills; physical therapists, who assess gross motor control; speech and language thera- pists; and adapted technology and transition specialists.

planning or Modifying interventions

Given the emphasis on collaborative approaches that this text emphasizes, just how does the consultant work with the consultee to develop an effective plan? The consultant’s job is to elicit from the consultee what he has done, is currently doing, and wants to do given the situation, and then to encourage and facilitate these plans. The consultant will probably need to help the con- sultee think through the possible consequences of whatever approach he plans to implement, possibly adding refinements. This is the collaborative part, in which the consultant facilitates the discussion by following the problem-solving stages and adding suggestions based on her obser- vations and knowledge of interventions. Between the two of them (or three or more, depending on parental or SST involvement), they will probably develop a better plan than either of them would have developed alone. In secondary schools, where students have multiple teachers, a good source of intervention ideas is teachers who are experiencing relatively greater success with a particular student.

As the cases presented in Chapter 9 will demonstrate, the collaborative approach is a challenging and rewarding activity for school-based consultants. The challenge comes pri- marily from having to rein in your own tendencies to tell other professionals and parents what to do before listening to their ideas. The rewards come when the students start to improve their learning or behavior, and the consultees have a feeling of pride and empowerment because they made such a significant contribution to both the design and implementation of the interventions.

FaCtorS to ConSiDer in DeSigning or MoDiFying interventionS The plan that the consultant and the consultee agree on should meet at least the following criteria:

1. It makes sense in light of the referral; that is, it is data-based and (ideally) scientifically based.

2. It is designed with a specific objective in mind. 3. It is not overly labor-intensive; the consultee should not feel that he has been given an

undue burden to carry out. 4. All stakeholders are involved in and supportive of the plan. 5. It has some form of evaluation built in, with checkpoints established. 6. It meets the KISS standard: Keep it simple and sensible.

Given the limited resources most schools face, it is preferable to attempt interventions that have some scientific support. The What Works Clearinghouse (WWC), established by the U.S. Department of Education Institute of Educational Sciences, rates interventions, including commercially available programs, based on scientific studies that meet the WWC’s standards for research. For example, WWC rated the Lindamood Phoneme Sequencing (LiPS) program, a highly structured, small-group or individually administered reading

Chapter 3 • Problem-Solving Consultation in a Multi-Tiered System of Support 73

program, as having potentially positive effects on alphabetic principle, reading fluency, and math, but no discernible effects on reading comprehension, and potentially negative effects on writing for students with learning disabilities. Currently, the Web site offers practice guides on topics such as (1) assisting students who struggle with mathematics: RtI for ele- mentary and middle schools; (2) using student achievement data to support instructional decision making; and (3) helping students navigate the path to college: What high schools can do. The documents are written for practitioners by experts on the topic who rate their own suggestions as having either strong, moderate, or low levels of evidence. The extent to which a particular strategy or program is evidence-based can also be located by searching the WWC Web site, which may prove useful when selecting a new program or debating the merits of a program demanded by a lawyer representing a student with a disability. Additional online resources for intervention ideas include Interventions Central, the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, and the IRIS Center at Vanderbilt University. The books Interventions for Achievement and Behavior Problems in a Tier 3 Model Including RtI by Shinn and Walker (2010) and RtI Applications: Academic and Behavioral Interventions by Burns, Riley-Tillman, and VanDerHeyden (2012) have a number of evidence-based inter- vention ideas.

Consultants must balance the ease or acceptability of an intervention plan with the likeli- hood that it will work. Interventions that are scientifically based (i.e., evidence-based interven- tions [EBIs]) and that directly address the referral concern are more likely to be effective. However, the “perfect” plan should not be the enemy of a “good” plan. It is unlikely that a per- fect plan will ever be developed or implemented; it is very likely that a good plan will need some adjustments along the way.

Sometimes, and more often than we would like, interventions fail despite concerted efforts to problem-solve and adhere to the intervention plan. The collaborative philosophy is especially appropriate for this kind of situation because the consultee was included as an equal partner since the onset of the consultation and therefore should feel compelled to continue in the consultation process to determine appropriate program modifications. Occasionally, failure is complicated by divergent views over the goals of the consultation project. Though this seems to be obvious, sometimes the consultant fails to clarify the goals of the consultation at the out- set. The consultee may believe, for example, that the goal of a behavior change project is sim- ply to give the consultant enough data to produce an assessment plan for special education consideration. The consultant, however, is convinced that if the consultee would carry out the plan effectively, the student would never have to be considered for special education. The fol- lowing chapter addresses divergent goals and dealing with resistance, but this is always a dif- ficult situation. Closure occurs when the consultant and the consultee agree that the consultative effort ought to be terminated, at least for the present. It is also possible that a case may be closed because the relationship between the consultant and the consultee has deteriorated. In this case one or the other party simply provides his own closure even though the case is not resolved. Fortunately, this is not common. A more common observation is that some consulta- tion cases never seem to end; certain students need assistance throughout their school careers. Annual IEPs and transition planning formalize this consultation process for students with dis- abilities. Most cases, however, do reach at least a tentative conclusion, although the time it takes to do so is not easily predictable. Probably the best rule of thumb is to say that consulta- tion ends when the consultee feels it should, assuming the student’s needs are being met. The consultee has referred the student, so she is in the best position to know when the consultation should end. We hope this coincides with the project’s success.

Activity 3.7

Imagine that you are about to undergo a weight loss or physical fitness improvement program. Write a goal for yourself or your group in observable, measurable terms. How might you monitor your progress toward your goal? Describe some interventions to

reach your goal. What possible treatment- integrity data might you collect? Identify multiple methods (observation, self-report, permanent product) and multiple sources for these data (self-report, doctor’s report, spouse/partner).

74 Chapter 3 • Problem-Solving Consultation in a Multi-Tiered System of Support

treatMent integrity

Sanetti and Kratochwill (2009) defined treatment integrity, also referred to as treatment fidel- ity, as “the extent to which the essential intervention components are delivered in a compre- hensive and consistent manner by an interventionist trained to deliver the intervention” (p. 448). Noell (2009) describes two levels of treatment integrity to consider: the consulta- tion process and the intervention plan implementation. Because problem solving and the interventions derived from the consultation process are not always carried out in the way in which they were intended, it is necessary to assess whether and how well they occurred in order to deduce the effects of an intervention correctly. Interventions that are implemented sporadically or poorly illicit little to no change in students’ behaviors (Webster-Stratton, Reinke, Herman, & Newcomer, 2011). Public school classrooms, playgrounds, and family– home realities often constrain the complete implementation of consultation plans. Examples of conditions that can affect treatment integrity are lack of teacher know-how to implement the intervention; difficulties in the timely provision of reinforcement; the impracticality of shifting activities when needed; and the control of variables such as mood, behavior of other students, fire drills, and students coming and going (sometimes to receive needed support services).

Integrity data are essential to drawing valid conclusions about the outcome of an inter- vention because you need to know whether and how well the intervention occurred in order to judge its effectiveness (Sanetti & Kratochwill, 2009). Treatment integrity consists of both the quality and quantity of the interventions, and includes factors such as the competency of the interventionist, adherence to the treatment plan, intervention dosage, delivering the intervention to the appropriate students, and level of students’ engagement (Webster-Stratton et al., 2011). Treatment integrity and adaptation may seem to be mutually exclusive; how- ever, many suggested interventions need to be adapted to the context in which they will occur in order to be effective (Webster-Stratton et al., 2011). Different interventions may require different thresholds of adherence to be effective, and the minimum amount of integ- rity to produce the desired outcome may vary by student population characteristics (Vujnovic, Fabiano, Pariseau, & Naylor, 2013). More research is needed to identify the crit- ical strategies or principles of evidence-based interventions and the types of alterations that improve intervention effectiveness within a given context (Herman, Riley-Tillman, & Reinke, 2012).

Ongoing consultation is likely to produce better treatment integrity than the one-shot approach. Vujnovic and colleagues (2013) found teachers’ adherence to a yearlong daily behavior report card (DBRC) intervention (DBRCs are described in Chapter 6) for students with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder to be relatively good due to the monthly consul- tations. They noticed that treatment integrity actually increased immediately after each con- sultation meeting. Additional trends include lower treatment integrity during the first month of implementing the DBRCs as well as relatively poor treatment integrity on Fridays. Consultants may want to avoid starting interventions on Fridays, and they should continue to provide ongoing consultations even if fidelity is poor during the initial few weeks. Once interventions are established, they are likely to continue if ongoing behavioral consultation is provided.

Implementation of an intervention requires change in teacher behavior. Direct assessment of the adult behaviors involved in both consultation and providing supplemental instruction or behavior management techniques should be conducted because educators may overestimate the extent to which they adhered to best practices. For example, Lynch, Powers, and Hagans-Murillo (2004) found SST members to self-report a high level of fidelity to the problem-solving process, while a review of actual SST summary forms indicated a distinctly lower level of observance of the problem-solving steps. Specifically, teams had identified a distinct, measurable inter- vention goal (10% of the 92 plans reviewed) or gathered baseline data (5% of the plans) only sporadically despite over half of the team members’ reporting consistently engaging in these practices. A number of problem-solving consultation integrity checklists have been developed, such as the CBC Objectives Checklists (Sheridan, Eagle, Cowan, & Mickelson, 2001). The problem-solving steps listed in Figure 3.1 can also be converted into an integrity checklist by adding an adherence to a problem-solving scale, such as 1 = not observed, 2 = needs

Chapter 3 • Problem-Solving Consultation in a Multi-Tiered System of Support 75

improvement, 3 = present, and 4 = consistent and comprehensive, or 1 = did not occur and 2 = occurred. Inexperienced consultants are encouraged to solicit assistance from a peer or supervisor to conduct frequent integrity checks of their consultation practices, and more sea- soned consultants are encouraged to seek such professional feedback on their consultation skills at least once per year.

One of the outcomes of a consultation meeting may be a treatment-integrity checklist that is tailored to the intervention plan. The consultant can use the checklist to engage in some spot checking, and the consultee can also use it to guide her actions or to review and reflect midway through the intervention phase. Ideally, a combination of methods is used to assess intervention integrity. For example, Sheridan, Swanger-Gagné, Welch, Kwon, and Garbacz (2009) combined permanent products (e.g., home–school notes, completion of a sticker chart, amount written in a student log), self-report, and direct observation to assess teachers’ and parents’ adherence to behavioral intervention plans and found considerable consistency across all three measures. They also reported a high degree of intervention integrity across both parents and teachers, which raises the question of whether measuring treatment integrity can lead to improved integrity. It is possible that the act of breaking the intervention plan into small, discrete steps improved inter- ventionists’ understanding of what it was they were expected to do. It is also possible that the knowledge that someone would be checking on their activities inspired greater effort to imple- ment the intervention as planned. The example treatment-integrity checklist in Figure 3.6 can be modified to measure the quality of a targeted (Tier 2) small-group intervention. It could be used as either a self-report checklist by the interventionist or as a treatment fidelity observation by a consultant, or both.

treatment acceptability

Dart and colleagues (2012) found that providing teachers with the opportunity to test-drive the intervention led to improved treatment integrity and student engaged time. Consultants engaged six teachers in behavioral consultation to identify a treatment plan for specific students with behavior problems. One of four interventions (i.e., self-monitoring, check-in/check-out, response cost, and behavior specific praise) was suggested. (See Chapter 6 for a description of these four interventions.) Two of the six teachers exhibited high treatment adherence during the baseline phase and were subsequently dropped from the study. (If this study is indicative of the outcome of most behavioral consultations, one can expect only 33% of teachers will actually attempt the intervention identified in a traditional behavioral consultation.) The four remaining resistant teachers were prompted to implement the other three interventions briefly over two days during a specified 30-minute block of time. At the end of the test-drive phase, the teachers rank-ordered the three interventions from most to least acceptable. Next, the teachers implemented the intervention they found most acceptable, and their treatment integrity dramatically improved compared to baseline.

Teacher acceptability and treatment fidelity have been linked for decades; it makes good sense that teachers are more likely to implement an intervention they find acceptable. However, Dart and colleagues observed that teachers do not always know whether an intervention will be to their liking until they try it. As a general rule of thumb, simpler interventions are more acceptable than complex ones, and interventions that require fewer resources are more popular than those that require more. In fact, in the Dart et al. study, the consultants provide all the materials necessary for implementing each intervention. Finally, teachers will find interven- tions that they don’t know how to do or how to do well to be unacceptable. In this case, perfor- mance feedback from the consultant can help.

performance Feedback

Noell (2009) reviewed the growing body of research on how to improve treatment integrity and concluded that performance feedback is one of the most studied and effective approaches to promoting intervention integrity in schools. Consultants who follow up with consultees by providing data on how well an intervention is working should see greater intervention integ- rity, particularly if the data are graphed (Noell, 2009). For example, Codding and Smythe (2008) found that simply providing high school biology teachers with performance feedback

76 Chapter 3 • Problem-Solving Consultation in a Multi-Tiered System of Support

data on the amount of time students spent transitioning resulted in shorter transitions and improved academic engaged time. One of the most compelling studies of the effects of per- formance feedback compared three types of consultation follow-up activities: (a) weekly plan evaluation interviews; (b) weekly plan evaluation interviews with an emphasis on the social significance of the consultee’s efforts; and (c) performance feedback meetings on the perma- nent products of the intervention, graphed student-progress-monitoring data, and treatment- integrity data, including the number of intervention steps completed or omitted (Noell et al., 2005). Teachers randomly assigned to the performance feedback condition had significantly greater treatment integrity, and their students had better outcomes than those in the other two groups. There was no relationship between treatment integrity and intervention acceptability, partly because teachers in all three conditions rated the intervention acceptability quite high.

Figure 3.6 Academic intervention fidelity checklist

Date: ________ Teacher: ________________ Consultant: _____________

Weekly Fidelity Survey: Targeted and Intensive Interventions

I used/observed the following general strategies during small-group intervention (check):

Never Once Several

Times (2-3)

Frequently (4 – 20 times

per group)

Modeling target skill (letter–sound association, think-alouds, etc.)

Explicit instruction on reading skills

Elicit background information

Frequent and accurate student response rate (every student every

minute)

Immediate corrective feedback for errors

Positive feedback/encourage effort/ performance-based rewards

Quick instructional pace

Choral and independent responding

Target Behavior(s): Additional Strategies Used:

❒ Vocabulary ❒ Repeated Reading

❒ Fluency ❒ Listening Passage Preview

❒ Comprehension ❒ Text at student’s reading level

❒ Phonemic awareness ❒ Graphic organizers/story maps

❒ Phonics/decoding ❒ My turn, together, your turn

❒ Other: ____________________ ❒ Other: ____________________

Targeted group (below benchmark): Number of students_____________

Pulled _____________ times per week for ____________ minutes each.

Intensive group (far below benchmark): Number of students_____________

Pulled _____________ times per week for ____________ minutes each.

Notes/Comments:

Chapter 3 • Problem-Solving Consultation in a Multi-Tiered System of Support 77

Activity 3.8

Find and watch the video Talking about Teaching at https://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=gRTlAIOuARo. Discuss the strate- gies Jim Knight uses to provide performance

feedback in a nonthreatening way. What con- ditions or conversations may have occurred prior to this meeting to set the stage for this instructional coaching to occur?

Activity 3.9

Discuss the way performance feedback is pro- vided to varsity athletes, actors, or debaters. What purpose does performance feedback

serve? How is it best delivered? What unintended effects may result from performance feedback in these contexts or in a school context?

This led the authors to conclude that “acceptability is not sufficient to ensure implementa- tion” (p. 102, emphasis in original). A meta-analysis of 36 performance feedback studies found performance feedback to increase the fidelity of implementing a new intervention, across preschool through high school grade levels, in both general and special education classrooms and to be more effective in increasing treatment integrity for academic skills compared to behavioral skills (Solomon, Klein, & Politylo, 2012). Performance feedback that is delivered immediately or within a day of attempting the intervention produced more favora- ble results than following up a week later (Solomon et al., 2012).

Jim Knight, from the Kansas Coaching Project, has produced a video of himself providing performance feedback to a teacher, which you can find at https://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=gRTlAIOuARo. In this video, Knight reviews a video of the teacher teaching. He begins the consultation by praising the many positive instructional strategies utilized by the teacher and, through the course of their discussion, makes a few suggestions based on the stu- dents’ response to instruction. The video concludes with four easily understood suggestions (labelled “classroom takeaways”) such as (a) emphasize effort and (b) keep everyone working with “cushion time” activities. This video is a great example of providing collaborative consulta- tion to improve general education instruction (i.e., Tier 1).

assessing treatment integrity

Interventions in schools are often multifaceted. They often include many different steps because of a multitude of antecedent and consequent events involving multiple school per- sonnel, family members, and even the student and his peers. Thus, an intervention can degrade in many different ways, and we may not know specifically how good is good enough (Noell, 2009). For example, if an intervention is implemented only 30% of the time and most of the essential and some of the nonessential steps are omitted, can we reasonably expect improved student outcomes? If you consider the consultation process (and not the interven- tion plan implementation), would a problem-solving SST that fails to engage in the first step of “identifying student’s strengths” by launching right into the problem identification phase represent a meaningful deviation from protocol and thus compromise the outcomes? In actu- ality, there is much we do not know yet about which elements of consultation are directly linked to improved consultee and student functioning (Frank & Kratochwill, 2009; Noell, 2009; Sanetti & Kratochwill, 2009). We do know, however, that to do nothing is to invite failure. There is good evidence that problem-solving consultation leads to intervention plans that are likely to match the student’s need and incorporate evidence-based interventions. But consultants cannot stop there and pray that all will go well. To be optimally effective, they must collaboratively design acceptable interventions and follow up with performance feed- back and intervention-integrity assessment. The probability of treatment integrity increases

78 Chapter 3 • Problem-Solving Consultation in a Multi-Tiered System of Support

with continuing consultant involvement. One of the realities of excessive consultant–consultee caseloads is the inability of the consultant to monitor each case carefully. Be sure, when acting as a consultant, that you have reviewed the facts about each case before seeing the consultee for a follow-up session or before making a classroom observation so that you can remember the details of the background and treatment plan. An intervention integrity check- list would provide this information. This preparation inspires the consultee’s confidence in you and in the process, and it enables you to determine if the treatment is being carried out with integrity.

Treatment-integrity data can be collected through self-report, direct observation, and per- manent products (Sheridan et al., 2009). An integrity checklist like the one in Figure 3.6 could capture any number of treatment-integrity dimensions, including intervention delivery, students’ responses, and students’ outcomes. Intervention delivery could be measured in any number of ways, including the following:

1. Number of components that were present (e.g., on March 4, three of the four steps to implement a daily behavior report card were present)

2. Duration and frequency (e.g., Sam participated in a 20-minute phonemic awareness groups three times per week)

3. Quality (e.g., on a scale of 0 to 5, the quality of the intervention observed on March 4 was a 3 based on the amount of instructional time devoted to the target skills [7 of the 30  minutes were lost to inefficient transition time], student level of engagement [two-thirds of the students were active participants], and extent to which individual differences were taken into account).

Echevarria and colleagues (2011) suggest that it is important to use treatment-integrity measures that can capture a continuum of indicators because measuring only whether or not a feature of an intervention occurred fails to capture the quality of the intervention or instruc- tional program. In their study, all of the teachers trained on the Sheltered Instruction Observation Protocol (SIOP) model (see Chapter 7 for a description of SIOP) for teaching English language learners implemented each of the SIOP instructional features to some degree, but the teachers classified as high implementers checked more frequently for under- standing, modeled vocabulary words, and provided students with more opportunities to respond than did the low implementers. The high implementers also used a wider variety of teaching techniques, repeated the directions more frequently, and explained concepts in multi- ple ways. As a whole, students of the high implementers made more progress in science than the students of the low implementers.

A combination of quantitative and qualitative data is ideal for assessing treatment integrity. The quantitative data may provide information about how often the intervention occurred, while the qualitative data may inform the team about the quality of the intervention. Another way to assess treatment integrity is to collect information from multiple sources. For example, in trian- gulation, the consultant may conduct observations, the consultee may complete self-report checklists, and the student may be interviewed about how well he thought the intervention worked and whether his confidence and skill improved as a result of the intervention. Interpreting data from multiple methods and sources may be complicated, particularly if they are contradic- tory, and there is no empirically derived approach to integrating these data to determine overall treatment integrity (Sheridan et al., 2009).

Like all issues in school-based services, the trick is finding the time to collect the data. Evaluating a permanent product like a daily behavior report card may take less time than conducting repeated observations. When designing or selecting an intervention, consider which interventions might generate treatment-integrity data most easily. The onus of collect- ing treatment-integrity data can be shared between the consultant and consultee, but the bur- den to the consultee should not be so great as to inhibit the consultee’s motivation to deliver the intervention. Collecting treatment-integrity data is essential to making informed deci- sions about a student’s response to an intervention and level of need because students don’t benefit from interventions that don’t exist. Currently, there are very few validated treatment- integrity instruments for school settings. Treatment-integrity protocols in clinical settings have been developed for psychotherapy and substance abuse (Schulte, East, & Parker, 2009).

Chapter 3 • Problem-Solving Consultation in a Multi-Tiered System of Support 79

Even among researchers, little attention has historically been paid to treatment integrity. A review of four school psychology journals from 1995 to 2008 found only half of the school- based intervention studies published in these journal contained treatment-integrity data (Sanetti, Gritter, & Dobey, 2011).

While greater attention is now paid to documenting treatment integrity in research, there remains almost no scientific knowledge about the extent to which consultees general- ize the skills or interventions they acquire through the consultation process (Coffee & Kratochwill, 2013). Because the goal of consultation is not only to problem-solve for the referred student (i.e., client) but also to increase the capacity of the consultee to respond effectively to other students with similar needs, it would be helpful to know if teachers apply what they learn through consultation and intervention implementation to other children, in different settings, over time. Coffee and Kratochwill (2013) found very little evidence of treatment generalization in their study. In this study, a consultant helped to develop an inter- vention based on delivering four to five praise statements within a 15-minute interval. The consultant followed up with a booster session (i.e., a review of the intervention plan), then later prompted the teachers to try the intervention with other students (i.e., generalization prompt). The consultant conducted an interview designed to promote generalization (i.e., generalization training). However, implementation remained low for both the target student and other students who displayed similar needs. This led the authors to conclude “that even the most straightforward and simple treatment with teachers who agreed to implement it, reported acceptability, and expressed satisfaction with the consultation process was not done” (p. 29). Thus, the most optimal means for getting teachers to implement interventions remains somewhat a mystery.

Summary

Collaborative problem solving takes on various forms and features depending on the context, training, and intent of the consultant and consultee, but at its heart it has a data- based, outcomes-oriented focus on providing evidence- based interventions proportional to students’ needs. It fits well within a multi-tiered system support delivery model. But intentions and proven processes are only as good as the fruit they bear. Consultees’ acceptability of an intervention is desirable but not sufficient to guarantee treatment imple- mentation or effectiveness. One of the roles of the consult- ant is to help the consultee understand the importance of using interventions that have a good probability of being effective. Another objective is to support consultees by assisting with collecting necessary materials and ongoing data on treatment integrity and student progress, as well as providing fairly rapid assistance when these data suggest the intervention needs to be adjusted. Consultation should be ongoing, with follow-up maintenance meetings sched- uled ahead of time. Providing performance feedback and allowing teachers to pilot-test a few interventions may increase treatment integrity. A consultee may think a pro- posed intervention is a good idea, only to discover it did not work well in her classroom or she didn’t really know how to execute it.

Some consultees expect quick results from well- planned interventions. Assuming the referral was for a

fairly significant problem (Tier 2 or Tier 3), it is unrealis- tic to expect a rapid turnaround of a student’s perfor- mance, either academic or behavioral. An experienced consultant helps the consultee understand the nature of habit strength in the perpetuation of behaviors. Long- standing habits cause people to persist in, or return to, behaviors that may have been inefficient or self-defeating. Expecting consultees to change some of their teaching or parenting habits in short order and to maintain these changes in the face of sometimes slow progress in the referred students may be challenging without explicit support from the consultant. By collecting sensitive pro- gress-monitoring data (which may display student improvement that the consultee does not readily notice on the global scale of functioning within a busy class- room), consultants can reinforce consultees’ intervention efforts.

The problem-solving steps are logically and sequen- tially organized and presented within an MTSS frame- work, which suggests a linear progression. Variations occur, however, and the competent consultant will learn when and how to allow for, or encourage, deviations. Trying to keep a complex human enterprise such as con- sultation flowing in a lockstep fashion is like trying to herd cats. It is better to learn to anticipate and even enjoy the deviations.

80 Chapter 3 • Problem-Solving Consultation in a Multi-Tiered System of Support

References Bandura, A. (1978). The self-system in reciprocal determinism.

American Psychologist, 33, 344–358. Bergan, J. R. (1977). Behavioral consultation. Columbus, OH:

Merrill. Bergan, J. R., & Kratochwill, T. R. (1990). Behavioral consulta-

tion and therapy. New York, NY: Plenum Press. Burns, M. K., Riley-Tillman, T. C., & VanDerHeyden, A. M.

(2012). RTI applications: Academic and behavioral interven- tions. New York, NY: Guilford.

Burns, M. K., Wiley, H. I., & Viglietta, E. (2008). Best practices in implementing effective problem-solving teams. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology (5th ed., pp. 1633–1644). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.

Caplan, G., & Caplan, R. (1993). Mental health consultation and collaboration. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Case, L. P., Speece, D. L., & Molloy, D. E. (2003). The valid- ity of a response-to-instruction paradigm to identify reading disabilities: A longitudinal analysis of individual differ- ences and contextual factors. School Psychology Review, 32, 557–582.

Christ, T. J. (2008). Best practices in problem analysis. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school psy- chology (Vol. 5, pp. 159–176). Washington, DC: National Association of School Psychologists.

Christenson, S. L., & Cleary, M. (1990). Consultation and the parent–educator partnership: A perspective. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 1(3), 219–241.

Christenson, S. L., & Conoley, J. C. (1992). Home–school col- laboration: Enhancing children’s academic and social com- petence. Silver Springs, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.

Codding, R. S., & Smythe, C. A. (2008) Using performance feed- back to decrease classroom transition time and examine collat- eral effects on academic engagement. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 18, 325–345.

Coffee, G., & Kratochwill, T. R. (2013). Examining teacher use of praise taught during behavioral consultation: Implementation and generalization considerations. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 23, 1–35.

Crowe, E. C., Connor, C. M., & Petscher, Y. (2009). Examining the core: Relations among reading curricula, poverty and first through third grade reading achievement. Journal of School Psychology, 47, 187–214.

Daly, E. J., Andersen, M., Gortmaker, V., & Turner, A. (2006). Using experimental analysis to identify reading interven- tion: Connecting the dots. Behavior Analyst Today, 7(1), 133–150.

Dart, E. H., Cook, C. R., Collins, T. A., Gresham, F. M., & Chenier, J. S. (2012). Test driving interventions to increase treatment integrity and student outcomes. School Psychology Review, 41, 467–481.

Deno, S., Espin, C., & Fuchs, L. (2002). Evaluation strate- gies for preventing and remediating basic skill deficits. In M. Shinn, H. Walker, & G. Stoner (Eds.), Interventions for academic and behavior problems (Vol. 2, pp. 213–242). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.

Deno, S. L., Reschly, A. L., Lembke, E. S., Magnusson, D., Callender, S. A., Windram, H., et al. (2008). Developing a school-wide progress-monitoring system. Psychology in the Schools, 46, 44–55.

Dettmer, P., Dyck, N., & Thurston, L. P. (1999). Consultation, collaboration and teamwork for students with special needs (3rd ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

Echevarria, J., Richards-Tutor, C., Chinn, V. P., & Ratleff, P. A. (2011). Did they get it? The role of fidelity in teaching English Learners. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 54(6), 425–434.

Erchul, W. P. (2011). School consultation and response-to- intervention: A tale of two literatures. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 21, 191–208.

Esler, A., Godber, Y., & Christenson, S. L. (2008). Best practices in supporting school-family partnerships. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology (Vol. 5, pp. 917–936). Washington, DC: National Association of School Psychologists.

Flanagan, D. P., Ortiz, S. O., & Alfonso, V. C. (2008). Response to intervention (RtI) and cognitive testing approaches provide dif- ferent but complementary data sources that inform SLD identi- fication. Communiqué, 36(5), 16–17.

Frank, J. L., & Kratochwill, T. R. (2009). School-based problem-solving consultation: Plotting a new course for evidence-based research and practice in consultation. In W. P. Erchul & S. M. Sheridan (Eds.), Handbook of research in school consultation (pp. 13–32). New York, NY: Routledge.

Fuchs, D., Fuchs, L. S., & Stecker, P. M. (2010). The “blur- ring” of special education in a new continuum of general education placements and services. Exceptional Children, 76, 301–323.

Fuchs, L. S., & Fuchs, D. (1998). Treatment validity: A unifying concept for reconceptualizing the identification of learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 13, 204–219.

Fuchs, L. S., & Fuchs, D. (1999). Monitoring student progress toward the development of reading competence: A review of three forms of classroom-based assessment. School Psychology Review, 28, 659–671.

Gamm, S., Elliot, J., Wright Halbert, J., Price-Baugh, R., Hall, R., Walston, D., Uro, G., et al. (2012). Common Core State Standards and diverse urban students: Using multi-tiered systems of support. Washington, DC: Council of Great City Schools.

Good, R. H., III, & Kaminski, R. A. (2002). Dynamic indicators of basic early literacy skills (6th ed.). Eugene, OR: Institute for the Development of Educational Achievement.

Gresham, F. M., Restori, A. F., & Cook, C. R. (2008). To test or not to test: Issues pertaining to response to intervention and cogni- tive testing. Communiqué, 37(1), 5–7.

Gutkin, T. B. (2012). Ecological psychology: Replacing the medical model paradigm for school-based psychological and psychoeducational services. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 22, 1–20.

Chapter 3 • Problem-Solving Consultation in a Multi-Tiered System of Support 81

Hagans, K., & Powers, K. (2013). Multi-tiered systems of support: Recommendations for the elimination of barriers to implemen- tation fidelity in California. Napa, CA: California Services for Technical Assistance and Training.

Herman, K. C., Riley-Tillman, T. C., & Reinke, W. M. (2012). The  role of assessment in a prevention science framework. School Psychology Review, 41, 306–314.

Hintze, J. M, Stoner, G., & Bull, M. H. (2000). Analogue assess- ment. In E. S. Shapiro & T. R. Kratochwill (Eds.), Conducting school-based assessments of child and adolescent behavior (pp. 55–77). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Kamphaus, R. W., DiStefano, C., Dowdy, E., Eklund, K., & Dunn, A. R. (2010). Determining the presence of a problem: Comparing two approaches for detecting youth behavioral risk. School Psychology Review, 39(3), 395–407.

Kearns, D. M., & Fuchs, D. (2013). Does cognitively focused instruction improve the academic performance of low- achieving students? Exceptional Children, 79, 263–290.

Lynch, M., Powers, K., & Hagans-Murillo, K., (2004). The impact of problem-solving prereferral interventions on stu- dent achievement. Houston, TX: National Association of School Psychologists Annual Conference; Burlingame: California Association of School Psychologists Annual Convention.

Murawski, W. W., & Hughes, C. E. (2009). Response-to- intervention, collaboration, and co-teaching: A logical com- bination for successful systemic change. Preventing School Failure, 53(4), 267–277.

Noell, G. H. (2009). Research examining the relationships among consultation process, treatment integrity, and out- comes. In W. P. Erchul & S. M. Sheridan (Eds.), Handbook of research in school consultation (pp. 323–342). New York, NY: Routledge.

Noell, G. H., Freeland, J. T., Witt, J. C., & Gansle, K. A. (2001). Using brief assessments to identify effective interventions for individual students. Journal of School Psychology, 39, 335–355.

Noell, G. H., Witt, J. C., Slider, N. J., Connell, J. E., Gatti, S. L., Williams, K. L., et al. (2005). Treatment implementation fol- lowing behavioral consultation in schools: A comparison of three follow-up strategies. School Psychology Review, 34, 87–106.

Powers, K., Hagans, K., & Busse, R. T. (2008). School psy- chologists as instructional consultants within a response-to- intervention model. California School Psychologist, 13, 41–54.

Project AAIMS. (2007). Project AAIMS algebra progress monitoring measures [Basic Skills, Algebra Foundations, Translations, Content Analysis]. Ames, IA: Iowa State University, College of Human Sciences, Department of Curriculum and Instruction.

Pulles, S. M., Maki, K. E., Hodgson, J. R., & Kanive, R. (2014). Relationship between reading inventory instructional level and student reading performance. Washington, DC: National Association of School Psychologists.

Sanetti, L. M. H., Gritter, K. L., & Dobey, L. M. (2011). Treatment integrity of interventions with children in the school psychol- ogy literature from 1995 to 2008. School Psychology Review, 40(1), 72–84.

Sanetti, L. M. H., & Kratochwill, T. R. (2009). Toward developing a science of treatment integrity: Introduction to the special series. School Psychology Review, 38(4), 445–459.

Schulte, A. C., Easton, J. E., & Parker, J. (2009). Advances in treatment integrity research: Multidisciplinary perspectives on the conceptualization, measurement, and enhancement of treatment integrity. School Psychology Review, 38(4), 460–475.

Shapiro, E. S. (2011). Academic skills problems: Direct assessment and intervention (4th ed.). New York, NY: Guilford.

Shapiro, E. S., & Gebhardt, S. N. (2012). Comparing computer- adaptive and curriculum-based measurement methods of assessment. School Psychology Review, 41, 295–305.

Sheridan, S. M., Bovaird, J. A., Glover, T. A., Garbacz, S. A., Witte, A., & Kwon, K. (2012). Randomized trial examining the effects of conjoint behavioral consultation and the mediating role of the parent-teacher relationship. School Psychology Review, 41, 23–46.

Sheridan, S. M., Eagle, J. W., Cowan, R. J., & Mikelson, W. (2001). The effects of conjoint behavioral consultation: Results of a four-year investigation. Journal of School Psychology, 39, 361–385.

Sheridan, S. M., Swanger-Gagné, M., Welch, G. W., Kwon, K., & Garbacz, S. A. (2009). Fidelity measurement in consultation: Psychometric issues and preliminary examination. School Psychology Review, 38(4), 476–495.

Shinn, M. R., & Bamonto, S. (2008). Advanced applications of curriculum-based measurement: “Big ideas” and avoiding confusion. In M. R. Shinn (Ed.), Advanced applications of curriculum-based measurement (pp. 1–31). New York, NY: Guilford.

Shinn, M. R., & Walker, H. M. (2010). Interventions for achievement and behavior problems in a Tier 3 model includ- ing RtI. Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.

Skinner, C. H., Rhymer, K. N., & McDaniel, E. C. (2000). Naturalistic direct observation in educational settings. In E. S. Shapiro & T. R. Kratochwill (Eds.), Conducting school-based assessment of children and adolescent behavior (pp. 21–54). New York, NY: Guilford.

Solomon, B. G., Klein, S. A., & Politylo, B. C. (2012). The effect of performance feedback on teachers’ treatment integrity: A meta-analysis of the single-case literature. School Psychology Review, 41, 160–175.

Sprick, R. (2009). Doing discipline differently. Principal Leadership, 9(5), 18–22.

Steege, M. W., & Watson, T. S. (2009). Conducting school-based functional assessments: A practitioner’s guide (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Guilford.

Sugai, G., & Horner, R. H. (2009). Responsiveness-to- intervention and school-wide positive behavior supports: Integration of multi-tiered system approaches. Exceptionality, 17, 223–237.

Vujnovic, R., Fabiano, G. A., Pariseau, M. E., & Naylor, J. (2013). Parameters of adherence to a yearlong daily report card inter- vention for students with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disor- der. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 23, 140–163.

82 Chapter 3 • Problem-Solving Consultation in a Multi-Tiered System of Support

Walker, H., & Shinn, M. (2002). Structuring school-based inter- ventions to achieve integrated primary, secondary, and tertiary prevention goals for safe and effective schools. In M. Shinn, H. Walker, & G. Stoner (Eds.), Interventions for academic and behavior problems (Vol. 2). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.

Webster-Stratton, C., Reinke, W. M., Herman, K. C., & Newcomer, L. L. (2011). The incredible years teacher class- room management training: The methods and principles that support fidelity of training delivery. School Psychology Review, 40, 509–529.

Woodcock, R. W., McGrew, K. S., & Mather, N. (2001). Woodcock- Johnson Tests of Cognition and Achievement (3rd ed.) Itasca, IL: Riverside.

Ysseldyke, J. (2009). When politics trumps science: Generalization from a career of research on assessment, decision making, and public policy. Communique, 38(4), 2–4.

Ysseldyke, J., & Christenson, S. (2002). Functional assessment of academic behaviors. Longmont, CO: Sopris West.

Communication and Interpersonal Skills

Chapter 4

Ms. Baker, a third-grade teacher, was asked to comment on her work with Ms. Osprey, who is the resource specialist-consultant at her school. Ms. Baker said she greatly enjoyed her work with the consultant because she thought that Ms. Osprey listened to her ideas; knew how to help her describe problems accurately; and helped, not by taking over her job but by showing her how to deal with problems more effectively. Together they clarified issues regarding a schedule for Ms. Osprey’s direct work in Ms. Baker’s class. Ms. Baker would gladly welcome help from the consultant again.

Mr. Cook (a seventh-grade teacher-consultee), commenting on his work with Dr. Tilly, the school psychologist (the consultant) at Williams Junior High, said that he was not happy with his recent consultation experience. He thought that Dr. Tilly acted like he knew everything, didn’t listen well, rushed to conclusions based on previous cases that he wanted to brag about, and implied that the consultee should have been able to solve the problem without having referred it to the consultant. The consultant later described this event as a success, boasting to other teachers that he had helped Mr. Cook with a complicated case.

83

Learning Outcomes

4.1 Understand the elements of effective communication skills.

4.2 Apply your knowledge in developing a communication and interpersonal style that is likely to result in personal and professional acceptance by consultees and in the development of effective interventions.

4.3 Recognize the nature of power in interpersonal relationships and how consultants can develop and maintain a collaboratively oriented power base.

4.4 Understand the nature, types, and causes of resistance to consultation, and identify strategies for dealing proactively with resistance, both individual and systemic.

4.5 Develop collaborative working relationships with culturally and linguistically diverse families and colleagues.

This chapter discusses and analyzes the subcomponents of communication and interpersonal skills, as well as two related phenomena: power and resistance. As the chapter-opening vignettes indicate, these interdependent phenomena occur simultaneously as the consultant and the consultee deal with one another. In the first case, the consultant’s effective and positive communication and interpersonal skills made Ms. Baker feel that consultation was a very use- ful experience, one that she wants to repeat. In the second case, Mr. Cook left the consultation experience with the exact opposite feeling. Dr. Tilly needs to improve his communication and interpersonal skills, stop generating resistance, and stop abusing his power position. In both cases, the consultees were influenced by the way in which they and their consultants were communicating (verbally and nonverbally) with each other and the way in which they were relating (bonding, distancing, merging, dissolving, accepting, resisting) as the consultation sessions proceeded. As Kurpius and Rozecki (1993) have said, “If the consultant does not have a mastery of the art of communication and an understanding of the intricacies of interpersonal interaction, the consultation process will most often appear lifeless and unlikely to be of long- lasting help” (p. 143).

84 Chapter 4 • Communication and Interpersonal Skills

When school-based consultants enter into a consultation role with consultees, they need to remember that they are playing multiple subroles and engaging in many activities that are essen- tial to the consultative function, such as gathering and considering data, generating plans, identi- fying resources, teaching skills, encouraging, clarifying, modifying plans, and so on. These general activities are supported by the communication and interpersonal skills that are presented in this chapter. The third primary skill needed by school consultants, problem solving, was described in Chapter 3.

CommuniCation SkillS

Communication has been defined in a variety of ways, all intended to indicate that the process requires a sender of a message, the message itself, and a receiver. Without these three compo- nents, plus some others, there is no communication. Communication requires an exchange of meaning where each participant recognizes and/or tries to influence the other’s experience or beliefs. It is important to recognize that the message received is not always the message intended to be sent. Various sources of noise, such as prior experiences with the consultant or different expectations about what will be the outcome of the consultation, commonly result in miscom- munication. Attending, active listening, reframing, empathy, keeping a goal orientation, and asking questions are among the many skills needed for effective communication. All will be discussed in the following chapter subsections.

attending

Nothing is more annoying in a conversation than having a listener who isn’t paying attention. Attending skills are characterized by good facial mannerisms such as eye contact, head nods, and squinting or lifting of the eyebrows as appropriate. Consultants need to be careful not to let per- sonal habits interfere with their communication style and detract from it. Some people squint too much, twirl their hair, look at their nails, or look at the clock or their watch every 30 seconds. All of these tell the listener that they aren’t paying attention, possibly because they are bored or because they are anxious for the consultee to stop talking so they can pass on their opinions about the situation and their remedies for it.

Beyond the surface appearance of attending, however, are the more important internal attending skills, which require a balance among listening to the words the consultee is using; translating them according to your experiences and preferred theories (your personal filter); and blocking out your urges to interrupt, pass judgment, or rush to a conclusion. Urging your con- sultee to cut to the chase is a good fantasy but will give him the clear impression that he and his perceptions of the problem and possible solutions are not important.

Activity 4.1

In teams of two (dyads), have one person try to speak to another who seems bored, uninter- ested, distant, or otherwise nonattending, per- haps behaving as others have done to you.

Discuss how this makes the speaker feel. Then have one of the partners use better attending skills, modifying them until they feel comforta- ble both to the speaker and the listener.

active (Reflective) listening

Active, or reflective, listening as a communication skill has gained in popularity since the 1970s because of the works of Carkhuff (1969), Ginott (1972), and Gordon (1974). Active listening shows the speaker that you have heard both the subject content and the emotional content of her message. The active listener reflects back the speaker’s words so that the speaker knows that her words have been heard accurately and that the listener has understood the feelings behind the words.

Gordon (1974, pp. 48–49) presented 12 “roadblocks” to active listening. These roadblocks are methods or tactics that have the effect, wittingly or otherwise, of blocking communication. Three of these roadblocks are presented here with examples of what a consultant might say to

Chapter 4 • Communication and Interpersonal Skills 85

demonstrate each one. Of course, using these roadblocks will likely spoil a consultation relation- ship. Imagine how you would feel if any of the following statements were made to you!

1. Ordering, commanding, directing. “Never mind what might happen; just ignore the stu- dent when he acts out. You have to do it; it’s a ‘best practice.’”

2. Advising, offering solutions or suggestions. “Well, be that as it may, it would be best to do it my way. I’ve seen it work before in other classes; it ought to work for you.”

3. Name-calling, stereotyping, labeling. “You’re like a lot of beginning teachers I’ve seen. You’re afraid that if you’re firm, the kids won’t like you. I call that being wishy-washy.”

Other subskills of active listening include the use of prompts, clarification-seeking, sum- marizing, and paraphrasing (Busse & Beaver, 2000). An example of a prompt is the following:

“You’re feeling angry because Ms. Brown has said some things that you don’t think are fair.”

Generally a response like this makes the speaker feel that you have really been attending to his message, not just to his words, and that you want to hear more about it.

Here are some examples of clarification-seeking:

“I’m not sure that I understand what is happening between you two. Could you tell me more about it?”

“Tell me more about his rudeness to the other children. Just what does he say to them?”

“So what you’re telling me is that only the cold-stare technique seems to be having any effect. Is that correct?”

The following are examples of summarizing:

“Now, let me summarize to be sure I’m hearing everything you’ve told me: [followed by a list of summary points].”

“Okay, here’s what I’m hearing: _______. Are those the main points?”

Paraphrasing involves restating in one’s own words what another person has just said. Here is an example of Speaker A saying something, and Speaker B paraphrasing it:

Speaker A: “Without a full-time aide, I don’t see how I’ll be able to give these inclusion kids what they need.”

Speaker B: “You’re concerned that the children with disabilities in your class won’t get what they need without the assistance of an aide.”

One of the reasons for engaging in active listening, apart from the feelings of connected- ness it gives a consultee, is that it keeps us close to the facts. For example, not summarizing accurately can get us into the position so well demonstrated by the “telegraph” or “whisper” game, where a message is passed in a whisper down a line of people. After about eight people have relayed the message in a whisper to one person, each in succession, it is almost certain that the information will have changed, sometimes dramatically, from the way it started.

Reframing

Reframing a problem in a positive way promotes problem solving. One of the enduring concerns of school-based consultants is the necessity of keeping consultees and other involved constitu- ents in a positive, problem-oriented frame of mind. When problems are difficult and compli- cated, or when consultees think that key individuals may not be carrying through with appropriate interventions, they may become discouraged and even negative. Reframing is one of the tech- niques that may be used to put a more positive spin on a conversation so that people may be more encouraged to keep trying in the face of discouraging events. Here is a quick example:

“Phan is a horrible child, he can’t get anything right. It doesn’t matter what I do!”

“I definitely agree that Phan is struggling with following the school rules, and during my observations, he complied with only 60% of your requests. Why don’t we see if we can get his compliance rate up to 80%, which is actually typical of children his age. I think with some support and interventions, we can increase his success.”

86 Chapter 4 • Communication and Interpersonal Skills

Empathy

Empathy is implied by active listening, but we highlight it because it is crucial to the consultant’s general style and demeanor. Teachers and parents expect professionals in the field of education to be empathic. They want educators to listen to their concerns, to understand them at a level greater than just the word meanings alone, and not to rush to pre-formed solutions. Indeed, empathy is one of the most important, and often one of the most difficult, skills and attitudes that school consultants need to acquire. Consultants should always strive to be empathetic—but not to engage in therapy. It is not the job of the consultant to address a consultee’s deep, long-lasting issues or current personal crises. Rather, the consultant should be able to provide appropriate referrals to mental health professionals and redirect the conversation to problem solving about the student, not the consultee. For example, a psychologist found that she was spending more and more time each month conversing with her colleagues about their current crises and mood swings. Obviously word had gotten out that she was a really good person to talk to. However, the psychologist realized that she was there to provide mental health services to the students, not their teachers, so she identified four or five respected clinicians who accepted the district’s insur- ance plan and began to refer her colleagues. In doing so, she freed up her time to run more groups with her students.

Another way a consultant can display empathy is by allowing a consultee or group member to save face after making an unproductive and possibly unprofessional remark. When tensions are high, people can lose themselves in the moment and make very unthoughtful comments. It is the ethical responsibility of the consultant never to allow harmful or pejorative comments to go unchecked; to say nothing is to potentially condone the comment. However, you can help the consultee to reframe and reflect on the statement in a way that communicates empathy for her or his situation. In the case of group consultations (e.g., student study team [SST] or individualized education program [IEP]), individuals sometimes say something that is potentially destructive of the consultative process. Others in the group may question what they heard and may react nega- tively to it. The consultant needs to put these issues on the table and have members explain them- selves, even at the risk of temporarily increasing tension. Through this process and the use of the following conflict reduction techniques, parties to the conflict should be able to come to a closer agreement about how to proceed:

• Name the conflict or its source. • Have parties to the conflict explain their positions. • Stick to facts, not opinions or personalities. Avoid personalizing. • Brainstorm possible solutions. • Seek mutual agreement. • Be hard on ideas but soft on people.

Activity 4.2

In dyads, Person A speaks to Person B about some real or imagined conflict with another person. Person B puts a mark on a piece of paper every time he feels like commenting instead of listening until Person A has told her whole story. Next, reframe the conflict in terms of the facts or the actual behaviors

rather than how events and details were per- ceived. Reverse the roles. How did Person A feel when she found that she could tell her whole story without being interrupted? How many times did Person B have to mark his paper because he felt like commenting or questioning Person A?

keeping a Goal orientation

Consultees are generally very busy and have to deal with a lot of competing demands. Consultants should be considerate of the consultee’s time by trying to understand the concern and identify some potential solutions as efficiently as possible. The need to stay on topic and look for solu- tions must be balanced with rushing prematurely to conclusions and possibly being too overbear- ing. Consultees are not likely to implement an intervention for very long if they feel it has been

Chapter 4 • Communication and Interpersonal Skills 87

foisted on them without ongoing support. Some suggestions for being goal-oriented include the following:

1. Use an “I” message instead of a “you” message. “I’m concerned about our lack of progress” or “I think a change of interventions would be a good idea.” This is most likely going to work if the consultee holds you in some regard.

2. Say “and” instead of “but.” “The students were really engaged during the share-pair and they appeared a bit less on-task during the independent seatwork.”

3. State behavior objectively. “What I saw when I was in your room was that Joanne twice hit other children, but not hard or with what I would call an attempt to harm them. Is this usually the way she interacts with others?”

4. Give feedback not advice. “During my observation, I noticed that Johnny was much less disruptive when he was in close proximity to you.” Examples of advice would be “You should move Johnny to the front of the classroom” or “You should circulate around the room more often.”

5. Name your own feelings. “I just wanted to tell you how thrilled I am with the way you deal with the ‘fearsome foursome.’ You are providing the curriculum and methods that encourage attending and responding from them as well as the others. It’s great to watch it working so well.”

6. Say what you want to happen. “We agreed that you would try a check-in, check-out system for Alecia because it is likely to reduce the number of disruptions she makes. How’s it going? What do you think? How can I help you?”

7. Offer something they can walk away with. “Okay, based on our discussion, I’m going to come in and observe a few different times next week and we will meet again to discuss, but in the meantime you are going to try using three positive statements to every corrective statement; did I get that right?”

8. Express concern for others. “Bill, teaching your students is one of the toughest jobs on this campus. It’s draining; it’s frustrating. I admire you for being as patient as you are when so many of your students are having a bad time of it all at once.”

9. Use assertive body language. Consider your regard for, and willingness to work closely with, individuals who have trouble establishing and maintaining eye contact, slouch, mutter, seem very unsure of anything, and act like they would rather be somewhere else. Most people would rather spend their professional hours with people who reflect the oppo- site picture. Effective consultants use their assertive body language to convey the image that the referral problem will be solved, they and the consultee can work together to solve it, and quitting is not a viable option.

10. Facilitate rather than dominate. Facilitative problem solving differs substantially from the way in which an expert may give advice because facilitation specifically focuses on helping consultees develop their own ideas and skills. Being facilitative, rather than taking over problems for consultees, is one of the most challenging tasks for beginning consult- ants to learn. Expert or overly technical language can shut down communication. Keep the focus on what is best for the child. Facilitation requires the ability to get people with different perspectives to work together. Being able to sit in on a teacher–parent conference and keep the conversation goal-oriented and directed toward solutions can make an immense difference in a student’s life.

As simple as these suggestions may seem, some consultants find them increasingly diffi- cult to practice when the consultation relationship starts to falter, possibly due to uncooperative behavior from the consultee. Some consultees seem to project a passive resistance that is hard to pin down. Here the consultant needs to use an assertive style that lets the consultee recognize the

Activity 4.3

In small groups, have one person repeat some complaints he or she has heard from professionals in the field about their col- leagues, students, or students’ parents. Try

using the 10 suggestions listed in the Keeping a Goal Orientation section. Partners should help each other in the construction of these statements.

88 Chapter 4 • Communication and Interpersonal Skills

consultant’s concerns and perceptions without blaming or accusing. Additional information about and ideas for remedying resistance in consultation are developed later in this chapter.

asking Questions

This is the most important and most delicate skill in the consultative interaction because questions, by their very nature, can be both inviting and threatening. Their primary pur- pose, of course, is to gain information, but the manner in which they are used may often have unfortunate consequences, particularly if the consultee suspects that the point of a question is not what its surface content implies. It is incumbent on the consultant to ask questions so that the consultee is not threatened by the questions and, by extension, the consultation process.

Questions help to clarify the problem. What really is the issue and from whose perspec- tive? There may be multiple problems and/or issues; each constituent may see these primarily from his or her point of view. Try to stay objective through the processes of problem identifica- tion and problem analysis (Bergan & Kratochwill, 1990) because there may be multiple prob- lems and/or issues with potentially multiple solutions.

Questions serve three main purposes: to gather information and data, to seek opinions, and to detect attitudes. The first purpose is the most important and ostensibly the one that underlies most questions. The other two purposes may be more covert: The consultant gets information about the subjective realities that may be affecting the interactions between the consultee and the student but are not spoken about objectively. For example, consider a teacher-consultee who has implemented a behavior management program that he does not want to use because he believes it is either too labor-intensive or simply won’t work. His responses to the consultant’s questions about how it is working will give the consultant a pretty good idea that the consultee doesn’t want to continue with this strategy. Consider the following interchange between a consultant and a consultee about a token-economy system:

Consultant: Tell me how the token-economy system is working for Allen.

Consultee: Yeah, well, we’re doing it. I don’t know. He might be getting better.

Consultant: You sound a little unsure. Is the frequency of Allen’s yelling out decreasing since you started using the point system?

Consultee: Oh, I don’t know. I’m too busy teaching all the other kids to be doing all this charting and whatever. He’s probably better. I’m going to go back to using the sentence-writing strategy. [This is a punishment tactic in which the student writes “I must not talk out in class” 50 times for every time he talks out. It is this consultee’s favorite technique; he’s well known for it.] Allen needs to know that I mean business.

It seems clear that the consultee has not bought into the token-economy system. A possible questioning response to this consultee’s attitude and reluctance to implement the intervention might sound like this: “Tell me about implementing this token-economy system. How much additional time and effort does it require? Let’s find some time to review where we are and what to do next. Do you have 5 minutes now?”

Benjamin (1987) suggested that the questioning process includes three format considera- tions: open/closed, direct/indirect, and single/multiple. An open question is designed to gain maximum information over a relatively broad scope. “Tell me about Jane’s progress over the past 2 months” is quite open because it asks for (apparently) any kind of information over a long period of time in any area that strikes the consultee as important. A closed question, however, asks for brief answers to highly focused questions, such as “How often did Bill hit others on the playground today during the morning recess?” or “How many words did José read correctly in this week’s 1-minute oral reading assessment?”

A direct question is a straight request for information: “How confident are you about teach- ing students who are English language learners?” or “How many words did José read correctly on the 1-minute assessment?” An indirect question seeks information in a more subtle fashion: “I’d sure like to know how it must be to work with your students all day long.” Consider the

Chapter 4 • Communication and Interpersonal Skills 89

following “fencing match” between a consultant using a series of direct questions and a con- sultee who acts guarded in his response style:

Consultant: So how’s it going with Shaquelle?

Consultee: Fine.

Consultant: Is he getting to school more often now?

Consultee: I guess so.

Consultant: Has his responsiveness to you increased?

Consultee: Hard to tell.

The consultant will sense that the consultee seems to be avoiding a meaningful discussion through the use of noncommittal and vague responses. In that case, the consultant may shift to a more indirect method of asking for information, such as the following: “I know you’ve been concerned with Shaquelle’s apparent lack of interest in school, and you’ve tried some interventions. Tell me how you see the picture now.” By including a prefatory statement, the consultant may establish a context for the question and remind the consultee of the steps already taken or suggested.

Single questions such as “What do you do when Omar gets into his dawdling mode?” seem to enhance the communication process much more than do multiple questions, such as “What do you do when Omar gets into his dawdling mode? Do you get after him right away or wait awhile? How do you know when to intervene? Some people react too quickly. I think. What do you think?” Confronted with that barrage of multiple questions, most consultees prob- ably, and correctly, ask you to wait until they can answer one question before you ask another.

Clarifying questions should not be confused with loaded questions. The classic loaded question “Have you stopped beating your wife?” illustrates the damage a loaded question can wreak to collaborative consultation. There is almost no way for the respondent to reply without somehow endorsing the questioner’s accusation. Similarly, questions like “What happens when you stop berating Thomas?” or “When you fail to reach Maya academically, how does she respond?” will shut down communication tout de suite (in other words, immediately).

It is generally best to focus questions for a number of reasons. First, we get the kind of informa- tion that we seek by asking focused questions. Second, time is usually limited; although we might like to spend more time with each consultee, such a luxury is uncommon. Third, by being focused one gives the consultee the impression that she is efficient and competent. Finally, it is dangerous to be casual in the choice of questions with some consultees because they may take that as an excuse to ramble. There are definitely times to ask “How’s it going?” but we are likely to gather more specific information if we ask “In regard to the extinction plan, can you give me an example of when it seemed to work?” When the consultee has responded to that single, direct, and closed question, then you may want to ask “And can you give me an example of when it didn’t?” Benn, Jones, and Rosenfield (2008) found competent consultants use more clarifying questions and statements and offer fewer expert opinions compared to consultants who were rated as partially competent or novice.

One caveat to this principle is that sometimes a consultee is really seeking some moral sup- port or sympathy rather than problem solving. The tonic a struggling interventionist needs to keep going may be an empathetic ear and a sincere “You are really working hard and seem very committed. I’m sorry things are not going as planned, but I’m confident in the end your efforts will really help.” However, too much content-free “cheerleading” might unintentionally result in “admiring the problem” or encouraging learned helplessness within the consultee. A really talented consultant can surmise on a case-by-case basis when to sympathize, when to problem- solve, and when to do both.

Activity 4.4

Ask students in the class to list examples of poor questioning techniques that they have encountered. Draw from books, television (news interviews), movies, and real-life expe- riences. Discuss why these techniques or

questions were poor, why they were used, and what effect they have on the communi- cation process. Class members should sug- gest ways to improve these techniques.

90 Chapter 4 • Communication and Interpersonal Skills

Potential Difficulties in Communication

It is not uncommon in interpersonal communication for people to miscommunicate; to talk past each other; to disagree; and possibly to slip into an argument that may disrupt, if not destroy, the consultative process. Although consultants cannot control the reactions of consultees, they can avoid behaviors on their part that may lead to poor communication and problem-solving break- downs. Pugach and Johnson (1989) discuss several barriers to effective communication, which are presented here with an example statement made by a consultant using the respective method:

1. Advice. “So, Ms. Garcia, Willy is one of your poorest readers. He must need more work in phonemic awareness. Give him an extra half hour whenever you get the time. That should do it.”

Eventually, consultants do give advice (i.e., develop interventions collaboratively), possi- bly as a confirmation or facilitation of a consultee’s thinking about his own problem-solving efforts. When teachers and parents are stuck for ideas, the consultant should certainly be able to suggest alternative interventions, which should be based on best practices. The error is in giving your advice before the consultee has had a chance to explore his own thinking about solutions and before you have a good grasp of the problem. Sometimes, we give advice because we feel pressured to do so. If the context of a consultative interaction is that the consultee has “come to you for advice,” and you don’t have any to give, or you believe it is too soon to generate an inter- vention program, the consultee may feel let down or that you are incompetent. You can avoid this situation by reviewing the nature of the collaborative model, reminding the consultee that more data should be obtained before hurrying to plan development, reviewing what the teacher is cur- rently doing or has done in the recent past, and then agreeing on some possible temporary tactics the consultee can use until the referral problems are understood in more depth.

2. False reassurances. “Hey, not to worry. Those outbursts are probably due to something going on at home. They’ll pass in a few days or weeks. Most things we get ourselves concerned about don’t amount to a thing. Remember, don’t sweat the small stuff.”

Some consultants, in an effort to relieve the stress of a consultee, make it sound like the referral issue is really quite simple and may resolve by itself or quickly be improved. This can minimize the consultee’s feelings and devalue her concerns. It may also set up a feeling within the consultee that she must be incompetent to be worried about something so trivial. Finally, it may set up a situation where time proves that the consultee was right about the seriousness of a problem, thus indicating a lack of competence on the part of the consultant.

3. Misdirected questions.

Consultant: So, Ms. Ortiz, tell me about Alphonso.

Ms. Ortiz (Consultee): Well, his reading is really quite poor. He—

Consultant (Interrupting): Oh, does he have a brother in the fourth grade? I think I know him.

Ms. Ortiz: Well, yes, he does. But Alphonso is really almost a nonreader—

Consultant (Interrupting again): Well, here’s what we have to do. Can you get me his cumulative folder? Put it in my mailbox. Now, if he’s like his brother, well, you tell me. Does he have ADHD [attention deficit hyperactivity disorder]?”

These misdirected questions happen for one of two reasons: (a) The consultant has his own agenda and seems determined to force it on the consultee, attempting to have the problem fit a predetermined notion the consultant has formed about the problem, or (b) the consultant’s listening

Activity 4.5

Compare and contrast “nice” or passive ver- sus “jerk” aggressive sides of consultation by listening to the following podcast about skepticism: https://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=LsYZ-zmz_yI. How can assertive- ness, intervention, and discreditation work within collaborative consultation to promote

better outcomes for children? What are some points that you have learned from the pod- cast? Try outlining or diagramming the main concepts of the podcast. Discuss some of the gray areas and potential biases of the author of the podcast.

Chapter 4 • Communication and Interpersonal Skills 91

skills are so poorly developed that he has no idea that he is interrupting or asking irrelevant ques- tions. The consultant is flying off in all directions, lacking focus and sensitivity to the needs and interests of the consultee. Somehow the question of how to get help for Alphonso in reading has become a family-related problem, possibly associated with ADHD. One wonders if this consultant will ever begin to problem-solve about Alphonso’s reading problem.

4. Wandering interaction. “Yes, Alphonso’s reading problem. I thought it was math. Well, either way, I believe he has a brother who is similar. There is interesting research on inheritability of learning disorders and mental illness. I had to read it once for a course I took. Didn’t you go to University of Wisconsin too?”

This is similar to the issue of misdirected questions, but here the consultant seems to be the person with an attention deficit. She can’t remember what was told to her a few minutes ago, gets cases mixed up, and seems unable to focus on what is relevant.

5. Interruptions.

Consultee: LaTreece needs so much help. We have to review . . .

Consultant (Interrupting): Yes, I know. So many things to do.

Consultee: Well yes. As I was saying, LaTreece can’t do any of the work at grade level . . .

Consultant (Interrupting again): This business of work at grade level. Really now, how many times do I have to tell teachers . . . ?

Just as the consultee is getting to the heart of the concern, the consultant breaks in to ask questions or make comments that frustrate the efforts of the consultee to tell her story. This sort of consultant impulsivity breaks the flow of the interaction and suggests that trying to problem- solve with this consultant is not worth the effort.

6. Credibility gap. Consultant (Ms. Smith): (To herself, upon seeing a referral from Mr. Wong): “Oh, boy, another waste of time from Wong. I’ll knock myself out giving suggestions, he’ll nod his head, won’t do any of them, and will allude to calling his union representative.”

Consultee: (To himself, when told at the student study team [SST] meeting that the inter- ventions discussed will be monitored by the consultant Ms. Smith) “Oh, boy. Smith, as usual, won’t have a clue about how I should implement these ideas. She never does. How would she know? She never taught fifth grade.”

This is the most subtle of the communication problems. It involves the usually unspoken belief on the part of one or both parties that they shouldn’t take the consultation process seriously because the other party isn’t (a) competent, (b) in a position to collaborate, or (c) of any real help. This can occur when a consultee has been uncooperative in the past, so that the consultant enters a dyadic interaction with little hope for a positive outcome. It can also occur if a consultee has no faith that the consultant can grasp the significance of a problem or can help construct meaningful interventions. In either case, the lack of faith precludes success because collaboration cannot operate in a climate of little faith on the part of the participants.

Evaluating Your Communication Skills

Both beginning and experienced consultants can benefit from having their consultation skills evaluated. Feedback from consultees and supervisors can help the consultant understand how others perceive both the consultant personally and her effectiveness. Consultants can reflect on and journal about what went well or amiss after consulting with a colleague or parent- consultee. For consultants, engaging in this level of self-analysis, along with the more objective feedback provided by their consultees and supervisors, promotes the confidence that comes from being an effective communicator.

Activity 4.6

Video-record a consultation sessions and evaluate it with a peer, professor, or col- league using the observation rating scale in Figure 4.1. Note your body language and

nonverbal communication efforts. Were you aware of them before this exercise? Do you believe they add to or detract from your interviewing skills?

92 Chapter 4 • Communication and Interpersonal Skills

Date: ______ Consultant: __________________________ Observer: ________

Activities observed (mark all that apply): ____ Rapport established ____ Purpose of meeting stated ____ Student and/or consultee concerns discussed ____ Intervention techniques implemented and reviewed ____ Student progress/data/goal reviewed ____ Future plans for assessment/intervention planned

Consultation Strategies Observed 0—Not present 1—Attempted 2—Competent 3—Superior

Acknowledges consultee’s point of view 0 1 2 3

Identifies important points regarding consultee/client needs and directions 0 1 2 3

Summarizes, paraphrases, and clarifies 0 1 2 3

Pursues issues assertively; on topic 0 1 2 3

Reinforces consultee’s efforts 0 1 2 3

Actively listens (e.g., maintains eye contact, nods head, uses “uh huh” “hmmm” non-verbal types of communication) 0 1 2 3

Empathetic, accepting, and broad-minded 0 1 2 3

Asks relevant questions (clear, concise, open) 0 1 2 3

Professional (avoids interrupting, does not ask misdirected questions, does not wander off topic, etc.) 0 1 2 3

Demonstrates accurate knowledge of consultee and client (e.g., student need and progress; classroom curriculum and routines) 0 1 2 3

Demonstrates accurate knowledge of assessment and intervention techniques related to referral concern 0 1 2 3

Strengths/Suggestions:

__________________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________

CommuniCation tEChnoloGiES

Information technology has undergone dramatic diversification in the past decade with the intro- duction of social media, which can be defined as “the means of interactions among people in which they create, share, and/or exchange information and ideas in virtual communities and networks” (Wikipedia, 2013). E-mails, texts, tweets, and so on, are sent and read throughout the day, which has increased both the amount of communication as well as the noise. A school-based consultant should determine whether to communicate in a public or private space. Public forums, blogs, YouTube and Facebook posts, and Twitter feeds are generally public venues. It is inappro- priate, unethical, and quite possibly illegal to post confidential information in a public forum. E-mail, phone calls, and text messaging are generally considered private communications between the sender and the receiver, but they can easily be made public by the receiver. The con- sultant should balance the ease of communicating via e-mail or text with what is potentially lost. It is convenient to send a quick e-mail when something pops into your mind rather than writing a note, making a call, or stopping by the consultee’s room at a later time to discuss the issue in person. However, the emotional content of your message and the response is lost. Emoticons are a pale replacement for actual human interaction and, in most cases, are not very professional. Here are some general guidelines for electronic communication etiquette:

1. Use the consultee’s preferred mode of communication. A consultant can ask how to follow up with the consultee. Teachers also have preferences for how they would like parents to contact them. Some teachers prefer e-mail or text messages; others want face-to-face communication

FiGuRE 4.1 Consultation Evaluation Tool: Observation of Consultation Skills

Chapter 4 • Communication and Interpersonal Skills 93

or phone calls. The consultant can assist in establishing the preferred mode of communica- tion between the teacher and the parent. Until you confirm their preferred mode of communi- cation, adopt more traditional/formal modes such as in-person meetings and phone calls. E-mails are more formal than texts. Older individuals may not text or may consider receiving a text as overly personal.

2. Maintain professionalism. Use a professional e-mail address (preferably the one provided by your school district), not the one you use for personal e-mails (i.e., babycakes@aol). Leave a concise, professional voice mail greeting (i.e., do not rap your greeting).

3. Reread message before hitting send. The autocorrect in text messaging can make some ridicu- lous modifications to your message. Don’t send sloppy or grammatically incorrect e-mail mes- sages. In e-mails, include a greeting (Dear Mr. Smith) and signature (Best regards, Dr. Powers).

4. Double-check the addresses. A colleague of the second author [Powers] intended to send a message complaining about her supervisor to her friend but inadvertently sent it to her super- visor because the friend and the supervisor have the same first name. When you type in the name for an e-mail message, be sure it is the right Bob or Jose that comes up in the address bar.

5. Double-check attachments before hitting send. You do not want to e-mail your observation notes on a student to the wrong parents.

6. Do not check e-mail or texts while in a meeting. Constantly glancing at your mobile device is not active listening.

7. Never respond immediately to an e-mail that upsets you. Wait at least 24 hours to respond so you can construct a rational rather than an emotional response.

8. Answer voice mails within 24 hours and e-mail within two to three days (excluding week- ends and holidays).

intERPERSonal SkillS

Consultation is essentially a problem-solving process that depends on effective communication and interpersonal skills. Communication skills can be successful only if they are delivered in the con- text of an interpersonal relationship that is positive and professional. This section reviews informa- tion and provides activities designed to improve a consultant’s knowledge and skills in interpersonal relationships, power dynamics, and methods for understanding and dealing with resistance.

Activity 4.7

The following examples contrast positive and negative interpersonal traits and suggest com- ments that characterize them. The first exam- ple in each pair is a positive trait; the second is negative. After reading each pair of comments, create a different positive response that is appropriate for the trait.

Open: “I’m glad you could see me.”

Closed: “You want to see me now? Well, I suppose.”

Accepting: “I’m sure that you did what you felt was best.”

Judgmental: “Why would you want to do it that way?”

Empathic: “It must be really difficult dealing with students who challenge us so often.”

Callous: “What did you expect? That’s what teaching here is all about.”

Puts consultee at ease: “Tell me about your day.”

Puts consultee on defensive: “Cert- ainly there must be better ways to teach reading.”

Stresses collaboration: “We can get together to solve these problems.”

Plays expert: “Oh, no, research clearly shows that doing it the other way is bet- ter. Trust me.”

Professional approach: “Let’s review to be sure I’ve heard you accurately.”

Immature approach: “Billy? Did we discuss him already? What was our plan? Did we have one?”

Broad-minded: “Well, that’s an inter- esting way to look at it. How might we use that idea?”

Narrow-minded: “Well, we’ve never tried that before. We’d better stick to the tried and true.”

94 Chapter 4 • Communication and Interpersonal Skills

Consultants who are open, constructive, caring, task-oriented, enthusiastic, calm, flexible, and respectful of others’ points of view are more likely to experience success than those who manifest the opposite traits (Harris, 1996). Given the multidisciplinary nature of the school- based consultation, it is critical to attend to these interpersonal skills.

Activity 4.8

Think about the various kinds of relationships you have established with peers, coworkers, and supervisors over the past few years. Some, no doubt, were more positive than others. What were the interpersonal skills that some of

these people manifested that made you enjoy working with and for them? What mannerisms (behaviors, traits) made you dislike or not want to work with others?

It is difficult to imagine someone being skilled in collaborative problem solving who has terrible interpersonal skills. For example, a consultant may have a wealth of knowledge about reading interventions, but if she delivers these interventions in an overbearing manner, this knowledge will not change practice. Forging positive relationships, conveying competence and confidence, projecting the idea that the situation is going to improve, following through with enthusiasm, developing and maintaining trust, and treating consultees as adults are all interper- sonal skills that are important for successful interactions in the schools. The following chapter subsections discuss these skills, with suggestions for how a school consultant can manifest them.

Forging Positive Relationships

Although one shouldn’t fall into the trap of believing that it is essential to be liked by all people at all times, it is certainly the case that people are more willing to work with affable, outgoing, friendly people than with people who aren’t.

Suggestions: Become one of the staff. Don’t be aloof. Get out of your office or your own classroom. Make comments that indicate that you identify with your consultees rather than with any other group. Be the kind of person that consultees feel comfortable talking to. While maintaining your own professional identity (resource specialist, school psycholo- gist, and so on), try to walk in your consultee’s shoes. Learn the art of small talk and when to use it. For some consultees, 5 minutes of rapport building before serious talk begins is essential; for others, 10 seconds of small talk is enough. Consultants who serve multiple schools may want to arrange their schedule to be at the school for its special luncheon day or weekly faculty meeting. Joining the social/birthday club may be worth the extra costs of being a member at multiple schools.

Conveying Competence and Confidence

Being friendly is essential, but consultees won’t have any use for you if that’s all you are. You need to be prepared to be a helper by developing a repertoire of evidence-based interventions (EBIs) and methods for evaluating intervention outcomes that can be adapted to fit a variety of situations (Kelleher, Riley-Tillman, & Power, 2008). The What Works Clearinghouse and Intervention Central are Web sites that are an excellent resource for EBI ideas. Confidence comes from a feeling of being well trained and prepared for consultation and from successful experiences. It is common to feel like an “imposter” early in your career, particularly when

Activity 4.9

What communication and interpersonal skills are addressed in this video on interdisciplinary collaboration? What are some barriers to col- laboration? What are some communication and expectations that foster collaboration?

How might this apply to collaborative problem solving in schools?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v= NsndhCQ5hRY

Chapter 4 • Communication and Interpersonal Skills 95

consulting with professionals with much more experience. Some ideas to consider are the following: (a) you are probably more familiar with the current research because you are so newly trained, and (b) your primary contribution is to guide the discussion and provide the consultee with the opportunity to reflect on the case, not to offer solutions. Confidence bred of egotism or an inflated self-image not supported by the reality of one’s competence will soon be detected by your consultees.

Suggestions: Develop as many of the skills listed in this chapter as you can. School-based consultants first have to be competent in process; content knowledge comes with experi- ence and continued study of the educational research. When a situation arises for which you can’t find any answer or solution, and none is forthcoming from your consultee, admit that this is the case and then go out and find helpful information. Talk to your peers, search the literature for best practices, and review your experiences in other cases to see what you can think of for your next meeting. Challenge your consultee to do the same.

Projecting the idea that the Situation is Going to improve

A consultant can make a valuable contribution by being optimistic. Try to convey that the situa- tion of concern is amenable to improvement. Don’t buy into the hopelessness you may hear from some consultees; provide an antidote to the defeatism that is so common, especially in high- poverty schools. Try to adopt the mantra “No excuses; it’s our job.” A good source of information about this phenomenon is Seligman’s (2011) Flourish.

Suggestions: Much of the defeatism that consultants hear in the schools is a function of stress and burnout. Teaching is a very difficult profession, and when a teacher’s ego needs are thwarted by students who are disruptive or failing, these stresses may begin to have an effect. By the time the referral gets to the consultant, the teacher often wants relief in the form of the removal of the student or the implementation of some punishment plan. When you perceive this degree of stress, remember the following:

• Be a good listener. Plan to spend some time allowing the teacher to vent frustrations.

• Reflect the emotional content of the consultee’s message.

• Project the possibility that, by working together, you and the consultee can improve the situation.

• Demonstrate competent problem-solving skills (e.g., getting specifics, reviewing data), seeking points of agreement, and stressing the possibilities.

• Ask how you can help (short of removing the student from the teacher’s responsibility).

• Connect suggestions to desired student outcomes and the teacher’s desire to assist stu- dents in achieving a high-quality education.

• Establish a sensitive assessment system to measure student progress and celebrate pro- gress when it is made.

• Set a time to meet again. This will reinforce the ongoing nature of your commitment.

Following through with Enthusiasm

One of the condemning definitions of consultants is that they “pop in, pop off, and pop out.” Consultation as a service delivery method will be accepted as a viable, worthwhile model only if consultants demonstrate commitment manifested by timely follow-up and staying with the situation until it is resolved or until the consultee decides that she wants to let it develop on its own for a while. Consultants need to follow through without becoming a nag or a pest.

Suggestions: Always set a time for a next meeting, and be there. Come prepared with a copy of the notes you wrote after your last meeting. Be sure you have done the part of the plan assigned to you. Go beyond this if possible. Have some new ideas to discuss. Suggest some fresh perspectives. Review current goals and interventions, including progress-monitoring and treatment integrity data. Be prepared to praise efforts and  celebrate success. Validate treatment integrity (assuming you have observed it).

96 Chapter 4 • Communication and Interpersonal Skills

Be  thorough without being overbearing. Respect your consultee’s time constraints. Providing a graph of the progress-monitoring and/or treatment integrity data may help to focus the conversation.

Developing and maintaining trust

Anyone who has been new to an organization knows that a period of time is necessary before trust is established. As the proverb says, it takes a lifetime to build trust but only a moment to lose it. Consultees need time to build an opinion of a new consultant, to see if that person is true to his word. Similarly, consultants need time to build trust in those with whom they work. If a consultee says that he has tried an intervention, has he? If a principal says that she will provide support for a program, will she?

Suggestions: Be sure that you are honest and dependable in your dealings with others. Practice being a “high-trusting” person, one who expects others to do as they say, just as you do. If you find that you cannot follow through on some project as you said you would, be sure to inform your colleagues as soon as possible. Collaborative consultation is built on mutual trust, not just on hope.

treating Consultees as adults

Beginning school-based consultants need to learn that consulting with adults in the schools, as well as parents of referred students, is very different from and often more challenging than working directly with students. Successful consultants learn to appreciate that adult consultees differ in training, willingness to participate in the process, ability to carry out plans, and perspectives on problems. Having all the expert content knowledge in the world in the areas of curriculum, teaching methods, and behavior management is of no use if the consultant does not know how to relate it to the consultee as an adult learner-collaborator. Adults prefer to be self-directed; they do not want or expect to be told what to do unless they ask for this assistance directly. They generally prefer to be active contributors to the interac- tive process rather than passive participants mandated to accept transmitted expertise from others (Cobern, 1993). Adults prefer to believe that they are able to solve their own prob- lems with some facilitative (collaborative) help from the consultant. Unlike students, adults have real experiences as teachers or parents and have developed a frame of reference based on their teaching/parenting experiences that they bring into a consultative relationship.

Suggestions: Avoid talking in a condescending manner. Ask questions that will help you to understand the consultee’s experience, position, and points of view. Whether consultees carry out the plan may depend on the consultant’s skill in getting them to believe that they have a central voice in the problem’s conceptualization and solution.

PowER in thE ConSultativE RElationShiP

One of the key concepts that underlies a collaborative approach to consultation is egalitarianism, or a nonhierarchical relationship between the consultant and the consultee. You cannot assume, however, that the existence of this collaborative philosophy guarantees that power dynamics won’t influence the relationship. It is best to understand power in interpersonal processes so that you can use it constructively.

French and Raven (1959) and Raven (1965) discussed six forms of social power that can be influential in most types of interpersonal relationships. In the following examples, Person A is usually (but not necessarily) in an authority position relative to Person B.

• Reward, in which Person A is able to bestow benefits, valued praise, or awards on Person B.

• Coercive, in which Person A can either dispense or withhold benefits from Person B or can legitimately confront Person B.

• Legitimate, in which Person B believes that Person A has a legal or an authoritative ability to control Person B.

• Referent, in which Person B sees Person A as similar to himself or holding like values and may therefore comply with suggestions from Person A.

Chapter 4 • Communication and Interpersonal Skills 97

• Expert, in which Person A is perceived as having knowledge or expertise not possessed by Person B.

• Informational, in which the information has the power, not the person (A).

Erchul, Raven, and Wilson (2004) further delineated these six types of power into 14 dis- tinct forms (for example, informational power was divided into direct and indirect forms) and made the distinction between “harsh or strong” power bases (which are more coercive and heavy-handed) and “soft or weak” power bases (which are seen as more subtle, indirect, and noncoercive). In a study designed to measure school psychologists’ use of power in consul- tative relationships, Wilson, Erchul, and Raven (2008) found that these consultants preferred to use “soft” as opposed to “harsh” power bases, and this preference was stronger for women consultants. Erchul et al. (2008) suggest a cautionary note to those who believe that power has no place in consultative relationships by pointing out that consultation is ultimately about changing an adult’s behavior or perceptions, and applying power strategies can be quite effec- tive. They wrote, “Although school [consultants] have the potential to influence and thereby change the behavior of consultees, many are reluctant to recognize and exercise this influence, and as a result the effectiveness of consultation is not maximized” (p. 318). They end with a challenge to school consultants to abandon the “traditional, passive consult-and-hope approach” to consultation and to harness what is known about social influence to change teachers’ and parents’ behavior.

Martin (1978) and Harris and Cancelli (1991) suggest that reward, coercive, and legitimate power should probably be reserved for supervisory or administrative personnel and that the power sources for a collaboratively inclined consultant should be referent, expert, and informa- tional. We discuss these three types of power sources in the following subsections.

Referent Power

According to social influence theory, consultees who feel that you are one of them, or at least that you can see their problems from their point of view, will be more likely to change their behaviors. If consultees cannot relate to the consultant, however, the consultees will reject him, and the consultant’s efforts will collapse. In this case consultees will not see the consultant as having referent power and therefore may devalue his potentially useful contributions. Some ways to build referent power, particularly when consultees are very dissimilar from you in personality, age, experience, and so on, is to find topics in common to discuss over lunch and other down times (maybe you both watch Game of Thrones?). You can also note how alike you both are in your commitment to children and/or the school, perhaps even bringing in the school mascot or motto as a way of illustrating your unity. Beginning statements with “I’ve been there . . .” or “When I was a teacher . . .” can help build the referent power as long as they are sincere.

Activity 4.10

Assume that you are a special education teacher-consultant who has not taught in general education. A general education teacher-consultee subtly questions your ability

to understand what teaching in general edu- cation classes is all about. How can you deal with this potential threat to your referent power base?

Expert Power

Expert power occurs when a consultee is motivated to implement an intervention because she believes the consultant is an expert in a given field. In schools, consultants may be perceived as experts in identifying and designing interventions for students with disabilities; however, a draw-back to this perceived expertise is that consultants may act or appear to be gatekeepers to special education and other services. The gatekeeper role should be negotiated carefully, or consultation will become hierarchical rather than collaborative. A better expert scenario is if the consultees are influenced by the consultant because of the consultant’s expertise in the consul- tation process (i.e., problem solving) and content (that is, specific information about assessment

98 Chapter 4 • Communication and Interpersonal Skills

and interventions for learning and behavior problems). Consultants who have established their competence in problem solving, progress monitoring, and intervention design may be able to influence teachers to try different interventions because the consultees view the consultant as an expert in collaborative consultation. Inexperienced, insecure, or passive consultants will prob- ably be unable to use this type of social power base to influence consulteees. Fortunately, there are other options.

The consultant’s expertise in both process and content should be used to help the consultee work out the details of her plans, to suggest ways to improve her ideas, and to list alternative steps or strategies from which she selects appropriate interventions based on her ideas about what she would like to do, as well as ideas from the consultant that are compatible with the con- sultee’s expert judgments. Martin (1978) has suggested that competent consultants try to strike a balance between referent and expert power bases. One doesn’t want to appear to “have all the answers,” nor does one want to be “just like everyone else” and not bring additional insights and information to the consultative effort.

It is important to remember in collaborative relationships that expert power works both ways: Consultees also have this power (Martin, 1978). They have expertise in teaching, Common Core Standards, or classroom behavior management that a consultant may not have. They know the curriculum, their students, and their own frame of reference regarding what is possible in their classrooms, what has worked for them in the past, and so on. Similarly, par- ents are experts on their children. Their knowledge base needs to be understood, respected, and used.

informational Power

According to Raven (1965), informational power derives from valuing scientific findings or the experiences of people who know about the topic. In any given consultant–consultee dyad, either party may have more informational knowledge than the other. The source isn’t as important as is the perceived usefulness of the information. One of the roles of the consultant discussed in Chapter 2 is that of information provider. Consultees expect that school-based consultants have their positions because they have informational power in addition to some degree of expert power based on their experience, training, advanced degrees, and the ability to project themselves as experts. School consultants who stay abreast of the research by subscribing to and reading research journals, pursuing Web sites with reputable and empirical information like the What Works Clearing House, and attending professional conferences will have more informational power than those who do not seek to gather scientific information. The following scenario illus- trates this point.

Consultee: Fransisco is unable to master his addition math facts. Here it is second grade, and he received small-group instruction led by a parent volunteer all last spring and the past month [October], and he can only produce 4 digits correct per minute [DCPM]. There is no way we will get him to the 20 DCPM required by the district. It’s hopeless!

Consultant: Tell me about how Fransisco approaches his work and what interventions you tried in both whole-group and small-group instruction.

Consultee: The parent volunteer has been teaching him touch math, but when I watch Fransisco, he uses his fingers rather than the touch points, which is fine because we are only adding single-digit problems.

Consultant: Well, it sounds like the touch math program isn’t working for him if, after many months, he isn’t applying the strategy. Perhaps the parent volunteer didn’t really know how to teach this program.

Consultee: How hard can it be? You just put dots on the numbers and then count them.

Consultant: There is a bit more to it. Remember we all received a full day of training, but your parent volunteer has not, so she may not be implementing it correctly. I’ll come and observe the group one afternoon and teach your whole class a lesson so you can observe the group on a different

Chapter 4 • Communication and Interpersonal Skills 99

afternoon, and then we can meet to discuss how far your parent is following the protocol. But I’d also like to suggest we provide some direct instruction on addition fluency.

Consultee: Uh, no—I think that is fancy talk for flashcards, and you know I don’t approve of flashcards—it sucks the fun right out of math.

Consultant: You got me [chuckle], but I was just reading a synthesis of the latest research on math interventions [Gersten et al., 2009], and there is a lot of scientific research to suggest that devoting 10 minutes a day to fact fluency instruction will increase Fransisco’s skills, as well as those of the other students. Let’s see if we can’t find a fun way to do it.

Consultee: I did hear about a game kids can play in pairs, where each has half a deck of playing cards, and they both turn one card over. The kid who adds the card’s face value first keeps the cards. How does that sound?

Consultant: Excellent! That is a great way to promote and reinforce addition fluency.

Consultee: Can you tell me where I can find that report by the way? It might have some other good ideas.

Consultant: Sure—it’s on the What Works Web site. I’ll e-mail the PDF to you today.

In this scenario, the consultant succinctly presented her summary of the research but was flexible and encouraging about how the consultee might put the research into practice. Much of the research on evidence-based interventions is on general instructional techniques that can be varied to match the context in which they occur. In this case, the consultant thought having the student practice single-digit addition problems was key to increasing his fluency, but she did not insist on flashcards. The consultant may observe the student to ensure that he is engaged during this activ- ity and suggest minor changes (e.g., change his partner to someone slightly above his level, remove all cards higher than 7) if the student’s engagement is less than expected.

the Dominance Debate

Dominance, or social influence, is the actual success one has in influencing the other as meas- ured by the number of assertions that lead to acceptance or acquiescence by the other. In one of the first studies on this phenomenon in school-based consultation, Erchul (1987) concluded that consultant dominance was associated with higher effectiveness ratings by consultees, and the consultee’s domineering behavior was negatively associated with a consultant’s perceptions of the consultee’s willingness to collect baseline data. Gutkin (1999) reinterpreted Erchul’s study to assert that collaboration is more effective than dominance in consultation, thus sparking the collaboration debate (Erchul, Grissom, & Getty, 2008). In one of the largest studies of this con- cept to date, Erchul and colleagues (2007) failed to find a positive relationship between consult- ant dominance and the outcomes of behavioral consultation, but they did find a positive association between the consultee’s dominance and his perceptions of intervention effectiveness and student progress toward the intervention goal. The authors concluded that these unexpected findings may be due to a mismatch between the needs of the student (behavioral) and the content of the consultation (academic interventions), and the youth and inexperience of the consultants (who were all graduate students) relative to the consultees (teachers).

Erchul et al.’s (2008) review of the literature on relational communication in school con- sultation found most, if not all, of the research to involve graduate student consultants. Thus, it is unclear how these findings apply to consultation provided by experienced practitioners, given the social power differential between a graduate student and an experienced teacher.

Kelleher, Riley-Tillman, and Power (2008) examined the impact of more collaborative content in problem-solving consultation through a multiple-baseline repeated-measures study. In this study, consultants systematically varied the extent to which they involved the consultee in designing the intervention. In the expert-driven condition, consultants provided a prepackaged intervention protocol and provided performance feedback on whether the steps were completed correctly. In the partnership-driven condition, consultants and consultees collaborated on devel- oping the intervention protocol, and they critiqued and modified the protocol together after it had been implemented. Both the partnership and the expert-driven approaches involved the standard

100 Chapter 4 • Communication and Interpersonal Skills

problem-solving processes (i.e., problem identification, analyses, intervention, evaluation) and generally produced good outcomes, but the more collaborative process within the problem- solving model was associated with higher levels of treatment integrity, suggesting it is not just what we do (problem solving) but also how we do it that matters.

RESiStanCE

A consultee’s behavior, like that of everyone else, has one of two functions: to get something or to avoid something. Those who decide that they don’t want something develop behaviors designed to avoid it. If consultees or students don’t want to engage in the changes intended by a consultative effort, they usually find some way to avoid that effort. The term we use for these avoidance tactics is resistance.

Resistance seems to occur in just about all change efforts. It appears to be a natural reac- tion to self-initiated change efforts as well as those we perceive as being suggested or directed by others. It occurs when a consultee feels either threatened by proposed changes in his work envi- ronment, as when he needs to change his behavior in order to affect a change in a student’s behavior, or if he believes that his views on the issues were not given appropriate consideration.

Activity 4.11

Watch this video on overcoming resistance to change. Discuss what contingencies might make a teacher either adopt or reject the sug- gestion to modify her curriculum for a student with a reading disability. Make up a 4 × 4 grid

of possible incentives and disincentives to implementing a modified curriculum.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v= hcz1aZ60k7w

Gallesich (1982) wrote, “Resistance to consultants is a natural phenomenon. The integra- tion of any new person into an ongoing social structure unbalances it, creating reactions and forcing members to make adjustments” (p. 279). Gallesich reminds us that resistance can be healthy or unhealthy. A healthy form of resistance might occur when the changes being sug- gested are really counterproductive and the consultee resists on that basis. Unhealthy resistance might take the form of blocking needed changes that would benefit the student or the system but would be inconvenient for the consultee to perform or would be alien to the consultee’s beliefs or accustomed ways of behaving. Another example of unhealthy resistance would be when the con- sultee is angry or fearful about a proposed change (innovation, intervention) and does not express this anger directly but instead expresses it indirectly by subtly sabotaging or ignoring the recom- mended intervention. An example of sabotage is given in Activity 4.12.

Activity 4.12

At the end of the conference, Ms. Provo, the third-grade teacher of Ahmad, agreed with the resource specialist to try a “good behavior card” for Ahmad. This consists of putting a card on the corner of a student’s desk with a list of positive behaviors that the teacher is to check off as they occur. Ms. Provo thought the idea added too much extra work for her, but she did it, although with a tone of voice and

attitude that made Ahmad feel more like he was being punished than rewarded.

1. Analyze the dynamics behind this situation. 2. How might the consultant handle this

situation once it becomes clear that Ms. Provo is being passively resistant to the intervention?

As illustrated in the video in Activity 4.11, resistance is usually not malicious. The role of the consultant is to understand the factors fueling resistance (much as one would conduct a functional behavioral assessment of a student who presents with behavioral challenges) by taking the specific perspective of the consultee into consideration. Resistance can derive from personal experiences or characteristics of the consultee as well as systemic influences such

Chapter 4 • Communication and Interpersonal Skills 101

as well-accepted school norms, subtle hints from administrators, or anything that interferes with the problem-solving process (Wickstrom & Witt, 1993). Cautilli, Tillman, Axelrod, Dziewolska, and Hineline (2006) assessed the impact of consultee resistance on consultants’ behaviors and perceptions. They found consultants, when faced with resistance, reduced the number of suggestions and questions they posed to the consultee, missed more sessions, and reported greater negative perceptions of the consultee and themselves. They concluded that resistance serves as an escape function for consultees by allowing the consultee to avoid answering difficult questions.

During an interview with a consultee or in the context of a group meeting (e.g., SST), the consultant must be aware of resistance tactics that may be used, wittingly or otherwise, by con- sultees with an agenda that differs from the consultant’s. These tactics delay progress or, at worst, completely thwart the spirit and purpose of consultation. The following information will help you to understand resistance: its types, its causes, and ways of dealing with it.

types of Resistance

All experienced consultants have their own lists of behaviors they have observed that demon- strate resistance. The next chapter subsections discuss some of the most common types of resistance.

thE DiRECt BloCk Some teachers have no interest in consultation, ignore any efforts to get them to change their minds or behaviors, and simply stonewall the whole process. Or they may engage in the pro- cess up to the point of implementation and then decide that they don’t want to participate any longer.

“YES, But . . .” The consultee always seems to have some reason not to try anything. Although she may agree that an idea has merit, she concludes that it is not worth trying because it might not work, it might be too much work, or there are not enough resources to make it work. She may give some of the following reasons:

“I tried it before with a different student, but it didn’t work.”

“Somebody else said she tried it, but it didn’t work.”

“The problem is too serious.”

“This student has [some disability], and this needs to be treated elsewhere.”

“I don’t have the time.”

“This sounds like a good idea, but I’m just not sure that a change from what I’m doing would be good right now.”

“If I do that for this student, it will seem unfair to the others. They will want it, too.”

“We don’t have the extra bodies in the classroom to do that.”

“We have too many other demands (large class size, Common Core Standards, etc.).”

All of these reasons (excuses) for not implementing a change effort may have some truth. Only an analysis of the situation can determine what part is truth and what part is an excuse or stalling tactic. Part of this analysis could include using resources in creative new ways. As discussed in Chapter 2, consultants aligned with the mental health theory of consultation would suggest that any of the reasons listed previously may be due to a consultee’s lack of confidence, objectivity, skill, knowledge, or a combination of these.

“i DiD it, But it DiDn’t woRk” The consultee has (or claims to have) tried the recommended interventions and found them wanting. If you are not engaged in routine treatment integrity checks, you often don’t find out that this has happened until you inquire about the effectiveness of the intervention. If the con- sultee calls to tell you that an intervention isn’t working and asks for further help, she probably isn’t resisting. Resistance occurs after a plan has been developed, time has gone by, and the

102 Chapter 4 • Communication and Interpersonal Skills

consultee supposedly has tried the plan and been unsuccessful but hasn’t bothered to tell you. This sort of passive resistance may be due to a feeling of embarrassment because the plan’s not working. Of course, it is entirely possible that the recommendations haven’t been successful for a variety of reasons other than resistance. When you look into the situation and see if the con- sultee is eager to move forward or not, you will have a better sense of whether the problem is resistance or something else. Naturally, it is necessary to assess whether the intervention was carried out as intended (i.e., treatment integrity).

Friend and Bauwens (1988) list other types of resistance common to school consultation: the reverse, in which the consultee agrees to planned interventions but does not follow through or does them in a manner that is unlikely to work (as in the example in Activity 4.12); the projected threat, in which the consultee refuses to cooperate because some person (principal, parent, per- haps even the student) won’t like it; the guilt trip, manifested by a consultee who acts as though the extra burden of the intervention is excessive; and tradition, in which history is invoked as an argument against trying anything new or different.

Causes of Resistance

Any threat to the status quo can cause some people to put up defensive barriers and to find many reasons to resist. Habit strength, a perceived threat to role image or security, too much work, philosophical belief conflicts, poor planning and/or delivery, psychological deficits within the consultee, lack of skills, and the so-called principal’s office are among the most common causes for resistance. Each is discussed in the following subsections.

haBit StREnGth “I’ve been teaching for 12 years and this is the way it works for me.” Teaching and parenting are supported in part by the usefulness of habit, or consistency. Teachers and parents tend to do today what they did yesterday, last week, and last year. Even schools often have, as a priority, the maintenance of a consistent approach to education. A consultant is usually called in because the consultee’s habitual reactions to the referral situation aren’t working. Therefore, trying to get the consultee to try new approaches is to some extent a question of appreciating the strength of the consultee’s habits and suggesting a new behavior with which the consultee has a good chance of being successful. For example, a consultee’s usual reaction to the disruptive behavior of a student is a mild reprimand, a cold stare, a brief talk with the offending student after class, a punishment consequence (perhaps having the student write class rules a number of times), sending the offending student to the office, and then a conference with the parents, usually in that order. Imagine that your consultee tried these tactics with a student, then redid them more strongly but to little avail. Because she has used up her habit repertoire, she refers the student to the school’s SST, and you proceed with your consultative efforts. You may find that the only kinds of suggestions that she will come up with, or will accept from you, are those closely related to the six habitual responses she has already tried. Success in this case might well depend on the consultant’s ability to structure recommendations that are similar to, or compat- ible with, these habitual responses yet have a better chance of working than those the consultee has already tried. It is also possible that the consultant can get the consultee to reframe the problem, to think about it differently, and on that basis to accept ideas that she may not have thought of herself.

thREat to RolE imaGE oR SECuRitY “Asking for help makes me look incompetent.” Like all professionals, teacher-consultees have an image of themselves as being generally competent. Students with moderate to severe learning or behavior problems may threaten this image. Having to ask someone else for assistance puts the consultee in a “one-down” position, which can lead to the types of resistance we have discussed. An example is the case of a veteran teacher (Ms. Jones) who has a good reputation for dealing with difficult students. She now gets the most troublesome student she has ever had, one who has caused her to lose her professional demeanor in front of her class and who definitely threatens her security and comfort level as a teacher. Needing to refer this student erodes Ms. Jones’s self- image further. Defensiveness may accompany this situation as she tries to project her belief that she has tried everything, that the problem lies within the student, and that she shouldn’t have to

Chapter 4 • Communication and Interpersonal Skills 103

try anything else. She believes that special education (or suspension, or movement to a different classroom) is needed.

Your success as a consultant in this case depends on your ability to develop a positive rapport with Ms. Jones—to convince her that you appreciate what she has done and that it would be helpful to try some new tactic with the student, if only for the sake of your relation- ship, or because a reframing or variation of her own good ideas might work, or in the interest of gathering data.

too muCh woRk “Nobody wants more work.” Consultants need to be sure that the ideas they and the consultee have discussed are not really too labor-intensive. It is common to find that resistance develops after the consultee tries the suggested intervention; only then does it become clear that, as the consultee sees it, it really is too much work. Interventions that derive from the behavior modi- fication approach seem to some consultees to be too much work when they involve cumber- some ways of data collection, frequent reinforcement delivery, or dealing with the initial distractions from teaching core content that accompany the implementation of a token- economy system.

An example occurred with Mr. Sanchez, who seemed happy about the potential use of a behavioral contract. After a week without much progress toward the goals, he complained that it was just too much work charting the behaviors and communicating with the parents about the reinforcers they were to deliver. The consultant agreed that it may have been too much all at once, and they amended the contract to only 2 hours a day, switched to a Web-based app, and provided reinforcers at school. After another week, Mr. Sanchez agreed to chart the data for a half day.

PhiloSoPhiCal BEliEF ConFliCtS “I pride myself on treating all the students the same.” In school-based consultation, we need to recognize that each participant in a collaborative consultation team has an implicit philosophy or set of beliefs and values that governs his practice and views regarding the needs and welfare of students. One of the sources of philosophical disputes occurs over the extent to which students with disabilities should be included in general education classes or whether to promote self-determination by placing more of the decision making in the hands of students. Because few teacher preparation programs are grounded in behaviorism (Alberto & Troutman, 2013) behaviorally based interventions and suggestions may be met with resistance. In a randomized, multiple-baseline study, Coffee & Kratochwill (2013) concluded that the teachers’ resistance to implementing an intervention to improve students’ behaviors by providing frequent praise derived from the teachers’ lack of training in and philosophical opposition to behavioral tech- niques. Some teachers and parents believe that positive reinforcement is akin to bribery. They do not believe that students ought to be given special recognition or rewards for “doing what they are supposed to be doing.” They seem to maintain a Puritan ethic that requires, but does not reinforce, perfection in behavior. Sometimes it helps to give a gentle reminder that, in many other settings, we go to extraordinary measures to help people in need, such as providing cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) to a drowning victim. We wouldn’t expect everyone standing around a pool to get CPR just because a lifeguard applied it to one child who fell in and nearly drowned!

PooR PlanninG anD/oR DElivERY “I’ll blindly start some interventions; something has to stick.” Certainly there exists the possibil- ity that consultation is being resisted because it has been poorly designed, either at the conceptual level (that is, not well explained as a service delivery model) or at the case level (when an actual case is being poorly managed by the consultant). Some specific steps for ensuring competent delivery of consultative services are as follows:

1. Establish rapport before discussing details of a case or intervention. Getting to know the teacher or parent beyond surface appearances is not always easy in schools because of the busy schedules all professionals (and parents) have. Still, it doesn’t take long to convey to people the idea that you are interested in what they have to say, that you are particularly

104 Chapter 4 • Communication and Interpersonal Skills

interested in what they have done to date about the concerns they have, and that you are interested in their ideas about what to do next.

2. Do not get caught up in the “I’m in a rush; tell me what to do” syndrome that seems to characterize many informal referrals that occur in schools. Be firm about the process that has been established for accessing your services and, with some exceptions based on emergencies, stick to it. Staff members will regard you as more professional if you indicate that you believe their issues are important enough to set aside time for a meaningful discussion.

3. Keep notes. An example is presented in Figure 4.3.

It is important to refrain from solving a consultee’s poor planning or delivery problems by taking over. The following scenario (along with the cases presented in Chapter 9) demonstrates how a collaborative-minded consultant avoids this trap. Note how the consultee, a general education teacher, continually tries to get the consultant, a resource teacher who has just started working with Sammy, to solve the problem and how the consultant “out defers” the consultee.

Consultant: Good morning, Ms. H. How are you today? Consultee: Not so good. You know Sammy, of course. He’s no better. When we had

the SST meeting on him, you told me to get back to you if things didn’t improve. Well, I’m back.

Consultant: Sounds discouraging. Let’s see if I remember the details. He’s in your fourth grade, weak academically, a bit hyper, off-task. Right so far? You were going to gather some data on his work completion and something else . . . I forgot what it was. We had also discussed using a contract. Is that right?

Consultee: Oh, you remember him all right. The “something else” was out-of-seat behavior. I tried the contract. It worked for a week or so. I really think he belongs full-time in special ed. Why are we wasting time this way? Two periods of RSP [resource specialist program] aren’t enough.

Consultant: Yes, the contract. I’m glad you were able to try it. Tell me about it. Consultee: Well, you know, stay in your chair, finish some work for a change, and

you can earn some free time. The usual sort of thing. He didn’t know what to do with himself when he earned the free time (only twice, you know), so he lost interest in the contract. What are you going to do about him?

Consultant: I’m not sure what we can do; it’s kind of up to you. I’ll be glad to help, but I really need to know more about what’s been tried, what the data look like, and what you’d like to try next.

Consultee: Well, the data sheets are in my room if you want to see them. They don’t show any change since I started keeping track 2 weeks ago. If it is up to me, where I’d like to go next is back to IEP and get on with full-time place- ment in special education. That’s what he needs. So should I put in another referral or what?

Consultant: No, that won’t be necessary. We can bring it up at the next meeting for another look, if you’d like. But listen, have you got 5 minutes right now? Let’s take a look at those data and then talk over some ideas about how to help Sammy.

Consultee: Well, 5 minutes, okay.

Together they go to the consultee’s room and review three data sheets, on which the number of out-of-seat behaviors that occurred during the first hour of class are recorded.

Consultee: Well, what should I do with him? Consultant: Let’s start with what has been tried and then see if some of those ideas are

working and how we can build on what you’ve already tried with him. Consultee: Well, as I say, nothing seems to work. I mean there is nothing I can do

about his poor reading. If I stop to help him with every word, the group starts to moan.

Chapter 4 • Communication and Interpersonal Skills 105

Consultant: Okay. Let’s stay with that. The poor reading is a real problem, and we’ll hope that his two periods a day in RSP with me are going to be helpful to him. I’m starting to see progress already, but grade-level text is definitely frustrating for him to read. In the meantime, what are some ways you can get around his inability to read grade-level text and still ensure he is learn- ing the content?

Consultee: Well, I suppose if I could find a study buddy for him, someone he wouldn’t clown around with so much, and the buddy could preview vocabulary with him so the reading wouldn’t be so difficult.

Consultant: Good idea. Think about who your more serious students are; one of them would be a good role model and peer tutor for him. That’s a good idea. What else have you thought about?

Consultee: We did the contract, and it was a flop. What could I do with that? How should I do it? I wish you’d write one. Maybe I don’t know how.

Consultant: When you were using the contract, what ideas did you have about why it wasn’t working? Why did it flop?

Consultee: Well, as I told you, he didn’t know how to take advantage of the rein- forcer. He just wandered around the room, bothered a few kids, and acted bored.

Consultant: So he hasn’t learned how to make good use of free time, even when he’s earned it. Tell me about the reinforcer. Where did the idea of free time come from? Was it his choice?

Consultee: No, it’s what I always use. I took a course at the university, and that’s what the teacher said: Use free time as a reinforcer because everybody likes it.

Consultant: Well, what do you think of that now? I mean for Sammy. Consultee: Well, he’s an exception. One for every rule, you know. What are you

suggesting? Consultant: You know Sammy. What do you think he’d be willing to work for? Consultee: I don’t know. But I’m not into giving away candy or anything else. Once

you start doing that, that’s all they want. Consultant: Have you seen the reinforcement survey some of the teachers use? It’s that

one-page questionnaire that gets at what kids like and are willing to work for. Many of the things listed aren’t things you have at school; they’re things their parents get or do with them. Do you think it might help to see how Sammy responds to this? Your contract idea might work after all if you’re able to get a more specific set of reinforcers to use.

Consultee: Yeah, well, maybe. Do you have a copy of it? I’ve seen it but haven’t used it yet. And I need you to look at the contract before I try it again. It needs something to make it jazzier.

Consultant: I’ll be glad to. There might be some way to link the contract to the out-of- seat behavior you are monitoring. Sometimes contracts fail because the student is unclear about the behavioral expectation. I’ll get you some cop- ies of the reinforcement survey, and after you’ve filled it out with Sammy, put it into my box and I’ll come to see you about the contract wording and design. [Makes a few notes for himself.] Now, here’s where we are now. I’ll get you some copies of the survey, and you’ll return it to me and we’ll meet then to develop another contract. I’ll also put Sammy’s name on the SST meeting agenda if you still want me to.

Consultee: For sure. Consultant: Meanwhile, you’ll be getting Sammy a good role model as a study buddy,

and what else would you like to try with him before we go to IEP again? Consultee: I’m going to call his mom again. I had asked her to—well, you know, we

talked about it at the last IEP—get him some books at his level from the library and sitting down with him every night to help him with his reading, writing, and spelling. I don’t think she’s done a thing about it. His home- work doesn’t look like anybody helped him with it.

106 Chapter 4 • Communication and Interpersonal Skills

Consultant: You may be right. Could I make a suggestion? Perhaps you might put more focus on what Sammy’s mother can do. Sometimes parents get over- whelmed when asked to work on too many things. What do you think?

Consultee: Oh, I don’t know. I think she can spend 20 minutes a night. I’ll feel her out about it. I gotta go. See you whenever. Get me that stuff.

In this case, the consultee approaches the consultant feeling agitated and defeated. She has let her worst fears take over and has given up on her own ability to help the student. The consult- ant does not allow himself to fall into this trap of saving her by readily accepting her cata- strophic reactions to what seems to be the result of a poorly designed contract, poorly monitored out-of-seat behavior, and a lack of follow-up on a plan that Sammy’s mom was supposed to follow. In only 5 minutes or so, all of this is revealed, and steps are planned to remediate much of it. The consultant has assigned himself some tasks, and the consultee has some work to do. The consultee wants something official to happen, so she asks for another IEP meeting. She knows that the IEP is the forum where she can press her case for full-time special education for Sammy, and she may be able to talk the team into agreeing with her. The consultant hopes not, however, and he will continue to try to get all other sources of help for Sammy activated. Perhaps members of the IEP will agree and make other suggestions that will further that aim.

Notice how often the consultee tries to get the consultant to do something: to take over responsibility for Sammy, or to activate a process of removing the problem from the consultee’s class. As you review how this consultant deflects these direct requests or demands, you should get some notion of how a collaborative consultant works. It would have been very easy to do one (or both) of two things: give in and agree that full-time placement is needed, or act like the expert and tell the consultee just what she should do to deal with Sammy. When the consultee defers to the consultant’s assumed expertise in solving all problems, the consultant out-defers her by getting her to think about what she has done and how she might improve it.

Activity 4.13

In dyads, have Partner A invent a school-relevant problem and act very deferential toward the consultant (Partner B). The consultant should

practice deflecting this deference and urge the consultee to apply her own problem-solving skills to the problem.

PSYCholoGiCal DEFiCitS within thE ConSultEE “I’m too stressed, unhealthy, or overly invested in what I’m doing to consider interventions.” Sometimes a consultee will not participate in the consultation process for reasons that are unclear. She may vacillate between compliance and refusal or may work very hard at the interventions for a period of time and then ignore them inexplicably. Such behavior may signal the presence of some disturbed intrapsychic activity that should be dealt with outside the consultative interac- tions, preferably in a therapeutic setting. Common indicators of stress that may be leading to impaired functioning are a long-term change in mood from well modulated to depressed or angry; rapid, inexplicable mood shifts; overreaction to mild setbacks; and comments that indi- cate that the person is “on the edge” emotionally (Sapolsky, 1994; Selye, 1993). Caplan and Caplan (1993) have discussed manifestations of psychological deficits under their “lack of objectivity” condition, which was presented briefly in Chapter 2.

laCk oF SkillS “I don’t actually know how to implement the intervention.” Imagine that, in the course of discussing the disruptive behavior of a student, a consultee mentions the use of a contract. The consultant agrees that this would be a good idea and encourages the consultee to do it. The consultee, Mr. Smith, has never written a contract before; he’s just heard about it. In the course of their short conversation, the consultee doesn’t tell the consultant that he needs help in designing a contract. A week goes by; nothing happens. The consultant inquires about the situation, and the consultee states that he hasn’t had time to look into it. Another week goes by, with the same result. By now the consultant is convinced that the consultee is resisting,

Chapter 4 • Communication and Interpersonal Skills 107

for unknown reasons, so she confronts him mildly. At this point it becomes clear that the consultee doesn’t know how to write or implement contracts but is shy about admitting it. This would be an example of a skill deficit, one of the four “lacks” found in some consultees (see Chapter 2).

The case of Mr. Smith may not really demonstrate resistance; to the consultant, how- ever, resistance appears to be the reason until she learns that the problem involves a skill deficit. The consultant cannot assume that the activity called for in the intervention plan is within the skill repertoire of the consultee. Perhaps the consultee has implemented the inter- vention before but is having difficulty tailoring it to the current referral student or context. The consultant can address skill deficits by reducing the demands on the consultee; the con- sultant can prepare any materials, model the intervention, provide a detailed (even scripted) step-by-step set of directions, observe the intervention implementation, and provide perfor- mance feedback. Teachers may need to try a couple of different interventions before they find the one that works best for them in their current situation (Dart, Cook, Collins, Gresham, & Chenier, 2012).

It is our observation that most teachers are more skillful in areas of curriculum delivery than they are in areas of behavior management. There are a number of possible reasons for this relative lack of skills, including poor teacher training in the area of behavior management: Many teacher-training programs devote only scant attention to this area, perhaps assuming behavior will be appropriate if the curriculum is delivered adequately. Additional reasons include a reluc- tance to be firm, a rejection of behaviorist ideas, and the erroneous belief that it is not a teacher’s “job” to manage students’ behaviors. Because of the paramount need for consultants to be useful to teachers in this area, Chapter 6 is devoted to the causes, effects, and remedies for classroom behavior management problems.

thE PRinCiPal’S oFFiCE oR thE union REPRESEntativE “I’ll get out of this by complaining to the principal or union representative.” Parsons and Meyers (1984) describe schools as either proactive or reactive. A proactive school is led by a principal who is familiar with cutting-edge philosophies and methods and, while not embrac- ing anything blindly, is open-minded about studying newer ideas with a view toward incorpo- rating them into the school. In contrast, the reactive principal usually reacts only under pressure; some outside force compels this person to take action, and it is taken reluctantly, with a negative affect coloring its implementation. School desegregation, under court order, was often handled in this way, as is, to a much smaller degree, full inclusion or implementing a multi-tiered system of support (MTSS) delivery model. In reactive systems, maintenance of the status quo is more important than the desire to seek ways to improve the system. Consultants working with reactive principals need to devote more time to establishing relationships, laying the groundwork, and explaining all steps of the process than do those working in more com- fortable, proactive sites. In general, a threat to complain to the union representative is an empty one as long as you are only advising the teacher on evidence-based interventions he may wish to attempt. An angry, resistant teacher is unlikely to implement any intervention well, if at all, unless you can help him see what he may gain (i.e., a calmer classroom, additional support in the classroom, recognition for helping the school meet its goal of 90% first-graders reading on-grade level) from the extra effort.

Activity 4.14

In small groups, review the causes for resist- ance. What types of communication styles, interpersonal skills, or social power influence

described thus far might you employ to over- come each type of resistance?

overcoming Resistance

The main methods for dealing with resistance from either teacher-consultees or parent- consultees are to uncover its roots and deal with them realistically; look for ways to modify the plan or a consultee’s responsibilities; provide reassurances; emphasize the rewards that may accrue if the

108 Chapter 4 • Communication and Interpersonal Skills

plan is carried out; seek help from other sources of support such as a principal or a mentor teacher; and, if necessary, call a temporary halt to the consultation. Given the intensity of some of the situations that call for consultation, it is sometimes necessary to take time out from plan building—as long as the student’s rights to a free and appropriate public education are not restricted. When you take a break before returning to working on the plan, people are sometimes more willing to progress. In any case, do not take resistance personally. Treat resistance as an objective problem that can be worked out. Taking it personally; getting defensive; or, in the worst case, complaining to others about the consultee’s lack of effort or professionalism only jeopardizes your relationship with the consultee and may tarnish your reputation in the school and the district.

Once the sources and types of resistance are delineated, the consultant needs to determine methods for dealing with them. In the following subsections, we discuss a number of ideas from the literature as well as suggestions derived from practice.

makE thE ConSultEE FEEl ComFoRtaBlE with You After a first consultation meeting, the consultee should be eager to participate in another. Displaying the desirable interpersonal skills described earlier in this chapter enhances this pos- sibility. In addition, attempting to “get inside the consultee’s world” can increase comfort levels. Observation in a classroom, a playground, or a lunchroom can give the consultant a good picture of the setting of the problem and may lead to a focused discussion of practical interventions. It also shows consultees that the consultant is really interested in seeing the problem from their perspective. Consultants can make a concerted effort to understand and be sympathetic to the current pressures on teachers and parent consultees. Americans demand more from their public schools every day. The constant cry for accountability, tougher standards, more discipline, sophisticated technology, and (for students with disabilities) greater opportunities for inclusion can easily overwhelm even experienced teachers and administrators. Sensitivity to a teacher’s burden of stress is certainly necessary.

REDuCE thE thREat Resistance may be tied to a belief on the part of the consultee that engaging in consultation may generate a loss of status or feelings of incompetence. The primary way to deal with this is through the implementation of a collaborative approach in which the consultee is acknowledged as a coequal in the consultation process. Some specific suggestions are to (a) start on the con- sultee’s turf, (b) be clear about the collaborative nature of the consultation from the onset, (c) create a strong relationship to build trust and alleviate fear, (d) try to minimize the number of new ideas and approaches the consultee has to learn, and (e) give the consultee as much free- dom as possible. You should not tell the consultee what to do; instead help her think of practical solutions that have a high probability of success in her classroom or, in the case of a parent- consultee, at home.

Consultants need to listen to the expertise and ideas of consultees to understand their point of view. When consultees believe that their ideas are important and are being consid- ered, they are more likely to listen carefully to the consultant’s ideas and are more likely to put the collaboratively developed ideas into practice. The following is a possible way to intro- duce the idea of collaborative consultation to a consultee with whom you have not previously worked. Note that the consultant mentions confidentiality, which is another way to reduce the resistance.

Hello, Mr. Sanchez, I’m Ms. Washington. I’m the new resource teacher here at ABC School. I’m pleased to meet you. I know you want to tell me about Isaiah, and I’m eager to start our discussion also, but I’d like to start by mentioning two important items. The first has to do with the way I like to be of assistance as a consultant. I prefer to work in what is known as a collaborative model. By this I mean that we problem-solve together and try to think of interventions that are appropriate for your classroom. I’m not the expert, by any means; in fact, in your classroom, you’re the expert. I’m here primarily to get your insights and ideas about the problems and possible solutions. Through our discussions, I’m sure we can come up with some good ideas.

Chapter 4 • Communication and Interpersonal Skills 109

Now, the other thing I need to mention is confidentiality. When I work with consultees in the schools, I regard everything they tell me as confidential; that is, it stays between us. I don’t talk to the principal or other teachers about the details of our discussions or about what I observe in your classroom. You are free, however, to tell anyone else about our work together. Naturally, in team meetings we will both be sharing information we have discussed about Isaiah and other students. There are only three exceptions to this confidentiality: If you tell me about anyone who is being abused, is abusing others, or is threatening others, I am obligated to report it. Is this information clear? Do you have any questions? If you do not have questions, let’s start with you telling me about Isaiah. I’ll be keeping notes just to help me keep the facts straight.

DEvEloP PoSitivE ExPECtationS Sometimes a consultant has to lay some groundwork to affect the belief system of the consultee regarding the potential value of the intervention. Citing similar cases from your experience in which the intervention worked well, having the consultee talk to other consultees who have had similar situations that were handled successfully, and/or reviewing the literature that describes the intervention being used successfully help lay some groundwork. It may be helpful to have the consultee observe another teacher implement similar interventions successfully; observational learning can be a powerful tool. Throughout the process, the consultant should also point out how consultation can be helpful. The collaborative, positive tone can be established at the begin- ning with an introduction such as this one:

My role as a consultant is to give you assistance in your efforts to work more effectively with this student. Therefore, I will be gathering information about the problem through interviews with you and observations of the classroom behavior of the student. I am not here to evaluate you. My job is to help you think through some possible ways of assisting the student to perform better in the classroom or on the playground. One of the ways in which I like to work with teachers is to encourage them to think of their own ideas about how they would like to solve a student’s problem. I have found that teachers have many good ideas but sometimes just need someone to discuss them with. Two heads are often better than one, and pooling our ideas can work better than if just one of us does all the work in gener- ating ideas. Besides, we’re talking about your classroom, and the fact is that you are the one who is going to implement most of the changes we will discuss. Therefore, it makes sense that we work with your ideas and with approaches with which you feel comfortable.

oFFER inCEntivES As illustrated by the video in Activity 4.12, people are not likely to change their behaviors if there is no incentive to do so. First you might examine what incentives currently exist for the teacher to maintain the status quo and see if you can change them. For example, the teacher may no longer be allowed to send the student to the office for minor infractions. One incentive might be to tap into the teacher’s sense of personal accomplishment and desire to improve student’s lives. You can do this by informing the teacher that you are aware of her efforts; that

Working in dyads, have one person act the role of the consultant, and the other a potential consultee. Assume that this is a first meeting between the two. Have the consultant intro- duce herself and explain the consultation process to the consultee. Have the consultee simply be accepting during this interchange. Repeat the process, but this time have the

consultee express doubts about the process based on the information you have learned about resistance, such as the extra amount of work, the need for data gathering, the implica- tions of being observed, the belief that the referred student needs special education, and so on. In class, review strategies for dealing with these common forms of resistance.

Activity 4.15

110 Chapter 4 • Communication and Interpersonal Skills

her efforts are appreciated; and that, through her efforts, the student has a better chance for suc- cess than he would have had otherwise. Positive reinforcement for efforts usually encourages people to keep trying. For a very resistant teacher, you may reinforce small approximations of behavior change, with the hope that she will be encouraged to make bigger changes to her teaching. Some additional suggestions include having teachers present their successful consul- tation cases to the staff members. Consultants can also work with administrators and the teach- er’s union to include evidence of collaboration and intervention integrity in how teachers are evaluated. Charting progress-monitoring data that indicate the student is improving can also be immensely reinforcing.

EStaBliSh a ClEaR Plan A detailed plan with clearly defined roles and timelines will assist teachers in overcoming their resistance to change. The defined roles include not only who will do what and by when but also establish an implicit contract between the consultant and consultee to engage in collaborative problem solving. A detailed plan is like a recipe that anyone can use to make a dish or implement a plan. A detailed plan helps to identify which parts of the plan were and were not implemented or effective. It also reduces the consultee’s confusion and increases accountability as long as everyone concerned signs off on the plan.

REDuCE thE amount oF EFFoRt REQuiRED BY thE ConSultEE When a referral for assistance is made, either directly to the school-based consultant or to the SST, the teacher is most likely already spending more time with the target student than with most of his students because of the nature of the presenting problems. The teacher hopes that, through the referral process, he will obtain some sort of relief. The teacher must understand, however, that in the beginning of an intervention he may have to do things dif- ferently and this may involve what seems like more work. When he finds out that consulta- tion results in more work, not less, he may show resistance in the present case and also be unwilling to use the process again. Therefore, it is very important that the consultant be as efficient as possible.

Depending on the case and the consultee involved, it may be a good idea for the con- sultant to be upfront about the reality that, at least initially, the consultation process may result in somewhat more effort on behalf of the teacher (e.g., meetings, data keeping). If all goes well, the amount of effort will be reduced as the problem is resolved, and in the long run it will be less than what would have been needed without engaging in the consultation process. It is sometimes helpful to point out that the consultee is now spending extra time with the target child and apparently isn’t feeling that this expenditure of time is resolving the concerns. The new or different approaches generated through the consultation process may cost the consultee less time or trouble in the long run than the approaches he is now using.

The consultant can also articulate his goal of trying to find the least time-consuming assessment and interventions, thereby acknowledging the many competing demands facing the consultee. For example, the consultant could state:

We need to keep track of what the student is doing as we try different approaches to modify her behaviors. We’ll try to make this data gathering as convenient as possible to avoid interfering with your teaching. Do you have any questions or comments about this approach?

Another way of reducing the consultee’s efforts is to give direct assistance to the teacher in the form of data gathering, coteaching, preparing special materials, providing direct ser- vices to the student, and monitoring other students while the teacher deals independently with a target student.

StaY with thE Situation until it iS RESolvED A competent consultant knows that problems are rarely solved after one consultation session. Often the first session is devoted to establishing rapport, discussing how to think about the prob- lem, considering what data to gather and how to gather them, reviewing the student’s history, and

Chapter 4 • Communication and Interpersonal Skills 111

discussing tentative solutions. This session does not usually involve the development of substan- tive or final solutions to the problem. Follow-through is necessary. One of the requirements of most initial consultation sessions is that the consultant and consultee set another time to meet again for further discussion. The exception is when the situation is finally resolved to everyone’s satisfaction, when there is mutual agreement that it might be best to put the case aside for a while, or some third factor (for example the student leaves the school). By supporting the con- sultee throughout the problem-solving process, the consultant demonstrates persistence and pro- fessionalism, two admirable attributes that may decrease resistance in future consultees once word gets out.

Don’t waStE PEoPlE’S timE Most school-based consultation sessions need to occur in 10 to 25 minutes because teachers and support staff are too busy to devote much more time to a single consultative meeting. Devoting an excessive amount of time to consulting on one student may reduce the likelihood that the consultee will want to engage in follow-up consultation and intervention adjustments if the first plan fails (Sprick, 1999). Longer consultation meetings may occur during a first meet- ing (when a student’s background is reviewed), when the consultant is engaged in a group consultation regarding a particularly difficult situation (perhaps as part of an SST or IEP meet- ing), when parents are involved (particularly parents who do not speak English and require translation), or when the consultant is engaged in system-improvement work. During formal meetings, an agenda with a schedule, like the one in Figure 2.4 in Chapter 2, can ensure that a meeting moves along and doesn’t get bogged down. A common waste of time is “admiring the problem”— acting as if the problem is horrific or inexplicable and discussing it to death. A competent consultant moves the discussion from problem identification and analyses to gener- ating potential solutions. She does this by gathering the necessary data, synthesizing the infor- mation, and then leading the consultee to consider strategies for intervention. These activities represent the directive nature of collaborative consultation and emphasize a problem-solving and solutions-based approach.

Activity 4.16

View the video Contracting for Consultation. Early in the consultation, the teacher indicates a concern about how much time the consulta- tion process will take. What does the consult- ant do to keep her engaged? The teacher mentions a couple of times that the instruc- tional consultation steps are similar to those

used by the problem-solving team. Did the consultant possibly miss an opportunity to make connections to the consultee’s prior experience? How might you have responded to the teacher’s comments?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v= wNnEQBngH4U

Figure 4.2 presents a list of the important manifestations and causes of resistance in con- sultation, based on the acronym RESISTANCE. Also presented in Figure 4.2 is a list of some of the most useful approaches for dealing with resistance. These approaches are based on the acro- nym FACILITATE.

GaininG anD DElivERinG inFoRmation

the interview

All of the communication skills we have discussed are used in an interview format, which may be informal or formal. Informal interviews are more common. They consist of those numerous occasions when the consultant and the consultee meet in the hallway or the teacher’s lounge and spend a relatively unstructured (but not purposeless) 5 minutes or so talking about a student. Formal interviews are planned in advance, are held at a specified time and place, have a definite agenda and set of goals, and may occur in a group or team setting (for example, an SST, IEP or transition planning meeting).

112 Chapter 4 • Communication and Interpersonal Skills

When a consultant is informed of a consultee’s concerns, it is generally best to sched- ule an informal meeting first simply to discover the severity of the referral problem. Sometimes, this informal meeting is all that is necessary. The consultee may leave with the information or idea that she needs in order to deal effectively with the problem without any further assistance. Usually, however, the result of this first (informal) meeting is the deci- sion either to make a referral to the SST, to reconvene an IEP, or to meet again one on one in a more formal way. When setting up a formal interview, it is important to establish a nonhierarchical, collaborative relationship at the outset. You can do this by having the con- sultee establish the time and place of the meeting. Teacher-consultees have a fairly rigid daily schedule compared to that of most school consultants, so this flexibility on the part of the consultant should be expected.

The consultant should have semistructured set of questions to ask during the formal inter- view. The nature of the questions depends on the nature of the referral. In the case of behavior problem referrals, the consultant will want to know the answers to the following questions:

• What does the behavior look like? • How often does it occur? • In what settings does it occur most often? When and/or where is it unlikely to occur? • What happens after it occurs? • What function does the behavior appear to serve (escape undesired condition, gain desired

attention and/or activity, etc.)? • What are some competing, more desirable behaviors?

Referrals focusing on academic deficits may generate the following questions:

• What skill are you most concerned about? • How discrepant is this from grade-level standards?

MANIFESTATIONS AND CAUSES OF RESISTANCE IN SCHOOL-BASED CONSULTATION

Consultees can resist the consultation process in many ways. The following list uses the acronym RESISTANCE to remind us of the manifestations and causes of resistance to consultation.

R Refusal, active or passive E Expectations too high S Skill inadequacy I “I did it; it didn’t work.” S System lack of support, real or imagined T Threat to existing ecology of the classroom A Anxiety over being watched N Nonreinforcement for efforts C Confidence, lack of E Easier to insist that someone else (e.g., special education) do it

DEALING WITH RESISTANCE

Understanding resistance is one thing; dealing with it is quite another. The following is a brief list of suggestions based on the acronym for the key word in resistance-busting: FACILITATE. F Facilitate A Assist in consultees’ thinking and plan building C Communicate both your support and ideas I Interpersonally relate L Live in consultees’ shoes I Inquire T Teach A Acknowledge consultees’ efforts T Tolerate consultees’ discrepant views but don’t allow inappropriate practices E Evaluate your collaborative efforts

FiGuRE 4.2 Manifestations and causes of resistance; methods for dealing with them

Chapter 4 • Communication and Interpersonal Skills 113

• Are there patterns, such as consistent errors in the data you collected on the target skill? • Can the student do better on this skill if he is motivated to do so? • What interventions have you attempted in the past? What were the outcomes?

The consultant should follow up the interview with some direct assessment of the behav- ior, such as classroom observation or curriculum-based measurement (CBM) to confirm and better define the problem behavior. This may be a first step toward establishing base- line data.

taking notes and keeping track

It is important for the consultant to take notes during a formal interview. Because note keeping may be disconcerting to some consultees, it is necessary for you to explain why you will be tak- ing notes, especially if this is the first formal interview you have had with a particular consultee. Your reasons will probably include at least the following:

1. It is important that you keep information accurately because many situations are complicated. 2. You are dealing with many student–teacher–parent issues at the same time, and it is easy

to get cases confused as the weeks go by if you don’t keep fairly detailed notes. 3. You will probably be writing a report on this referral at some point, especially if it

becomes a referral for special education eligibility, and your notes are necessary for this purpose.

Our experience is that teacher and parent consultees seem favorably impressed when  they see that careful notes are taken; one teacher commented to the first author [Kampwirth] that she wished her physician seemed as interested in what she had to say as I did! During a formal meeting, like an SST or IEP, one way to be more inclusive about what is being written is to use a laptop connected to a projector during your note taking. Thus, everyone can see what is being written and there are no surprises when the notes are printed or e-mailed.

Figure 4.3 is an example of summary notes given to a consultee after a first consultation meeting with a consultant. These summary statements were generated from the notes the con- sultant took during the interview with the consultee and provide a good example of solutions- oriented collaborative consultation. For consultations on the fly, a memo, note, task, or calendar entry into a smartphone, iPad, or similar electronic device will help track the details of a conver- sation and schedule follow-up activities.

Delivering Feedback

Wiggins (2012) defines feedback as “information about how we are doing in our efforts to reach a goal” and he differentiates it from advice and praise in that good feedback provides tangible, actionable, and goal-referenced information on the teacher’s performance. The following exam- ples are ordered in increasing specificity:

“Ms. Thompson, based on my observation, many of your students are disruptive.” “Ms. Thompson, you could be more positive.” “Ms. Thompson, I noticed when you circled the room, creating close proximity with some

of the disruptive students, their behaviors improved.” “Ms. Thompson, when you provided whole-group instruction from the front of the room,

student compliance with your requests was 50% and any given student appeared on-task 70% of the time. However, during independent seatwork, when you circled the room providing praise and corrective feedback to students, the compliance rate increased to 90% and the on-task rate increased to 80%.”

It is important to provide ongoing feedback to sustain the teacher’s and parent’s efforts (Vujnovic, Feabiano, Pariseau, & Naylor, 2013) and more immediate feedback (within one day) is more effective than delayed feedback (one week or more; Solomon, Klein, & Politylo, 2012). More information on delivering feedback is described in Chapter 3 (improving treatment integ- rity) and Chapter 9 (coaching models of professional development).

114 Chapter 4 • Communication and Interpersonal Skills

ConSultinG with PaREntS anD FamiliES

Consultation with parents is recognized as a valuable, indeed essential, responsibility of the school-based consultant (Sheridan, Clarke, & Burt, 2009; Wilkinson, 2006). The question for the school-based consultant is rarely as simple as “Should we contact the parents about this problem?” More likely questions center around when the parents should be contacted; by whom; how often; and with what agenda, goals, or offers to assist.

When. There are points in which interaction with parents is mandatory (i.e., prior to special education eligibility assessment and before every IEP meeting). However, problem- solving collaboration encourages continuous interactions with parents, preferably starting with a teacher who has regular contact with the parents of a targeted student. Teachers and support staff should also be encouraged to contact the parents when the student is doing well in class. Calling with good news can have a positive impact on the teacher’s relation- ship with the parent.

Consultee (teacher): Ms. Sallie Date: 9-26

Grade: 5 (resource specialist program) School: Jefferson

Consultant: Ms. Morrison, resource Room: 14 services program (RSP) Parent: Ms. Appleby teacher

Student referred: Billy Appleby Age: 10

Reason for referral: Billy isn’t completing his work in any subjects in his fifth-grade class with Ms. Sallie. He dawdles, plays with toys, talks to and bothers others, and alternates between being the class clown and playing the role of the tough guy (e.g., “You can’t make me”). Ms. Sallie is suggesting a self-contained class for him.

Background information: Billy is the second of three children of parents who were divorced last year. His schoolwork started to fall off at about the same time (mother’s report). Mom now works full-time. Father has moved to another state. Billy is doing well in his one hour of resource specialist program.

Solutions that have been tried and results: Billy has been kept after school, made to take work home, been moved nearer the teacher, and been put on a behavior contract. His mother has also tried tutoring him at home. The contract has helped somewhat but probably needs to have stronger contingencies. Otherwise, he just seems to be getting worse.

Tentative ideas that were discussed: Review behavior contract (consultant and consultee), conference with mother, conference with Billy, counseling for Billy, use Billy as a tutor, token economy for producing work, get Billy a tutor from an upper grade, get Billy an in-class study buddy.

Today’s plan: Consultant will arrange a conference with Billy’s mother and then with Billy. Consultee will review behavior contract with Billy and seek input from him on more effective reinforcers. Consultee will review Billy’s day with him at the close of every day for 1 week; a note will be sent home to his mother summarizing each day. I’ll conduct a survey-level assessment within a week and an observation in Ms. Sallie’s class. I’ll contact Mr. Pruzek (school counselor) about possible counseling.

Next meeting date: 10–4 at 10:30, Ms. Sallie’s room.

cc: Mr. Poplar, principal; Ms. Appleby; Mr. Pruzek, counselor.

FiGuRE 4.3 Summary notes from a first consultation meeting about Billy (10-year-old student)

Chapter 4 • Communication and Interpersonal Skills 115

By whom. There are no formal rules governing who is the best person to be in contact with parents about their children. Traditionally, the classroom teacher has been the primary contact person, and this remains generally true. The parents of students with disabilities may be contacted by either the regular or the special education teacher.

How often. Again, the answer depends largely on circumstances. The sensitive consult- ant will determine the amount of parent contact necessary and the parents’ willingness to engage in these contacts. Of course, the parents can take the lead by contacting school person- nel whenever they want. Most parents do not abuse this privilege and some may lack the con- fidence, English language proficiency, literacy level, or schedule flexibility schedule to make the first contact.

An agenda for parent consultation. The school-based consultant or teacher who contacts the parents needs to have a purpose to govern her consultative interactions. Here are some topics to think about before contacting the parents:

• What exactly do I want to convey? What is the problem or issue? How can I frame it in an objective manner to ensure a cooperative relationship and not generate parent defensiveness?

• A main purpose of the first contact is information trading. What information do I want to give, and what do I want to get?

• Do I know this parent? What is the family structure? Who lives at home? What are the family’s resources?

• How can I frame my concern as an invitation for the parent to work with me? What positive things can I say about his child? How can I express my concerns in language he can understand? For most parents, use the language of laypeople; avoid jargon and technical terms.

• Assuming a positive, or at least neutral, response from the parent, what can I suggest as a next step? What do I want her to do? Shall I invite her in for a conference? Shall I give her a specific task? How can I suggest we collaborate?

• In the case of a family in which a language other than mine is spoken, who can translate for me? What implications does this have for the nature of the phone or e-mail contact?

The consultant needs to consider that each family constructs its own reality. The student and her family members may not see the problem as you do or even be in complete agreement among themselves. Also, many families do not have the amount or type of education you have; be careful not to talk over their heads or down to them. Some families are not forthcoming about themselves or their customs, values, or beliefs. Be alert for their unwillingness to share much about themselves or their child while you try to remain objective about the facts and the need to take some action. Some families accept problems as part of life and may not share your desire to do something about them. While recognizing this value difference, try to indicate why their assistance would be helpful and show or suggest specific tasks they can do to assist their child.

Parents generally appreciate being asked to collaborate in problem solving (Sheridan et. al., 2012). They may respond positively and with many good ideas if asked for their advice about the referral problem. Others express a belief that you, as the educator, know best what to do. Many parents put the same amount of faith in educators that they do in physicians. While we are not advocating a doctor–patient (expert) model, we believe that the sensitive consultant needs to understand that not all parents are able or willing to collaborate beyond a willingness to listen.

Be flexible in terms of when and where you meet. In some forms of conjoint consultation, some meetings take place in the child’s home. Asking working parents to meet with you at school in the middle of the afternoon may be unreasonable. Other parents may be able to meet with you only if child care is provided.

Conjoint consultation, as described in Chapter 2, is a promising approach to partnering with parents (Sheridan, Clarke, & Burt, 2009; Wilkinson, 2006). Collaborating with the parents and the teachers simultaneously means that resources can be pooled to develop a more powerful intervention, which means greater consistency between home and school than when consultation

116 Chapter 4 • Communication and Interpersonal Skills

happens with each party separately. The following are suggested steps for the conduct of the meeting, whether it is in the SST or another format:

1. Secure a comfortable, attractive room for the meeting. It should reflect the seriousness and importance of the meeting and should be free from distractions. Refreshments, though optional, are always appreciated. A recorder of important information should be assigned, especially when the information relates to plan development.

2. The person conducting the meeting should be alerted to the arrival of the parents by the secretary at the front office, and should come out to greet the parents, lead them to the meeting room, offer them seats, and conduct the introductions of all team members. Name cards placed in front of all participants may be a good idea, especially in large meetings. Remember, parents may be overwhelmed by a crowd of strangers. Whether or not the student attends the conference depends on factors such as the student’s age, his ability to attend to the content of the meeting, the parents’ wishes, and so on. One factor to consider is the sensitive nature of the information to be delivered. If the committee believes that the student may not be able to integrate the complexity or personal nature of the information comfortably, it is better to inform the student about the essential sub- stance of the meeting in a private setting with the parent and a faculty or staff member well known to the student.

3. Some small talk designed to establish rapport and help the parents relax may be useful. Then the team leader should announce the purpose and goals of the meeting, asking the parents to give their input regarding these issues.

4. The first step is to reach consensus about the nature of a problem and desired out- comes. The problem should be stated in behavioral terms, without jargon and disease- oriented terminology. For example, it is better to say, “We are concerned about Billy’s high level of activity and his difficulty in completing his classwork” rather than “Observation of Billy suggests ADHD. Do others in Billy’s family find it hard to con- centrate? Have you taken Billy to the doctor about this problem?” To get the parents’ opinions about the problem you may ask: Do they see it at home? How does it mani- fest itself there (if they do see it at home)? Have they tried specific approaches to deal with it? How have these approaches worked? What are they doing about it now? Some of this information may be expanded later through the use of a questionnaire or rating scale that the parent fills out with the assistance of a member of the school staff, usually a school psychologist.

5. Analyze the problem to the depth necessary to develop a set of goals and interventions. Get the parents’ complete input and be sure to add their comments to whatever written documentation is being developed. The who, what, when, where, and how questions men- tioned previously need to be answered here. Loose ends need to be tied, or people will get frustrated later when the plan unravels due to poor planning.

6. If the parents (and/or the student) will have a role in the implementation of the selected interventions, you must be sure that they are able to do their part in carrying them out. At the point of assigning responsibilities to the parents, remember that you may be asking them to engage in behaviors or undertake activities with which they are unfamiliar or uncomfortable. Christenson (1995) suggests that the school team should ask the parents, “What resources or support would you like to have as you try this idea?” Sometimes parents don’t know how to answer because they haven’t experi- enced this sort of question before. It may be good to suggest ways in which the school can help. At least inform the parents of the school team’s intention of following up on plan implementation.

7. It is now time to bring the meeting to a close. Briefly summarize the purpose, goals and interventions developed, progress monitoring and treatment integrity data collection meth- ods, and team members’ responsibilities. If a written document is ready at this time, copies can be given to relevant personnel. Thank the parents for their participation, and establish a plan for the next follow-up procedure. The plan is then implemented, problems are worked on as they arise, and ongoing evaluation indicates how well the interventions are being implemented and how well they are working. To see these stages in a consultation role play, visit https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CS5vJ3AmUzQ.

Chapter 4 • Communication and Interpersonal Skills 117

Resistance by Parent-Consultees

Students who present with serious behavior/adjustment or learning challenges threaten the professional status and satisfaction of teachers, and these same behaviors or conditions also threaten and upset the personal lives of parents. The idea that an outsider (an individual repre- senting the school) asks to get involved in a family’s life may have threatening connotations, especially for families that traditionally handle problems within the family rather than seek outside resources. Many families are confused about how to deal with their child’s school- related problems (O’Shea, O’Shea, Algozzine, & Hammitte, 2001). Some family members have been rebuffed by school personnel, blamed for their child’s shortcomings, and told what to do rather than participating as equal contributors to problem solving on behalf of their child (Esler, Godber, & Christenson, 2008). In these cases, resistance is quite logical. Remember that consultation, whether with teachers or parents, is not about winning arguments or gaining some tactical advantage, as in a debate. It is also not about blaming or a search for intra-child (or intra-family) deficits. It is about problem solving. Learning is not solely produced by school personnel but is obtained by students who have supportive assistance from their schools, parents, and communities. This is a positive and constructive frame of mind to bring to parent consultation work.

Sources of resistance to effective collaborations with families include feelings of inadequacy; previous bad experiences with schools; suspicion about treatment from gov- ernment institutions; limited knowledge about school policies, procedures, and ways to assist with schoolwork; and coping with the everyday demands of making a living and rais- ing a family (Banks, 1993; Liontos, 1992). One suggestion when encountering resistance from members of marginalized groups is to utilize members from the family’s background or culture to mediate between or among the constituent parties (e.g., an older sibling or a minister; Banks, 1993).

Many of the strategies for overcoming resistance described earlier in this chapter should help with working with reluctant parents. While you are discussing the problem with the family, you should also be trying to get a deeper understanding of the family’s composition and dynam- ics. Understanding these factors may be of assistance in the development and monitoring of interventions, particularly if they involve the active participation of the family. Consultants should be aware and sensitive to the role that cultural and linguistic differences may play in the consultation process.

ConSultation in CultuRallY anD linGuiStiCallY DivERSE SEttinGS

The public schools in early 21st-century America are increasingly characterized by diversity. In many urban and some suburban areas, Caucasian students are no longer the majority they were 50 years ago. By the year 2050, less than 50% of the United States will be non-Hispanic

Activity 4.17

Working in teams of varying sizes, with differ- ent members taking turns at various roles, role- play consultation meetings for the following problems:

1. Third-grade boy, poor reader, starting to act aggressively toward others. He lives with his mother, father, a high-achieving older sister.

2. Fifth-grade girl who is performing poorly academically and has had little contact with her father over the past two years. Her mother is not married and works full-time.

3. High school sophomore who refuses to go to his resource class anymore. Says

he’s “sick of being one of those dum- mies.” Parents are cooperative but report losing control of their son at home.

4. Twelve-year-old with severe develop- mental disabilities. Parents want her fully included in the regular sixth-grade class, preferably without an aide, because none of the general education students have aides.

5. Seventh-grade boy starting to show withdrawn behaviors, telling his friends that he thinks he is transgender. Parents are adamant than he cannot be.

118 Chapter 4 • Communication and Interpersonal Skills

whites. Eurocentrism, Americanization (a belief in the melting-pot idea associated with cul- tural homogeneity), and similar notions gave way to a recognition of the positive values of multiculturalism, cultural pluralism, and bilingual education (Banks, 1993).

A growing literature relates consultation to multi- or cross-cultural issues. Sue and Sue (1990) point out some of the ways in which people from different cultures act differently from one another, including language (which includes paralanguage behaviors such as inflections, use of hands, loudness, and nonverbal communication), time orientation, and proxemics (personal space). In addition to overt behaviors, culture strongly influences a person’s frame of reference. Members of the dominant culture may be unaware of the cultural frame of reference of the con- sultee when the conultee happens to be a member of a minority group (Ingraham, 2008). Sileo and Prater (1998) have indicated some of the major areas of differences in cultural patterns that may affect how parents approach consultative discussions. In terms of family dynamics, they may have different expectations regarding child behaviors; in the area of acceptable interactions between children and adults, they may not agree with the dominant views in the school; regard- ing student characteristics, there may be differences in terms of whether children should be com- petitive or cooperative; and there are differences in terms of willingness to accept help from someone outside the family or culture. For example, in Arab culture, family honor and avoidance of shame are critical; thus, school consultants may need to emphasize more than usual how infor- mation will be kept confidential. Individuals from Arab cultures may also be more hesitant to seek help or to describe a child’s problems openly and honestly because of feelings of shame (Gofoth, 2011).

Another example can be found among Mexican American families. Children from fami- lies with Mexican backgrounds assist their families with household chores and child care much more frequently than children from Asian or European backgrounds due to a strong cultural value of serving family obligations (Tsai, Telzer, Gonzales, & Fuligni, 2013). A school-based consultant can thus be aware of this and realize that the student may have numerous family obli- gations, which may or may not impinge upon the student’s time to complete schoolwork. Any home-based interventions could incorporate the target skill into the students’ family responsi- bilities, such as reading aloud to younger siblings, following recipes to reinforce measurement and fractions, and so on.

Because the school culture may be incongruent with the family culture of diverse students, Ortiz, Flanagan, and Dynda (2008) recommend becoming familiar with the culture of the fami- lies you serve. For example, across and within cultures, family members may have differing views on what is and is not a disability and the implications of the condition for the well-being of the student and the family. Anne Fadiman’s book The Spirit Catches You and You Fall Down (Fadiman, 1997) provides an excellent illustration of cultural differences in conceptualizing dis- ability: The Hmong family featured in the book has a much different view of their daughter’s seizure disorder than do the medical doctors who treat her.

Ingraham (2000) has developed a comprehensive conceptual framework for multicul- tural and cross-cultural school consultation that considers cultural similarities and differ- ences among consultants and consultees from different backgrounds. She notes that consultation constellations can occur in which collaborators bring a multitude of frames of references to the collaborative process, though she notes that, given the current demograph- ics of the school staff (predominantly European American, white, middle-class, female), the most prevalent constellation is consultant-teacher similarity with a culturally different family and student (Ingraham, 2008). Ingraham (2004) has also presented brief case studies of consultations when consultants and consultees were from different backgrounds, dem- onstrating how subtle differences in cultural and/or ethnic perspectives color the process and outcomes of consultation. While cross-cultural competency involves understanding variations in actions, communication patterns, and worldview across cultures, consultants should avoid the ecological fallacy of applying culture-level characteristics or stereotypes to individuals. Individuals vary in terms of how they manifest their cultural heritage and the extent to which they are assimilated into the dominant culture. Cultural competency is not something one can arrive at; rather, it is a complex set of skills and knowledge that can be improved continuously. Some suggestions for enhancing cultural competence include the following:

Chapter 4 • Communication and Interpersonal Skills 119

1. Be aware of and reflect on cultural differences; they can affect parent–teacher–consultant interactions.

2. Examine your own cultural beliefs and ways of responding. How are they congruent (or not congruent) with the family’s culture?

3. Try to understand a student’s behavior within the context of her culture. 4. Find ways to validate culturally specific beliefs, actions, and contributions in other

cultures. 5. Learn about family members’ beliefs about schooling, disability, and child rearing. 6. Learn about important historical events that may affect adjustment, such as past privations

from living in a refugee camp. 7. Realize that consultees may or may not be familiar with a collaborative approach to

consultation. 8. Be familiar with some words and forms of greetings that are common to the students and

families you serve. 9. Attend local community events and celebrations, such as a quinceañera or Tet (Vietnamese

New Year). 10. For students who recently arrived from a non-English-speaking country, learn important

words and phrases to assist the student’s very early adjustment to the classroom.

Activity 4.18

Students from many different racial and ethnic groups might wish to comment on the content of this previous section. Which has more influ- ence on a person’s communication style: her

ethnicity or her social class? How do people vary in their preferences for interpersonal rela- tions? Are these variations a function of ethnic- ity, cultural expectations, or other variables?

Li and Vazquez-Nuttall (2009) and others have identified the need for socially just consul- tation in schools, in which consultation practices focus on trust, fairness, and equity for all and reject institutional practices that marginalize culturally and linguistically diverse individuals and families. The need for socially just consultation derives from past and current personal and insti- tutional biases and discrimination that have resulted in marginalizing groups of individuals.

Racism experienced by an individual may be in the form of microaggressions, which are subtle, preconscious, or unconscious statements or actions that belittle individuals based on their race, gender, or culture. They can take the form of being left out of a group, racial (or sexist) jokes, and teachers conveying lowered expectations (Yosso, Smith, Ceja, & Solórzano, 2009). Just drawing attention to a person’s race in an assessment or a conversation about abili- ties could invoke the threat of a stereotype in which ethnic minorities’ performance is dimin- ished by their fear of confirming a negative stereotype. In a series of landmark studies by Steele and Aronson (1995) on stereotype threat, African American students performed signifi- cantly poorer in conditions in which their race was solicited and the test was described as a measure of their intellectual abilities compared to African American who took the same test but were told it was a problem-solving exercise and not diagnostic of their abilities (ReducingStereotypeThreat.org, 2014). The intent of the person creating the microaggression could be benign or even culturally affirming; however, it is how the message is received that matters. Microaggressions are hypothesized to have a cumulative deleterious effect on indi- viduals of color and to be a major source of the achievement gap between White Americans and their Latino/Latina and African American counterparts. Clearly, consultants should strive to avoid microaggressions when consulting with teachers and parents by being attuned to how their message is received, admitting their limited knowledge of the consultees’ culture but stat- ing their willingness to learn, and avoiding discussing ethnicity and culture in connection with ability or potential.

Jeannie Oakes (2005) has written extensively on how American school systems’ tendency to track students limits the educational opportunities of economically disadvantaged and culturally diverse students. Working at a systems level (as described in Chapter 9), a consultant can

120 Chapter 4 • Communication and Interpersonal Skills

collaborate with school personnel to examine the tracking policies and practices within the school and identify actions that can help to rectify any inequalities. For example, the school consultant and her team can track office disciplinary referrals, referrals to special education, and retentions at grade level to determine if certain groups of students are overrepresented.

Activity 4.20

Mr. SanFillipo, the resource teacher at Grove Middle School, calls Ms. Phan, mother of 13-year-old boy Phuong, who is having attendance, behavior, and achievement problems. Ms. Phan turns the phone over to her husband, who informs Mr. SanFillipo

that they are not interested in discussing their son and that they will take care of their  own family’s business. A month goes by and Phuong shows no change in his behavior. What steps might a consultant take at this point?

Activity 4.19

All humans have biases; it helps us to sort large amounts of information into more manageable categories. Biases are also at the root of stereotyping. Examining your own possible biases will help you to attend to potential prejudices you and the larger society may have. Take one or more of the online Hidden Bias Tests produced by the psychologists from Harvard University, University of Virginia, and University of Washington. Search the Internet for Project Implicit, and sign in and select from a menu

of tests that include biases about gender and careers, disabled and abled, fat and thin people, gay and straight people, Arabs or Muslims compared to others, Blacks com- pared to Whites, skin tone, and old versus young. The tests measure unconscious, or automatic, biases. Reflect on the results of your test and share your thoughts with oth- ers. Were you surprised by your biases? How might your biases affect your collaborative consultation skills? How can you (or should you) compensate for them?

RESEaRCh on CRoSS-CultuRal ConSultation A qualitative investigation of novice consultants and experienced teachers who taught culturally and linguistically diverse (CLD) students found that consultants who described their own cross- cultural learning experiences and employed cross-cultural strategies were more effective when consulting with teachers who believed that cultural knowledge and skill can inform their teach- ing (Ingraham, 2003). The author asserts that multicultural training is critical to providing novice consultants with these skills.

Lopez (2000) applied case study methodology to examine the impact of interpreters on instructional consultation with non-English-speaking families. She concluded that interpreters who were familiar with the school established rapport more easily with the students and their families; in addition, students and families felt more comfortable disclosing personal information to an interpreter who worked at the school compared to an external interpreter. Lopez concluded that untrained interpreters can provide questionable information by distorting or diminishing mes- sages as they interpret. The researcher concluded that interpreters were very useful for collecting background information, developing interventions, and evaluating the results of the interventions even though their contributions did slow down the problem-solving process.

Arra (2010) employed a mixed-methods case study approach to examine the effects of cross-cultural training provided during a graduate school consultation course. He developed the Cross Cultural Competency Questionnaire (CCCQ) to measure students’ developing skills in four areas: consultation, culture, professional characteristics, and working with families. Arra concluded that the course was effective in increasing students’ confidence in the cross-cultural skills, partially because of the instructor’s practice of repeatedly measuring students’ perceptions of their cultural competency and adjusting the course based on these data.

Much of the scholarly writing on cross-cultural collaboration is descriptive or conceptual rather than empirical. There is a dearth of scientifically based strategies or methods for improv- ing collaboration, problem solving, or treatment integrity when consulting cross-culturally.

Chapter 4 • Communication and Interpersonal Skills 121

References Alberto, P. A., & Troutman, A. C. (2013). Applied behavioral anal-

ysis for teachers. Boston, MA: Pearson. Arra, C. T. (2010). An examination of cross-cultural curriculum

development and student cross-cultural competencies in a school-based consultation course. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 20(2), 169–183.

Banks, C. A. M. (1993). Parents and teachers: Partners in school reform. In J. A. Banks & C. A. M. Banks (Eds.), Multicultural education: Issues on perspectives (2nd ed., pp. 332–352). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

Benjamin, A. (1987). The helping interview. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.

Benn, A. E., Jones, G. W., & Rosenfield, S. (2008). Analysis of instructional consultants’ questions and alternatives to ques- tions during the problem identification interview. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 18, 54–80.

Bergan, J. R., & Kratochwill, T. R. (1990). Behavioral consulta- tion and therapy. New York, NY: Plenum Press.

Busse, R. T., & Beaver, B. R. (2000). Informant report: Parent and teacher interviews. In E. S. Shapiro & T. R. Kratochwill (Eds.), Conducting school-based assessments of child and adolescent behavior (pp. 235–273). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Caplan, G., & Caplan, R. B. (1993). Mental health consultation and collaboration. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Carkhuff, R. R. (1969). Helping and human relations (2 vols.). New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.

Cautilli, J. T., Tillman, C., Axelrod, S., Dziewolska, H., & Hineline, P. (2006). Resistance is not futile: An experimental analogue of the effects of consultee “resistance” on the consultant’s thera- peutic behavior in the consultation process: A replication and extension. International Journal of Behavioral Consultation and Therapy, 2, 362–374.

Christenson, S. L. (1995). Families and schools: What is the role of the school psychologist? School Psychology Quarterly, 10(2), 118–132.

Cobern, W. (1993). Constructivism. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 7(1), 105–112.

Coffee, G., & Kratochwill, T. R. (2013). Examining teacher use of praise taught during behavioral consultation: Implementation

and generalization considerations. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 23, 1–35.

Dart, E. H., Cook, C. R., Collins, T. A., Gresham, F. M., & Chenier, J. S. (2012). Test driving interventions to increase treatment integrity and student outcomes. School Psychology Review, 41, 467–481.

Erchul, W. P. (1987). A relational communication analysis of con- trol in school consultation. Professional School Psychology, 2, 113–124.

Erchul, W. P., DuPaul, G. J., Grissom, P. F., Junod, R. E. V., Jitendra, A. K., Mannella, M. G., et al. (2007). Relationships among relational communication processes and consulta- tion outcomes for students with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. School Psychology Review, 36, 111–129.

Erchul, W. P, Grissom, P. J., & Getty, K. C. (2008). Studying interpersonal influence within school consultation. In W. P. Erchul & S. M. Sheridan (Eds.) Handbook of research in school consultation (pp. 293–321). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Erchul, W. P., Raven, B. H., & Wilson, K. E. (2004). The relation- ship between gender of consultant and social power percep- tions within school consultation. School Psychology Review, 33, 582–590.

Esler, A. N., Godber, Y., & Christenson, S. L. (2008). Best prac- tices in supporting school–family partnerships. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology (Vol. 5, pp. 917–936). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists Publications.

Fadiman A. (1997). The spirit catches you and you fall down. A Hmong child, her American doctors, and the collision of two cultures. New York, NY: Farrar, Straus, & Giroux.

French, J. R. P., & Raven, B. H. (1959). The basis of social power. In D. Cartwright (Ed.), Studies in social power (pp. 150–167). Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan, Institute of Social Research.

Friend, M., & Bauwens, J. (1988). Managing resistance: An essen- tial consulting skill for learning disabilities teachers. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 21, 556–561.

Gallesich, J. (1982). The profession and practice of consultation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Summary

The three most important skills that consultants must have are communication, interpersonal effectiveness, and problem solving. This chapter presented information and activities on communication and interpersonal effec- tiveness, including electronic communication sugges- tions, using social power to influence others, engaging in cross-cultural consultation, and responding to resistance to the consultation process. Consultants should expect resistance, create a plan for dealing with its most obvi- ous causes, learn to recognize its symptoms, and realize that change is not easy for many people. If you are either a self-selected or an administratively appointed consult- ant and believe in the value of a collaborative and data- based approach to dealing with students’ learning or

behavior/adjustment problems, do what you can to sell the idea to others, especially your consultees. A year after you have begun, evaluate yourself and your efforts. You will very likely be pleased.

Continually evaluate your overt and subtle actions and communications for potential bias and stereotyping. Learn about and engage with members of cultures and communi- ties that differ from your own. Cultural competence requires ongoing learning and reflection. Your ability to communi- cate and to deal positively and effectively with others often determines the success or failure of the consultative enter- prise. Certainly anybody who believes that consultation is worth doing will need to study and master the skills discussed in this chapter.

122 Chapter 4 • Communication and Interpersonal Skills

Gersten, R., Beckmann, S., Clarke, B., Foegen, A., Marsh, L., Star, J. R., et al. (2009). Assisting students struggling with mathematics: Response to Intervention (RtI) for elemen- tary and middle schools (NCEE 2009-4060). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.

Ginott, H. (1972). Teacher and child. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Gofoth, A. N. (2011). Considerations for school psychologists work- ing with Arab American children and families. Communiqué, 39(6), 1, 28, & 30.

Gordon, T. (1974). T. E. T.: Teacher effectiveness training. New York, NY: McKay.

Gutkin, T. B. (1999). Collaborative versus directive/prescrip- tive/expert school-based consultation: Reviewing and resolv- ing a false dichotomy. Journal of School Psychology, 37, 161–190.

Harris, A. M., & Cancelli, A. A. (1991). Teachers as volunteer consultees: Enthusiastic, willing, or resistant participants. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 2, 217–238.

Harris, K. (1996). Collaboration within a multicultural society: Issues for consideration. Remedial and Special Education, 17(6), 355–362, 376.

Ingraham, C. L. (2000). Consultation through a multicultural lens: Multicultural and cross-cultural consultation in schools. School Psychology Review, 29, 320–343.

Ingraham, C. L. (2003). Multicultural consultee-centered consulta- tion: When novice consultants explore cultural hypotheses with experienced teacher consultees. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 14, 329–362.

Ingraham, C. (2004). Multicultural consultee-centered consulta- tion: When novice consultants explore cultural hypotheses with experienced teacher consultees. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 14(3–4), 329–362.

Ingraham, C. (2008). Studying multicultural aspects of consul- tation. In W. P. Erchul & S. M. Sheridan (Eds.), Handbook of research in school consultation (pp. 269–291). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Kelleher, C., Riley-Tillman, T. C., & Power, T. J. (2008). An initial comparison of collaborative and expert-driven consultation on treatment integrity. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 18, 294–324.

Kurpius, D. J., & Rozecki, T. G. (1993). Strategies for improv- ing interpersonal communication. In J. E. Zins, T.  R. Kratochwill, & S. N. Elliott (Eds.), Handbook of consulta- tion services for children (pp. 137–158). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Li, C., & Vazquez-Nuttall, E. (2009). School consultants as agents of social justice for multicultural children and fami- lies. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 19, 26–44.

Liontos, S. B. (1992). At-risk families and schools: Becoming partners. Eugene, OR: ERIC Clearinghouse on Educational Management, College of Education, University of Oregon.

Lopez, E. (2000). Conducting instructional consultation through interpreters. School Psychology Review, 29, 378–388.

Martin, R. (1978). Expert and referent power: A framework for understanding and maximizing consultation effectiveness. Journal of School Psychology, 16, 49–55.

Oakes, J. (2005). Keeping track: How schools structure inequality. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Ortiz, S., Flanagan, D., & Dynda, A. (2008). Best practices in work- ing with culturally diverse children and families. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology (Vol. 5, pp. 1721–1738). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.

O’Shea, D., O’Shea, L., Algozzine, R., & Hammitte, D. (2001). Families and teachers of individuals with disabilities. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

Parsons, R. D., & Meyers, J. (1984). Developing consultation skills. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Pugach, M. C., & Johnson, L. J. (1989). The challenge of imple- menting collaboration between general and special education. Exceptional Children, 56, 232–235.

Raven, B. H. (1965). Social influence and power. In I. D. Steiner & M. Fishbein (Eds.), Current studies in social psychol- ogy (pp.  371–382). New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.

ReducingStereoTypeThreat.com (2013). What is stereotype threat? Retrieved on June 1, 2014, from http://www.reducingstereotype- threat.org/definition.html

Sapolsky, R. (1994). Why zebras don’t get ulcers: A guide to stress, stress-related diseases, and coping. New York, NY: W. H. Freeman.

Seligman, M. (2011). Flourish. New York, NY: Free Press. Selye, H. (1993). History of the stress concept. In L. Goldberger &

S. Brevitz (Eds.), Handbook of stress (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Free Press.

Sheridan, S. M., Bovaird, J. A., Glover, T. A., Garbacz, S. A., Witte, A., & Kwon, K. (2012). A randomized trial examining the effects of conjoint behavioral consultation and the mediat- ing role of the parent-teacher relationship. School Psychology Review, 41, 23–46.

Sheridan, S. M., Clarke, B. L., & Burt, J. (2009). Conjoint behav- ioral consultation: What do we know and what do we need to know? In W. P. Erchul & S. M. Sheridan (Eds.), Handbook of research in school consultation (pp. 171–202). New York, NY: Routledge.

Sileo, T., & Prater, M. (1998). Creating classroom environments that address the linguistic and cultural backgrounds of students with disabilities. Remedial and Special Education, 19(6), 323–337.

Solomon, B. G., Klein, S. A., & Politylo, B. C. (2012). The effect of performance feedback on teachers’ treatment integrity: A meta- analysis of the single-case literature. School Psychology Review, 41, 160–175.

Sprick, R. (1999). Twenty-five minute planning process: Teacher to teacher problem solving. [DVD] Available from http://www. safeandcivilschools.com/products/scs_catalog.php

Steele, C. M., & Aaronson, J. (1995). Stereotype threat and the intellectual test performance of African Americans. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 797–811.

Sue, D. W., & Sue, D. (1990). Counseling the culturally different: Theory and practice (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Wiley.

Tsai, K. M., Telzer, E. H., Gonzales, N. A., & Fuligni, A. (2013). Adolescents’ daily assistance to the family in response to mater- nal need. Journal of Marriage and Family, 75, 964–980.

Vujnovic, R., Fabiano, G. A., Pariseau, M. E., & Naylor, J. (2013). Parameters of adherence to a yearlong daily report card inter- vention for students with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 23, 140–163.

Chapter 4 • Communication and Interpersonal Skills 123

Wickstrom, K. F., & Witt, J. C. (1993). Resistance with school- based consultation. In J. E. Zins, T. R. Kratochwill, & S. N. Elliott (Eds.), Handbook of consultation services for children (pp. 159–178). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Wiggins, G., (2012). Seven keys to effective feedback. Educational Leadership, 70, 10–16.

Wikipedia. (2013) Retrieved on September 17, 2014, from http:// en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_media

Wilkinson, L. (2006). Conjoint behavioral consultation: An emerg- ing and effective model for developing home-school partner- ships. International Journal of Behavioral Consultation and Therapy, 2, 224–238.

Wilson, K., Erchul, W. P., & Raven, B. H. (2008). The likelihood of use of social power strategies by school psychologists when con- sulting with teachers. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 18, 101–123.

Yosso, T. J., Smith, W. A., Ceja, M., & Solórzano, D. G. (2009). Critical race theory, racial microaggressions, and campus racial climate for Latina/o undergraduates. Harvard Educational Review, 79, 659–690.

Legal and Ethical Issues in School Consultation

Chapter 5

Mr. Romero is the special education teacher at Chavez Elementary School. He has been working with the general education staff to increase the number and quality of services for students with disabilities in the general education classes. He has been particularly concerned lately about the actions of Ms. Peterson, a second-grade teacher who steadfastly refuses to make any accommo- dations for José, an 8-year-old with moderate hearing loss. When Mr. Romero talked to her about it and recommended using a frequency modulation (FM) system, Ms. Peterson brushed him off, stating that she can’t be bothered wearing a microphone all day. Mr. Romero sees this as a violation of the spirit of inclusion, in addition to a failure to provide the necessary accommodations for José. Is this a violation of ethical standards? What steps should Mr. Romero take to deal with this issue?

At Jackie Robinson High School, Jerome, a student with serious emotional disabilities, became exasperated with his teacher and exhibited a verbal outburst that left the teacher feeling intimidated and angry. The teacher expressed strongly that Jerome should get a disciplinary trans- fer (DT) to another school. The school psychologist, Dr. Foley, conducted a manifestation determi- nation (MD) and concluded that the outburst was a manifestation of Jerome’s disability. He also found that the anger management counseling, which is required by Jerome’s individualized education program (IEP), had not been provided. Therefore, he recommended that Jerome receive counseling rather than a transfer to another school. The principal declared that Jerome would be transferred somehow because she needed to appear to support her teachers. Two days after the MD meeting (and on a day Dr. Foley was working at another school), a last-minute IEP meeting was held: Jerome was transferred to a different school and placed in a self-contained class for students with emotional disabilities. Dr. Foley suspects the change in placement had more to do with the principal’s desire to “save face” than with finding the best program for Jerome, but he says nothing. What ethical, legal, and standards-for-practice issues are raised in this scenario?

124

Learning Outcomes

5.1 Describe the purpose, sources, and importance of ethical codes.

5.2 Summarize the major ethical principles and laws that relate to school consultation.

5.3 Using cases, illustrate how laws, ethical codes, and standards of practice are applied in school- based consultation situations.

5.4 Apply Koocher and Keith-Spiegel’s problem-solving model to recognize and deal with ethical violations.

5.5 Recognize potential ethical issues before they become points of conflict.

5.6 Summarize broad areas of ethical competency.

5.7 Apply ethical competencies to real-world confrontation and advocacy situations.

The PurPose, sources, and ImPorTance of eThIcal PracTIce

Attention to ethical responsibilities is important for at least the following reasons:

1. Consultants are trying to influence the actions of other people. 2. In the practice of consultation, one attempts to use various forms of social influence

(Erchul & Martens, 2002) and some degree of power in order to convince a consultee to

Chapter 5 • Legal and Ethical Issues in School Consultation 125

take certain actions. One needs to be careful not to let influence become secretive or non- collaborative manipulation.

3. Issues of confidentiality exist whenever consultants discuss students and their families. 4. Issues of confidentiality also exist when consultants discuss or observe teaching practices. 5. Any hint of unethical practices, whether validated or not, can destroy credibility and future

efforts at consultation.

Professionals assuming the role of school consultants, whether internal or external, must be aware of and attend to ethical practices. There is no national association of consultants that has developed an ethical code, but fortunately other associations and organizations have. The codes provided by the Council on Exceptional Children (2010), the American Psychological Association (2010), the American Counseling Association (2014), and the National Association of School Psychologists (2010) give direction and guidance to school consultants.

PrIncIPles of eThIcal BehavIor

Across the various professional codes of ethics, five broad principles emerge. Each will be dis- cussed in the following subsections.

Principle 1: competence

No person should extend her services as a consultant unless she is competent to do so by training and experience. Working beyond your level of competency could result in harming the student (Jacob, Decker, & Hartshorne, 2011). Unfortunately, it is not at all clear what competence means because consistency in standards of training is not common. Exactly what sort of training and how much experience a consultant should have is not clearly spelled out in codes of ethics or in stand- ards for practice. Professional responsibility often comes down to one’s own insight: Anyone who doesn’t feel competent to engage in a professional activity probably isn’t competent and shouldn’t do it. Instead, one should explain one’s situation to one’s superior and try to help the school or district find other persons to accomplish the task. Or one can seek additional training oneself.

Activity 5.1

It has been mentioned in this text that the three primary competencies in consultation are communication, interpersonal skills, and prob- lem solving. Discuss what it means to be competent in each of these three areas. What

training or experience makes one competent to engage in the process of consultation? What experience and training would be helpful in the overall area of content, such as knowledge of interventions and when to recommend them?

Principle 2: Protecting the Welfare of clients

This principle is usually regarded as the most important ethical principle in support service work. In consultation, it is necessary to regard both the consultee and the student as clients. Also, there may be multiple consultees and clients, and the welfare of all involved parties becomes signifi- cant. Often the root of an ethical dilemma may be whose needs take priority: the student’s, the consultee’s, or sometimes a third party’s. A rule of thumb may be to prioritize the needs of the most vulnerable individuals (including children) and persons who have faced societal discrimi- nation (such as cultural, language, and sexual minorities and individuals with disabilities) over those who are more privileged.

School consultants need to protect the rights of the clients (both adults and students) to choose or decline the consultant’s services. Parental consent is required if a child will receive intensive services beyond that typically provided in the general education setting. School con- sultants must respect the dignity of all persons, including individuals whose background differs from that of consultants. Consultants should strive to create a school climate that is welcoming and supportive of individuals, regardless of race, socioeconomic status, religion, gender identity, immigration status, sexual orientation, disability, or any other distinguishing characteristics (National Association of School Psychologists, 2010).

126 Chapter 5 • Legal and Ethical Issues in School Consultation

A student’s welfare may be threatened through the use of assessment instruments that are not appropriate for that individual, the development of policies that may be biased against certain people, the encouragement of dependency on the consultant or consultee, and the use of inter- ventions that are not well validated by empirical evidence or are haphazardly applied. The wel- fare of a student may also be compromised by school-wide or districtwide policies and practices. Jacob, Decker, and Hartshorne (2011) suggest that consultants have a responsibility to engage in ethical systems-level consultation, such as exploring any unintended negative outcomes of a school’s testing programs, grade retention policies, discipline procedures, investment in pro- grams that lack scientific support, and student grouping practices, including the inclusion of students with disabilities in general education programs.

Activity 5.2

Discuss the concept of client (student) wel- fare. Give examples from your experience that indicate a positive example of meeting the welfare of the student and a negative example. What steps can a school consultant take to ensure that the welfare of the stu- dent  is the primary driving force behind

interventions that are designed for and car- ried out with students? Describe what it means to be a vulnerable person or group. Name some groups that may fit this descrip- tion. Should we have a higher standard of ethical practice when working with these individuals? Explain your answer.

Principle 3: maintaining confidentiality

Whenever a consultation-based service delivery system is to be used in a school, confidentiality must be established at three levels: the administration, the individual consultees, and the students and families. A school principal should not ask a consultant to evaluate the performance of a teacher-consultee (unless these activities are clearly delineated in contractual arrangements), and the consultee should not have to fear that the consultant is talking to others about their conversa- tions or the consultee’s performance as a teacher. Information about a student in need should be shared only with professionals who can directly assist in helping the student and his family. Gratuitously discussing a student’s problems in the lunchroom or on recess duty is inappropriate.

There are limits to confidentiality, and these limits should also be explained to potential consultees. Confidentiality protections are not absolute. Certain information may be disclosed (based on professional judgment), certain information must be disclosed, and certain information may not be disclosed. For example, abuse of other persons or threats to self or others need to be reported in all states. Individual states vary in their laws excluding certain behaviors from the ordinary right to privileged communication. For example, sexual harassment between students at all ages is forbidden by law in some states, and knowledge of its occurrence must be reported to the local authorities. The Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) and the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPPA) are federal laws that prohibit the release of educational or health (including mental health) information without the consent of the parent or without the consent of the student when the student is a legal adult, unless failure to do so will cause harm.

There is sometimes a seemingly contradictory reality to issues of confidentiality. Consultants want to let consultees know that consultants hold in confidence what they discuss with consultants about their teaching methods, philosophy, and ideas for intervention, as well as what consultants observe in the course of the consultees’ teaching. You will not be welcome for long in classrooms if teacher-consultees find out that you are talking to others about what you observe that may not reflect favorably on them. Sometimes, however, you will observe some- thing that you believe is not in the best interests of students. You need to talk with the teacher about your concerns. But what if the teacher does not change the behavior of concern? What if he continues to engage in potentially detrimental behavior? Following the principle of “protecting the welfare of clients,” you may need to break confidentiality when you become aware of behav- iors that can be harmful to others. To do so, first tell the teacher that continuing his behavior will result in your describing to his supervisor (e.g., his principal) what you have observed. In making the decision to do so, it is recommended that you follow the 10-step process described by Koocher and Keith-Spiegel (2008), which is presented later in this chapter.

Chapter 5 • Legal and Ethical Issues in School Consultation 127

Principle 4: social and moral responsibility

Consultants need to make sure that their behavior and statements are governed by the best inter- ests of the constituents, not by their own needs or agendas. Williams, Amistead, and Jacob (2008) describe the development of an ethical professional as a “dynamic, multiphase acculturation process [that] results in an adaptive integration of personal moral values and the ethics culture of the profession” (p. x). Like most skills, ethical reasoning and actions do not develop in a vac- uum; rather, they are nurtured through didactic instruction on ethics, quality supervision, and personal and professional experiences. Formal ethics training may occur through instruction on ethical principles, codes, and problem solving; analyses of case studies; and role-playing diffi- cult situations (Jacob, Decker, & Hartshorne, 2011). One of the most difficult scenarios is to decide whether to be a whistleblower, particularly when one is a trainee. For example, an intern or student teacher may be confronted with unethical practices but may be hesitant to speak up, either to the consultee engaged in unethical behaviors or to her supervisor, for fear of repercus- sions such as forfeiting a letter of recommendation or future employment opportunities. For this reason, trainees should always be supervised by a university faculty member who can assist in ethical problem solving.

Principle 5: Integrity in Professional relationships

Collaboration is a relationship-based activity. Consultants need to be open and honest with their colleagues and the families with which they work. They need to respect the opinions of these individuals, especially in situations when they may not agree with their approaches. It is some- times surprising how many different people claim to speak for a given student. Each person believes she is advocating for the best interests of the student, but as in the story of the blind men describing the elephant, some of them perceive only parts of the big picture. One of the roles and skills of highly effective school-based consultants is to be able to meld these diverse ideas and personalities into a cohesive collaborative team. Once again, the goal is to achieve synergy so that, by working together, the team members can accomplish more than by working in isolation. There is a more thorough discussion of advocacy issues at the end of this chapter.

codes of eThIcs and sTandards for ProfessIonal PracTIce

In addition to these general principles, professional organizations develop more specific ethical guidelines and professional standards. For example, the National Association of School Psychologists (2010) has four broad ethical themes that subsume 17 ethical principles and 90 specific standards. Some of the National Association of School Psychologists (NASP) ethical principles most applicable to school-based consultation are (a) privacy and confidentiality; (b) fairness and justice; (c) responsible assessment and intervention practices; (d) forthright explanation of professional services, roles, and priorities; (e) respecting other professionals; and (f) multiple relationships and conflicts of interest. Regarding potential conflicts of interest, the National Association of School Psychologists (2010) stipulates:

School psychologists whose personal or religious beliefs or commitments may influ- ence the nature of their professional services or their willingness to provide certain services inform clients and responsible parties of this fact. When personal beliefs, conflicts of interests, or multiple relationships threaten to diminish professional effectiveness . . . , school psychologists ask their supervisor for reassignment of responsibilities, or they direct the client to alternative services. (Standard III.4.2)

Activity 5.3

Role-play an interview with a teacher-consultee with whom you have not consulted previously. Explain your method of consultation and your approach to confidentiality in your proceedings, along with the limitations on that confidentiality.

Also role-play giving a talk to all the teachers in the school about these same matters. How would you present your views to the principal before talking to all the teachers?

128 Chapter 5 • Legal and Ethical Issues in School Consultation

Thus, consultants should consider whether their personal views may interfere with their ability to provide the best client-centered services. For example, a school psychologist who views premarital sex or homosexuality as immoral may not be well suited to a high school set- ting. If she allows these personal views to have a negative impact on her interactions with gay colleagues, parents, or students, she is behaving in an unethical manner.

The Council on Exceptional Children (2010) provided a relatively brief code of ethics that can reasonably be applied to students with and without disabilities. A more elaborate set of standards for professional practice is available on their Web site. The Council on Exceptional Children (CEC) code of ethics requires members to

1. Maintain challenging expectations for individuals with exceptionalities to develop the highest possible learning outcomes and quality-of-life potential in ways that respect their dignity, culture, language, and background.

2. Maintain a high level of professional competence and integrity, and exercise professional judgment to benefit individuals with exceptionalities and their families.

3. Promote meaningful and inclusive participation of individuals with exceptionalities in their schools and communities.

4. Practice collegially with others who are providing services to individuals with exceptionalities. 5. Develop relationships with families based on mutual respect, and actively involve families

and individuals with exceptionalities in educational decision making. 6. Use evidence, instructional data, research, and professional knowledge to inform practice. 7. Protect and support the physical and psychological safety of individuals with exceptionalities. 8. Neither engage in nor tolerate any practice that harms individuals with exceptionalities. 9. Practice within the professional ethics, standards, and policies of CEC; uphold laws, regu-

lations, and policies that influence professional practice; and advocate for improvements in laws, regulations, and policies.

10. Advocate for professional conditions and resources that will improve learning outcomes of individuals with exceptionalities.

11. Engage in the improvement of the profession through active participation in professional organizations.

12. Participate in the growth and dissemination of professional knowledge and skills.

legal Issues

There are three sources of public school law: (a) the U.S. Constitution, (b) statutes and regula- tions, and (c) case law (Jacob, Decker, & Hartshorne, 2011). The Constitution and Bill of Rights guarantee certain rights. Though there is no explicit right to education, certain amendments have been applied by the courts to safeguard access to public education. Specifically, the Tenth Amendment, which limits the power of the federal government, has been interpreted as guaran- teeing the right to a free and public education for all: If the state gives education, something of value, to some citizens, it must provide it to all citizens. The Fourteenth Amendment requires due process before a state can deprive a person of life, liberty, or property. This amendment has been interpreted to mean that a citizen has the right to due process before a state can deny or restrict the citizen’s access to education. In Chapter 1, we discuss due process in schools, noting that open and proactive communication can curb many conflict situations that might result in the parents filing a grievance. Families can file two types of grievances: (a) failure on the part of the state (i.e., school district) to meet substantive standards by not providing quality programming, or (b) failure to meet procedural standards, such as missing required timelines or improperly completing paperwork. Zirkel (2013) reviewed the past 30 years of legal action and concluded that the courts have emphasized meeting procedural standards over substantive standards. Current substantive standards were defined in the Rowley v. Department of Education case to be an IEP that is reasonably likely to provide the student with some educational benefit. Zirkel calls for new legislation that defines a higher substantive standard for special education services, which may include requiring evidence-based services and considering student’s self-sufficiency and whether the services would make the student’s education commensurate with students with- out disabilities. Of course, when it comes to ethics, consultants should strive to implement special education services that meet these higher standards.

Chapter 5 • Legal and Ethical Issues in School Consultation 129

School consultants learn many of the procedural standards through their graduate training. When you begin your position, review your district’s special education handbook to become familiar with the district processes for following federal and state laws. Most of the litigation under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) concerns the question of a free and appropriate public education (FAPE; Zirkel, 2013), which is discussed in Chapter 1. School con- sultants can help ensure a FAPE for all students by encouraging evidence-based interventions and instructional practices, monitoring students’ progress (switching strategies if progress is insufficient), and participating in continuous professional development. Most legal cases are filed over a concern that the student was denied a FAPE under IDEA (Zirkel, 2013), and the number of federal IDEA cases doubled from 1990 to 2000 (Zirkel, 2013).

Providing legal Testimony

If you are called to testify in your capacity as a school consultant, the following tips may help:

1. Describe yourself: training, experience (estimated number of times you have performed this particular service), credentials, honors, how you stay current or developed some spe- cific expertise (conferences, journals), and any other experience that will help lend credi- bility to your testimony.

2. Describe your practice: a. Is it evidence-based? Cite research and/or NASP standards and/or What Works

Clearinghouse. b. Review relevant laws and policies. c. Know the psychometric properties of any tests you administered. Be able to explain why

you selected the test and the likelihood that the test produced reliable and valid results. 3. Present information on student outcomes and present level of performance: Concrete

examples of academic skills and behaviors (videos, charts, work samples, grades, observa- tions, norm-referenced test results, test scores related to Common Core State Standards) that show improvement over time will strengthen your case.

4. Identify the student’s needs and how the program or services meet them. 5. Always be truthful. Even if your testimony is not strong, at least you told the truth. Admit

if you made a mistake and correct it. 6. Don’t let the attorneys rush you. Ask them clarifying questions. 7. Dress professionally. 8. Ask your district’s attorney to prepare you ahead of time.

The family educational rights and Privacy act and the health Insurance Portability and accountability act

In addition to IDEA, school consultants should be aware of the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) and the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPPA). FERPA secures parents’ rights over their child’s records, including the right to read all of their child’s records and the right to request that a record be changed or amended. FERPA also stipu- lates that schools cannot release records on a student without parental permission except in a few situations, such as sharing records with school officials who have legitimate educational interests and to comply with an audit or judicial order. HIPPA protects patients’ privacy by prohibiting the sharing of medical information in a way that could be overheard by others and by requiring that medical information be stored securely. Consultants who provide mental health services may need to ensure that their procedures are HIPPA-compliant. Clearly, consultation requires sharing information; however, school-based consultants should be sure that they are sharing information only with people who have a need to know and that they are respecting the students’ and fami- lies’ privacy by not holding these discussions in public places.

Activity 5.4

Observe the 10-minute HIPPA training video. Discuss how the infractions and guidelines apply to consultation in schools.

https://www. youtube.com/watch?v= d2Cw0ARJVDM

130 Chapter 5 • Legal and Ethical Issues in School Consultation

a ProBlem-solvIng model for dealIng WITh legal and eThIcal Issues

Koocher and Keith-Spiegel (2008) provide a problem-solving model designed to assist consult- ants and others in their efforts to determine if an ethical violation exists and how to deal with it. Following a series of steps may provide consultants with greater confidence in their decision making, and it allows them to describe to the consultee or some other third party (e.g., an admin- istrator, a professional review board) how they came to their decision. These steps, in addition to others suggested by Jacob, Decker, and Hartshorne (2011), are as follows:

1. Identify the problem or situation. 2. Define the parameters of the situation. 3. Define the potential ethical and legal issues involved. 4. Consult federal and state codes and regulations, ethical guidelines, professional standards,

and district policies. 5. Consult with trusted colleagues. 6. Evaluate the rights, responsibilities, and welfare of all affected parties. 7. Generate a list of alternative decisions possible for each issue. 8. Enumerate the consequences of making each decision. Consider both short- and long-term

consequences for each possible decision. Consider the possible psychological, social, edu- cational, and economic costs to each stakeholder.

9. Conduct a risk-benefit analysis by speculating on the likelihood that each potential conse- quence will occur and the severity of harm that may ensue.

10. Make the decision.

Activity 5.5

Apply Koocher and Keith-Spiegel’s problem- solving ethics model to a dilemma you have encountered or one of the four scenarios at the end of this chapter. In step 3, be sure to identify which ethical principles (competence, protecting the welfare of clients, maintaining confidentiality, social and moral responsibility, integrity in professional relationships) are at

issue. In step 4, identify all relevant federal (IDEA, 2004; Sec. 504, Rehabilitation Act of 1973; Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act of 1974) and state laws as well as pro- fessional ethics codes that are pertinent. See the CEC codes discussed earlier in this chapter or consult the ethics codes for your discipline.

an examPle

Each of the principles in the CEC Code of Ethics, the CEC Standards for Professional Practice, and the 10 steps previously listed are used as guidelines to help determine an appropriate course of action in the following scenario.

A special education teacher called an IEP meeting for a student with emotional disturbance who presented with behavior adjustment problems such as defiance toward teachers, physical assaults on other students, and inappropriate language. The IEP team met to review the situation and to develop specified interventions. The interventions were agreed upon by the IEP team and documented in an addendum to the IEP. The school psychologist followed up with the teacher through two individual consultation sessions. A few weeks after the IEP meeting, however, the teacher decided that what the student really needed was a severe tongue-lashing in front of the class. The teacher revealed the diatribe only to the school psychologist (the consultant), relating that she had reprimanded the student for failing the high school competency test again, warning that he was unlikely to pass and graduate if he didn’t “shape up.” This intervention had not been suggested by either the IEP team or the consulting psychologist. In fact, most of the interventions that were agreed upon at the last IEP meeting were never implemented. The teacher indicated that the case was closed because the student had (at least for now) stopped his inappropriate behavior.

1. Identify the problem. The teacher did not follow the recommended interventions and engaged in a behavior that is likely to be detrimental to the target student. In addition, the teacher violated the student’s confidentiality by sharing information on his competency test results with the entire class.

Chapter 5 • Legal and Ethical Issues in School Consultation 131

2. Define the parameters. The teacher’s questionable behavior, as reported by the teacher herself, occurred in the classroom in front of all the other students in that class.

3. Define the potential ethical-legal issues involved. The question here is whether the teach- er’s behavior violates ethical or legal principles. Was the student harmed by the teacher’s behavior? Is it appropriate or effective for a teacher to berate a student either privately or, as in this case, in front of the student’s peers? What alternative behavior might the teacher have engaged in? Why did the teacher not engage in more proactive strategies? Did the teacher not know how to respond in a more proactive manner (i.e., a “can’t do” situation) or did she not want to try more positive and possibly more proactive methods (i.e., a “won’t do” situation)?

4. Consult legal-ethical guidelines. The teacher’s behaviors seem inconsistent with ethi- cal principles of (a) competence and/or (b) protecting the welfare of clients, depending on if it was a “can’t do” or a “won’t do” scenario. In addition, she clearly violated ethi- cal principles regarding maintaining confidentiality. It appears that the following CEC guidelines may have been compromised: guideline (a), having to do with respecting the client’s dignity; guideline (b), having to do with a high level of professional competence and judgment; guideline (f), having to do with using informed expertise to dictate prac- tice; guideline (g), having to do with protecting the client’s psychological safety; and guideline (h), having to do with inflicting no harm on the client. In addition, the school district’s special education handbook clearly specifies that verbal aggression is a forbid- den response to students’ maladaptive behavior and emphasizes positive behavior sys- tems over punishment. Federal law requires a functional behavioral assessment and behavioral intervention services for students whose behavior interferes with their ability to attain their IEP goals (Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act, 2004). Some state statutes require that the behavior intervention services be “positive” and explicitly prohibit interventions that cause pain or trauma (California Education Code, 2005). It appears that the teacher’s actions may violate these laws because she failed to implement the interventions identified by the IEP team, opting for a punitive response instead.

5. Consult with trusted colleagues. After finding out about the incident, the school psy- chologist conferred with the school counselor, who is a member of the IEP team, about the case. He asked his colleague for her opinion about the following: Did the teacher harm the student? Did the teacher intend to harm the student, or was she naive? After a heartfelt discussion that included a thorough review of the IEP consultation notes, the counselor and psychologist concluded that the teacher had been given ample directions on how to respond proactively to the student’s aggressive behaviors. No one had checked, however, to see if she could or would implement these strategies. The school psychologist and counselor debated whether the teacher had engaged in behaviors that were “potentially dangerous to the student” (and therefore should be informed that the consultant would be reporting this behavior to the principal), or whether the teacher’s “being verbally firm with the student” was within her rights and did not constitute “probable harm.”

6. Evaluate the rights, responsibilities, and welfare of all concerned. The teacher’s right (and responsibility) is to manage her classroom and to deal with behavior challenges in a way that best maintains a peaceful and productive classroom. The student’s right is to be educated by individuals who have the student’s welfare uppermost in their minds. Therefore, a student shouldn’t have to endure hostile and (potentially) damaging ver- balizations from his teachers. Because this student has an emotional disability, he is a member of a vulnerable group that deserves additional protection and consideration. However, the other students in the class, who also have emotional disabilities, have a right to a free and appropriate education, including a class that is relatively free from distractions. The student’s parents have a right to expect that their son’s teachers will maintain an atmosphere that conveys safety and concern for their child’s welfare. It would appear in this case that the rights of the student and parents need to take prece- dence. The teacher does not seem to have acted in the best interests of the student; instead, she seems to have given in to frustration and (at least temporarily) to have lost her professionalism.

132 Chapter 5 • Legal and Ethical Issues in School Consultation

7. Generate a list of alternative decisions. The school psychologist has three alternatives: (a) Do nothing; (b) talk to the teacher about her behavior and inform her that it is inappro- priate and unproductive to talk to students in a demeaning way and that she should desist from this behavior in the future; or (c) inform the principal, who will talk to the teacher about it and who may file an ethics violation against the teacher that, if sustained, will go into the teacher’s personnel file.

8. Enumerate the consequences of making each decision. Choice (a) is clearly inappropri- ate because the unethical behavior would go unchecked and would therefore have a higher likelihood of recurring; choice (b) may be acceptable if the school psychologist believes that this behavior was an aberration and is not likely to happen again if he speaks to the teacher about it, and particularly if he thinks some coaching, modeling, and reinforcement of proactive discipline strategies may lead to increased capacity and decreased likelihood that such events might recur; (c) seems to be the strongest response and should probably be invoked if there is reason to think that this behavior has happened before and could hap- pen again.

9. Conduct a risk-benefit analysis. A risk-benefit analysis considers various outcomes and their likelihood of occurring. A potential risk of utilizing choice (b) is that the teacher may not think the statement from the consultant is very meaningful, and she may there- fore ignore it the next time she is feeling stressed by this student’s, or any other stu- dent’s, disruptive and disrespectful behavior. Adding some direct coaching and feedback to ensure that she has the skills to respond proactively makes this option more attractive, assuming she is open to such efforts. The likely benefit is that the teacher will appreciate the faith the consultant has in her and, if she begins to think her behavior could have been damaging to the student because of what the consultant has said to her, she vows to herself never to let it happen again. This may be a teachable moment that will make her more receptive to coaching on positive behavior management strategies. A less likely outcome, but a possibility nonetheless, is that the teacher will be offended by the con- sultant and will not only ignore the offer of assistance to desist humiliating her students publicly but convey to her fellow teachers that the consultant is overly critical. The risk involved in choice (c) may be that the teacher believes her behavior is appropriate (she’s witnessed other teachers berating their students and nothing has been said to them about it) and therefore thinks she’s being unfairly discriminated against because of her willing- ness to take part in the consultation process. In addition, she may now believe it was a mistake to seek assistance from the IEP team and to share her experiences with the school psychologist because, if she hadn’t, her behavior would have gone unnoticed. She may conclude that she should not have sought consultation because the school psycholo- gist cannot be trusted. A less likely, but possible, outcome is that the teacher will lose her job and the students will thus lose a teacher who is generally competent. The benefit of choice (c) is that it may announce to other teachers that this sort of behavior is unethical and will not be tolerated, though this outcome is unlikely because the principal’s actions should be kept confidential.

10. Make the decision. The school psychologist decides to invoke option (b) based on his assessment of the seriousness of the offense, his knowledge of the teacher and her typical behavior, and his belief that this was very likely a professional lapse that won’t recur if he uses option (b). He talks to the teacher, and she agrees that her behavior was excessive and certainly not typical of her, and she says that she will not engage in such behavior again. The teacher and the consultant clarify the confidentiality issues and discuss ways to imple- ment the positive behavior support (PBS) plan to improve the student’s behavior. The school psychologist plans to observe the teacher a few times next week to ensure the PBS is in place.

Activity 5.6

Review the steps taken in the previous exam- ple. Comment on the reasoning process the consultant uses in trying to decide what to do.

How would you have modified the process? Do you think there could have been other options? Do you agree with the final decision?

Chapter 5 • Legal and Ethical Issues in School Consultation 133

areas of PoTenTIal eThIcal conflIcT

There are a number of potential ethical conflicts in school-based consultation. The first has to do with the nature of the consultation contract itself. School consultants typically operate infor- mally, but they certainly should be explicit when explaining their role, their preferred method of interacting with the consultee, and confidentiality and its limits.

The second area is loyalty and responsibility. In schools it often seems that consultants are serving many constituents at once: the teacher-consultee, the parent, the principal, possibly a higher-level administrator, and sometimes the sole interests of the student. Interns and student teachers need to meet the demands of their training program and professors in addition to want- ing to obtain good fieldwork evaluations, letters of recommendations, and permanent employ- ment. Discussion of possible conflicts should occur between interested parties when it is clear that the different parties are at odds about how to proceed. It is not always clear whose needs and interests should take precedence, although the student, particularly the vulnerable student, should be given top priority whenever possible.

The third area consists of selecting the best course of action when resources are limited. Consider the dilemma of qualifying a student for special education for a reading disability but the special education teacher is much less skilled, in this scenario, at teaching reading than the student’s general education teacher. Thus, having the student who is struggling with learning to read leave the effective reading teacher for the ineffective one poses a real problem. Resources in schools are never unlimited. If the consultant and consultee decide to engage in one activity (extensive testing), it comes at the expense of any other activity (intervention). Consultants and consultees may not agree, for a number of reasons, on which interventions to try. Intervention choice is, to some degree, related to one’s values, training, and biases; the available empirical evidence for the interventions; and other variables that may not be explicit. Again, discussion and compromise, hallmarks of a collaborative approach, are the best ave- nues to take if disputes occur. As a general rule, it is best to help the consultee develop his own ideas because, for the most part, he is the one who will be implementing them. Scenario 1 at the end of the chapter includes a good example of a consultant-teacher who seems to stand in direct violation of this ideal.

Another potential area of conflict concerns confidentiality. As previously mentioned, issues of confidentiality should be discussed and made clear before any sort of consultation work takes place. The discussion should start at the administrative level; be sure that your immediate supervisor knows your position regarding confidentiality. This position should also be shared with the local school principal and then with the teachers. School consultants starting a consulta- tion service delivery system would do well to address all school staff members to explain the process and review confidentiality issues. These should be reviewed with individual teachers the first time a consultant works with each of them (Jacob, 2008). An example of how to introduce the consultation process, including the limits of confidentiality, to an individual consultee was presented in Chapter 4 in the section called Reduce the Threat.

Activity 5.7

After reviewing the material mentioned above (from Chapter 4), rehearse giving an introduc- tory statement about your style of consulting

(the implicit contract) and your position on confidentiality.

The last area of potential conflict is the amount of responsibility assumed by the consult- ant. In a collaborative mode, responsibility is shared, and accountability is the joint responsi- bility of all constituent parties. If plans don’t work, the implementer has the responsibility to inform the other members of the problem-solving team, who will reconvene to assess the situ- ation. If communication processes are working well, this should be relatively easy to do. When communication seems to be breaking down, it may be appropriate for the consultant to look for possible sources and types of resistance or barriers to consultation, which were discussed in Chapter 4.

134 Chapter 5 • Legal and Ethical Issues in School Consultation

In the final analysis, school-based consultants need to be aware that they may find them- selves in situations where there may be some question regarding the ethical standards we have summarized. As professionals, when we believe a violation has occurred, we are obligated to take some action, such as following the 10-step procedure described in this chapter. As Jacob, Decker, and Hartshorne (2011) point out, in the area of ethics, professionals have no rights, just responsibilities.

eThIcal comPeTencIes, confronTaTIons, and advocacy

Jacob, Decker, and Hartshorne (2011) and McNamara (2008) identify seven broad areas of com- petence that educators and student service providers should continually strive to develop:

1. Become sensitive to the ethical implications of one’s actions, including potential unin- tended deleterious effects of one’s efforts to assist teachers, students, and families.

2. Develop a sound working knowledge of relevant laws, standards, and ethical codes. 3. Assume a proactive, rather than reactive, stance in ethical thinking and actions in an effort

to prevent problems from occurring. 4. Master ethical problem solving by deliberatively applying the 10-step process to a variety

of consultation cases. 5. Become aware of one’s cultural view and worldview, how these values may differ in indi-

viduals from different cultures, and how these differences affect one’s actions. McNamara (2008) observed that professionals who hold religious or moral convictions related to issues such as abortion or sexual orientation may struggle with giving unbiased assistance to clients who have these issues.

6. Embrace the complexity and ambiguity involved in most ethical problems, including rec- ognizing that there is often more than one appropriate course of action.

7. Demonstrate the personal strength to take action and to accept responsibility for it.

The last competency is possibly the most important because armchair ethical problem solving does little to benefit children and youth, who are ultimately our first priority. Henry Mintzberg wrote, “Everything that every effective leader does is sandwiched between action on the ground and reflection in the abstract. Action without reflection is thoughtless; reflection without action is passive. Every leader has to find a way to combine these two mind-sets—to function at the point where reflective thinking meets practical doing” (as cited in Ukleja Center, 2003). Consultants must think and act in an ethically consistent manner, which is sometimes difficult, particularly when it requires confronting a colleague or supervisor. McNamara’s (2008) sugges- tions for addressing a colleague about an unethical activity are to avoid judgmental statements, to be very explicit in describing both the behavior of concern and the ethically appropriate alterna- tive behavior, and to communicate that the purpose of the discussion is to improve the colleague’s professional performance. The consultant may want to role-play or consult with a colleague ahead of time, as well as to document the conversation. While confrontation is often uncomfort- able, it can lead to improved performance or even system change.

A 2006 U.S. Supreme Court ruling sanctions disciplining school personnel for criticizing the policies and practices of their school district if they identify themselves as speaking as an employee (Jacob, 2008). If district policies or practices violate the law, however, then the employee can safely report the unlawful activities and avoid reprisal due to the protection afforded by federal and state whistleblower laws (Jacob, 2008). Some concerns can be raised anonymously. For example, a 2004 complaint brought by the American Civil Liberties Union to the California State Department of Education resulted in a statewide process that allows anony- mous complaints to be filed when a public school lacks appropriate texts, credentialed teachers, and/or safe and hazard-free facilities (Eliezer Williams v. State of California, 2004). These Williams complaints must be investigated and resolved within 30 days.

The role of the school consultant needs to include advocacy for students and parents, espe- cially in situations where teachers or school administrators may be putting the interests of their classroom or the school ahead of interests of the student. However, consultants should avoid becoming overzealous campaigners. An advocate is a person who seeks to establish a certain condition for an individual client or group within a system. Advocate is also a term one should use carefully because to declare oneself an “advocate” may imply that the other professionals

Chapter 5 • Legal and Ethical Issues in School Consultation 135

involved are not advocates and thus not concerned about the best interests of the client(s). In the final analysis, there is a place for advocacy, but it needs to be done in a collaborative style. In almost all instances, the ability to work together for these rights and needs will ensure a more harmonious work environment and a greater chance to have these rights and needs met rather than taking a strong advocacy position that may be socially, scientifically, and/or politically inappropriate.

Summary

This chapter presented information about ethics codes, profes- sional standards, and competencies for ethical behavior. Ethical guidelines developed by professional groups, particularly the Council on Exceptional Children (2010), were reviewed, and

the steps to ethical problem solving were described. Some legal issues were presented, including tips on providing legal testi- mony. Four case study scenarios provided at the end of the chapter can be used to practice ethical problem solving.

Four Scenarios for Additional Practice in Ethical Problem Solving The class or study group should review one or more of the follow- ing scenarios and follow the 10-step problem-solving method. Specifically, define the ethical issue(s). Which principles, standards, or laws seem to be violated? What are some possible responses and the likelihood that they will lead to a good or bad outcome? Based on an analysis of the scenario, what decision(s) seem(s) best?

ScEnArio 1

Ms. Sally Phillips (Ms. P) is a resource specialist-consultant in Hannibal High School. She was very pleased three years ago when her district decided to move toward more of a collaborative con- sultation mode of service delivery. She had long held the belief that her talents weren’t being utilized after she was assigned the role of resource teacher and expected to teach students, primarily those with learning disabilities, all day. Because of her previous experience as both a math and a science teacher at Hannibal High School, she yearned to get back into the general education class- room and assist teachers who were working with the same students with learning disabilities who were seeing her for one or two peri- ods a day. She was convinced that she could offer many good ideas to content-area teachers if she only had the time to do consultation instead of providing direct instruction all day. Therefore, when the district decided to make the move toward a consultation-based system of service delivery for students with exceptionalities, she jumped at the chance. She’s been acting as a consultant to the general education staff on a full-time basis for the past three years.

The problem is that she is very unpopular in her role. Specifically, general education teachers have complained to the principal that (a) she is pushy, she believes her ideas about accommodations and modifications are better than what the other teachers are doing, and she is quick to let them know that; (b) she is not a good listener; (c) when engaged in any form of cooperative teaching, she takes over as much as possible and turns lessons into what she wants them to be; and (d) her con- cern for the needs of the students with disabilities seems to have fallen by the wayside in favor of her using her position to impose her ideas on other teachers. Her recommended modifi- cations and accommodations often seem to have no empirical foundation.

ScEnArio 2

Maurice is 17-year-old student at Rufus King High School and has autism. He has done well in his program, including passing a number of general education electives and making substantial growth in his language arts and mathematics special education classes. His IEP team met, and during the transition planning phase of the meeting, Maurice expressed a strong interest in working with large wildcats. The transition specialist acknowledged this interest and arranged for Maurice to work part-time stocking the shelves of the local pet store. His special education teacher suspects this is not what Maurice had in mind, and that the placement was due to conveni- ence because the district transition program already had a relation- ship with the store owner.

ScEnArio 3

Amanda is a kindergarten student who turned 5 years old in November. She has struggled in class since the start of the school year. Her speech is often unintelligible, she requires frequent redi- rection, she is unable to identify letter names or sounds, and she does not have one-to-one correspondence in counting. A student study team (SST) was held in October, and Amanda responded very well to some simple behavioral interventions. However, her academic performance has not improved substantially. Amanda attends a half- day kindergarten program and did not attend preschool. Her parents have limited English language and Spanish literacy abilities. Amanda’s teacher and the speech pathologist want Amanda to be assessed for an intellectual disability (ID). The school counselor and school psychologist disagree, arguing Amanda’s delays are more likely due to a lack of opportunity to learn than to a disability. They also believer that removing Amanda from instruction to complete the testing would be harmful, as would a misdiagnosis of ID. Everyone agrees that Amanda needs more support; however, special education is the only supplemental instruction available in the school.

ScEnArio 4

A school psychologist conducting a triennial evaluation on a seventh-grade female student named Monica realizes that Monica has no idea that she has been diagnosed with a learning disabil- ity. Monica was unaware that she was performing significantly below grade-level standards in language arts and mathematics

136 Chapter 5 • Legal and Ethical Issues in School Consultation

and did not recognize the term IEP. When asked if she plans to attend her next IEP team meeting, she responded with a quizzical look. In all other areas Monica is very verbose, including her preferences for certain friends, teachers, and movie stars. Monica also relates that she plans to become a teacher and has enjoyed babysitting for two neighborhood children because she is quite good at keeping them occupied; she also likes the money that she

earns, which she is saving to buy a computer. An interview with Monica’s mother revealed that she adamantly opposes informing Monica about her disability status, contending it will only harm her self-esteem.

Note: The authors wish to acknowledge Amanda Smith and Monica Cordova for their assistance in writing these four scenarios dealing with ethical dilemmas.

references American Counseling Association. (2014). American Counseling

Association code of ethics. Alexandria, VA: Author. American Psychological Association. (2010). Ethical principles of

psychologists and code of conduct. Washington, DC: Author. California Education Code. (2005). Education code section 56520.

Retrieved March 8, 2011, from http://law.justia.com/codes/ california/2005/edc/56520-56525.html

Council on Exceptional Children. (2010). CEC code of ethics and standards of practice. Arlington, VA: Author.

Eliezer Williams v. State of California. (2004). San Francisco County Superior Court.

Erchul, W. P., & Martens, B. K. (2002). School consultation: Conceptual and empirical bases of practice. New York, NY: Plenum Press.

Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act. (2004). Pub. L. No. 108–446.

Jacob, S. (2008). Best practices in developing ethical school psy- chological practice. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology (5th ed., pp. 1921–1932). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.

Jacob, S., Decker, D. M., & Hartshorne, T. S. (2011). Ethics and law for school psychologists (6th ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

Koocher, G. P., & Keith-Spiegel, P. (2008). Ethics in psychology and the mental health professions: Standards and cases. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

McNamara, K. (2008). Best practices in the application of profes- sional ethics. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology (5th ed., pp. 1933–1942). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.

National Association of School Psychologists. (2010). Principles for professional ethics. Bethesda, MD: Author.

Ukleja Center. (2003). The ethical leader within. Retrieved from http://www.csulb.edu/colleges/cba/ucel/student-resources

Williams, B. B., Armistead, L., & Jacob, S. (2008). Professional ethics for school psychologists: A problem-solving model casebook. Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.

Zirkel, P. A. (2013). Is it time for elevating the standard for FAPE under IDEA? Exceptional Children, 79, 497–508.

Consulting About Students with Social, Emotional, and/or Behavioral Problems

Chapter 6

Mr. Jacobs is an English teacher. In his opinion, his 10th-grade class is his worst class of the day because of the presence of three boys who always seem to be doing something to irritate him. They are mildly defiant, just enough to get a small laugh from some of the others, and they always seem to be talking to somebody. Their work is careless and sometimes contains suggestive com- ments. He has separated them and routinely sends them to the vice principal’s office. He is reluc- tant to do more, hoping instead they will soon see that their behavior is self-defeating and leading to poor grades. He sees you, the school-based consultant, in the teacher’s lounge in November and asks you for some advice. How might you, as a school consultant, respond to Mr. Jacobs’s request?

Ms. Peterson, an experienced primary-grade teacher, has been assigned a student in her third- grade regular education class who has autism. She is not pleased with this placement, which she feels was forced on her by an administrator who is too worried about lawsuits. During the first week in her class, this student has caused major disruptions. She has sent you a request for help and your immediate consultation. How might you, a board-certified behavior analyst, respond to this request?

Ms. Gonzalez, a ninth-grade English teacher, has sent a referral to the student study team (SST) regarding a new girl in her class who is socially isolated, cries for no apparent reason, and often seems to be daydreaming. Conversation with the girl’s mother indicates that she, too, is concerned about her daughter but doesn’t know what to do about it and was not forthcoming in regard to possible reasons for the girl’s behavior.

137

Learning Outcomes

6.1 Describe assumptions to understanding social, emotional, and behavioral problems.

6.2 List some general reasons for social, emotional, and behavioral disorders, and possible interven- tions for them.

6.3 Identify characteristics and needs of students with autism spectrum disorder (ASD), emotional disturbance (ED), attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), and other disorders associated with social, emotional, and/or behavioral challenges.

6.4 Review two major systems for categorizing emotional or behavioral disorders.

6.5 Describe the purpose of a functional behavior assessment (FBA) and positive behavioral interventions.

6.6 List the major components of schoolwide positive behavior support (SWPBS) and how it meets the criteria for being a multi-tiered system of support (MTSS).

IntroductIon to SocIal, EmotIonal, and BEhavIoral ProBlEmS

School-based consultants are undoubtedly asked to assist consultees with social, emotional, and behavioral problems in the classroom such as those described in the three chapter-opening vignettes. In this chapter, the term behavioral problem is used very broadly to refer to poor social skills, emotional adjustment problems, and/or disruptive and harmful behavior that has a negative

138 Chapter 6 • Consulting About Students with Social, Emotional, and/or Behavioral Problems

impact on the student’s or fellow students’ ability to learn. Aberrant behavior can be approached in a number of ways; we emphasize a behavioral approach because it focuses on the function of a behavior in order to replace it with a more positive or adaptive response.

Three key assumptions to a functional understanding of behavioral problems are the following:

1. All behavior serves a purpose, and that purpose may be that the student is trying to get something (such as teacher attention, peer attention, power, or revenge), avoid something (such as completing work, being harassed by others, personal discomfort, or boredom), or both (perhaps peer attention is an alternative to boredom, or disruptively seeking the atten- tion of the teacher is a means of avoiding having to think and work independently; O’Neill, Albin, Storey, Horner, & Sprague, 2015).

2. Students have behavioral problems because they are not motivated to produce the prosocial behavior (i.e., performance deficit) or because they don’t know how to produce the proso- cial behavior (i.e., skill deficit). If it is due to a skill deficit, then the issue becomes whether they need to learn the skill (acquisition), employ the skill more often (frequency), or adapt and apply the skill in new settings (generalization; Alberto & Troutman, 2013).

3. Two behaviors that appear very similar may serve different purposes (Steege & Watson, 2008). For example, a child may cry pitifully to gain attention from his mother and employ the same histrionics to avoid a difficult class assignment by being sent out of class to talk with the psychologist. The child’s crying when he learns that his dog has died is perfectly acceptable and should not trigger an intervention, whereas crying to gain attention and to escape work may require a behavioral change. Thus, the function or purpose of the behav- ior is examined in order to understand why the behavior is occurring and whether it is prosocial and healthy. Conversely, two different behaviors may serve the same purpose.

Given these three assertions, understanding and responding to behavior problems is a bit like solving a mystery. Keeping with the philosophy of collaborative problem solving, we will discuss behavioral problems in terms of prevention and interventions rather than diagnosing static pathology within the child. We will also review two major classification systems and some specific disorders.

Activity 6.1

Recall situations from your own childhood or your school-based professional experience in which similar behaviors were regarded as both problem- atic and not problematic (maybe even humor- ous), depending on the setting or the other

people involved. What teacher or other aspect of the classroom ecology, such as class size, type of class, presence of an aide, or philosophy of the school administration, can lead to more or fewer behaviors being viewed as problematic?

Most behavioral problems have multiple determinants. It is rare that a student has only one reason for her poor classroom behavior (Kazdin, 1985). This is important because the treat- ment you apply needs to be tailored to the many causes that may operate in a case. Typically, causes are both external (for example, gang influences, boring lessons, or punitive discipline) and internal (such as a desire for power; poor health, hunger, or mental illness; emotional reac- tivity to stressors; or self-defeating self-talk). Cause may be related to a distal antecedent (that is, anything that has happened in the student’s past to have predisposed him to a given pattern of behavior or responding, such as child-rearing practices), or it may be related to a proximal ante- cedent, which occurs close to the target behavior and is presumed to have been the most imme- diate prompt to that behavior, such as one student’s calling another a derogatory name. It may also be multifaceted, influenced by two or more conditions. If a student tells herself that others want to hurt her, and someone looks at her in a way that she perceives to be threatening, she may react to this stimulus by yelling at or hitting the other student. External antecedents are easier to detect: One child provokes another; the teacher raises her voice; the principal appears on the playground; or the building shakes violently from an earthquake, causing some students (and teachers) to panic.

Chapter 6 • Consulting About Students with Social, Emotional, and/or Behavioral Problems 139

BEhavIor ProBlEmS: rEaSonS and SuggEStEd IntErvEntIonS

Multiple factors can place a child at risk for developing behavioral problems. This list is not intended to be exhaustive, but it does contain those general reasons that should be considered by consultants when students who manifest behavioral challenges are referred to them. Greater attention and detail is devoted to conditions that the school-based consultant may reasonably be able to influence. Those conditions fall into two large categories: (1) family and community and (2) classroom and schools.

Family and community

Within an ecological systems framework, the family and community exert considerable influ- ence over developing children. They can be both sources of support and risk. Typically, school- based consultants have less influence over students’ family and community compared to their classroom and schools, but parenting programs and connecting families with resources may relieve some of the stress our most vulnerable families and communities feel.

ParEntIng Parenting may be both a distal antecedent to a behavioral problem (i.e., these practices may have occurred years ago but still have an influence) or a proximal antecedent (as in the case of a stu- dent who comes from a home where he sees conflict, confusion, and negativity every morning before leaving for school). Parents can fail in many ways to provide the kind of emotional and physical stability needed for a student’s well-being and emotional security, including divorce (or the threat of it), laxness, inconsistency, harshness, demeaning comments, coercive control, and so on. For example, low maternal monitoring and nurturance were associated with higher exter- nalizing problems (e.g., conduct disorder, oppositional defiance, and hyperactivity) and victimi- zation across racial groups and genders (Windle, et al. 2010). Hart and Risley (1995) found economically poor parents to have fewer strategies for coping with their children’s excesses or noncompliance than working-class and middle-class parents. They also found that well-educated parents were more likely than poorer families to explain alternatives to their young children, rather than issuing directives. Families experiencing economic poverty generally have many more stressors than middle- and upper-class families, including gang violence; domestic abuse; substance abuse; under-resourced schools; and anxiety to provide basic food, housing, and health care. Poverty has been linked to diminished executive functioning, a key cognitive skill for chil- dren controlling their behaviors (Hook, Lawson, & Farah, 2013). Parental nurturing, cognitive stimulation, and reduced stress have been found to mediate the relationship between poverty and poor executive functioning (Hook et al., 2013). Parental mental illness, which cuts across all economic levels, can also have a negative impact on parenting. Parents struggling with poverty and/or mental illness need school-based consultants who can connect them to resources, includ- ing parent training.

The research on the benefits of parent training for students with behavioral problems is relatively strong. A meta-analysis of 28 randomized control trial studies of parent management training found this clinical approach to parent training to be effective in decreasing child disrup- tive behavior (Michelson, Davenport, Dretzke, Barlow, & Day 2013). Another meta-analysis of a wider range of parenting programs found some components of parenting programs to be associ- ated with more positive outcomes than others. Specifically, Kaminski, Valle, Filene, and Boyle (2008) analyzed 77 published studies on parent training programs and found the most effective components to be targeting parental consistency, increasing positive parent–child interactions and emotional communication skills, teaching the appropriate use of a time-out, and requiring parents to practice the new skills with their children during the training sessions. In a randomized clinical trial of a family cognitive-behavioral intervention that included parenting training, the children of parents experiencing depression who received the intervention demonstrated better coping skills, and the parents engaged in better parenting strategies than the families assigned to the control group (Compas, Champion, & Forehand, 2010).

Besides helping parents access parenting classes, consultants can work with school per- sonnel to understand that some of the behaviors that seem out of place at school may be rein- forced at home. The classic example is the coercive pain control cycle (Rhode, Jenson, & Reavis, 2010), described in Chapter 2, in which the child does not comply with a command because the

140 Chapter 6 • Consulting About Students with Social, Emotional, and/or Behavioral Problems

command was rescinded too often by parents who lacked the skills, energy, or foresight to follow through. The most effective response is to follow up each act of noncompliance with one repeti- tion of the request and then, when both requests are ignored, a consequence that is not desirable to the child. It may take a number of these so-called precision requests before the child internal- izes that the coercive cycle doesn’t work. An extinction burst may happen in which the noncom- pliant behavior gets worse before it gets better (Rhode et al., 2010). It is very important for you, as a consultant, to prepare the consultee for the possibility of the extinction burst and to conduct sufficient observations to confirm that the teacher is avoiding the coercive cycle.

Activity 6.2

Over the next few weeks, look around your community, home, and classroom for evidence of the coercive pain control cycle. One good

rule of thumb is “Don’t ask a child to do some- thing if you are not willing and prepared to follow through.”

Activity 6.3

Stage a debate, with some students acting as educators and others acting as media repre- sentatives. Debate the following question:

“Does media violence influence the behavior of schoolchildren?”

Parents of youth with behavioral problems can feel angry, ashamed, overwhelmed, and defensive about their children’s behaviors. Like anyone else, they do not enjoy these emotions and may try to avoid contact with school personnel after receiving multiple negative reports. Consultants and teachers should try to encourage the parents’ engagement by recognizing their efforts, sending notes and/or e-mails when the student does well, and projecting an objective and optimistic approach.

mEdIa Children and youth have access to more different types of media than ever before. It is difficult to tease out the potential harms and benefits of the amount of time that youth spend online. One question a consultant may ask a parent is, “What is your child missing out on when she or he is online?” Childhood obesity is a big problem in the United States and, with few exceptions (for example, Wii fitness), screen time is a sedentary activity. There is also potential for bullying to occur on social media sites. Any bullyproofing program and policy should address cyberbully- ing. The National Association of School Psychologists has developed a cyberbullying awareness curriculum called “Cybersmart!”

Violent video games, YouTube videos, and movies are probably not helpful for students with behavioral problems. A longitudinal study of over 1,000 urban middle school students found engagement in violent media to predict declines in achievement and increases in delin- quent and aggressive behaviors (Graber, Nichols, Lynne, Brooks-Gunn, & Botvin, 2006). The researchers also found parental monitoring, which is probably negatively correlated to exposure to violent media, to be the best predictor of both future academic success and behavioral compe- tence. Hofferth (2010) examined African American and White children’s computer, video game, and TV use in 1997 and 2003, and concluded that the computer had largely a positive effect, particularly for girls. For example, low to moderate computer use was positively associated with reading and problem-solving skills for White and African American girls and African American boys 5 years later, but not for White boys. Conversely, video gaming was likely to increase aggression in boys.

The Hofferth study exemplifies one of the complications about technology. Good educa- tional websites and apps can promote student learning. More and more students are being asked to use the Internet, including multimedia sources, for research. Thus, the Internet is a great resource and also a potential source of harm (Margo, 2012).

Chapter 6 • Consulting About Students with Social, Emotional, and/or Behavioral Problems 141

PEErS Positive relationships among students are associated with a healthy learning environment. Conversely, bullying can have very serious ramifications. Bullying can take many forms, includ- ing being excluded, overt verbal or physical attacks, cyberbullying on social networks, or passing pictures or messages via phone texting to embarrass someone. DeVoe et al. (2002) report that, between 1993 and 2001, the number of children who reported being bullied at school went from 5% to 8%. During the fall of 2010, a rash of suicides by students who were bullied because they were sexual minorities heightened awareness among school personnel and inspired the YouTube Web site: “It Gets Better.” Establishing gay–straight alliances (GSAs) can mediate some of the impact of bullying by providing gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender, and questioning (GLBTQ) youth a safe place to connect to other youth and a means for advocating for their equal rights. Olweus and Limber (1999) found substantial reductions in bullying and victimization by using the Bullying Prevention Program in numerous settings around the globe. Often the key to ending bullying is empowering the bystanders to report or intervene, thus changing the culture of the school. Other important factors in curbing bullying is debunking the myth that bullying is a natu- ral part of growing up and getting teachers to respond to any evidence of bullying as a teachable moment in which to correct the behaviors of the bully and bystanders (Graham, 2010).

Children with challenging behaviors often experience rejection by prosocial peers, which diminishes their opportunities to develop collaboration, empathy, emotional regulation, and social problem-solving skills. Over time, these rejected youth drift into deviant peer groups, where their antisocial behaviors are reinforced and become more deeply established (Herman, Riley-Tillman, & Reinke, 2012). This is one reason why grouping students with behavior prob- lems together into one class or program is problematic; it is one of the reasons why Don’s school, described in Chapter 10, decided to integrate students with autism spectrum disorder with gen- eral education students.

Activity 6.4

Discuss the nature and incidence of bullying in schools with which you are familiar. If you feel comfortable, share your personal experience with bullying in terms of the response by adults

and other bystanders. What programs of bully- ing prevention or intervention are you familiar with, and what is the key to their success? How has technology affected patterns of bullying?

classroom and Schools

tEachEr–chIld rElatIonShIPS Close relationships with teachers have been found to improve academic and soioemotional func- tioning among children with behavior problems (Sabol & Pianta, 2012). Positive student–teacher relationships encourage students to internalize their teachers’ beliefs about school and school- work. Emotionally supportive first-grade teachers were found to have students who were less aggressive and more in control than teachers who were less supportive (Merritt, Wanless, Rimm-Kaufman, Cameron, & Peugh, 2012). Negative or conflict-based relationships with teach- ers can have a negative impact on student achievement and adjustment for years (Rudasill, Reio, Stipanovic, & Taylor, 2010; Sabol & Pianta, 2012).

Rejecting and unsupportive teachers exacerbate aggression problems in children (Herman et al., 2012). This type of acrimony may even be influenced by race: African American students have poorer relationships with teachers (Sabol & Pianta, 2012), are referred more often to the office for discipline for more subjective behavioral infractions, and receive harsher punishment than their White peers (Skiba, Michael, Nardo, & Peterson, 2002). Milner and Tenore (2010) describe two teachers, one White and one African American, who had very few disruptions in their classroom because they employed culturally responsive classroom management. Based on extensive observations and interviews, the authors describe this management approach as (a) understanding power structures among students; (b) commitment to equity and equality; (c) immersion in the students’ world; (d) understanding the self in relation to their students, students’

142 Chapter 6 • Consulting About Students with Social, Emotional, and/or Behavioral Problems

parents, and students’ communities; and (e) granting students entry into their world. For exam- ple, one of the teachers shared stories with his students about the impoverished conditions of his childhood, which allowed the students to see that they might share some of the same vulnerabili- ties that their teacher had experienced.

Consultants can assist teachers in fostering emotionally supportive, warm relationships with students. Mikami, Gregory, and Allen (2011) found coaching teachers to inquire about stu- dents’ extracurricular interests and to use these interests, as well as other positive behavioral management techniques, resulted in increased student engagement, academic achievement, and positive peer interactions. Because professional development on fostering supportive relation- ships with students is rare (Center for Mental Health in Schools, 2008), it may fall to a school- based consultant to provide this support. A review of three professional development programs that explicitly focused on improving student–teacher relationships found the programs success- fully improved the quality of interactions between the teachers and their students, particularly if the training was accompanied by consultation (Sabol & Pianta, 2012). Through consultation, a referral for a student with difficult behavior could result in improving a teacher’s capacity to con- nect and engage with all of his students. This may be particularly important for beginning teach- ers, who tend to respond to difficulties in teaching by becoming more critical of students and less innovative (Shernoff, Mariñez-Lora, Frazier, Jakobsons, Atkins, & Bonner, 2011).

Students benefit in multiple ways from positive relationships with adults, including feeling more connected to the goals of the school and program and feeling safe to take academic risks, both of which foster student engagement and inhibit acting-out behaviors. Students with behav- ioral problems are at risk for dropping out. Dropping out is a gradual process that begins with cognitive and psychological disengagement from teachers, peers, and academic content before the actual dropping out occurs (Appleton, Christenson, & Furlong, 2008). Student mentoring programs, such as Check and Connect, that focus on developing a consistent, positive relation- ship with an adult at school have been found to increase student engagement and reduce the incidence of dropping out (Sinclair, Christenson, & Thurlow, 2005).

Activity 6.5

What are some ways to fail or succeed in estab- lishing positive, appropriate relationships with students? How does the developmental stage

of the student influence this relationship? How might the gender, race, or background of the teacher and/or the student be a factor?

claSSroom managEmEnt PractIcES Even to casual observers, including parents, it seems clear that some teachers need more training in classroom behavior management. Classroom management is frequently reported by teachers to be their biggest challenge, and teachers who leave the profession early often cite student mis- behavior as the major reason (Webster-Stratton, Reinke, Herman, & Newcomer, 2011). Sometimes lack of training is the root cause. Some teacher preparation faculty members avoid teaching classroom management to future teachers because they think it is overly influenced by behaviorism or they believe that a good lesson will take care of all student behaviors. Teachers with poor classroom management have classes marked by disorganization, disruptive noise, overreliance on harsh discipline methods, and a general lack of evidence that they are in control. Students in these classes are often more hyperactive, louder, more disrespectful, and more unpro- ductive than are students in other classrooms. Often, students who misbehave in these class- rooms do not do so in classes under better management. The Incredible Years Teacher Classroom Management (IY TCM) program is an empirically supported professional development program that has been found to increase teachers’ consistency and confidence (Webster-Stratton et al., 2011). Students of teachers trained in IY TCM were found to be more socially competent, self- regulated, cooperative with their teachers, and less aggressive. Through workshops and coach- ing, teachers learn to exhibit more empathy, positive attention, problem solving, praise, and encouragement to their students while applying reminders, warnings, and negative consequences very selectively. For an overview of the Incredible Years program, go to https://www.youtube. com/watch?v=Vrer8b3XmXE.

Chapter 6 • Consulting About Students with Social, Emotional, and/or Behavioral Problems 143

The research on positive classroom management is extensive. A consultant should observe a classroom with an eye toward identifying effective strategies in place and areas in need of improvement. For example, note preventive aspects, such as the quality of the classroom’s phys- ical appearance (neat, attractive, functional), whether rules are clearly displayed or otherwise conveyed, whether students have knowledge of the consequences for both appropriate and inap- propriate behavior, and evidence of an organized plan for teaching. It is important to examine the antecedents to behavior problems because teachers are often focused only on the consequences (i.e., punishment). Sometimes rearranging the classroom so there are no blind spots, practicing transitions from one activity to another, implementing a token economy properly (including pro- viding the tokens frequently, paired with a description of the behavior being reinforced, and no haggling about the tokens), and having clear consequences for following or breaking the class- room rules will reduce much of the behavioral disruptions and increase academic learning time.

Activity 6.6

Interview teachers to get ideas about their behav- ior management techniques. What do teachers who are skilled at behavior management do

about relatively common behavior management problems, such as talking out, bothering one’s neighbor, and engaging in off-task behavior?

School clImatE The climate of a school can be felt by touring the hallways. Are teachers speaking to students in a positive and calming manner, or are they ordering students around, relying on punishment to direct students’ behaviors? Are there a lot of adults in the hallway during passing periods or are teachers in their classrooms? What greets you when you enter the school: metal detectors or a friendly parent ambassador? Safe and Civil Schools is a training program designed to improve school climate. Randy Sprick describes the key components of this program in the following video clip: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cQ5uF1urkY4. Safe and Civil Schools is a type of schoolwide positive behavior support (SWPBS) and will be discussed in greater detail later in this chapter.

Within-child reasons for Behavior Problems

Student behavior is a function of students’ environment. Without assessing their environment, variables that sustain problem behaviors will be missed and existing resources will be over- looked (Ysseldyke, Kekway, & Klingbiel, 2012). However, it is important to consider the child’s unique needs and motivation in determining how best to consult on a behavioral referral.

motIvatIon “Kids just wanna have fun!” For some students, the desire to enjoy themselves is more impor- tant than any other agenda the teacher may have. Glasser (1992) believes that having fun is a student need that schools ignore or try to repress, at great cost. He states that this need is as important as three others he discusses: belonging, power, and freedom. Often, students’ efforts to have fun are benign and tolerable, but sometimes they intrude on the teacher’s efforts to keep all students productive and on-task, after which the teacher has to intervene. As we discuss in the next chapter, there are a number of strategies for making lessons engaging, including draw- ing on students’ prior knowledge; giving them some choice in when, where, or how an assign- ment is completed; keeping a cognitive emphasis (i.e., avoid routine, mindless work; avoid

Activity 6.7

Class members should observe a class of stu- dents or the following video clip: https://www. youtube.com/watch?v=EjkQ8VlrJIU. Look for the “little things” that often make a difference

in preventing disruptions. What seemingly innoc- uous behaviors of some students, or the teacher, resulted in a de-escalation of disruptive behavior in the classroom or playground?

144 Chapter 6 • Consulting About Students with Social, Emotional, and/or Behavioral Problems

talking down to the students; talk just a bit above their developmental level because this will keep them interested and help develop their vocabulary). Frustration because of not being suc- cessful at school tasks can be a major source of classroom behavior problems, particularly among students with behavioral difficulties. Differentiated instruction, including providing appropriate scaffolding and using heterogeneous and homogeneous grouping, can increase a student’s success rate. Continuously checking that the student understands what is expected and can complete the work with good accuracy and fluency is key to keeping students engaged, par- ticularly those who struggle academically. For a quick overview on differentiated instruction, watch the following video, which was created by a teacher with 10 years of teaching experience: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MPl8OSCX_f8.

Activity 6.8

In small groups, discuss the role of fun in learn- ing. What can teachers do to meet students’

needs (or desires) to have fun while learning?

Activity 6.9

Give some examples of attention-seeking behaviors that are disruptive to the learning process. In groups of three, analyze these

behaviors and develop some tentative plans for dealing with them.

mEntal IllnESS A basic assumption in behavioral assessments and interventions is that behavior is meaningful: It doesn’t occur randomly. While we may not always be able to identify the exact antecedents that initiated the behavior or the consequences that maintain the behavior, they are assumed to exist. An exception to this rule may occur in the more severe forms of mental illness. Some children and adolescents have serious mental illness that manifests as hallucinations, suicidal ideation, and so on, which may be caused by some internal physiological imbalance in addition to environmental conditions. Approximately 21% of children ages 9 to 17 have a diagnosable mental or addictive disorder (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 1999). Yet only one in five children with mental illness receives treatment (U.S. Public Health Services, 2000). The outcomes of youth with mental illness are dire. They are at substantial risk for incarceration, dropping out of school, and suicide. Under the Individuals with Disability Education Act (IDEA), school personnel are required to seek out, identify, and serve students with mental illness if the behavioral manifesta- tions at school meet special education or 504 eligibility requirements. For example, a student with a diagnosis of depression may be served under the Other Health Impairment (OHI) category if the depression is negatively affecting her ability to perform well in school. Conversely, a student with bipolar disorder may be served under the emotional disturbance (ED) category due to alienation from peers and teachers and/or overt violent behaviors.

Prevention and early interventions are the most powerful solutions to addressing mental illness because more intensive responses, such as psychotherapy, are only moderately effective (Ysseldyke, Kekway, & Klingbeil, 2012). Gutkin (2012) argues the high rates of mental illness are a result of the medical model used by schools to direct services. He notes that school support providers devote considerable time to diagnosing pathology within the child, which not only diverts resources that could be used for prevention and intervention, but the diagnosis results in teachers and parents feeling unqualified to assist. Early identification and intervention are criti- cal to reducing the impact of mental illness on students’ development (Freeney-Kettler, Kratochwill, Kaiser, Hemmeter, & Kettler, 2010). Several screening instruments are available, yet as few as 2% of schools screen all children for mental health problems (Kamphaus, DiStefano, Dowdy, Eklund, & Dunn, 2010). Freeney-Kettler and colleagues reviewed three published screeners and their own Preschool Behavior Screening System and found all but one to be admin- istered in less than 10 minutes (a necessary condition for schoolwide screening) and to have adequate reliability, validity, sensitivity, and specificity. Kamphaus et al. (2010) compared two

Chapter 6 • Consulting About Students with Social, Emotional, and/or Behavioral Problems 145

shortened versions of the Behavior Assessment System for Children (BASC; Reynolds & Kamphaus, 1990) and found that both miniversions of the BASC demonstrated adequate reliabil- ity and criterion validity. They suggest that screeners may detect children who are at risk for mental illness more adequately than the traditional teacher referral process, which is subject to teacher bias. Universal screening can be part of an MTSS process in which students who are identified as at risk for mental illness receive more thorough assessment and, contingent on those results, targeted mental health services (Volpe & Gadow, 2010).

Children with mental health problems receive most of their care at school; however, lim- ited budgets and personnel can compromise the extent to which school-based mental health pro- viders can meet the needs of their students (Suldo, Friedrich, & Michalowski, 2010). School psychologists who have a desire to provide mental health services and receive administrative support for such activities are more likely to provide these services (Suldo et al., 2010). Similarly, students in states with more support for hiring school counselors (i.e., separate funding for school counselors or school psychologists or mandated school-counselor-to-student ratios) were found to have more achievement growth and lower rates of internalizing and externalizing behaviors, and their teachers had more positive perceptions of their school climate (Reback, 2010). When students are receiving outside services, consultants can increase the effectiveness of those ser- vices through collaboration with the mental health provider once appropriate consent for release of information is obtained.

Activity 6.10

Why might some schools or school personnel be more equipped to provide mental health services than others? How do mental health problems affect learning for the student and

her classmates? Is it the school’s responsibility to provide these services, or should some other agency take responsibility?

HealtH Issues Some students have allergies that affect their ability to concentrate on schoolwork. Others may have a poor diet that leads to hypoglycemic behavior, which is marked by irritability and unco- operativeness. Some students may have other undetected medical conditions (such as poor vision or hearing, Tourette’s disorder, and so on) that can influence their behavior. Medication taken to alleviate the symptoms of an illness or even cure the illness may have side effects that negatively affect learning and behavior. Some medication taken to improve performance may have rela- tively short-duration effects, and behavior problems could occur as the medication wears off. Taking medication can also evoke a displacement of responsibility, whereby a child feels she can’t be held accountable for her actions because she “didn’t take her meds that day.” The school nurse and the student’s parents can provide important information about the medical condition, treatment, and potential side effects. If a student appears overmedicated or his illness is not suf- ficiently treated, the consultant should arrange a meeting immediately with the parents to address these issues, which, if left unattended, could be cause for filing a case of neglect.

Activity 6.11

Discuss how physical and mental illness interact. How might students’ feelings about their chronic illness affect how they deal with their medical condition? How might they feel about their

illness as they develop? Can an illness become a crutch? If so, what can a school consultant do to assist students with a chronic illness to manage their care and remain engaged in school?

IndIvIduals wItH dIsabIlItIes educatIon Improvement act

Under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEA; the IDEA abbrevia- tion was retained because of popular usage), special education services and legal protection in the form of due process are provided to students with behavioral problems if they meet one or more of the 13 IDEA eligibility categories and they need the support to access the curriculum

146 Chapter 6 • Consulting About Students with Social, Emotional, and/or Behavioral Problems

and instruction. Thus, a student with a mental health diagnosis who is performing well in school, including socially, behaviorally, and academically, may not qualify for special education ser- vices. Among the 13 disability categories, autism, emotional disturbance, other health impair- ment (due to the high likelihood of students with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder being served under these criteria), and traumatic brain injury are the most likely to be associated with significant behavioral problems.

autism Spectrum disorder

Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) is a developmental disability that affects verbal and nonverbal communication and social interactions and is often associated with repetitive activities, stereo- typed movements, resistance to environmental change or change in daily routines, and unusual responses to sensory experiences (34 CFR Sec. 300.8(c)(1)(i–iii); IDEA, 2004). Almost half of children with ASD have intellectual disabilities (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2012). ASD can be identified in children as young as 2 years of age (Sullivan, 2013). For reasons that are not clear, autism has become much more prevalent. From 2001 to 2004, the number of students receiving special education services under the category of autism tripled (U.S. Department of Education, 2009). Better early identification, particularly among African American and Hispanic children, explain some but not all of the increase in ASD prevalence over the years (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2012).

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2012) estimates that 1 in 88 children has ASD. However, public schools report a much lower rate of ASD (1 in 288), and there is signifi- cant variability across states, from one state reporting 1 in 933 to another reporting 1 in 101 stu- dents as having ASD (Sullivan, 2013). Students with ASD and average intellectual functioning are less likely to be identified and served by special education compared to students with intel- lectual disabilities. States with relatively low rates of ASD tend to serve proportionally more students under the special education categories of intellectual disability, speech and language impairment, and learning disability, suggesting that high-functioning students with ASD may be underidentified in these states (Sullivan, 2013). Boys are five times more likely to be diagnosed with ASD than are girls (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2012). Hispanic and American Indian/Pacific Islanders are much less likely than Asian and White students to receive special education services for ASD; however, it is unclear whether the former are underrepre- sented, the latter are overrepresented, or real group differences in the prevalence of autism exist (Sullivan, 2013).

Autism is described as a spectrum disorder to convey the wide range of severity in which it may manifest. A student who is described as high functioning may have average to above- average intelligence. Asperger’s disorder is considered part of the autism spectrum but is associ- ated with less impaired social and communication skills. (Chapter 10 includes a case study of a student with high-functioning autism.) On the low-functioning end of the autism spectrum, com- munication may be so impaired that an alternative form of communication maybe required; for example, the Picture Exchange Communication System (PECS) allows for communication through selecting a symbol or picture representation. Assistive technology has become much more affordable and transportable with the advances in portable computers and tablets. Numerous apps for iPads assist students with autism. Examples include Autism Xpress, which is designed to teach students with autism to recognize emotions in the facial expression of others; iCommunicate, which can be used to build customized schedules, storyboards, and communica- tion boards; and ProLoquo2go, which helps children communicate their needs by creating sen- tences using words and picture prompts. An assistive technology specialist may be available for consultation from the district or county central office. A test drive of any costly (high-end) device should be conducted before it is purchased. Some states, like Wisconsin, have assistive technology lending centers.

Because early intervention produces significant improvements in functioning among chil- dren with ASD, schools are facing increasing pressure to provide evidence-based intensive inter- ventions to children with ASD. Lovaas (1987) conducted some of the earliest work with students with severe autism and other forms of developmental delay, and this work provides the basis for many of the behavioral interventions currently used to assist students with autism. The Lovaas program begins with discrete trial training, in which a teacher working individually with a child

Chapter 6 • Consulting About Students with Social, Emotional, and/or Behavioral Problems 147

cues a specific behavior, prompts or assists the child in making the appropriate response, and provides reinforcement to the child (U.S. Department of Education, 2010). In addition to the discrete trial training, the Lovaas therapists teach parents and teachers how to support the student with autism, including prompting for generalization of the skills taught in the discrete trial train- ing. Based on the What Works Clearinghouse’s very stringent standards for quality research, the Lovaas program has potentially positive effects on the cognitive development of children with disabilities but no discernible effects on their communication, academic achievement, or social/ emotional functioning (U.S. Department of Education, 2010). Additional promising programs include the Learning, Experiences: Alternative Program (LEAP), which combines applied behavior analysis (ABA) in a naturalistic environment, inclusion with nondisabled students who act as peer models, child-directed play, and parent training (Strain & Hoyson, 2000). Also, Treatment and Education of Autistic Related Communication Handicapped Children (TEACCH), which occurs in a self-contained classroom, provides teacher-directed instruction and supports parent involvement (University of North Carolina, 2010). An alternative approach to discrete trial training is pivotal response, which is less adult-directed, focuses on students’ interests, and attempts to enhance more global skills like problem solving and self-regulation compared to very specific skills (Koegel & Koegel, 2006). In addition to these programs, board-certified behavioral analysts (BCBAs) and board-certified assistant behavioral analysts (BCaBAs) are professionals who are specially trained to conduct assessments and treatments based on applied behavior analysis.

Activity 6.12

Watch the video on Tevor’s ABA, or discrete trial therapy, session at https://www.youtube. com/watch?v=AkuRLPMPw7A. Identify the

behavior(s) to be decreased and the behavior(s) to be increased. Describe the behavior analyst’s use of reinforcers and redirection.

Parents of a student with autism are ten times more likely to file a lawsuit against the school district than are parents of students with any other disability because (a) treatment is very costly, (b) schools have not had great success in meeting the needs of students with ASD, (c) the Internet and other media increase parents’ exposure to unproven interventions, (d) there is a pau- city of research supporting interventions for children with ASD, and (e) symptoms of severe autism can exert a significant toll on the child’s family members and school personnel (Zirkel, 2011). In these cases, parents often demand additional resources in the form of tuition reimburse- ment for private schools or ABA to develop treatment plans, monitor progress, and guide one-on- one aides to implement the behaviorally based interventions in public school settings. In these cases, the parents argue that the current program provided to their child does not constitute a free and appropriate public education (FAPE) under IDEA. Conversely, some parents of children with ASD may litigate for full inclusion in general education, possibly with some type of aug- mented or assistive technology, to improve their child’s communication. In this case, parents are invoking their child’s right under IDEA to be educated in the least restricted environment (LRE). As a general rule, districts do not need to provide the most costly or intensive therapies in exist- ence as long as school personnel can show the student with ASD is making progress. The 1982 Rowley v. Department of Education case found that a district was not required to fund additional interventions or supports if it had followed all the procedural rules (e.g., parental notification, timelines, convening an IEP, sufficient dispute resolution mechanisms) and provided a program in which it is likely that the student will receive educational benefits (Zirkel, 2013). To provide an analogy, districts are required to provide a Camry, but they do not need to fund a Lexus.

Losing law suits can be very expensive, as illustrated by the Porter v. Manhattan Beach Unified School District case, which resulted in the school district and California Department of Education paying a $6.7 million settlement to the family and lawyers of a student with ASD. While districts prevail more often than parents, entering into litigation is a losing proposition because its adversarial nature prompts parents to continue litigation until they win (Zirkel, 2011).

Preparing and participating in due process cases can cost hundreds of personnel hours and is not only a diversion from what most educators want to do (i.e., help children), it can

148 Chapter 6 • Consulting About Students with Social, Emotional, and/or Behavioral Problems

also be extremely stressful. Therefore, it behooves educators, administrators, and support staff to be as proactive as possible with families of students with ASD. Making early, frequent, and positive contacts and communicating an enduring commitment to collaboration can help establish the trusting relationship necessary for problem solving when future bumps in the road occur.

Potential problems include a family that becomes adopted by a zealous advocate or parents who find a treatment that they think will cure their child. Because autism can be so debilitating, the search for a cure can be very enticing. Empirically unsupported but popular interventions include auditory integration training, sensory integration training (SIT; Gresham, Bebee-Frankenberger, & MacMillan, 1999), specialized diets, hyperbaric cham- bers, and even swimming with wild dolphins. A consultant working with a family that is seeking a cure through some improbable means should remain very sympathetic to the stress experienced by the family and the power of false hope while maintaining a focus on implementing the most scientifically supported interventions and therapies. Both the National Professional Development Center (NPDC) on ASD and the National Standards Project (NSP) review the research to identify evidence-based practices for individuals with ASD. The consultant should keep the discussion focused on measureable outcomes for the child and not on philosophical discussions about the etiology of autism. The consultant may also use exam- ples of role models like Temple Grandin to help parents reconcile themselves with their child’s diagnosis. Ms. Grandin, who has autism, is an innovative animal scientist and a renowned author and speaker. She has written a number of books on autism and Asperger, including texts for adolescents.

Emotional disturbance

IDEA (2004) defines emotional disturbance as a category of eligibility for services in the following way:

(i) The term means a condition exhibiting one or more of the following characteristics over a long period of time and to a marked degree, which adversely affects educational performance: a. an inability to learn that cannot be explained by intellectual, sensory, or other health

factors; b. an inability to build or maintain satisfactory interpersonal relationships with peers and

teachers; c. inappropriate types of behavior or feelings under normal circumstances; d. a general pervasive mood of unhappiness or depression; e. a tendency to develop physical symptoms or fears associated with personal or school

problems. (ii) The term includes children who are schizophrenic. The term does not include children who

are socially maladjusted unless it is determined that they have an emotional disturbance. (34 CFR Sec. 300.8(c)(4)(i–ii))

This definition has been criticized since its inception in the early 1990s, primarily because it is vague (Kauffman, 2000). For example, one of the five possible characteristics listed—“An inability to learn that cannot be explained by intellectual, sensory, or other health factors”—makes it possible that a student with a learning disability might be construed to be emotionally disturbed. It is difficult to discern among social maladjustment, behavioral disorder, and emotional disturbance. IDEA excludes students who are socially maladjusted and does not address behavioral disorders, but it does include emotional disturbance. If those disorders are considered symptoms of emotional disturbance or developmental delay, then the student may be eligible to receive special education services. Regardless of the definition, students classified as emotionally disturbed are educated in some of the most restrictive envi- ronments (self-contained classrooms or nonpublic schools for students who are emotionally disturbed) and have some of the highest rates of dropping out and incarceration compared to any other disability group (U.S. Department of Education, 2010). Many have observed that educators are much better at identifying students with emotional disturbance than they are at helping them. Students with ED will probably require some of the intensive behavioral (Tier 3) interventions described at the end of this chapter.

Chapter 6 • Consulting About Students with Social, Emotional, and/or Behavioral Problems 149

traumatic Brain Injury

In IDEA, traumatic brain injury (TBI) is defined as follows:

[A]n acquired injury to the brain caused by an external physical force, resulting in total or partial functional disability or psychosocial impairment, or both, that adversely affects a child’s educational performance. Traumatic brain injury applies to open or closed head injuries resulting in impairments in one or more areas, such as cognition; language; memory; attention; reasoning; abstract thinking; judgment; problem-solving; sensory, perceptual, and motor abilities; psychosocial behavior; physical functions; information processing; and speech. Traumatic brain injury does not apply to brain injuries that are congenital or degenerative, or to brain injuries induced by birth trauma. (34 CFR section 300.8(c)(12))

Many students with TBI do not receive proper educational support because they appear to have made a full recovery. Yet certain skills fail to develop later because of the injury (Schutz, Rivers, McNamara, Schutz, & Lobato, 2010). For example, an injury in early childhood may manifest in adolescence as the youth’s executive functioning, which is responsible for self- control and self-management, fails to develop (Schutz et al., 2010). A few of the common causes of TBI among children include shaken-baby syndrome, athletic injuries, automobile and motorcycle accidents, and violence. Injuries that happen later in childhood or adolescence can be associated with depression as the teen mourns his lost capabilities. The more severe the injury, the greater the impact on cognitive functioning and the longer the recovery (Schultz et al., 2010). Some of the symptoms of TBI (e.g., impulsiveness, poor anger coping, poor self- control) can lead to greater risk of acquiring an additional TBI by engaging in self-destructive behaviors. Consultants can assist students with TBI by arranging for a smooth transition from hospital to home and school, coordinating with rehabilitation providers, identifying school-based resources (counseling, peer note takers, recording devices to aid memory, etc.), supporting the generalization of any cognitive compensatory strategies taught in rehabilitation, and conducting ongoing functional assessments of behavior to track progress across the stages of recovery (Dykeman, 2009).

attention deficit disorder with hyperactivity

Another source of legal guidelines for dealing with students with behavioral problems is con- tained in Section 504 of the Vocational Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (P.L. 93–112). Section 504 is a civil rights act and, as such, is unfunded. It requires that schools protect the rights of students whether or not they have been identified as having disabilities if they have difficulty in a major life activity such as school learning. Accommodation plans for students who are determined to fit these regulations are intended to be carried out in general education settings (Conderman & Katsiyannis, 1995). For example, children with ADHD who are not otherwise disabled are given accommodations designed to assist them with behavior or learning problems in the general edu- cation classroom. Because ADHD is a medical diagnosis, students with ADHD can also receive special education services under the IDEA category Other Health Impairment (OHI); in fact, ADHD is listed in the definition of OHI (34 CFR Sec. 300.8(c)(9)(i)). Like all the other condi- tions described previously, the ADHD symptoms must adversely affect the student’s educational performance, even in the presence of accommodations, for the student to qualify for special education services. For example, a 504 plan may suffice for a student whose ADHD symptoms can be addressed through a combination of self-management, parental training, simplified requests from the teacher, and medication.

dIagnoStIc and StatIStIcal manual oF mEntal dISordErS

Two different systems can be used for the classification of students with emotional, social, and/ or behavioral problems—the fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5; American Psychiatric Association, 2013), used in clinical settings, and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEA, 2004), which guides eligibility decision making in school settings.

150 Chapter 6 • Consulting About Students with Social, Emotional, and/or Behavioral Problems

The American Psychiatric Association’s DSM-5 is the most well-known system for organ- izing clusters of aberrant behaviors and emotions (symptoms) into discrete categories; however, other classification criteria do exist, such as the Research Domain Criteria (RDoC) developed by the National Institute for Mental Health (NIMH), and the International Classification of Diseases used by the World Health Organization. The release of the fifth version of the DSM prompted considerable controversy over the secrecy in which the deliberations occurred and potential diag- nostic inflation that may occur with its use (Brock & Hart, 2013a). Without very precise lan- guage, some argue, responses to everyday problems will become misdiagnosed as a medical illness to be treated with pharmaceuticals, leading to overdiagnosis and overmedication (Brock & Hart, 2013a). NIMH, which funds a lot of research on treating mental illness, has called for a more biologically based classification system to avoid misclassification and somewhat arbitrary criteria associated with the DSM-5; however, most experts agree we do not yet have the ability to identify metal illness accurately based on genetic testing, biomarkers, neural scans, and the like (Brock & Hart, 2013a).

The fifth edition of the DSM is the classification system currently used by psychiatrists, clinical psychologists, and other mental health practitioners in nonschool environments. Some school psychologists and counselors may also use this system. Attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), conduct disorder (CD), oppositional defiant disorder (ODD), and autism spectrum disorder (ASD) are diagnostic categories in the DSM-5 that constitute common labels given to children who exhibit a wide variety of externalizing behaviors considered unfavorable to the learning process. The fifth edition of the DSM redefined autism from five subcategories of pervasive development disorder as autism spectrum disorder and social communication disorder to reflect current understanding that autism symptoms occur along a continuum rather than as a distinct disorder (Brock & Hart, 2013b). Internalizing problems defined in the DSM, such as anxiety, depression, anorexia, and self-injurious behaviors, may be difficult to identify in the school setting, and students with these problems may need more long-term, intensive mental health services than can be provided by school personnel. Therefore, consultants are encouraged to develop contacts with high-quality, local mental health providers.

IdEa versus the DSM-V

The primary use for the categorical systems described is in eligibility and placement decisions. A DSM-5 diagnosis is required for private insurance companies to pay for mental health services. A student with a DSM-5 diagnosis may or may not meet special education eligibility standards. The key issues will be (1) how well the student is able to meet general education curricular standards, (2) whether the student disrupts others from learning, and (3) whether the student is a potential harm to herself and/or others. Students with DSM-5 diagnoses who need special education to progress through the curriculum are typically served under the disability categories of emotional disturbance, autism, or other health impairment depending on the student’s behavioral concerns.

Most school-based consultants usually do not emphasize or rely on DSM diagnoses. They believe a behavioral or functional approach to assessment is more practical. The behavioral approach differs in significant ways from the traditional, or categorization, approach. The behavioral approach looks at the function of behavior, while the clinical approach regards behavior as symptomatic of an underlying condition that produces the behavior. For example, if a student is disruptive, defiant, and uncooperative toward a teacher, the behaviorist looks at the student’s learning history and the contingencies currently operative in the classroom. Personality constructs such as “oppositional” are merely used as descriptors for communication purposes or perhaps to define a “trait” if the behavior is consistent across many settings but not as explanatory constructs.

The clinician probably would diagnose the disruptive, defiant student as having a conduct disorder because the student’s behaviors match those listed in DSM-5 under that category. Such a diagnosis runs the risk of confusing the cause with the symptom so that one might be led to believe that the conduct disorder causes the described behaviors. This belief in the process of reification, or giving categories a life of their own, along with the subsequent power to produce symptoms, has been a major stumbling block in any reconciliation between behaviorists and traditionalists (Deitz, 1982). Thus, while both behaviorists and clinicians are interested in the

Chapter 6 • Consulting About Students with Social, Emotional, and/or Behavioral Problems 151

causes of behavior, they look at different sources for those causes. The behaviorist looks at cur- rent functions that the behavior is attempting to serve and the contingencies that support the behavior, while the traditionalist looks at past history or internal events that have led to the dis- ease or disability (that is, the category), which in turn leads to the observed behaviors. Although behaviorally oriented consultants probably consider DSM diagnoses as descriptive rather than explanatory, we often hear them used as causative entities, as in, for example, “Of course she can’t sit still; she has ADHD.”

It is interesting to note that in both the clinical and the school setting, a child with behavior problems must have an identified mental illness (clinical) or disability (school) to receive addi- tional support. Thus, in both settings, a student has to be labeled something before treatment can be provided. In spite of two decades of argument against a categorical system of funding special education and related services in the schools (Hunt & Marshall, 1999; Prasse & Schrag, 1999; Ysseldyke & Marston, 1999), the categorical system remains in use.

IdEa mandates on assessment, Intervention, and discipline of Students with Behavior Problems

The primary function of IDEA (2004) is to protect the right of students with disabilities to receive a FAPE. Because education is a valuable resource, a core American value is that individuals should not be denied access to such a resource because of their disability. Expelling or suspend- ing a student for more than 10 days, cumulatively across a school year, is considered a denial of their FAPE if the infraction was as a direct result of their disability (see IDEA, 2004, Sec. 615(k) (1)(E)(i)). A manifestation determination (MD) must be made by the IEP team in order to deter- mine whether any punishable misconduct was caused by or had a direct and substantial relation- ship to the child’s disability or whether the misconduct was the result of the local education agency’s failure to provide an appropriate IEP. Prior to the 2004 reauthorization, the burden of proof was on the school to show that the infraction was not a result of the student’s disability. Now the onus is on the family to show the misbehavior was a result of their child’s disability or failure to implement a suitable IEP. If the infraction is determined to be a manifestation of the disability, the IEP must conduct a functional behavioral assessment (FBA) and implement a behavior intervention plan (BIP) based on the FBA and return the student to the previous place- ment unless all parties agree to a change in placement or the infraction included weapons, drugs, or serious bodily injury. In the case of the more dangerous offenses, the school can remove the student unilaterally for up to 45 school days.

FunctIonal BEhavIoral aSSESSmEnt and analySIS oF BEhavIor

Problem solving to address a behavioral concern is similar to problem solving for an academic concern. Problem identification, termed functional behavioral assessment (FBA), involves col- lecting data from multiple sources and multiple settings in order to describe when and where the problem behaviors occur, how they manifest, and possible contextual variables that trigger and reinforce the behavior (Alberto & Troutman, 2013; Steege & Watson, 2008). Accordingly, FBA relies on direct and indirect measures of the target behavior (e.g., observation, interview, check- lists, review of permanent products or disciplinary records) rather than highly inferential data collection methods (e.g., projective tests, diagnostic criteria, psychoanalysis). Identifying the function of a maladaptive behavior is extremely advantageous to developing effective interven- tions. Using FBA to address behavior problems is a professional standard, recognized by many professionals groups since the late 1980s (O’Neill, Albin, Storey, Horner, & Sprague, 2015) and codified into federal law with the 2004 reauthorization of IDEA (Steege & Watson, 2008).

Functional Behavioral assessment

Functional behavioral assessment is a collection of assessment methodologies that all share the purpose of attempting to identify the variables that control a behavior and using that knowledge to design individualized interventions (Watson & Steege, 2003). This process is used primarily with students referred because of behavior problems but can apply equally well to academic problem assessment (Ysseldyke & Christenson, 2002). Here the consultant tries to see what

152 Chapter 6 • Consulting About Students with Social, Emotional, and/or Behavioral Problems

affects the behavior: what drives it, maintains it, and prompts it, and what makes it potentially valuable or appropriate from the standpoint of the student. The goal is to look for patterns to understand the causes of the behavior (Ysseldyke, Kekway, & Klingbeil, 2012).

Essentially, functional behavioral assessment considers antecedents, behaviors, and consequences and how they interact (Shapiro & Kratochwill, 2000; Watson & Steege, 2003). Antecedent events (themselves often behaviors of teachers or others) might include teachers’ directions, earthquake drills, noises by other children, an upcoming social event, classroom overcrowding, and a history of coercive pain control interactions. Added to this list, especially by cognitively oriented behaviorists, are the student’s internal expectancies, attributions, motivations, and skills. Temporally distant events are largely outside the influence of school personnel. Temporally proximate events, which include establishing operations and setting events, are more under the control of school personnel. Establishing operations are antecedent events that change the saliency of an object or event as a reinforcer and increase the frequency of the behavior that has been used in the past to obtain the object or event. Deprivation and satiation are two easily understood establishing operations: If one is very thirsty, water becomes a more powerful reinforcer and the likelihood of drinking water is momentarily increased (Watson & Steege, 2003). For example, Bob is a student who likes to act out when his reading buddy, Tony, visits his class. Bob becomes more likely to act out when Tony reenters the class- room after a long holiday break. In this case, Tony acts as the discriminate stimulus, and the long absence increases the potency of Tony’s effect. Conditional probabilities are measured by direct recording of specific behaviors that occur in different contexts (Hintze, Stoner, & Bull, 2000). For example, multiple observations found Bob to act out in whole-group instruction more often than during small-group instruction. The hypothesis for why the behavior occurs can be generated from a study of these conditional probabilities as well as review of records and interview.

Consequences are events that follow the target behavior and influence its future probability of occurrence. We ordinarily think of positive reinforcement, extinction (planned ignoring), and punishment as three major classes of consequences that are used, wittingly or otherwise, by behavior modifiers. Conditional probabilities can be computed for consequent events as well.

Gresham (2002) believes that some behaviorists do not attend sufficiently to the potential influences of distal antecedents. The second author of this text (Powers) consulted with a teacher about a child who had a history of mildly disruptive behavior but was recently losing complete control, and the meltdowns were increasing in frequency. Looking at when the meltdowns were occurring, she noticed a trend with midweek peaks in frequency. A call to the parents revealed the student’s mother was receiving chemotherapy every Wednesday, returning from the treat- ment weaker and sicker with each passing week. The team hypothesized that the student was anxious, sad, and angry about his mother’s illness, and decided to reduce the stress he experi- enced Wednesday and Thursday by limiting the number of demands they made on him, giving him the opportunity on these days to seek quiet time or comfort from the counselor as well as making a referral to a support group for children of parents with cancer at the local hospital.

Gresham (2002) also suggests that behaviorists tend to focus excessively on the controlling influences of the consequences of behavior, sometimes ignoring the powerful potential of ante- cedent manipulation. If behavior is going to change, it will best happen when those who control the antecedents and consequences are willing to change the way in which they set up or deliver these events. The role of the consultant is to understand these controlling contingencies and to build intervention plans designed to alter them. At the end of a functional behavioral assessment, the following groups of questions should have at least tentative answers:

1. What exactly is the behavior of concern? What does it look like, how long does it last, how often does it occur, who else is involved, what purpose does it serve, and how serious is it?

2. What seems to prompt it? Does it occur because of some readily identifiable cause or ante- cedent? What is the reason the student gives for doing it?

3. What happens after the target behavior occurs that may be reinforcing the behavior? Does the student seem to get what he wants as a function of the behavior? In short, what purpose (function) did the behavior seem to have?

4. Based on these data, what hypotheses can be generated to explain these data? How might each hypothesis be tested?

Chapter 6 • Consulting About Students with Social, Emotional, and/or Behavioral Problems 153

Determining the function(s) of the student’s behavior may not be an easy task. There may be many competing explanations within the context of the dichotomous “get something–avoid something” paradigm. For example, a student may be noncompliant. What the student may be getting is a chance to demonstrate power. He may also be using noncompliance to avoid disliked tasks or to get attention, which, though negative from the teacher, may be positive from his peers. It may satisfy the needs of a depressed or easily irritated student by allowing him to be left alone. He may feel that others are picking on him, and noncompliance is a way to get even. A student frustrated with his own communication difficulties may be noncompliant rather than trying to explain to a teacher why he can’t do an assignment. He may have learned at home that noncom- pliance serves a number of the needs previously mentioned. Given the multiplicity of possibili- ties, consultants may have to estimate the most likely functions and build their plans with these functions in mind. Hypotheses are generated that can be tested one by one.

The more data the consultant has, the clearer the picture of the behavior should become. However, consultants often do not have the luxury of endless data collection. The consultee, usu- ally the classroom teacher, wants a quick end to the disruptive behavior and typically has quite a few cases ongoing at any given time. Therefore, data collection needs to be efficient and effec- tive. Indirect measures of the behavior through review of record, interview, and behavior check- lists are helpful for (a) assessing the various contexts in which the behavior occurs, (b) consultees’ potential to change their own behavior, (c) possible replacement behaviors and triggers, and (d) probable reinforcers of the behavior (Watson & Steege, 2003). Indirect measures are vital for assessing behaviors that are difficult to observe directly because they occur infrequently or in private. While indirect measures are relatively cost-effective compared to direct observation, consultants should not rely exclusively on these measures; direct observation and recording of the student’s behavior is not only best practice, it is also required by law as part of a comprehen- sive and valid FBA (Steege & Watson, 2008).

review of records

Students referred for a Tier 2 or 3 behavioral intervention, including students with disabilities, have often accumulated a long disciplinary record. Many of these data are anecdotal and may tell more about the informant than the actual student or his behavior. Some key details to look for include (1) number of office discipline referrals (ODRs); (2) number of suspensions or expul- sions; (3) general achievement levels; (4) interventions that have been attempted and any evi- dence of their fidelity and effectiveness; (5) attendance and tardiness; and (6) trends in the data, such as an uptick in disciplinary actions around administration of state testing, an increased likelihood of problem behaviors in the morning, or a past teacher who reported fewer discipline problems. Additional records you may peruse include the student’s health records, noting any medication and possible behaviorally related side effects, and some of the student’s classwork. Because the records can be rather large, it is best not to spend too much time analyzing them. Move on to direct observation as soon as possible (Watson & Steege, 2003).

Interviews

The art of interviewing requires all the skills discussed in Chapter 4. We cannot overemphasize the need to be an effective interviewer in order to be successful as a school consultant. What hap- pens during the interview, both in terms of information transmission and interpersonal bonding between the consultant and the consultee, provides the foundation on which consultation rests.

There are three primary sources of interview data: the teacher(s), the parent(s), and the referred student. In special cases, agency personnel may also be sources of interview data. The consultant may interview all concerned personnel, depending on the case and time availability. Certainly the most concerned teacher(s) should be interviewed, as should the parents. Interviewing the student can be very useful in terms of understanding her perspective, discussing antecedents and consequences to her behaviors, getting to know her self-perceptions, and reviewing possible reinforcers.

tEachEr IntErvIEW The teacher(s) should be interviewed at the beginning of the problem-solving process to help identify the problem behavior and possible contributing factors. If the student has more than one teacher, it can be very illuminating to interview the teacher or teachers who do not experience a

154 Chapter 6 • Consulting About Students with Social, Emotional, and/or Behavioral Problems

problem or experience fewer or less severe problems than reported by the referring teacher. From the referring teacher, gather information on which behaviors are the most disruptive or troublesome. Often students who have been referred for a targeted or intensive behavioral inter- vention have multiple behavioral problems. There are three good reasons for targeting only one or two behaviors: (a) It may be too overwhelming to develop and carry out interventions for a wide variety of behaviors; (b) if a consultee can have success with a limited number of targeted key behaviors, she may be more willing to try additional interventions with the remaining behaviors of concern; and (c) it is easier to monitor progress for one or two behaviors rather than multiple behaviors.

Once the undesirable behavior is operationalized, a competing desired behavior (meaning it cannot occur if the target behavior is occurring) is identified, and a plan is discussed to increase the frequency of the desired behavior through reteaching, modeling, and reinforcement. Compliance, defined as following a directive within 5 seconds, is a good behavior to target if the teacher does not have one specifically in mind (Rhode et al., 2010). Remember, different teach- ers are bothered by different behaviors, so it is important to identify which behavior(s) are most important to the referring teacher. Second, the teacher and student will ideally buy into changing the behavior. Third, potentially dangerous or highly disruptive behaviors should not be ignored.

Interviews can be highly structured, such as the functional assessment interview (FAI; O’Neill, Albin, Storey, Horner, & Sprague, 2015) or very open-ended, like the following ques- tions. (These are typical questions/comments that a consultant might use in order to elicit infor- mation about the problems and classroom context in which they occur):

• Tell me more about your concerns with the student’s behaviors. (Some teachers have a dif- ficult time being “behavioral”; they tend to describe their concerns in terms of value judg- ments, such as bad, disruptive, or provocative rather than in terms of observable actions.)

• Give me an example of this behavior: What is it like typically? Who else is involved in it? What are some non-examples of the behavior (i.e., behaviors that are not considered part of or examples of the target behavior)?

• Do you have any data on this behavior? How often and when does it occur? • What seems to bring on the behavior? What causes it? What circumstances are occurring

when it happens? • What do you typically do when it occurs? What has been your response in the past and

what is your response currently? What is the response of the other students? What has been the result of these responses?

• You’ve described settings in which it occurs. Are there times when it does not occur in the same settings? If so, what seems to determine whether or not it occurs?

• When the student behaves appropriately in situations where he usually has trouble, how do you or others react to him?

• What is your goal with this student and these behaviors? How do you want this student to behave? This may seem like an odd question. The consultee might say, “Like she should,” “Like the other students,” or “I want her to stop acting this way and start acting like she should.” If the consultee responds in this fashion, tell him that the purpose of the question was to give the two of you a goal for this student. How do the two of you want this student to behave? In other words, what behaviors of the student will you reinforce, and what behaviors will you ignore or discourage?

• What does the student do well? What are her strengths socially, academically, or other- wise? There is a shift in behavioral assessment practices recently toward collecting more data on positive assets, strengths, resiliency, and other indicators of positive adjustment because improving mental health may require increasing competencies as much as decreas- ing maladaptive behaviors (Merrell, 2010).

• Given what you know about this behavior and what you’ve tried up to now, what do you believe would be a good approach to take at this time? What do you believe is the best thing to do at this time?

Be aware that when teachers are asked these questions, they may come up with one or two responses other than what you intended. The first might be an attempt to put the burden on you to solve the problem unilaterally, for example, “That’s why I referred the student to you. What do you think I should do?” The implication here is that you are the expert and the teacher will do

Chapter 6 • Consulting About Students with Social, Emotional, and/or Behavioral Problems 155

whatever you tell her or she will at least consider it. The second type of response is designed to make the problem somebody else’s by requesting that the student be referred to special education (assuming that the student is not already identified as a student with a disability) or at least be removed a few hours a week for counseling. In this case, the teacher sees you as the gatekeeper who needs to be convinced that the student’s behavior is so difficult that only special education, medication, and/or counseling can deal with it. It is important with both types of responses to keep the focus on the problem-solving process and the student as part of the classroom. For an example of how this conversation may happen and how you can respond, watch the following video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xm1M7PR2I9E.

Activity 6.13

In pairs, have one partner play the role of a teacher who has referred a student for what he calls excessive disruptiveness. The other partner plays the role of the consultant, who tries to get the teacher to be specific about the behav- ior of concern and to get answers to questions

about possible antecedents and consequents, including classroom dynamics and results of interventions the teacher has tried. The con- sultee, in turn, will try to shift ownership of the problem to the consultant. How might the con- sultant respond?

ParEnt IntErvIEW Other than a call from the school to report that their child has been injured, there is probably no phone call, text, or e-mail parents fear more than the one that says that their child is causing behavior problems. The usual message that follows is that the parents need to talk to their child about it or come to the school to discuss it. Notification about a child’s behavioral issues causes a number of different reactions among parents. School personnel need to be sensitive to the fol- lowing possible reactions:

1. Anger. The parents may be angry at their child, at the school, or at the teacher in particular. They may also project blame onto others, often onto other students, or even accuse the teacher (directly or indirectly) of poor teaching or inadequate behavior management.

2. Denial. The parents may simply deny that there is a problem or try to minimize it, attempt- ing to convince you that it’s temporary and will soon go away, even though it may have been observed for years.

3. Acceptance. Here the parents are well aware of the behavioral or emotional difficulties their child is having, they agree that these problems are serious, and they want to know what they can do to help. Obviously this is the reaction the teacher or the consultant is hoping for, but it may take some time to appear. Even with acceptance, parents can feel disappointed in their child and their own child-raising skills, embarrassed, ashamed, and fearful about the deleterious effects of their child’s behavioral challenges later in his or her life.

Parents naturally tend to be protective of their children. The goal of school personnel is to work with this tendency, to use it to their advantage by projecting the impression that they, too, are on the side of the child and that they want to work as a team with parents to develop their child’s strengths and ability to cope well and to interact well with others in the classroom. When either anger or denial is predominant, consultants need to approach a parent in the same way a counselor does when faced with an angry or combative student: Stay calm, don’t take the reac- tion personally, be a good listener, reflect feelings, and take time to develop rapport while sup- porting the parent during this difficult interaction (Lehman & Irvin, 1996). Confrontation early in the proceedings will only strengthen the parents’ defenses; arguing leads to a win-lose mental- ity that stifles the give and take that is necessary in the beginning stages of an interview with a person feeling defensive.

Teachers and consultants need to have a plan in mind before the parents are called or inter- viewed face to face. They need to have their facts well organized and must be in a positive, help- ful frame of mind. This is not always easy, especially for the teacher who has just finished a difficult day with a student who manifests behavior or emotional difficulties. Here are some

156 Chapter 6 • Consulting About Students with Social, Emotional, and/or Behavioral Problems

issues to think through and plan for before contacting the parents, along with some strategies for keeping the interview positive and problem-centered:

1. Explain your reason for concern. After spending a few moments building rapport, which always includes some comments about the target student’s strengths, the consultee (or the consultant) spells out the behaviors that need to be discussed. Keep your discussion of both the strengths and the behaviors of concern objective and data-oriented. This impresses the parent positively and indicates a professional approach to observation of the child. Avoid child- or other-blaming approaches.

2. Ask for the parent’s opinion of the situation. Does she see this behavior at home? What does she think the function of the behavior may be? What does she do about it at home? Focus on replacement behaviors: What can be done to replace the unwanted behaviors with more appropriate behaviors?

3. Review efforts made to deal with the problem. Tell the parent what school personnel have tried and what results they have had. Generally, you haven’t had good results, possibly because the intervention attempts were weak , punitive, or inconsistent; otherwise, you probably wouldn’t be having this interview. Try to indicate some areas of improvement, however, in order to set a positive tone for the discussion.

4. At this point you may ask the parent what she thinks the school ought to do about the behavior, or you can suggest a plan for discussion. Your goal is to get an agreement, not to win an argument. Try not to debate with the parent about every point in your plan; be ready to compromise on small points in order to develop a plan both of you can agree on. Think of the discussion as win-win in purpose.

5. Having arrived at some goal-oriented, positive plan that involves action on the part of the school and the home, summarize it to see if there are any further questions or com- ments that the parent wishes to make. Then set a date when you will contact the parent to review the plan, usually in a couple of weeks. Of course, be sure to follow through on this promise. The daily behavior report card, discussed later in this chapter, is an excellent vehicle for promoting this goal-oriented exchange of information.

Activity 6.14

In dyads, one person plays the part of a teacher calling a parent about his child’s disruptive behavior. The other person plays the part of the parent, who acts defiant or hostile to the teacher.

In a second scenario (partners switch roles), the parent maintains a denial position. He asserts that his child would not engage in such behavior and that the teacher must be mistaken.

Activity 6.15

Observe the follow-up behavioral interview with a parent about Sam’s behavioral chal- lenges at https://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=a9XDO0ukHj0. How does the con- sultant help to focus the discussion on very specific skills in their context? How does the

consultant reinforce the parent’s efforts, includ- ing data collection? Discuss the consultant’s and consultee’s overall demeanor. Note how the consultant summarizes the plan and sets up a follow up. Role-play a similar interview with a fellow classmate, colleague, or friend.

StudEnt IntErvIEW Here are some general guidelines for consultants when they are planning to confer with individ- ual students about their behavior:

1. It is best to have conferences when no other students are around and you can devote 5 to 10 minutes or so to the student without being interrupted.

2. Don’t sit behind your desk; trappings of authority are likely to increase defensiveness or forced compliance.

Chapter 6 • Consulting About Students with Social, Emotional, and/or Behavioral Problems 157

3. Strive to listen more than you talk. Record your conferences from time to time to deter- mine the ratio of your talking compared to the student’s. Also try to determine the sources of breakdown in communication.

4. Use open-ended questions more than closed questions, especially when discussing the student’s feelings about her classroom experience.

5. Avoid asking why the student has engaged in a deviant behavior. Generally, students will say they don’t know, they will deny their responsibility and try to project blame onto others, or they will give you some socially acceptable reason that they hope will satisfy you and won’t get them in further trouble.

6. Try to get the student to take the initiative in coming up with a plan to solve the problem. Realize that her plan may reflect her degree of immaturity, so you may need to facili- tate the process of working out the details. This parallels the process of collaborative consultation.

7. If the student is reluctant or cannot think of a plan, suggest some ideas that are acceptable to you and encourage commitment from the student. Sometimes you may have to wait a day or so before deciding on a plan.

8. Never argue with a student. Arguments often turn into heated exchanges and are detrimen- tal to rational problem solving.

9. Note the student’s emotions. Avoid trapping the child in a logical or emotional corner. Leave an escape route by suggesting options.

10. If you suspect that the student is emotionally distressed beyond what you would expect in the circumstances, you may want to make a referral to the school-based consultant (that is, the psychologist or the counselor) or to the student’s parent, who may wish to seek his or her own resources for direct service (counseling) or other assistance in understanding the student.

rating Scales

Another method for determining the type and severity of behavior problems is to have the teacher, parent, or student fill out a rating scale. Rating scales can be either broad (assessing a number of possible disorders and skills) or narrow in scope. For example the Behavior Assessment System for Children–2 (BASC-2; Reynolds & Kamphaus, 2004) assesses a number of different disorders and competencies, including adaptive skills, externalizing problems, internalizing problems, and school problems. Conversely, the Childhood Autism Rating Scale–2 (CARS-2; Schopler, Van Bourgondien, Wellman, & Love, 2009) assesses a narrow range of behaviors associated only with autism and Asperger. Broad rating scales, like the BASC-2, work well for problem identifi- cation, but their length (the BASC-2 has 139 items) does not allow these scales to be used as universal screeners or for progress monitoring (Kamphaus et al., 2010). Recently a number of short rating scales have been developed and validated for these purposes, including the Behavioral and Emotional Screening System (BESS; Kamphaus et al., 2010) and the Brief Behavior Rating Scale (BBRS; Gresham et al., 2010). More recently developed scales are more likely to focus on students’ strengths and sources of resiliency rather than focusing exclusively on students’ defi- cits (Yesseldyke, 2012).

Because rating scales are indirect measures of student behavior, they can be influenced by the rater’s bias (halo effect, expectancy effect, etc.). For example, a teacher may be totally exas- perated with a student, which can affect the way in which he rates the child. He may indicate that a student “always” engages in aberrant behavior when such behaviors actually occur only spo- radically in all but the most severely disturbed children. The BASC-2 has some items that can detect possible bias or lack of objectivity. Second, it is common for persons reviewing a rating scale or checklist to focus on recent behaviors that may or may not be typical of the student.

Direct behavior rating (DBR) was developed to address this temporal effect by having the teacher rate a single, or multiple, operationally defined target behavior(s) after a specified period of time (Briesch, Chafouleas, & Riley-Tillman, 2010; Volpe & Briesch, 2012). Some example items include academic engagement, raising hand, respectful behavior, following directions, and finish work on time. A teacher could rate the percentage of math time (9:00–10:15) a student was academically engaged every day for 7 to 10 days to get a reasonably reliable baseline of his engagement in math. The rating can be an estimate: (a) 85% to 100% on task most of the time, (b) 65% to 84% on task more than off task, (c) 55% to 65% on task about half of the time,

158 Chapter 6 • Consulting About Students with Social, Emotional, and/or Behavioral Problems

(d) 35% to 55% off task more than on task; (e) less than 35% on task very rarely. DBRs are very flexible; allow for progress monitoring; and may be an efficient alternative to direct observa- tions, though they remain influenced by rater-related effects (Briesch et al., 2010; Volpe & Briesch, 2012). Therefore, direct observation should be used to verify the results of DBRs. Sandra Chafouleas and T. Chris Riley-Tillman have published a Web site with useful examples of DBRs that may be downloaded.

classroom observations

Direct observation in context(s) in which the problem occurs is necessary to conducting a func- tional behavioral assessment (O’Neill, Albin, Storey, Horner, & Sprague, 2015; Watson & Steege, 2003). The context may include the classroom, playground, school bus, passing period, and so on. There are a wide variety of observational systems spanning a continuum between anecdotal and systematic. Skinner, Rhymer, and McDaniel (2000) have described naturalistic observations as those that take place during ordinary classroom sessions. Narrative recording procedures are informal and primarily consist of a neutral observer recording what she sees in the classroom or playground, ordinarily in the form of a log or anecdotal record. It is impossible, except with a wide-angle television camera, to record everything, so the observer typically records only the antecedents, consequences, and behaviors that are being targeted and does so in a narrative form.

The following is an example of a narrative recording of a targeted behavior of a 6-year-old boy referred for suspected ADHD:

Date: September 10

Time: 9:20

Setting: Reading follow-up activity; not teacher-led. Six other boys and girls doing a worksheet having to do with consonant substitutions.

Antecedents: Boy (Will) adjacent to Hans (targeted student) stuck his tongue out at Hans.

Behavior: Hans got up, walked over to the soft toys box, got out a “bopper” (a soft mallet, stuffed with cotton), and went to Will and proceeded to hit him with it.

Consequence(s): Other children laughed. Teacher told Hans to stop. He did, but loudly pro- claimed that he was mad because Will stuck out his tongue. Teacher said she would talk to Will and Hans about it at recess break. Hans continued to mutter at Will.

Most observations conducted by consultants are anecdotal, descriptive, or narrative, which fail to meet psychometric and legal standards of an FBA (Hintze, 2005). Narrative or descriptive observations may help to zero in on potential discrete behaviors to track and possible antecedent–behavior–consequent associations, but they are not very useful for monitoring the effects of an intervention. More systematic and empirical methods, such as event- and time- sampling, record the occurrence of one or more operationally defined behaviors in a manner that can be verified through inter-rater agreement checks (Hintze, 2005). One example is the Student Observation System (SOS; Reynolds & Kamphaus, 2004) supplement to the BASC-2. The SOS is based on 15-minute observations of a targeted student using a time-sampling approach. The observer allows 27-second periods to go by, observes the student for 3 seconds, and then uses the next 27 seconds to record what was observed during the 3 seconds. This process is repeated for a total of 30 observations in the 15-minute period. Up to 13 specific behavioral categories are recorded, such as the response to teacher/lesson, inappropriate movement, and aggression. Of the 13 categories, 9 are maladaptive behaviors and 4 are positive/adaptive. Repeated observa- tions of a targeted student are conducted to identify conditions in which certain behaviors occur more or less frequently and to track progress over time to evaluate the effectiveness of an inter- vention. Computerized versions of the SOS and the Behavior Observations of Students in Schools (BOSS; Shapiro, 2010) have been developed for laptops and smartphones to facilitate data recording and analysis.

Many of the structured observation systems include collecting data on a comparison stu- dent in order to estimate how much the target student’s behavior deviates from the classroom

Chapter 6 • Consulting About Students with Social, Emotional, and/or Behavioral Problems 159

norm. If the comparison student, as well as the target student, is frequently off-task or disruptive, chances are a classroom management problem needs to be addressed before individual problem solving begins. Systematic observations also allow the consultant to compute conditional prob- abilities. Conditional probability requires recording the frequency of a target behavior during certain antecedent events (whole-group lesson, independent seatwork, etc.) and consequent events (peer attention, escape work, etc.). Eckert, Martens, and DiGennaro (2005) suggest that graphing the conditional probabilities will help to identify conditions that reinforce the problem behavior that occurs on a lean or infrequent schedule. Another source of data for generating hypotheses is to gather data across a number of conditions over the course of an entire day or many days and look for patterns. The Functional Assessment Observation Form (FAO; O’Neill, Albin, Storey, Horner, & Sprague, 2015) allows for the event recording of behaviors, proximal antecedents, and consequences by various time periods (8:15–8:45 a.m. rug time; 8:45–9:15 a.m. repeated reading, etc.) over the course of a number of days. It can be helpful in determining likely predictors of targeted behaviors as well as functions of the behaviors. Some of these meth- ods require sophisticated approaches and the availability of personnel whose only responsibility is to record behaviors, but most can be adapted for use by a teacher or aide. Hypotheses about why the problem behavior is occurring are generated from patterns that appear across periods, times, and settings identified through either visual inspection of the data or computing condi- tional probabilities.

applied Behavior analysis

Applied behavior analysis (ABA) is the deliberate manipulation of variables believed to be con- trolling or influencing the target behavior in order to see what effects these manipulations have on the behavior. Derived from research with students with severe disabilities, ABA exposes chil- dren to a series of brief intervention conditions designed to reflect possible reinforcement contin- gencies hypothesized to maintain the behavior in the natural environment (Martens & DiGennaro, 2009). It is essentially a very refined application of FBA in which one or more interventions under (preferably) strictly controlled conditions are accompanied by the accurate measurement of the effects of these interventions. The student’s responses to the various interventions confirm or discredit each hypothesis generated in the beginning of the problem analysis phase of problem solving.

When done carefully, ABA takes considerable training, time, and effort. Someone other than the teacher (who is ordinarily too busy teaching) must be the objective observer in the class- room. Recently, board-certified behavioral analysts (BCBAs) and board-certified assistant behavioral analysts (BCaBA) have become the professionals to conduct ABA, particularly with students with autism. However, many school psychology and special education training pro- grams also provide extensive training in ABA.

Figure 6.1 gives an example of a functional behavioral assessment conducted by a resource teacher-consultant and the referred student’s special education teacher. Note the attention to the search for causes (functions) of the student’s behavior, in addition to efforts to answer the who, what, when, and where questions: What is the behavior? When does it happen? Where does it happen? Who is involved? Antecedents and consequences are also addressed in this assessment.

FUNCTIONAL BEHAVIORAL ASSESSMENT

Student: Johnny BeGood DOB: 11-11-05 CA 10

School: ABC Number of students in class: 12

Teacher(s): Mr. Johnson Aide: Ms. Smith

Setting: Special education; special day class

Target behavior(s): Johnny is noncompliant; he does very little schoolwork; he pesters others (e.g., threatens, bullies, extorts money).

What is the current frequency/intensity/duration of the behavior? (1) Johnny refuses to follow teacher directives between 5 and 10 times a day. If the teacher repeats the request, he will often become

FIgurE 6.1 Functional behavioral assessment (FBA) example for Johnny BeGood

160 Chapter 6 • Consulting About Students with Social, Emotional, and/or Behavioral Problems

verbally abusive. This refusal/escalation may last between 5 and 50 minutes. (2) Johnny turns in only about 20% of the work assigned; this is mostly math, his best subject. (3) He pesters others with verbal insults and threats between 5 and 20 times a day, largely depending on the reactions of the other stu- dents or Mr. Johnson or Ms. Smith. He may persist until he is timed out; sometimes he just stops, espe- cially if he gets no reaction.

When, and during what activities, does the target behavior occur? Pretty much throughout the day, with fewer problems occurring during math. He frequently misses recess because of these behaviors.

What actions or behaviors of the targeted student or others typically precede the behavior? Mr. Johnson has not seen anything the others do to provoke Johnny. They are intimidated by him and try to avoid doing or saying anything to him. If he sees others getting attention for good student behaviors, he will sometimes insult them for that. Otherwise, it just seems to arise with no specific identifiable antecedent.

What are the typical consequences of the behavior, planned or otherwise? (Teacher’s response): I usually ask him to stop, and both Ms. Smith and I try to do it positively (e.g., “Johnny, remember our rules about polite- ness in class. I need you to do your own work at this time”). Sometimes when I’m sick of it, I’ll be stronger in my correction (“Johnny, stop insulting/pestering Billy. Mind your business, which is your work”). I never know which correction will or won’t work. He seems fairly oblivious to my response.

Are there known health issues that could be affecting his behavior? He seems physically healthy. Vision and hearing are apparently okay. The nurse has tried to get a more detailed history, but Mrs. BeGood just says there is nothing wrong with him and refuses to answer more detailed questions.

What are some desired reinforcers for this student? Mr. Johnson stated that free time works somewhat, but Johnny usually winds up losing it because he uses it unwisely. He seems not to know what to do with himself if he isn’t commanding attention by being a nuisance. Mr. Johnson has tried stickers, points toward bigger prizes (Beyblades, Pokemon cards), but he has earned these only once, and he didn’t seem impressed by them. He usually seems to like positive attention. At times, he tells us to “get lost” when we praise him for his efforts.

What is the function of the behavior? What is the student trying to get or avoid? Mr. Johnson believes he’s trying to get attention. He also may be using the behaviors to avoid doing schoolwork.

What are the desired replacement behaviors? Compliance to task requests; nonhostile behavior toward oth- ers; increase in academic output.

Under what conditions/situations are replacement behaviors exhibited? When and where does the student behave well? He’s at his best during math. He’ll stop provoking (sometimes) when Mr. Johnson or Ms. Smith threatens to punish him. He’ll sometimes stop if he gets no reaction from the others.

What has been successful in managing (i.e., replacing) the target behavior(s)? Nothing has been really successful. Perhaps a full day of math would help? So far, nothing has worked really well.

What has been unsuccessful? Pretty much everything listed above. Success is slippery with him. Sometimes Mr. Johnson thinks he’s done or said something that gets to him, but then it doesn’t seem to work the next day.

Have there been any recent changes in the school or home environment, daily schedule, medications, and so on? The home environment is characterized by inconsistent discipline; threats are common, as is ignoring deviant behavior, as reported by Mrs. BeGood. Mr. Johnson reports little follow-through regarding schoolwork or notes home. Johnny’s not on any medications as far as we know.

How well is his schoolwork matched to his skill level? Johnny struggles with completing work in all areas but math. He is significantly below grade level in all areas except math, so his special education teacher assigns him workbooks at second- and first-grade level. He has not met his IEP goals or objectives for the past 6 months.

Summary. Johnny is a very unhappy boy. He is completing very little work; his behaviors are interfering with his ability to learn. Modifications to try include allowing him to earn a desired activity for the entire class (i.e., group contingency) by improving his compliance, conducting a survey-level assessment to ensure academic tasks are within his instructional range, providing more scaffolding [see Chapter 7] for assignments that require a lot of reading and adding counseling to his IEP to help Johnny make more positive attributions. More precise baseline data on on-task and compliance rates will be collected and a goal will be developed based on the baseline data.

FIgurE 6.1 (continued )

Chapter 6 • Consulting About Students with Social, Emotional, and/or Behavioral Problems 161

Intervention Evaluation

Once a problem behavior is identified and analyzed, an intervention is implemented for 6 to 8 weeks. The effects of this intervention can be monitored in a number of ways, including observa- tions and behavior scales. The most common method of monitoring behavior is probably event (frequency) recording. Here the observer has determined in advance what the behaviors of con- cern are and then indicates with a mark on a predesigned form every occurrence for a specified period of time. One way to make this less disruptive for a teacher is to have her fill her left pocket with pennies and move one to her right pocket each time the target behavior occurs; thus, she can record the event and continue teaching, noting the total pennies in her right pocket at the end of the day. More high-tech solutions, such as a smartphone application to record an event, are also possible. In addition, events such as ODRs may be recorded by school personnel. Duration recording is used if the target behavior is a continuous behavior in which length of time is an important variable, as in tantrums or time on task. A teacher may start or stop a stopwatch (avail- able on most smartphones) with the beginning and end of a behavior, graphing the total at the end of the day. These methods provide data with which to compare day-to-day intervention effects. Figure 6.2 shows a typical event/duration recording form. Tallies would indicate the occurrence of discrete behaviors; the duration recording would track how long each event occurred.

Often teachers, particularly general education teachers, tire of this data-gathering activity after a few days, especially if they are tallying behaviors to gather baseline information. Teachers want to get on with the interventions and deal with the behaviors rather than count what they feel they already know exists. The consultant has to decide in each case how to deal with these poten- tial problems, including how important it is to gather data until a stable baseline is achieved.

In addition to monitoring the effects of the intervention on the student’s behavior, treat- ment integrity also needs to be assessed. Students don’t benefit from interventions they don’t receive. The consultants should collect data on the teacher’s behavior to improve intervention

FIgurE 6.2 Event/duration recording form

Student: Billy Wilson Teacher: Mrs. Jones

Behavior: Out of seat Date: Oct. 17

Time: 9:00–10:00

Discrete events version: Indicate with a check mark in each box the number of times Billy was out of seat from 9:00 to 10:00.

❑  ❑  ❑  ❑  ❑  ❑  ❑  ❑  ❑  ❑  ❑  ❑  ❑  ❑  ❑  ❑  ❑  ❑  ❑  ❑  ❑  ❑  ❑  ❑  ❑

Duration event version: Indicate the number of seconds Billy was out of seat for each occurrence from 9:00 to 10:00.

1. _______________

2. _______________

3. _______________

4. _______________, and so on

Activity 6.16

Discuss the functional behavioral assessment conducted on Johnny BeGood in Figure 6.1. Answer the following questions:

What are some antecedents to Johnny’s behavior?

What consequences are now operating?

What are some likely functions of Johnny’s behavior?

What strategies and supports should the teacher, school, and/or home implement in order to improve Johnny’s behavior?

Develop a positive behavioral intervention plan that will address Johnny’s needs in the least restrictive environment.

162 Chapter 6 • Consulting About Students with Social, Emotional, and/or Behavioral Problems

Activity 6.17

In small groups, write appropriate rules for pri- mary, middle, junior high, and senior high

classes based on the suggestions in this section for developing rules.

dIrEct InStructIon Teachers should provide direct instruction on behavioral expectations, including practicing transitions (e.g., entering the classroom, changing stations, turning in homework) to mastery, modeling behaviors that are consistent with classroom rules, and discussing non-examples. The time teachers devote in the beginning of the year to ensuring that students have the skills and knowledge to meet behavioral expectations will be more than made up throughout the rest of the year by having fewer disruptions. Overcorrection can be one technique to reestablish positive behavior if the students are beginning to slip. For example, students in a class realized if they stomped their feet when entering their bungalow (portable) classroom, they could make a lot of noise. During the whole month of November, the students’ entry became incrementally louder, though they still transitioned quickly to their desks. Finally on December 1, the teacher recorded their noise, played it back to them, explicitly told them that it was too loud and they were expected to enter quietly, and instructed them to leave the room and reenter. They entered more quietly, but some stomping could still be heard. The teacher had them leave and reenter six more times. By the third time they were silent as mice, but the teacher wanted them to

fidelity. (See Chapter 3 for more information on supporting and assessing intervention fidelity.) For example, the consultant may record the number of corrective and positive statements made by the teacher during a 20-minute observation to assess whether the teacher is employing the 3-positive-to-1-corrective-statement intervention properly. The consultant can also examine per- manent products such as the student’s behavioral contract or the teacher–parent log to see how well the teacher is able to implement the intervention.

SchoolWIdE PoSItIvE BEhavIor SuPPort

Schoolwide positive behavior support (SWPBS), also known as positive behavioral interven- tions and support (PBIS), is the behavioral equivalent to response to intervention (RtI) for academic concerns and is a form of MTSS. SWPBS involves multi-tier interventions, data- based decision making, and consultation teams to assist teachers at every level (Ihlo & Nantais, 2010; Johns, Patrick, & Rutherford, 2008). The number and amount of data collected and the intensity of intervention increase with each tier (Malecki & Demaray, 2007). For an overview on SWPBS, including some of the benefits, see the video clip at https://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=7QRoYyLZVqw.

universal Behavioral Interventions

Implementing SWPBS typically begins with developing schoolwide rules and setting some schoolwide behavioral goals based on data. Tier 1 primary/universal supports, such as effective classroom management and positive relationships with teachers and among students, should pre- vent problem behaviors for 80% to 90% of the students (Walker & Shinn, 2002). Some effective classroom management strategies include establishing rules, providing direct instruction on behaviors, and consistently and frequently reinforcing positive behaviors.

rulES Teachers should establish and publically post a small set (four to six) of operationally defined rules that instruct students on what to do (rather than what not to do). For example, “Keep hands and feet to oneself” and “Follow directions within 5 seconds.” The rules should describe behav- iors that are observable (i.e., not internal), and everyone can easily agree on whether a behavior complies with or violates a rule. A rule like “Be respectful” is hard to reinforce or punish because students and teachers may have very different ideas of what respect entails. The teacher should introduce the rule and continuously refer to the rules throughout the day (pointing out examples and non-examples as they occur) in the beginning of the school year.

Chapter 6 • Consulting About Students with Social, Emotional, and/or Behavioral Problems 163

practice and to understand how serious she was about them changing their behavior. The next week, the teacher made sure to reinforce the class when they entered quietly and to have them practice six times when they were noisy (which only happened once). Through overcorrection, the problem faded and never returned.

rEWardS and conSEquEncES In well-managed classrooms, students understand that appropriate behavior will be reinforced and a continuum of consequences will be applied for problem behaviors. Some ways to do this are to post rewards and consequences next to the rules on the classroom wall. Positive reinforce- ment, the undisputed best practice in behavior management, is essentially a contingency-based intervention. It is given when students engage in appropriate behavior. It may involve a verbal comment (“I really liked the way you handled that situation.”), a positive look (implying approval), or the administration of some type of reward (e.g., grades; notes home; phone calls home; certificates; and access to preferred objects or activities, possibly through the use of a reinforcement menu). The use of “mystery rewards” (Rhode et al., 2010), which are surprise rewards given in a variety of different situations, serves to keep up a level of intrigue regarding the use of extrinsic reinforcers. An object or action is only a reinforcer if it increases the likeli- hood that the positive behavior will recur given similar situations. This means the reinforcer must be desirable to the student. Some common “prizes,” such as stickers or pencils, can lose their appeal over the years. A menu of reinforcers can help identify tangible and social reinforcers. In addition, delivering the reinforcers with enthusiasm, making eye contact and being in close prox- imity, describing the positive behavior you are reinforcing, and using age-appropriate language can increase the effectiveness of the reinforcer (Rhode et al., 2010). A token economy, in which students save school game dollars to purchase larger prizes, can be quite effective if used prop- erly. Some tips include never discussing who received and didn’t receive a token (it is not a negotiation), having a specific spot for the tokens to be stored so they are not a distraction, and, if someone is asking for a token, reinforcing the students who are behaving properly in closest proximity to the student. Providing reinforcers to the students surrounding a student who is engaged in a problem behavior, without directly calling attention to the child, can be a powerful classroom management strategy. The goal is to catch the students being good by liberally provid- ing the token or points. You do not want to be too frugal with your rewards.

Activity 6.18

Some teachers don’t believe in rewarding posi- tive behavior. They worry students will not develop intrinsic motivation to “do good.”

Others suggest that such tactics are akin to bribery. How might you respond to a critic of reward systems?

Activity 6.19

In small groups, assign each group a grade level from preschool through high school. Design lists of consequences that range from the mildest to the most severe. Review each

group’s list, noting the different consequences that are believed to be appropriate at the dif- ferent grade levels.

Rewarding positive behavior is sometimes not sufficient for managing a classroom. Consequences that are proportional to the infraction need to be clearly identified. Some mild consequences include (a) nonverbal or verbal reminders of the rule not being followed, (b) time- out from a preferred activity or to watch another student engaged in the desired behavior, and (c) loss of a privilege or choice. Some more serious consequences include (a) loss of a preferred activity, (b) note or phone call home (possibly the phone call is placed by the student), (c) tem- porary removal from the class to another class or office discipline referral, and (d) permanent removal from class.

164 Chapter 6 • Consulting About Students with Social, Emotional, and/or Behavioral Problems

Another way to conceptualize the nature of contingency management in the classroom is in terms of the if-then rules that the teacher has established: If a student engages in a target behavior, then a certain contingency will apply. This requires that there are classroom rules and preestablished, usually negative consequences for students who fail to obey the rules. Conversely, there are positive consequences for appropriate, prosocial behavior. Contingencies tend to be more explicit in classrooms for students with special needs because the students in these classes usually need the structure of knowing exactly what the consequences will be for their behavior, either positive or aversive. Here are some examples of contingency management:

Ms. Rivera has noticed that her fourth-grade students start getting noisy and more active as recess approaches. This behavior has been increasing over the last week. Ms. Rivera tells her students that she has noticed the increase, gives examples of what she means, elicits examples from the stu- dents, and then tells them that she will delay their recess for 2 minutes if she notices it again. She has to apply this contingency only once during the following week; the students are no longer behaving inappropriately before recess.

Mr. Smith, a junior high shop teacher, has decided to modify his grading procedures to empha- size neatness in the workspace. He tells his students that every now and again he will give a signal, which means that all students should back away from their workstations and projects while he walks through the classroom giving bonus points to those students who have a neat work area and deduct- ing points for a messy area. After he has done this twice, only one boy persists in being messy, and Mr. Smith talks with him individually. This contingency change has produced a positive effect.

claSS clImatE Rewards and punishment are both consequences for behaviors. SWPBS also includes providing antecedents that elicit positive behavior, such as academic engagement. Some additional strate- gies for improving the climate of the classroom include the following:

1. Interest boosting consists of doing or saying something that will regenerate students’ inter- est in the subject matter or assignment. Perhaps a different way of presenting the informa- tion, getting students’ ideas about the topic, or relating it to some recent event might stimulate more interest and reduce the frequency of behaviors attributable to boredom.

2. Signal interference is a common teacher technique. It consists of “the look,” wherein the teacher stops or slows instruction to give a brief serious look at an offending student. This usually brings the ordinarily well-behaved student back to the understanding that he should be doing his assignments and not something else.

3. Proximity control is an effort to control a potentially disruptive situation by physically moving closer to the student or students who are misbehaving. Usually this is enough to stop disruptive behavior at least temporarily.

4. Temporary reassignments consist of having students who are causing behavioral disrup- tions go to a different part of the classroom. It is a mild form of time-out.

5. Gentle reminders are statements from the teacher about what the students are supposed to be doing. Teachers sometimes preface these reminders with a carrier phrase such as “Maria, I need you to . . .” or “Cody, we’re all doing our math follow-up now. You need to . . .”

6. Hurdle help consists of detecting times when students are stuck with an assignment and providing direct help, or providing a reminder to the whole group about how to overcome the problem such as “ask 3 before me” to signal a student should ask his neighbors for help before approaching the teacher.

7. Planned ignoring is a form of hoped-for extinction in which the teacher tries to avoid giv- ing any recognition for disruptive behavior. Depending on the student involved and the situation, this may be a safe and effective technique. It is best used when a backup plan that can easily restore order can be put into effect in case the planned ignoring does not work.

8. High rates of positive comments. Teachers should aim for a 3-to-1 ratio of positive to negative interactions with students, especially students whose behavior commonly prompts negative reactions. A positive greeting in the morning, a comment about something the student is interested in, a nod of recognition when things are going well, pointing out the good parts of otherwise inadequate work, and making a phone call or writing a brief note home to deliver some good news are some ways teachers can try to keep the ratio of posi- tive to negative on the positive side.

Chapter 6 • Consulting About Students with Social, Emotional, and/or Behavioral Problems 165

Ihlo and Nantais’s (2010) review of SWPBS found that schools are able to implement uni- versal behavioral support with fidelity, students and teachers reported that their schools were safer after implementation, and students’ problem behaviors, including ODRs, decreased.

targeted Behavioral Interventions

Approximately 10% to 15% of students will need some additional support to meet the behavioral expectations of school personnel (Ihlo & Nantais, 2010). These students may be identified through one of the short screeners described earlier in the chapter if universal screening is in place. Some common targeted interventions include behavior contracting, daily behavior report cards, individualized progress monitoring, and social skills groups.

BEhavIor contract A behavior contract is a specific form of a contingency management system, an agreement between a teacher or parent and a student that is based on the if-then proposition previously mentioned. In a simple contract, the consultee may say to a student, “If you finish your work, then you can go outside.” If the student agrees to this statement, then contract exists. If the student does not agree, no contract has been made because contracting implies mutual agree- ment. Teachers base most behavior management on a rather informal style of contracting. They often make if-then statements, though they do not always ask for, or expect, any verbal agreement from the students. Because uncooperative students usually do not follow implicit contracts, they may need more explicit contracts in writing. Consultants are often asked to help consultees write explicit contracts until the consultees develop some experience with them. This is an appropriate task for a school-based consultant and one she should welcome, particularly with an inexperienced teacher or a parent. An example contract can be found in Figure 6.3.

Activity 6.20

How might you increase the commitment of the teacher and the student for maintaining a contract-based intervention? How long should

a contract last if it is working? How long should it last if it is not working?

FIgurE 6.3 Behavior contract between a student and a teacher

Ms. Portelo (teacher) agrees to give Sylvia (student) one bonus point each time Ms. Portelo hears Sylvia make a positive comment to another student. Sylvia can earn up to four bonus points per day for this behavior. Bonus points will be applied to Sylvia’s grade to make up for missing homework. Good luck, Sylvia!

This contract begins on December 11, at 9:00 a.m.

This contract will be reviewed on December 20 at 2:30 p.m.

Signed:

MS. PORTELO _______________

SYLVIA _______________

SYLVIA’S MOM _______________

DATE _______________

Here are some general guidelines for establishing formal (written, explicit) contracts:

1. Keep the contract simple. It should be no more complicated or cumbersome than neces- sary. Most abandoned contracts met that fate because they took up too much time or required too much effort for the consultee.

166 Chapter 6 • Consulting About Students with Social, Emotional, and/or Behavioral Problems

2. Tasks and rewards need to be very specific. Spell out exactly what the student is to do, or stop doing, and exactly what the consequences will be.

3. Specify time constraints. For example, when will the contract go into effect? How long will it last? When must an assignment be completed?

4. Avoid tasks that are too difficult for the student. At first, it is a good idea to make the con- tract easy for the student to fulfill. In that way, the student will become attracted to the idea of contracting. Then you can escalate the expectations.

5. Formal contracts are signed by both parties and are often witnessed by another teacher, the consultant, the parent, or the principal.

6. Be prepared to have some students fail to carry out the contract. Discuss the reasons for failure with the student and then try again.

7. Whenever feasible, tie the contingencies to both school and home consequences. Behavioral improvement at school is often contingent on home support. (Christenson & Sheridan, 2001)

ProgrESS monItorIng/SElF-monItorIng Collecting repeated measures of a behavior and graphing these data relative to a specific goal can provide students with immediate feedback and a sense of accomplishment as they approach the goal. Students can even be taught to monitor their own behavior, which also serves as an intervention because students learn to be responsible for their own behavior rather than rely on a teacher or parent to acknowledge when the behavior occurs (Shapiro, 2010). Students should be provided direct instruction on the target behavior and then initially reinforced for accuracy (rather than for a change in behavior) until they can assess the pres- ence or absence of the behavior reliably. Once they are accurate, improvement of the behav- ior is reinforced.

daIly BEhavIor rEPort cardS A daily behavior report card (DBRC) is a relatively easy intervention to implement and has substantial empirical support (Vujnovic, Fabiano, Pariseau, & Naylor, 2013). The DBRC con- sists of (a) one or more operationalized behaviors (e.g., follow directions within 3 seconds) that are meaningful to the student, (b) specific behavioral goal or goals (e.g., follow directions within 3 second for 4 out of 5 requests), and (c) a reward (e.g., screen time or dessert after din- ner) delivered by a parent contingent on the student achieving her goals. The behaviors rated on the DBRC need to be defined very carefully by a consultant who knows how to create behavio- ral, observable, and measurable descriptors (Malecki & Demaray, 2007). DBRCs are flexible (i.e., they can target one or more skill over any specified period of time), are simple to adminis- ter, and can provide progress monitoring data (Ysseldyke, Kekway, & Klingbeil, 2012). For students with disabilities such as ED and ADHD, the DBRC can be based on their IEP goals and objectives.

Check-in/check-out (CICO) is one way to manage implementation of a DBRC interven- tion in which the student checks in with a designated adult at the beginning of the day to pick up his daily behavior report card (DBRC). The student then presents the report card to each of his teachers at the end of each period. The teacher provides feedback on his behaviors by selecting from a 3-point rating scale, and the student checks out with the designated adult by reviewing the report card at the end of the day and taking it home to his parents. The DBRC increases home– school collaboration if the report card is passed back and forth between the parents and teacher successfully. Online communication, such as creating a quick survey in Survey Monkey or Google Docs, may be used for the daily reporting if the student has difficulty keeping track of a paper version of the report card. For a quick description of DBRC, go to https://www.youtube. com/watch?v=ucKP7DdsBfw.

BEhavIor-SPEcIFIc PraISE Using praise as an intervention has many advantages, including being generally accepted by teachers, students, and parents, and requiring little to no extra materials or personnel to deliver (Coffee & Kratochwill, 2013). Behavior-specific praise (BSP) is a positive behavior support tech- nique that involves delivering a predetermined number of specific praises to the target student for

Chapter 6 • Consulting About Students with Social, Emotional, and/or Behavioral Problems 167

appropriate behaviors (Dart et al., 2012). For example, a teacher may set a goal of delivering 10 praise statements in a 45-minute period (or about one every 5 minutes) to a student with emo- tional or behavioral problems. Before attempting a praise intervention, determine whether the student is motivated by teacher praise and whether the student prefers to receive the praise pri- vately or publicly. Some suggestions on delivering praise in a manner most likely to improve student behavior include the following:

• Provide the praise soon after a positive behavior has occurred. If you delay, you may inad- vertently reinforce a negative behavior.

• Empty praise should be avoided. Praise should be contingent on positive behaviors occurring. • Offer praise to an individual rather than a group. Use the student’s name. • Make eye contact with the student. • Convey a positive affect (smile). • Use a credible tone (you don’t want to be overly sweet). • Identify the behavior worthy of praise. • Vary the praise word (good gets stale after too many uses; try fantastic or stellar) • Compliment students’ efforts, persistence, and skills to reinforce their tendency to attribute

success to their own effort and abilities.

Delivering praise to students to reinforce desired behaviors seems like a pretty easy inter- vention to implement; however, many teachers are more used to attending to disruptive behaviors and fail to notice and reinforce the positive behaviors frequently enough, even with ongoing consultation support (Coffee & Kratochwill, 2013). If a praise intervention is not being imple- mented by the teacher, the consultant may want to try having the students’ peers deliver the praise. For example, every time a peer praises the target student’s effort, behavior, work, or accomplishment, the teacher drops a marble into a jar. When the jar is full, the entire class enjoys a pizza party. The peers, motivated by the pizza party, are now attending more to the target stu- dent’s prosocial behaviors and the target student is getting much-sought-after peer attention. In addition, the peers’ perception of the target student as a troublemaker may change as they notice more and more positive behaviors. The teacher may want to model providing peer praise so it is delivered in a constructive, nondisruptive manner.

Activity 6.21

Write a praise statement that a teacher could deliver on observing Sally (who tends to be

off-task a lot) completing a third math problem without stopping.

rESPonSE coSt Some students with problem behaviors can actually become distracted by token economies that deliver points or tokens for positive behaviors. A response cost intervention provides the student with a specified number of chances to slip up before the consequence is applied. For example, a student has a monitoring form that contains a list of expected behaviors and five empty boxes. The teacher checks a box anytime the student engages in a disruptive behavior that is incompat- ible with the target behaviors. If the student has at least one empty box at the end of a 30-minute interval, he or she earns a reward (Dart et al., 2012). An example of response cost is provided in the case study of “Don” in Chapter 10.

SocIal SkIllS traInIng Since the early 1980s, researchers have become increasingly aware that deficits in social skills are correlated with behavior problems. Indeed, many behavior problems may be seen as sympto- matic of a lack of social skills or a failure to apply them. Gresham (2002) noted that two of the five criteria specified in IDEA for the category of emotional disturbance are (a) an inability to build or maintain satisfactory interpersonal relationships with peers and teachers, and (b) inap- propriate types of behavior or feelings under normal circumstances. Both of these criteria speak directly to possible problems with social skills acquisition or performance. An acquisition deficit

168 Chapter 6 • Consulting About Students with Social, Emotional, and/or Behavioral Problems

is the absence of, or failure to learn, particular social skills, while a performance deficit is the failure to perform these skills at the right time and to an appropriate degree (Gresham, 2002). Social skills training attempts both to teach the necessary skills to eliminate any acquisition or skill deficits and to assist the student in identifying the correct context for applying the skills. Social skills training typically involves small-group direct instruction, modeling, and guided practice of specific skills, such as:

1. Being polite or “teacher pleaser” behaviors (such as keeping your eyes on the person who is talking, taking turns, and saying “Thank you”).

2. Advanced social skills (such as joining in constructively and apologizing). 3. Skills for dealing with feelings (such as expressing one’s feelings and understanding the

feelings of others; recognizing when one is becoming upset). 4. Skills that reduce or eliminate problem behaviors such as skills for dealing with stress

(deep breathing, mental imaging) and anger (such as negotiating and using self-control). 5. Planning skills (such as gathering information and preparing for upcoming events or

due dates).

One of the limitations of social skills training is that the skills students learn in the group may not be generalized to other settings. Gresham (2002) suggests incorporating strategies to promote generalization from the outset of any social skills training program. Students with behavior problems are given a sequence of social skills training sessions but often do not gener- alize these skills to the playground or even to the classroom because the strength of the compet- ing stimuli in those settings overwhelms the situation-specific stimuli presented in the training sessions.

Intensive Behavior Interventions

Intensive behavior interventions usually consist of providing increased structure by professionals with specialized training. Because of the resources required to provide such a program, only students with the most severe behavior problems participate, resulting in behavioral grouping, usually in a self-contained classroom. Behavioral grouping has a number of limitations, includ- ing a lack of positive role models and an increased chance of students’ antisocial behaviors being reinforced, rather than ignored, by the other students. Intensive interventions should be individu- alized and based on an FBA conducted to identify the specific conditions that trigger and sustain the negative behaviors. According to Watson and Steege (2003), the resulting BIP should have the following components:

• Information to identify the student • Goals of the plan • Identification and description of interfering behaviors • Hypothesized function of interfering behaviors • Identification and description of intervention components • Antecedent modification • Replacement behavior • Procedures for teaching replacement behaviors • Procedures for reinforcing replacement behaviors • Reactive procedures (if applicable) • Description of data-recording procedures

The district or local education agency (LEA) often has a preformatted form for the BIP. The BIP should be developed by the IEP team, and the roles and responsibilities of all the IEP members should be clearly specified on the BIP. The BIP should be reviewed fre- quently by the team or a consultant who examines whether (1) the interventions detailed on the BIP are actually in place (i.e., treatment fidelity) and (2) the interventions are working or whether there might be a more efficient or effective way to support the student’s positive behaviors. As noted above, the quality of the FBA and BIP, and their implementation has major implications for making manifestation determinations following a school discipline violation.

Chapter 6 • Consulting About Students with Social, Emotional, and/or Behavioral Problems 169

Activity 6.22

Watch the 8-minute video of a principal attempting to problem-solve a situation with a student and a teacher at https://www. youtube.com/watch?v=X9_WwuGF4dM. Why does the student explode? What skills may the student lack? What could the teacher

have done differently? What consultation skills did the principal employ and fail to employ? What appears to be some of the ecological stressors on the student? What concepts dis- cussed in this and preceding chapters can you identify in this video clip?

Summary

This chapter presents information about students with social, emotional, and behavioral problems and a multi-tiered method (for example, SWPBS) for addressing their needs. Various assessments were reviewed, including interviews, behavior checklists, and direct observations. The problem-solving pro- cess for identifying and analyzing the behavior were reviewed, as well as legal mandates to conduct FBAs, develop BIPs, and

make manifestation determination decisions. The next chap- ter covers academic problems, including how to address aca- demic difficulties within an MTSS model. However, academic and behavioral problems often coexist. Ideally, consultants can provide direct and indirect services within an RtI/PBS service delivery model.

References

Alberto, P. A., & Troutman, A. C. (2013). Applied behavioral anal- ysis for teachers. Hoboken, NJ: Pearson.

American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statis- tical manual of mental disorders (5th ed.). Washington, DC: Author.

Appleton, J. J., Christenson, S. L., & Furlong, M. J. (2008). Student engagement with school: Critical conceptual and methodologi- cal issues of the construct. Psychology in the Schools, 45(5), 369–386.

Briesch, A. M., Chafouleas, S. M., & Riley-Tillman, T. C. (2010). Generalizability and dependability of behavior assessment methods to estimate academic engagement: A comparison of systematic direct observation and direct behavior rating. School Psychology Review, 39(3), 408–421.

Brock, S., E., & Hart, S.R., (2013a). Controversy surrounds release of DSM-5. Communique, 42(1), 1, 30, 31.

Brock, S. E., & Hart, S. R. (2013b). Changes to ASD diagnosis. Communique, 42(2), 1, 34, 35.

Center for Mental Health in Schools. (2008). Engaging and re- engaging students in learning at school. Los Angeles, CA: Author.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2012). Prevalence of autism spectrum disorders–autism and developmental disabili- ties monitoring network, United States, 2008. Morbidity and Mortal Weekly Report, 61(3), 1–19.

Christenson, S., & Sheridan, S. (2001). Schools and families: Creating essential connections for learning. New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Coffee, G., & Kratochwill, T. R. (2013). Examining teacher use of praise taught during behavioral consultation: Implementation and generalization considerations. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 23, 1–35.

Compas, B. E., Champion, J. E., & Forehand, R. (2010). Coping and parenting: Mediators of 12-month outcomes of a family group cognitive behavioral preventive intervention with fami- lies of depressed parents. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 78(5), 623–634.

Conderman, G., & Katsiyannis, A. (1995). Section 504 accommo- dation plans. Intervention in School and Clinic, 31(1), 42–45.

Dart, E. H., Cook, C. R., Collins, T. A., Gresham, F. M., & Chenier, J. S. (2012). Test driving interventions to increase treatment integrity and student outcomes. School Psychology Review, 41, 467–481.

Deitz, S. (1982). Defining applied behavioral analysis: An histori- cal analogy. Behavior Analyst, 5(1), 53–64.

DeVoe, J., Peter, K., Kaufman, P., Ruddy, S., Miller, A., Planty, M., et al. (2002). Indicators of school crime and safety. U.S. Departments of Education and Justice. National Center for Educational Statistics. NCES 2003-009/NCJ 196753. Washington, DC.

Dykeman, B. F. (2009). Response to intervention: The functional assessment of children returning to school with traumatic brain injury. Education, 130(2), 295–300.

Eckert, T. L., Martens, B. K., & DiGennaro, F. D. (2005). Describing antecedent-behavior-consequence relations using conditional probabilities and the general operant contingency space: A preliminary investigation. School Psychology Review, 34(4), 520–528.

Freeney-Kettler, K. A., Kratochwill, T. R., Kaiser, A. P., Hemmeter, M., & Kettler, R. J. (2010). Screening young children’s risk for men- tal health problems: A review of four measures. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 35(4), 218–230.

Glasser, W. (1992). The quality school: Managing students without coercion (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Harper & Row.

170 Chapter 6 • Consulting About Students with Social, Emotional, and/or Behavioral Problems

Graber, J. A., Nichols, T., Lynne, S. D., Brooks-Gunn, J., & Botvin, G. J. (2006). A longitudinal examination of family, friend, and media influences on competent versus problem behaviors among urban minority youth. Applied Developmental Science, 10, 75–85.

Graham, S. (2010). What educators need to know about bullying behaviors. Phi Delta Kappan, 92(1), 66–69.

Gresham, F. M. (2002). Best practices in social skills training. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school psychol- ogy IV (pp. 1029–1040). Bethesda, MD: NASP.

Gresham, F. M., Beebe-Frankenberger, M. E., & MacMillan, D. L. (1999). A selective review of treatments for children with autism: Description and methodological considerations. School Psychology Review, 28(4), 559–575.

Gresham, F. M., Cook, C. C., Collins, T., Cart, E., Rasethshwane, K., Truelson, E., et al. (2010). Developing a change-sensitive brief behavior rating scale as a progress monitoring tool for social behavior: An example using the Social Skills Rating System– Teacher Form. School Psychology Review, 39(3), 364–378.

Gutkin, T. B., (2012). Ecological psychology: Replacing the medical model paradigm for school-based psychological and psychoeducational services. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 22, 1–20.

Hart, B., & Risley, T. R. (1995). Meaningful differences in the eve- ryday experience of young American children. Baltimore, MD: Brookes.

Herman, K. C., Riley-Tillman, T. C., & Reinke, W. M. (2012). The role of assessment in a prevention science framework. School Psychology Review, 41, 306–314.

Hintze, J. M. (2005). Psychometrics of direct observation. School Psychology Review, 34(4), 507–519.

Hintze, J. M., Stoner, G., & Bull, M. H. (2000). Analogue assess- ment: Research and practice in evaluating emotional and behav- ioral problems. In E. S. Shapiro, & T. R. Kratochwil (Eds.), Behavioral Assessment in the Schools: Theory, Research, and Clinical Foundations (2nd ed., pp. 104–138). New York, NY: Guilford.

Hofferth, S. L. (2010). Home media and children’s achievement and behavior. Child Development, 81(5), 1598–1619.

Hook, J. C., Lawson, G. M. L., & Farah, M. J. (2013). Socioeconomic status and the development of executive function. Encyclopedia on Early Childhood Development. Retrieved June 3, 2014, from http://www.child-encyclopedia.com/documents/Hook-Lawson- FarahANGxp1.pdf

Hunt, N., & Marshall, K. (1999). Exceptional children and youth. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.

Ihlo, T., & Nantais, M. (2010). Evidence-based interventions within a multi-tier framework for positive behavioral supports. In T. Glover & S. Vaughn (Eds.), The promise of response to inter- vention: Evaluating current science and practice (pp. 239–299). New York, NY: Guilford.

Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act, Public Law 108–446 (2004).

Johns, S. K., Patrick, J. A., & Rutherford, K. J. (2008). Best prac- tices in district-wide positive behavior support implementation. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best Practices in School Psychology V (Volume 3). Bethesda, MD: NASP.

Kaminski, J. W., Valle, L. A., Filene, J. G., & Boyle, C. L. (2008). A meta-analytic review of components associated with parent

training program effectiveness. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 36, 567–589.

Kamphaus, R. W., DiStefano, C., Dowdy, E., Eklund, K., & Dunn. A. R. (2010). Determining the presence of a problem: Comparing two approaches for detecting youth behavioral risk. School Psychology Review, 39(3), 395–407.

Kauffman, J. M. (2000). Characteristics of emotional and behav- ioral disorders of children and youth (7th ed.). Hoboken NJ: Merrill/Pearson.

Kazdin, A. (Ed.). (1985). Treatment of antisocial behavior in chil- dren and adolescents. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.

Koegel, R. L., & Koegel, L. K. (2006). Pivotal response treatments for autism: Communication, social & academic development. Baltimore, MD: Brookes.

Lehman, C., & Irvin, L. (1996). Support for families with children who have emotional or behavioral disorders. Education and Treatment of Children, 19(3), 335–353.

Lovaas, O. I. (1987). Behavioral treatment and normal educational and intellectual functioning in young autistic children. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 55, 3–9.

Malecki, C. K., & Demaray, M. K. (2007). Social behavior assess- ment and response to intervention. In S. R. Jimerson, M. K. Burns, & A. M. VanDerHeyden (Eds.), Handbook of response to intervention: The science and practice of assessment and intervention. New York, NY: Springer.

Margo, P. (2012). Equal measure: Shielding students and enabling access. T.H.E. Journal, 39, 36–38.

Martens, B. K., & DiGennaro, F. D. (2009). Behavioral consulta- tion. In W. P. Erchul & S. M. Sheridan (Eds.), Handbook of research in school consultation. New York, NY: Routledge.

Merrell, K. W. (2010). Better methods, better solutions: Developments in school-based behavioral assessment. School Psychology Review, 39(3), 422–426.

Merritt, E. G., Wanless, S. B., Rimm-Kaufman, S. E., Cameron, C., & Peugh, J. L. (2012). The contribution of teachers’ emotional support to children’s social behaviors and self-regulatory skills in first grade. School Psychology Review, 41, 142–159.

Michelson, D., Davenport, C., Dretzke ,J., Barlow, J., & Day, C. (2013). Do evidence-based interventions work when tested in the ‘real world’? A systematic review and meta-analysis of parent management training for the treatment of child disruptive behav- ior. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, 16, 18–34.

Mikami, A. Y., Gregory, A., & Allen, J. P. (2011). Effects of a teacher professional development intervention on peer relation- ships in secondary classrooms. School Psychology Review, 40, 367–385.

Milner, R. H., & Tenore, B. F. (2010). Classroom management in diverse classrooms. Urban Education, 45(5), 560–603.

Olweus, D., & Limber, S. (1999). Bullying prevention program. In S. Elliott (Ed.), Blueprints for violence prevention. Boulder, CO: Institute of Behavioral Science, Regents of the University of Colorado.

O’Neill, R., Albin, R., Storey, K., Horner, R., & Sprague, J. (2015). Functional assessment and program development for problem behavior: A practical handbook. (3rd ed.) Independence, KY: Cengage Learning.

Prasse, D., & Schrag, J. (1999). Providing noncategorical, func- tional, classroom-based supports for students with disabilities: Legal parameters. In D. Reschly, W. Tilly, & J. Grimes (Eds.),

Chapter 6 • Consulting About Students with Social, Emotional, and/or Behavioral Problems 171

Special education in transition (pp. 259–284). Longmont, CD: Sopris West.

Reback, R. (2010). Schools’ mental health services and young children’s emotions, behavior, and learning. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 29(4), 698–725.

Reynolds, C. R., & Kamphaus, R. W. (1990). Handbook of psy- chological and educational assessment of children: Personality, behavior, and context. New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Reynolds, C. R., & Kamphaus, R. W. (2004). Behavior assessment system for children–2 (BASC-2). Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service.

Rhode, G., Jenson, W. R., & Reavis, H. (2010). The tough kid book: Practical strategies in classroom management (2nd ed). Eugene, OR: Pacific Northwest Publishing.

Rudasill, K. M., Reio, T. G., Stipanovic, N., & Taylor, J. E. (2010). A longitudinal study of student-teacher relationship quality, difficult temperament, and risky behavior from child- hood to early adolescence. Journal of School Psychology, 48, 389–412.

Sabol, T. J., & Pianta, R. C. (2012). Recent trends in research on teacher-child relationships. Attachment and Human Development, 14, 213–231.

Schopler, E., Van Bourgondien, M. E., Wellman, G. J., & Love, S. R. (2009). Childhood Autism Rating Scale (2nd ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Western Psychological Services.

Schutz, L. E., Rivers, K. O., McNamara, E., Schutz, J. A., & Lobato, E. J. (2010). Traumatic brain injury in K–12 students: Where have all the children gone? International Journal of Special Education 25(2), 55–71.

Shapiro, E. (2010). Academic skills problems: Direct assessment and intervention (4th ed.). New York, NY: Guilford.

Shapiro, E., & Kratochwill, T. (Eds.). (2000). Conducting school- based assessments of child and adolescent behavior. New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Shernoff, E. S., Mariñez-Lora, A. M., Frazier, S. L., Jakobsons, L. J., Atkins, M. S., & Bonner, D. (2011). Teachers supporting teachers in urban schools: What iterative research designs can teach us. School Psychology Review, 40, 465–485.

Sinclair, M., Christenson, S., & Thurlow, M. (2005). Promoting school completion of urban secondary youth with emo- tional and behavioral disabilities. Exceptional Children, 74, 465–482.

Skiba, R. J., Michael, R. S., Nardo, A. C., & Peterson, R. L. (2002). The color of discipline: Sources of racial and gender dispro- portionality in school punishment. The Urban Review, 34(4), 317–342.

Skinner, C. H., Rhymer, K. N., & McDaniel, E. C. (2000). Naturalistic direct observation in educational settings. In E. S. Shapiro & T. R. Kratochwill (Eds.), Conducting school-based assessment of child and adolescent behavior. New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Steege, M. W., & Watson, T. S. (2008). Best practices in func- tional behavior assessment. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology V (Volume 2). Bethesda, MD: NASP.

Strain, P. S., & Hoyson, M. (2000). The need for longitudinal, intensive social skill intervention: LEAP follow-up outcomes for children with autism. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 20, 116–122.

Suldo, S. M., Friedrich, A., & Michalowski, J. (2010). Personal and systems-level factors that limit and facilitate school psy- chologists’ involvement in school-based mental health services. Psychology in the Schools, 47(4), 354–373.

Sullivan, A. L. (2013). School-based autism identification: Prevalence, racial disparities, and systemic correlates. School Psychology Review, 42, 298–316.

University of North Carolina. (2010). TEACCH autism program. Retrieved June 10, 2014, from http://www.teacch.com

U.S. Department of Education. (2009). Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services, Office of Special Education Programs. 28th Annual Report to Congress on the Implementation of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, 2006, vol. 1, Washington, DC.

U.S. Department of Education. (2010). WWC Intervention Report. Lovaas Model of Applied Behavior Analysis. Early Childhood Interventions for Children with Disabilities. Retrieved from http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/pdf/wwc_lovaas_082410.pdf

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (1999). Mental Health: A Report of the Surgeon General. Rockville, MD: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, Center for Mental Health Services, National Institutes of Health, National Institute of Mental Health.

U.S. Public Health Service, (2000). Report of the Surgeon General’s Conference on Children’s Mental Health: A National Action Agenda. Washington, DC: Department of Health and Human Services.

Volpe, R. J., & Briesch, A. M. (2012). Generalizability and dependability of single-item and multiple-item direct behaviour rating scales for engagement and disruptive behavior. School Psychology Review, 41, 246–261.

Volpe, R. J., & Gadow, K. D. (2010). Creating abbreviated rating scales to monitor classroom inattention-overactivity, aggres- sion, and peer conflict: Reliability, validity, and treatment sensi- tivity. School Psychology review 39(3), 350–363.

Vujnovic, R., Fabiano, G. A., Pariseau, M. E., & Naylor, J. (2013). Parameters of adherence to a yearlong daily report card intervention for students with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 23, 140–163. doi: 10.1080/10474412.2013.785182

Walker, H. M., & Shinn, M. R. (2002). Structuring school-based interventions to achieve integrated primary, secondary, and tertiary prevention goals for safe and effective schools. In M. R. Shinn, H. M. Walker, & G. Stoner (Eds.), Interventions for academic and behavior problems II: Prevention and reme- dial approaches (pp. 681–701). Bethesda, MD: NASP.

Watson, T., & Steege, M. (2003). Conducting school-based functional behavioral assessments. New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Webster-Stratton, C., Reinke, W. H., Herman, K. C., Newcomer, L.A. (2011). The incredible years teacher classroom manage- ment training: The methods and principles that support fidelity of training delivery. School Psychology Review, 40, 509–529.

Windle, M., Brener, N., Cuccaro, P, Dittus, P., Kamouse, D. E., Murray, N., Wallander, J., & Schuster, M. A. (2010). Parenting predictors of early-adolescent’s health behaviors: Simultaneous group comparisons across sex and ethnic groups. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 39, 594–606.

172 Chapter 6 • Consulting About Students with Social, Emotional, and/or Behavioral Problems

Ysseldyke, J., Kekway, A. J., & Klingbeil, D. A (2012). Assessment of ecological factors as an integral part of academic and mental health consultation. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 22, 21–43.

Ysseldyke, J., & Christenson, S. (2002). Functional assessment of academic behavior. Longmont, CO: Sopris West.

Ysseldyke, J., & Marston, D. (1999). Origins of categorical special education services in schools and a rationale for changing them.

In D. Reschly, W. Tilly, & J. Grimes (Eds.), Special education in transition. Longmont, CO: Sopris West.

Zirkel, P.A., (2011). Autism litigation under the IDEA: A new meaning of disproportionality? Journal of Special Education Leadership, 24(2), 92–103.

Zirkel, P. A. (2013). Is it time for elevating the standard for FAPE under IDEA? Exceptional Children,79, 497–508.

Consulting About Students with Academic Skill Problems

Chapter 7

It is December, and Ms. Kim, the third-grade teacher, is very concerned about the lack of aca- demic success of four of her students, three boys and a girl. What factors may be causing these four students difficulty in keeping up with their peers and grade-level standards?

Ms. Lopez, the principal at Crossroads Middle School, asks you to talk with her about what she calls the generalized underachievement of many students in her school, particularly culturally and linguistically diverse students. She wants to know what can be done to remedy this situation. How might you, as a school-based consultant, assist Ms. Lopez?

Learning Outcomes

7.1 Describe effective teaching practices.

7.2 Contrast a skill deficit (can’t do) with a motivation deficit (won’t do).

7.3 Describe effective instruction for English language learners.

7.4 Discuss the role of the school consultant in understanding learning problems and developing appropriate interventions.

7.5 Summarize the steps in the review, interview, observe, test (RIOT) process, noting their connection to data-based consultation.

7.6 Compare a cognitive-processing deficit approach to a skill-deficit approach to conceptualizing learning disabilities.

IntroductIon

The term academic skill problem is used here to refer to a mismatch between a teacher’s expectation and the developing capabilities of the student. It is usually the teacher (but sometimes the parent) who determines whether a skill deficit exists. The mismatch may be between the student’s rate of learning, his skill attainment, or the amount and quality of work he produces and the teacher’s expectations for how much work, how well the work is completed, and how much support the student should receive. Framed in this way, an academic learning problem can be addressed in three ways: (a) increase the student’s skill; (b) decrease or modify the teacher’s expectations; and/or (c) provide instructional support, such as scaffolding assignments or differentiated instruction, to bridge the gap between expectation and performance. Ideally, an academic intervention is a combination of these three strategies.

One popular response to academic difficulties that does not incorporate these essential intervention components is grade retention. Research on grade retention indicates that it does not work; any short-term gains are lost by adolescence and teens who are more than a year older than their peers display more aggression (Jimerson & Ferguson, 2007). Martin (2009) found students who were older than their cohort due to either delayed entry (i.e., red shirting)

173

174 Chapter 7 • Consulting About Students with Academic Skill Problems

or retention to have poorer academic performance, academic motivation, and homework com- pletion compared to same-age or younger students. Students who are retained can feel a terri- ble sense of failure. They may feel embarrassed because their friends are promoted and they are not. Research clearly demonstrates that remediation or intervention and promotion are much more effective responses to academic delays than retention (Meisels & Liaw, 1993), so why do school personnel continue to retain students? One reason may be that educators are not familiar with the research and they see the short-term success of retention in their practice. Another reason is that retention (sometimes referred to as giving the gift of time) reduces the pressure on the teacher to differentiate instruction or provide supplemental instruction to accel- erate student learning.

The second author (Powers) participated in a meeting for a kindergartener who was strug- gling with early literacy skills. The teacher recommended retention, but the parents adamantly refused. The teacher’s response was to sigh and say: “Okay, then I’m going to do everything I can to get him to grade level.” The student began to participate in the small group the teacher ran after school (previously he was excluded because his teacher thought he was going to get caught up by repeating kindergarten); his parents increased their work with him on early literacy skills at home. By the end of the school year, he met grade-level standards. The power of targeted, evidence-based interventions to improve students’ academic skills is well documented but not well implemented. The challenge to school-based consultants is to bridge the divide between research and practice.

Students’ level of need is based on failure to achieve some national or state set of content and performance standards. The adoption and implementation of Common Core Standards (CCS) in almost every state has raised the bar in terms of expected performance. Students as young as kindergarten age now need to explain their math work and refer to a primary text when summarizing information. As students learn these new skills and teachers learn how to teach these new skills, school-based consultants will be very much in demand. School-based consult- ants with a good foundation in effective teaching and evidence-based intervention ideas can assist consultees in improving students’ academic skills.

School-based consultants cannot solve every problem at once. Often there is more demand than can be addressed through individual problem-solving consultations. A multi- tiered system of support (MTSS) is the best way to ensure that students with the greatest needs receive the strongest interventions. It is also a good system for improving core instruc- tion through data-based decision making and professional development. For example, 318 Reading First schools in Florida received professional development and support to imple- ment response-to-intervention (RtI)/MTSS practices, for example, (a) high-quality universal instruction, including methods for providing differentiated instruction; (b) benchmarking four times a year with Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS); and (c) small-group interventions for struggling readers provided by reading specialists and paraprofessionals based on progress-monitoring data (Torgesen, 2007). The results were startling: Within 2 years, the number of children referred to special education was cut in half, and there was a 30% decrease in the number of students scoring at or below the 10th percentile on the state test. Clearly, MTSS was more effective than individual consultants addressing the literacy needs of students one at a time. Burns, Riley-Tillman, and VanDerHeyden (2012) suggest that consultants should approach low academic skills as a classwide problem if the median score on the fall or winter benchmark for the class is in the frustration range, which would indicate that over half the students in the class find grade- level activities too difficult to maximize learning. The consultant will need to assist the teacher in identifying ways to increase these students’ rate of learning through small-group instruction or by making better use of whole-group instruction. The consultant can also help the teacher scaffold assignments so they are not too frustrating for the students. If 50% or more of the classes in a grade level meet this classwide problem criteria, then the consultant should consider approaching it as a gradewide problem (Burns et al., 2012). Chapter 9 contains good information on approaching problems from a systems change perspective, including professional learning communities and coaching models. In this chapter, we will  focus on providing good universal instruction (Tier 1) to culturally and linguistically diverse students, and targeted (Tier 2) and intensive (Tier 3) interventions for students with greater needs.

Chapter 7 • Consulting About Students with Academic Skill Problems 175

unIversal effectIve InstructIon (tIer 1)

Universal screenings or benchmarking of critical skills (e.g., reading fluency, computation fluency, reading comprehension, etc.) is the key to identifying whether the core curriculum is being delivered effectively to all students, including culturally and linguistically diverse students. A number of screening programs also provide progress-monitoring probes for students who fail to meet the benchmark and are in need of more close monitoring. DIBELS Next, which is available online at no cost, is a very popular system. AIMSweb includes reading and math probes. The Formative Assessment System for Teachers (FAST) provides universal screenings in reading, math, and behavior, and much of the assessment is computer-enabled, which will save time. All three systems have some measures in Spanish and, for a fee, school personnel can enter their students’ data into a database that produces data displays designed to guide instruction. To see a tutorial on entering and displaying AIMSweb data, go to https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wWlfk8fI4r0. Most important, all three systems are direct assessments of important academic skills with very good psycho- metric properties (i.e., reliability and validity)

Activity 7.1

Discuss why it is important to have screeners and progress-monitoring instruments that have good psychometric properties. What are the pros and cons of using teacher- or district-developed screeners? Are all com- mercially developed screeners equal? Visit

the Screening Chart on the Center for Response to Intervention Web site. The Fountas and Pinnell leveled books used by some districts to benchmark and progress- monitor their students is not on the chart. Why might that be?

If the universal screening indicates that many students are failing to achieve the bench- mark, then the school-based consultant should initiate data-discussions in which teachers, administrators, and related staff members examine screening data, establish goals for improve- ment, and discuss methods for achieving those goals.

The school-based consultant should follow the data discussions with observations in the class- room. The key detail to look for in a classroom observation is whether students are academically engaged. Academic engagement or academic learning time (ALT) is a strong predictor of academic success, yet it occurs much less than one may think (Shapiro, 2011). ALT is defined as the amount of time a student is actively engaged in curricular content with a success rate of 80% or higher.

Qualities of effective Instruction

Numerous models of effective instruction are available, and many of the concepts overlap, sug- gesting that some universal conditions encourage learning. Two such models are summarized in this chapter. The first that we discuss is the Functional Assessment of Academic Behavior (FAAB; Ysseldyke & Christenson, 2002), which includes a series of interviews and observations that the consultant can use to gather information on 11 characteristics of effective instruction:

1. Instructional match—Based on Vygotsky’s (1978) concept of zone of proximal development, material is matched to a student’s skills if 85% to 90% of the material is known

Activity 7.2

The principal in this video clip asserts, “Data team meetings are the heart of RtI in our school.” What does she mean? How does this data team meeting improve collaboration, instruction, and student outcomes?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v =04-fDELnReE

176 Chapter 7 • Consulting About Students with Academic Skill Problems

to him or her. Gravois and Gickling (2008) described this as “a comfort zone created when the student has sufficient prior knowledge and skill to successfully interact with the task and still learn new information” (p. 888). Burns and colleagues (2012) suggest that students should be able to complete 90% to 93% of a task correctly before they are asked to practice the task independently. If the student has mastered the task (100% accuracy), he or she is learning very little from the task. If the task is too difficult, the student will become frustrated and possibly learn erroneous strategies or answers that will need to be unlearned before the correct responses are learned.

2. Instructional expectations—High and clear expectations for each assignment, activity, and lesson facilitate students’ academic responding. In some classrooms, students may contribute to developing rubrics for projects, which can help them understand the expectations.

3. Classroom environment—A positive class climate encourages students to take aca- demic risks, which increases ALT. Dynarski and colleagues (2008) described personalized learn- ing environments as creating “a sense of belonging and foster[ing] a school climate where students and teachers get to know one another and can provide academic, social and behavioral encouragement” (p. 30). More instructional time and ALT occur in classrooms with smoother transitions and fewer disruptions than in disorderly classrooms.

4. Instructional presentation—Anita Archer and Charles Hughes (2010) advise teachers to deliver reading instruction by keeping a perky pace, eliciting many responses, monitoring students’ progress, providing feedback, modeling good reading, and maintaining students’ engagement by having them interact with the material. These instructional delivery characteris- tics describe good instruction in any content area, not just reading.

5. Cognitive emphasis—Instruction that prompts students to think about their thinking (metacognitive skills) and explain their answers promotes higher-ordered thinking skills as well as good study strategies. Remediation syndrome—a term used to describe mundane work- sheets, flashcards, and other types of “drill and kill” exercises too commonly delivered to low- performing students (particularly students in poverty)—is the opposite of lessons with a cognitive emphasis.

6. Relevant practice—The amount of practice, or learning trials, needed to master a skill varies by student and skill. In fact, a learning disability may be conceptualized in terms of needing more opportunities to practice a skill to mastery than is typical. Repeated practice is sometimes equated with the “drill and kill” activities described above. However, Bursuck and Damer (2010) assert that when the practice is “lively and geared to student needs on skills leading to important outcomes, practice will thrill, not kill” (p. 106). Various motivational strategies, such as charting students’ progress and reinforcing correct answers, can make repeated practice more engaging.

7. Check for student understanding—Students who have multiple strategies for over- coming a learning obstacle will have more ALT than those who have few or none. Students can be taught directly how to read through a word they don’t recognize in a sentence and then reread the sentence to try to figure out the meaning from the context. Students can also be taught to self-correct and to utilize various ways of receiving assistance. ALT is significantly diminished if a student raises her hand and stops working the second she gets to a problem, word, or direc- tion she doesn’t know or understand. In large classes, it might be a while before the teacher can assist her. An alternative is to teach “ask three before me” to cue students to ask fellow students before asking the teacher. Another good strategy is to have a card on each desk that can be flipped when assistance is needed, but the student continues to work, skipping the difficult or confusing item, until the teacher arrives. During whole-group instruction, students can respond individually using electronic clickers or writing answers on small whiteboards to show to the teacher. Effective teachers check that students understand assignments and assign homework that emphasizes practicing skills (rather than acquiring new skills) because homework is typi- cally completed independently.

8. Informed feedback—Effective teachers give frequent feedback to students so they don’t practice mistakes. Sometimes teachers reward for work completion without checking the accuracy or quality of the work, inadvertently reinforcing practicing errors. Catching a mis- take or incorrect strategy early and reteaching the concept or strategy (rather than simply pro- viding the correct answer) maximizes students’ ALT. A consultant can learn a lot about

Chapter 7 • Consulting About Students with Academic Skill Problems 177

students’ skill deficits by conducting error analyses of their work. For example, a consultant who is assessing a student’s reading skills may note that he makes many errors on multisyl- labic words, often failing to read the endings of these words. This information can guide instruction directly.

9. Adaptive instruction—Adaptive instruction includes modifying teaching strategies, groupings, and materials and increasing practice opportunities for students who need it (i.e., dif- ferentiate instruction; Burns et al., 2012; Ysseldyke & Christenson, 2002). A popular belief is that teachers need to teach to students’ modalities (visual, kinesthetic, auditory, left-brain, field- dependent, etc.); however, research does not support such aptitude-by-treatment interactions or differential-diagnostic prescriptive teaching (Arter & Jenkins, 1979). Students’ background experiences and skills and the various task demands (imagine trying to learn to knit by only audi- tory instruction) override any individual preferences for learning styles.

Activity 7.4

Search for “classroom teaching video” on Google, YouTube, or some other online resource, and select a 5- to 10-minute clip of an actual teacher teaching school-age children. Watch the clip and identify which of the 11 characteristics of effective instruction occur.

Now search for the videos on explicit instruction produced by Anita Archer and Charles Hughes. Watch one of their videos and identify any of the 11 characteristics of effec- tive instruction you see. Discuss the different videos with a peer.

Effective classroom teachers adapt their instruction by adjusting the time they devote to teaching a skill, group size, lesson structure, and focus (Burns et al., 2012; Torgesen, 2007). Differentiated instruction includes adding more modeling, practice, or direct instructions when needed as well has having very clearly defined expectations.

10. Progress evaluation—Effective teachers monitor students’ progress closely and make instructional and curricular modifications based on these data. Students receive supplemental instruction based on failing to master the content rather than age, instructional time, or predeter- mined grouping (Ysseldyke & Christenson, 2002). Students in Tier 2 or Tier 3 are monitored more closely so that intervention modifications can be made when necessary and students may be discontinued when they have met grade-level benchmarks. Progress monitoring requires mul- tiple forms of tests that are equivalent in difficulty and skills assessed, such as the DIBELS, AIMSweb, and FAST probes.

11. Motivational strategies—All of the above characteristics of effective teaching identi- fied above support student motivation. Additional motivational strategies are suggested later in the chapter.

Activity 7.3

Watch this video by a cognitive psycholo- gist on learning styles. Why do so many peo- ple, including educators, believe in learning styles? Discuss whether it is better to address

a learning problem as a skill deficit or a pro- cessing deficit.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v= sIv9rz2NTUk

effective Instruction for english language learners

The second model for effective instruction that is highlighted in this text was developed with the intention of improving instruction for English language learners (ELLs). The Sheltered Instruction Observation Protocol (SIOP) is an empirically based and very popular approach to teaching English language learners. It emphasizes building students’ background knowledge and vocabulary by providing multiple opportunities for students to speak about the subject (Echevarria, Vogt, & Short, 2008). For an overview of the SIOP model, go to https://www. youtube.com/watch?v=o5xK5gP_Tbw&list=PLGMRgEw1y872579VczixD61ZDzI74nNf r&index=2.

178 Chapter 7 • Consulting About Students with Academic Skill Problems

The SIOP identifies the following characteristics as essential to a lesson for English language learners:

1. Preparation—Clearly defined content and language objectives, appropriate content concepts, and use of supplemental materials and meaningful activities.

2. Building background—Explicitly linking new concepts to prior concepts or students’ personal experiences and emphasizing key vocabulary words. For examples on how to build on background knowledge, go to https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ytXeEFCTMbg&list=PL GMRgEw1y872579VczixD61ZDzI74nNfr&index=3.

3. Comprehensible input—Speech is appropriate for students’ English proficiency level, as is the use of a variety of techniques to communicate key concepts (e.g., modeling, visual, hands-on activities). For more on comprehensible input, go to https://www.youtube.com/watch ?v=mTnHonxao70&index=4&list=PLGMRgEw1y872579VczixD61ZDzI74nNfr.

4. Strategies—Consistent use of scaffolding; use of a variety of question types, including those that promote higher-order thinking skills; lots of opportunities for students to use strate- gies. For more on these strategies, go to https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rhYI3w5I0EA& index=5&list=PLGMRgEw1y872579VczixD61ZDzI74nNfr.

5. Interaction—Frequent opportunity to discuss and elaborate on content with the teacher and fellow students through strategic groupings, sufficient wait time, and clarifying key concepts in the primary language (L1) when necessary. For more on increasing students’ interactions with students and teachers, go to https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GjOrFN6PEDg&index=6& list=PLGMRgEw1y872579VczixD61ZDzI74nNfr.

6. Practice/application—Varied and numerous applied activities that integrate reading, writing, listening, and speaking.

7. Lesson delivery—Content and language objectives are explicit, students are engaged over 90% of the period, the pacing matches students’ ability level.

8. Review/assessment—Comprehensive review of key vocabulary and content, regular assessment of mastery of content and language objectives, and frequent feedback to students.

Activity 7.5

Compare the qualities of a good lesson for English language learners that emphasizes SIOP (Echevarria et al., 2008) to the 11 char- acteristics of effective instruction detailed in the FAAB (Ysseldyke & Christenson, 2002). What are some similarities and differences? Do you think an English-only student would

benefit from a SIOP-constructed lesson? Discuss whether you think there are univer- sally effective instructional practices or whether students from different backgrounds (particularly those from nondominant cul- tures) require qualitatively different kinds of instruction to succeed.

One of the ways to support ELLs with limited vocabulary and background knowledge is to teach them comprehension strategies, encourage them to read more widely, and target vocabulary development directly. Bursuck and Damer (2010) describe the what they call the fourth-grade slump and the eighth-grade cliff. Beginning in fourth grade, students are expected to read much more difficult text (i.e., text containing specialized vocabulary and abstract ideas). If a student does not have a frame of reference for the material, the text is much harder for him to comprehend and remember. For example, a student who discusses politics with his parents and listens to National Public Radio will comprehend a lengthy pas- sage about the three branches of government much more readily than a student whose family members talk very little about politics and prefer to listen to pop music. Without background knowledge, students cannot make the important connections between prior knowledge and new knowledge they read or hear discussed in class. For the students without this back- ground knowledge, the gap between them and their peers steadily increases to become the eighth-grade cliff, wherein they can no longer increase their background knowledge through reading because the text has become too difficult for them to comprehend (Bursuck & Damer, 2010).

Chapter 7 • Consulting About Students with Academic Skill Problems 179

When working with ELLs, make sure that oral presentations to them are comprehensi- ble. Repeat key phrases and emphasize important vocabulary. Increase the use of visual aids and wait time. Use the primary language (L1) to support learning in the second language (L2) by teaching cognates (words like elephant and elephante that are similar in both languages), providing instruction in L1, and teaching students to read in their primary language because it is associated with higher levels of reading in English later on (Goldenberg, 2008). Research has indicated consistently that skills and knowledge acquired in one language transfer across languages, so that a student will either know it in both languages or it will be much easier to learn in a new language (Goldenberg, 2008; Vanderwood & Nam, 2007). English language development, a specialized curriculum designed to promote English acquisition, is best taught as a separate period of instruction (Goldenberg, 2008). Accept answers based on con- tent, not perfection of English grammar. Many of the services provided in an RtI/MTSS model assist ELL students, including early screening of academic skills and providing inten- sive interventions in the language of instruction to students who are significantly delayed (Vanderwood & Nam, 2007).

effective Instruction for culturally diverse and low Income students

Students from minority backgrounds, particularly those who are ELLs, usually have more difficulty with academic achievement than do White or Asian students. The racial disparity in achievement is reflected in special education and dropout rates. American Indians are over twice as likely as White students to be identified as learning disabled, and African Americans are more than twice as likely as Asian American students to be identified as learning disabled (U.S. Department of Education, 2009). Graduation rates from high school are 90% for Asian American students, 81% for White students, 64% for American Indian and Latino/Latina students, and 61% for African American students (Stillwell, 2010). National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) data indicate that the gap in achieve- ment between White and Brown students decreased during the 1970s and 1980s but has widened in more recent years (Lee, 2002). In 2008, the average White 13-year-old scored 22 more points than the average Latino/Latina and 28 more points than the average African American student in math (National Center for Educational Statistics, 2009). The results in reading and across the other age groups (9- and 17-year-olds) are similar. There has been little success in closing the achievement gap since then despite the emphasis in No Child Left Behind (2001) on improving the achievement of all students, including racial sub- groups. The two prevailing explanations for why culturally diverse students underperform in American schools are (a) American schools are culturally incongruent, or even culturally hostile, to students of color; and (b) poverty.

There is some evidence that commonly observed differences between racial groups exist because the instruction given to minority students is not compatible with their cul- tural backgrounds (Boykin, 1994; Lee, 2001; Vasquez, 1993). Critical pedagogy and criti- cal race theory explain underachievement of culturally and linguistically diverse students as a direct by-product of White privilege and suggest political and social upheaval is nec- essary to end the oppression and underachievement of minorities (Sheets, 2003). These theories dominate the diversity training within many teacher education programs with the assumption that the primarily White education students will become effective teachers of culturally and linguistically diverse students by developing multicultural attitudes and/or a commitment to social justice (Sheets, 2003). Using case study and discourse analysis, researchers have provided descriptive evidence that teachers who are personally commit- ted to equity and racial justice are less likely to have low expectations and more willing to adjust their instructional methods to meet the needs of their students while still insisting on academic rigor (Ball, 2000; Stodolsky & Grossman, 2000). However, there is a paucity of research that directly connects teachers’ perceptions to their students’ educational out- comes (Sheets, 2003).

Because African American, Latino, American Indian, and South East Asian students are more likely to experience poverty as well as underachievement, many educators seek to close the achievement gap by abating the effects of poverty. Schools with the lowest test scores tend to have the highest numbers of students living below the poverty line and tend

180 Chapter 7 • Consulting About Students with Academic Skill Problems

to receive the lowest allocation of funding to pay teachers’ salaries (Hughes, 2013). Schools that serve low-income students generally have high teacher turnover, limited access to high-quality resources, and less-experienced teachers (Madaus, Grigal, & Hughes, 2014). Families living in poverty experience additional stressors such as increased crime, unem- ployment and underemployment, limited heath care and transportation, and substandard housing (Hughes, 2013). School-based consultants should be aware of these conditions that place youth at risk for poor achievement, mental illness, and dropout but refrain from admiring the problem.

High-Poverty, High-Performing schools and rtI/Mtss

High-poverty, high-performing (HP2) schools offer examples of how to mitigate the impact of poverty through high-quality services. Characteristics of HP2 schools are reviewed in Chapter 9. They include eliminating policies and practices that lead to lower achievement (e.g., tracking, grade retention, overly harsh discipline, overidentification in special education) and systemati- cally allocating and evaluating resources (Parrett & Budge, 2009).

RtI/MTSS is consistent with HP2 characteristics because of its emphasis on formative and summative data collection, and analysis can identify and monitor underachievement for specific groups of students (Newell & Kratochwill, 2007). RtI/MTSS may also improve instruc- tion in schools predominantly populated by African Americans and Latinos/Latinas, in which there is often a high proportion of ineffective teachers (Newell & Kratochwill, 2007). Indeed, Marston, Muyskens, Lau, and Canter (2003) report decreases in disproportional representation of African American students placed in special education with the implementation of problem- solving consultation. In a review of the literature, Hosp and Madyun (2007) concluded, “RtI provides a promising foundation for addressing disproportionality through its reliance on col- lecting and using data to make decisions and its focus on outcomes” (p. 179).

High expectations and differentiated Instruction

School consultants can also help teachers and parents of low-income students maintain high expectations for their children. Communicating high expectations (such as all students should pursue college, and providing inquiry-based, rather than rote, learning tasks) helps students experiencing the stressors of poverty to persist in school. Conversely, low expectations, low academic self-esteem, and learned helplessness (a belief that no matter what one does he is doomed to failure) are reactions to a learning history characterized by negative feedback (Seligman, 1975). As a counter to these reactions or beliefs, Slavin (1997) suggests that teach- ers accentuate the positive, eliminate the negative, go from the familiar to the new, use advance organizers or guided discovery, and create challenges in which students actively create prob- lems and solve them using their own knowledge and skills. Students feel defeated by failure.

Differentiating instruction by either reducing the task demands or increasing the support (scaffolding) leads to success and improved motivation to continue to put forth effort. Differentiating instruction should not be confused with tracking, a common school practice associated with increasing the achievement gap and segregation (National Association of School Psychologists, 2008; Schofield, 1995). Tracking involves whole-class ability grouping com- pared to differentiated instruction, which involves making instructional accommodations for students in a heterogeneous classroom. One of these accommodations may include homogene- ous small groups for a portion of the day, but the group membership is dynamic and based on progress-monitoring data (i.e., flexible grouping). Differentiated instruction includes heteroge- neous cooperative learning groups, variations in how students respond, previewing and review- ing content, adding higher-level questioning, various scaffolding techniques, and just about any empirically based strategy that accommodates individual needs and helps students access the curriculum (National Association of School Psychologists 2008). For an example, see Ms. Bender’s class schedule in Figure 7.1. Ms. Bender teaches third grade to predominately English language learners and uses class-wide oral reading fluency (ORF) data collected monthly (because she has more than 50% of her class below the benchmark) to group students into high, medium, and low groups. Students move from one group to another depending on how they perform on the monthly ORF; in the case of the low reading group, progress-monitoring data is collected weekly.

Chapter 7 • Consulting About Students with Academic Skill Problems 181

Interventions to Improve study skills and learning strategies

When teachers are asked why they think certain students aren’t doing well academically, they often respond, “Well, if she’d just study, she’d do fine.” Or a parent might say, “He’s so disorgan- ized. He can’t find anything. Even when he reads the material, he doesn’t know what to do with it. To him it’s all just a big bundle of confusion.” Failure to apply oneself through study, or possibly not knowing how to study, has been identified as a major reason for poor academic production, particularly as students enter junior and senior high school (Gleason, Archer, & Colvin, 2002; Harvey & Chickie-Wolf, 2008). Direct instruction on developing study skills can improve these skills and academic performance, yet it rarely occurs because many adults assume students have either mastered these skills at a younger grade or they will learn them on their own (Harvey & Chickie-Wolf, 2008).

Study skills can be classified into three categories: (a) organization of materials— a tidy desk and backpack and organized notebooks reduce time lost searching for the neces- sary materials; (b) organization of time—turning in assignments on time, budgeting time (including breaking large projects down into more manageable parts), using a planner, set- ting long- and short-term goals; and (c) study skills—reading for comprehension, test taking, note taking, outlining, self-monitoring how one studies and learns. Effective and efficient learners are characterized by strategic approaches to academic competence. The ability to acquire, memorize, organize, and transform information is typical of those who are aca- demically competent.

Study skills can be taught as a universal, targeted, or intensive intervention (see examples below). School-based consultants need to include some study of a referred student’s study meth- ods and habits in order to determine the extent to which problems in this area could be contribut- ing to academic learning difficulties. Students with disabilities may need explicit instruction and guided practice to master and generalize these skills. The negative impact of poor study skills increases with age; therefore, it is best to assess and intervene in the earlier grades so ALT is not lost to disorganization and ineffective learning habits.

fIgure 7.1 Class schedule for differentiated reading instruction

Days: Monday, Wednesday, and Friday

9:05–9:35 Peer-assisted learning: A more accomplished reader reads with a struggling reader following a spe- cific turn-taking protocol. Every other Friday, pairs are homogenously grouped.

9:35–10:35 Whole-group instruction on a unit that includes popcorn questioning, pair and share, and whisper reading to ensure a high level of student responding.

Days: Tuesdays and Thursdays

9:05–9:35 High and medium reading level students whisper-read high-interest, leveled text indepen- dently or in pairs. Ms. Bender and her paraprofessional each work with three to four students in the low reading group. First they remind the student how to use the organization of the text to find important information. Then they preview vocabulary for the upcoming unit. Next, they read the first paragraph to the students and then have the students take turns (alternating by sentence so those who are not reading aloud are following along) reading it back while they provide corrective feedback with either phrase drill or syllable segmentation.

9:35–10:35 Whole-group instruction on the unit that includes popcorn questioning, pair and share, and whisper reading to ensure a high level of student responding.

Activity 7.6

Watch and discuss this video of a secondary teacher discussing the importance and benefits of differentiated instruction.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v= MPl8OSCX_f8

182 Chapter 7 • Consulting About Students with Academic Skill Problems

Suggested interventions

• Universal interventions: Along with teaching content, all teachers teach students how to study the content to ensure integration and retention, including modeling and reinforcing a standard note-taking strategy across content areas. All the teachers also reinforce students’ use of an agenda to track short- and long-term assignments, including allowing time in class to update the agenda and spot-checking students’ agendas. Finally, all teachers incor- porate mnemonics into their content lessons.

• Targeted interventions: Advancement via Individual Determination (AVID) is a popular study skills program designed to close the achievement gap (AVID is discussed further in Chapter 8). Middle and high school students take this as a course to improve their writing, inquiry, and time management skills. Students are taught to generate high-ordered questions (i.e., questions involving synthesis and/or analysis) about the content they are learning in their advanced-placement courses. AVID acts as a support for average to low- average students enrolled in high-caliber classes.

• Intensive interventions: Intensive interventions involve small-group instruction on note taking, binder organization, test-taking strategies, metacognitive skills, and setting short- and long-term goals with modeling, rehearsal, and performance feedback. Teach self-talk strategies such as “read, cover, recite, check” to monitor mastery of content. Exemplary homework and binders could be showcased. Students’ use of the skills is spot-checked throughout the entire year.

Include parents in teaching and reinforcing good study skills. The responsibility for recording assignments and organizing materials should shift from the teacher and parents to the student as the student ages.

Improving Motivation

When trying to determine the reasons for academic difficulties, teachers and students often agree that the problem is one of motivation (Hidi & Harackiewicz, 2000). Teachers state that underachievers often do not indicate any interest in the subject matter or with the work required to be successful in that subject; students often comment that they find the work bor- ing or useless or, in a word, unmotivating. A behavioral approach to understanding a lack of motivation would be to examine the antecedents and consequences: If there is little learning, it might be because there is either an inadequate set of antecedent conditions (i.e., curricu- lum, materials, method, review of previously learned material, encouragement, goal setting, and so on) or no effective reinforcement for it (e.g., meaningful success, acknowledgment for work well done, sensible grading policies, goal attainment). If the learner does not believe that the consequences of learning are strong enough or immediate enough, she may produce poorer-quality work. Poorer work leads to even less reinforcement, and so the cycle continues. Poor work and reduced motivation also lead to reduced ALT. Conversely, highly motivated students have more success and engage in academic activities more often, result- ing in higher rates of ALT. Over time, these recursive cycles result in the “Matthew effect,” where the “rich get richer and the poor get poorer.” Only with direct targeted interventions that are proportional to students’ needs (i.e., how “poor” they have become) can this cycle be broken.

While students, teachers, and even parents may attribute poor achievement to lack of motivation, more often the reason is a skill deficit. VanDerHeyden and Witt (2008) summarized the existing literature on “can’t do/won’t do” assessment and note that judgments about whether a student fails to perform an academic task because he can’t do it (skill deficit) or won’t do it (performance deficit) occur frequently. However, these assessments are typically based on cas- ual observations, which are often inaccurate. Only by attempting to increase the students’ motivation to complete work by offering incentives, connecting the lesson to their interests, and ensuring a high level of success can it be determined if a performance-based intervention is effective. If performance-based or motivation interventions work, the student(s) will not require supplemental instruction on the skill. VanDerHeyden and Witt’s (2008) review of the “can’t do/won’t do” literature found that approximately 27% to 50% of the students identified as having significant academic learning problems had performance, not skill, deficits. By

Chapter 7 • Consulting About Students with Academic Skill Problems 183

reducing the number of students receiving supplemental instruction, more resources can be directed to those who will truly benefit from the targeted direct instruction. Of course, a por- tion of these students may have skill and performance deficits, which the consultant will have to consider as he assists his colleagues in developing and implementing Tier 2 interventions, possibly through the use of brief experimental analysis (BEA). See the case of Mark in Figure 7.3, which appears later in this chapter; his academic problems seem to arise from both skill and performance deficits.

Suggested interventions:

• Employ the Premack’s principle—work before play—by structuring the class with specific activities that have clearly defined goals for productivity and accuracy and by providing enticing rewards for students who meet the goals. Fun Fridays, viewing 20 minutes of a historical movie at the end of the day, and even multiplication fact bingo are examples of fun, educational activities that students can enjoy after working hard. One caveat is that recess and elective classes should not be held hostage to completing difficult work. For some students, these less academic periods in the day help them to remain engaged in school.

• Find ways of getting students involved in the learning tasks. In what ways could the tasks be more meaningful? Erin Gruwell, a relatively novice high school teacher, was so suc- cessful in connecting the language arts curriculum to her students’ personal lives that the students wrote a highly acclaimed autobiography, The Freedom Writers Diary (Freedom Writers, 1999), which became a major motion picture. Some of her motivating teaching strategies have been described in a teacher’s guide (Gruwell, 2007).

• Use technology, such as online math and vocabulary games that can provide immediate positive praise or corrective feedback.

• Provide cooperative and other group-oriented learning experiences. Allow students choices among different ways of reaching the same educational goals.

• Frequently reinforce correct responses, possibly with extrinsic reinforcers (token econ- omy, activity, social). Set students up for success by providing modifications or support when learning a skill that appears to be difficult for them.

• Reinforce accurate and immediate academic responding by allowing students to “work to get out of work.” For example, inform the students that for every problem they get right during the first 10 minutes of independent seatwork, they can cross out that same number of problems from the remaining set of problems to complete. In this way they are reinforced for beginning work without a delay and for producing accu- rate responses.

• Post students’ progress toward a clearly stated goal. For example, the goal “All children in Ms. Gonzalez’s kindergarten class can write their first and last name” could be represented by a thermometer in which the temperature goes up each time a child masters his or her name. When all 20 students have mastered their name, the thermometer has reached the goal and the class celebrates. Groups of students can compete among or within their groups for academic success and public accolades. Just be sure the same students are not always the victors or losers.

• If you believe that your failing students are attributing the failures to external causes (e.g., bad luck, teacher discrimination) or to internal causes (e.g., low ability, ethnic heritage), talk to them about these mistaken notions (Marsh & Craven, 1997). Your school counselor

Activity 7.7

Think of a skill that you can’t do very well, despite your best efforts (e.g., learning a for- eign language, ballroom dancing). Then think of an activity or skill you generally won’t do well (e.g., cooking, working out at the gym). Finally, think of a skill or activity that you excel in (e.g., graduate school, gardening, soccer).

How do motivation, skill, practice, and self- efficacy play into your determination and suc- cess with these endeavors? Generate some “can’t do/won’t do” examples, such as “I can’t run a marathon because I’ve never trained for one”; “I won’t run a 5K today because I’m too busy or feeling lazy.”

184 Chapter 7 • Consulting About Students with Academic Skill Problems

fIgure 7.2 Effective Instruction Observation Form

Lesson objective/instructional goal:

_________________________________________________

_________________________________________________

The teacher provides explicit instruction.

  Models the skill; includes visuals and manipulatives when appropriate.

  Identifies important details of the concept being taught.

  Introduces skills in step-by-step order.

  Provides instructions that have only one interpretation.

  Points out distinctive features and vocabulary of a new concept.

  Includes nonexamples when appropriate.

  Makes connection to previously learned material.

The teacher checks for understanding and provides corrective, timely feedback.

  Provides multiple opportunities for students to practice the new skill.

  Elicits responses from all students.

  Students’ procedural and conceptual knowledge are assessed.

  Provides extra practice for students who are less than 90% accurate.

  Provides corrective feedback promptly.

  Positive comments are provided for accurate responses.

  Corrective feedback is focused on the target skill.

  Elaborates on student responses.

  Ensures that students have mastered the skill before introducing the next skill.

Parts of the lesson that went really well:

__________________________________________________

__________________________________________________

__________________________________________________

__________________________________________________

__________________________________________________

Interventionist: _________________________________

Consultant: _________________________________

Date: _______________________

The teacher helps students maintain high levels of academic learning time.

  Gains student attention before initiating instruction.

  Paces lesson to maintain attention.

  Transitions quickly between tasks.

  Lesson has a cognitive emphasis (not just remediation).

  Intervenes when students are off-task to regain their focus.

  Motivational strategies are used.

  Student effort is encouraged.

  Three-to-one positive to corrective feedback is provided.

  Celebrates students’ success.

  High level of response rate in whole-group instruction.

  High level of response rate in small-group instruction.

  High level of accurate response during independent work.

  Differentiates instruction so students are likely to experience success with the task (i.e., provides scaffolds like previewing text or vocabulary when needed).

  Forms small homogeneous groups to reteach skill when needed.

  Uses peer-assisted learning and other techniques to elicit a high response rate.

  Other:

____________________________________________________

____________________________________________________

____________________________________________________

____________________________________________________

____________________________________________________

____________________________________________________

Suggestions for improvement:

____________________________________________________

____________________________________________________

____________________________________________________

____________________________________________________

____________________________________________________

____________________________________________________

____________________________________________________

Chapter 7 • Consulting About Students with Academic Skill Problems 185

may be able to conduct group sessions with underachievers to help them explore their reasons for poor achievement.

• Figure out which students hold power among their peers and get this group to work with the seemingly unmotivated students in terms of effort, behavior, study skills, and learning strategies.

• Try to balance the use of anxiety: Some anxiety spurs efforts; too much discourages people from trying.

Instructional consultants can use the form in Figure 7.2 to guide their observations and discus- sions with teachers in order to improve core instruction.

targeted InterventIons for acadeMIc ProbleMs (tIer 2)

As noted in Chapter 3, Tier 2 is probably the least-well-defined tier: It incorporates everything between good universal or core instruction to intensive specialized intervention. Thus, it includes the range of students, from those with minor needs to those that are significantly below grade level (Herman, Riley-Tillman, & Reinke, 2012). The first step, therefore, is to determine the significance of the delay through survey level assessment (SLA), in which specific grade-level tasks are attempted by the student, followed by either increasingly difficult tasks when correct answers are provided or decreasing the difficulty of the task until the targeted 85% to 90% accu- racy is achieved. Once the student’s instructional level is identified, the school-based consultant can explore various hypotheses for the delay in order to guide intervention development. Daly, Witt, Martens, and Dool (1997) propose five hypotheses for poor skill development that can be tested quickly through a brief experimental analysis (BEA):

1. They do not want to do it (performance). • Students are not motivated to respond to the instructional demands.

2. They have not had enough help to do it (acquisition). • Insufficient prompting and feedback are provided for active responding. • Student displays poor accuracy in target skill(s).

3. They have not spent enough time practicing it (fluency). • There is insufficient active student responding (practice) in curricular materials.

4. They have not had to do it that way before (generalization). • Students do not generalize the use of the skill to the natural setting and/or to other mate-

rials and/or settings. 5. It is too hard (poor instructional match).

• The instructional materials are too difficult and students have a high rate of errors or nonproductions.

Each of these hypotheses can be tested by applying the appropriate instructional strategy. The performance (or “won’t do” versus “can’t do”) possibility was addressed in the previous sec- tion on student motivation. The last hypothesis should be addressed if survey level assessment was conducted and you are working with tasks you have found to be within the student’s instruc- tional range. The other three hypotheses can be tested by providing direct instruction on the skill (Hypothesis 2, students need to acquire the skill), providing more practice opportunities (Hypothesis 3, they need to practice until they reach fluency), or providing cues and prompts and opportunities to learn the skill in different contexts and forms (Hypothesis 4, teach for generali- zation). A specific example of a BEA case study is illustrated in Figure 7.3; here, Mark’s responses to five different brief interventions provide useful information for designing subse- quent interventions. Standard scores on a published norm-referenced test would not inform a consultant about which specific reading intervention is most likely to work.

Activity 7.8

Read and discuss the vignette about Mark in Figure 7.3. How useful are the data Ms. Cassidy collected for understanding why Mark has trouble reading (i.e., problem analysis)? How useful are the data for designing an

intervention? What about Mark’s ability to comprehend what he reads—should Ms. Cassidy have tested comprehension, too? How might Ms. Cassidy use this information to consult with Mark’s teacher?

186 Chapter 7 • Consulting About Students with Academic Skill Problems

Mark is a third-grade student who has failed the past two DIBELS oral reading fluency (ORF) benchmarks despite participating in small teacher-led and peer-assisted grouping. The student study team (SST) decided the resources service program (RSP) teacher, Ms. Cassidy, would conduct a BEA in order to better understand why Mark is having difficulty reading and provide a 6-week intervention based on the results of the BEA. Ms. Cassidy first conducts an SLA to test Mark’s ORF on third- and second-grade probes and identifies second- grade probes as within his instructional range. By identifying the level of reading material Mark can read somewhat fluently, Ms. Cassidy has eliminated the possibility that Mark’s difficulty is due to poor instructional match (i.e., Hypothesis 5). Next, she administers a series of three second-grade probes on three separate days; taking the median of each set of three and then the median across the three days, she calculates Mark’s baseline to be 49 words correct per minute (WCPM) on second-grade reading probes. A goal of 61 WCPM (ambitious by the standards outlined in Shapiro, 2011) is identified for the end of a 6-week intensive supplemental instruction intervention. But how best to help him reach that goal?

Ms. Cassidy administers a standard reading BEA to Mark during a one-on-one 35-minute session. First, she tests the motivation condition by administering a second-grade ORF probe, on which he scored 45 WCPM. Next, she offers him an incentive (movie tickets) chosen from an incentive chart if he can beat his performance by 30% (58 WCPM) on a generalization probe (a probe that contains 80% or more of the same words as the first “instructional” probe). Mark succeeds (see chart on next page) by reading 59 WCPM on the second probe.

After testing the motivation hypothesis, Ms. Cassidy provides a simple repeated-reading intervention. In this condition, Mark read the same probe three times and then a generalization probe. Here Mark mightily surpasses his baseline and makes even greater gains with each subsequent reading (68 WCPM on the last postinstruction probe and 71 on the generalization probe). The next intervention is the phrase drill. After Mark reads an entire probe twice, Ms. Cassidy identifies a word Mark misread both times, provides the correct pronunciation of the word, and prompts Mark to read the sentence with the word three times. Mark, being a rather diligent but slow reader, only misread one word twice. After practicing this word in the context in which it occurs, he reread the passage (52 WCPM on the postinstruction probe) and a very similar passage (55 WCPM on the generalization probe). The phrase drill, as illustrated by the chart, had very little effect on Mark’s read- ing. This result is interesting because both the repeated reading and the phrase drill are interventions that target increasing fluency through practice.

Next, Ms. Cassidy investigates how well interventions that target acquisition of skills through direct instruction (modeling, corrective feedback) work for Mark. In the syllable segmentation intervention, Mark reads the same passage for 2 minutes, and Ms. Cassidy identifies any errors. After the 2 minutes, Ms. Cassidy points to the first word Mark misread and reads the word. She then covers the word with an index card and reveals each syllable as she says the syllable aloud. Then she models blending the syllables to make the word. Mark is then prompted to perform the same task (syllable segmentation). This is repeated for every word Mark misread; then Mark rereads the passage and another similar passage. Like the phrase drill, this intervention didn’t work that well for Mark. The last intervention Ms. Cassidy attempts, listening passage preview, involves Ms. Cassidy reading a passage aloud to Mark, modeling fluent reading with inflection, which is followed by Mark reading the same passage (85 WCPM on the postinstruction probe) and then a very similar passage (75 WCPM on the generalization probe). Mark did very well in this condition. Finally, Ms. Cassidy combined the listening-passage

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Reward Repeated Reading

Phrase Drill

Syllable Segmentation

Listening Passage Preview

Combination

Preinstructional Postinstructional Generalization

fIgure 7.3 Results of Mark’s brief experimental analysis (BEA)

Chapter 7 • Consulting About Students with Academic Skill Problems 187

After a FAAB evaluation has been conducted, the steps for using the information are similar to the steps used in problem-solving consultation presented earlier in this text. Powers and Mandal (2011) suggest combining BEA with error analysis and the FAAB results to conduct a very thor- ough problem analysis at Tier 2 or Tier 3. FAAB results in a set of statements about the extent to which the student is being exposed to an effective and supportive instructional system, both at school and at home. It results in a global picture of what is happening or not happening to assist the student’s learning. Based on this information, the teacher and consultant can begin to develop interventions that may be student-specific or more directed to how the classroom or home envi- ronment can be modified to support the student’s learning. In some cases, the identified problem is actually a classwide problem. Here, benchmarking and classroom observations of percentage of ALT can help identify the level of need. For example, if many more students than the student referred for assistance are below benchmarks for proficiency, then assisting a teacher in delivering instruction in a manner consistent with the strategies listed above is more appropriate than arrang- ing supplemental instruction for the referred student (Ikeda, Neessen, & Witt, 2008).

An emphasis on ecological solutions identified through problem-solving consultation should not mean a shift from seeking a deficit within the child to seeking a deficit within the teacher. There is nothing to gain by redirecting blame. There is everything to gain by approaching an academic learning problem by identifying conditions that are within school personnel control and by collaborating to modify these instructional conditions to maximize learning outcomes.

Treatment integrity is a key component to targeted (Tier 2) interventions. The weekly fidelity observation form in Chapter 3 can be used to measure the extent to which the interven- tions were implemented as designed, and can include quality, frequency and student outcomes. A goal for the 6–8-week intervention should be established based on the SLA and BEA results, and weekly or daily probes should be administered to monitor the student’s results. Burns and colleagues (2012) wrote, “EBIs [evidence-based interventions] should be the pool from which interventions are selected, but the specific intervention selected should be guided by individual student learning or behavior needs” (p. 3). Good EBI pools include Internet sources such as What Works Clearing House, Center on Response to Intervention, the IRIS Center at Vanderbilt, and Intervention Central, and textbook sources such as the Burns, Riley-Tillman, and VanDerHeyden (2012) book.

IntensIve InterventIons for acadeMIc ProbleMs (tIer 3)

A targeted intervention may not accelerate learning enough for a student with academic skill deficits to achieve grade-level standards. In this case, a more intensive intervention, such as spe- cial education, is required. For students with significant intellectual or severe behavioral prob- lems, special education is generally warranted and attempting targeted academic interventions first can be skipped. But for the largest group of students who receive special education (i.e., students with learning disabilities), the information gathered from targeted interventions is criti- cal for informing intensive intervention development.

Interventions for Intellectual disabilities and language delays

Cognitive ability and school achievement are strongly, though not perfectly, related (Brody, 1997; Salvia, Ysseldyke, & Bolt, 2009). Obviously other factors also play a part in school, but students who manifest slower-than-average rates of conceptual understanding, as measured by

fIgure 7.3 (Continued)

preview and repeated-reading techniques into one intervention and found this combination to be very effective for improving Mark’s oral reading fluency.

Based on the results of the BEA, Ms. Cassidy assisted Mark’s teacher in restructuring the peer tutoring to include having the peer model fluent reading and then listening to Mark read and reread the same pas- sages. She also worked with Mark’s teacher on establishing an incentive program for completing work accurately and on time. Ms. Cassidy’s supplemental instruction will include listening passage preview and repeated reading of third-grade text (given the scaffolding, Mark should be able to read third-grade material with 80% to 90% success), as well as teaching Mark some strategies for previewing his science, history, and social studies texts.

188 Chapter 7 • Consulting About Students with Academic Skill Problems

well-normed intelligence tests, generally have lower academic achievement (and school grades and school completion) across all socioeconomic groups (Reynolds, Lowe, & Saenz, 1999). For myriad reasons, lower cognitive abilities correlate with lower socioeconomic status. Some of these reasons include poor prenatal care, exposure to lead poisoning, low-quality preschools, lack of after-school and summer school programs, and lack of support for oral language develop- ment in the home. Hart and Risley (1995) conducted an in-depth study of language use in homes of toddlers from professional, working-class, and welfare-subsidized families and found startling differences in the amount, variety, and use of language in the home. By 3 years of age, the chil- dren of families receiving welfare had been exposed to 13 million fewer cumulative words than children of working-class families, and 20 million fewer than children of professional families. The exposure to language translated directly into children’s use of language, with the average 3-year-old raised in a professional family using a larger variety of words than the parent of the welfare-subsidized family. Some of their conclusions include the following:

• Parents’ language reflected the number, variety, and flexibility of strategies they possessed (or didn’t possess) for coping with their child’s inventiveness and/or rambunctiousness.

• Well-educated parents modeled explaining alternatives rather than directives. • Well-educated parents talked to their children beyond what was necessary to manage or

provide care. • The amount that the child spoke stopped increasing when he began to talk as much as his

family members. • After socioeconomic status was controlled for, there was no statistically significant asso-

ciation between race and amount of talk.

Most cognitive measures are heavily influenced by language skills, and those that are purport- edly language-free are not culture-free. We don’t know the impact of grinding poverty on students’ nonverbal skills as measured by supposedly purely nonverbal assessments of cognition. It is well established that early vocabulary and phonological awareness skills are associated with learning to read on time, with vocabulary becoming a more powerful predictor of later reading (Hemphill & Tivnan, 2008). Reading delays become more difficult to remediate as students pro- gress in age (Good, Simmons, & Smith, 1998). Clearly, early screening and targeted intervention are the best responses to cognitive and language delays.

Suggested interventions:

• Teach vocabulary directly by increasing the amount that students read and are read to; directly teaching important words in isolation and in context, varying the number of repetitions to meet individual students’ needs; teach word acquisition strategies; and build curiosity about words into the lessons and classroom ecology.

• Provide for repetition, review, and rehearsal under varying conditions. • Use manipulatives, visuals, and concrete aides. • Increase wait time, the span of time given to students to respond before moving on to

another student. Three seconds is a good rule of thumb for appropriate wait time. • Preteach academic skills and content, including vocabulary words. Arrange with the stu-

dent ahead of time the question you will ask him during whole-group instruction so he can be prepared to answer it.

• Model correct responses; provide corrective feedback. • Group students heterogeneously so low achievers can profit from the modeling provided

by more adept students.

supporting students with Health and sensory Impairments

Poor vision, hearing, and general health should certainly be looked at as possible contributors to academic deficiencies. The screenings done by school nurses should detect these problems, but in some cases a more thorough evaluation needs to be done. Lynch, Lewis, and Murphy (1993) have demonstrated that children with medical problems are often passive, inattentive, and with- drawn, which adds an emotional and motivational issue to their medical condition. If the consult- ant believes the academic problem may be related to these factors, a physical evaluation of the student should be conducted by qualified personnel.

Chapter 7 • Consulting About Students with Academic Skill Problems 189

After the medical condition is diagnosed, the consultant needs to consult reputable online resources and medical practitioners to gather information on how the medical condition may affect the student’s learning and how the student’s family can receive support. For example, Google searches for “juvenile diabetes,” “muscular dystrophy,” and “neurofibromitosis” bring a wealth of information to a consultant’s fingertips. The challenge is to identify and use the infor- mation that is most research-based and relevant to the child’s functioning at school. The consult- ant should become familiar with the health problems associated with the diagnosis and use this information to guide any further assessments, which should be functionally related to the health problem and possible side effects from the medical treatment, including pharmacology. If special education services are required, students with sensory disabilities can qualify under “visual impairment” and “deaf” or “hard of hearing.” Students with other medical problems may qualify under “other health impairments.”

The second author (Powers) was flabbergasted to learn of a school psychologist adminis- tering tests of cognition, achievement, and processing (the typical IQ/discrepancy learning disa- bility battery) to a child with advanced Duchenne muscular dystrophy. This was clearly a case of “If all I have is a hammer, than everything looks like a nail” mentality. The psychologist would have served the family and student much better by assessing ecological supports and/or needs and student functioning and adjustment as it relates to a terminal disease, than administering the full learning disabilities battery.

Suggested interventions:

• Interview parents, the student, the teacher, and other support providers about their percep- tions of the student’s disability or illness to identify ways to lend support. There are cul- tural variations on how illness is interpreted and very serious gaps in America’s health care system.

• If the student is likely to have prolonged absences from school, work with your special education service providers to arrange for home and hospital educational services.

• Increase cleaning and other hygienic behaviors (for example, train students to sneeze into their sleeves) for classrooms with a student who has a compromised immune system.

• Inquire about food and medication allergies. Food allergies have become a serious concern in public schools. They can be life-threatening and produce side effects that distract from schoolwork.

• Refer to the school nurse and possibly to other health care providers if you suspect a hear- ing, vision or health problem.

• Inform parents about potential support groups. • Accommodate seating and other variables for the student.

Interventions for students with adHd

Approximately one in 10 children have been diagnosed as having attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD; Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2014). The prevalence of ADHD diagnoses has increased dramatically from 7.8% in 2003 to 11% in 2011; and the use of medication has increased by 28% over the same 8 years (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2014). The symptoms of ADHD include difficulty remaining focused on a task, impulsive behavior, and sometimes hyperactivity (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2014). This condition is certainly not new; it has been described in the literature for at least 50 years (Barkley, 2005).

If the student appears unable to attend or to remain attentive enough to profit from instruc- tion even after Tier 2 interventions have been attempted, she should be referred for a Section 504 plan or special education services because school personnel have a responsibility to serve students with ADHD even if the child has not received a medical diagnosis (Martin & Zirkel, 2011). The Office of Civil Rights (which oversees Section 504) and Office of Special Education Programs (which oversees IDEA) agree that, unless there is a state law in place preventing school personnel from diagnosing ADHD for special education or Section 504 planning, school person- nel are required to identify and serve students with ADHD. If a district requires a medical exam to diagnose and serve a student with ADHD, it should be conducted at no cost to the family. School personnel cannot recommend or require that students with ADHD be treated with

190 Chapter 7 • Consulting About Students with Academic Skill Problems

medication. A psychopharmacological approach to treating ADHD is common, but it is also con- troversial. Alan Sroufe, a renowned child development psychologist, published an article in the New York Times (Sroufe, 2012) criticizing the use of Ritalin and other drugs to treat ADHD based on the lack of empirical evidence of long-term benefits to the child. Yet many children and ado- lescents take medication for the short-term benefits of improved concentration in order to make it through the school day (Thorell & Dahlstrom, 2009).

Extended suggestions for interventions for students with ADHD and similar conditions can be found in a U.S. Department of Education (2004) resource guide, which is available for free on the website for What Works Clearinghouse. The authors of this guide suggest a three-pronged approach: (1) explicit, structured, and high-quality academic instruction; (2) behavioral interventions; and (3) classroom accommodations. Some of these suggestions are reflected in the list that follows.

Suggested interventions:

• Place students in environments where distractions are minimized. • Keep the lessons highly structured. Provide an advance organizer; review previous lessons;

set learning and behavioral expectations; have lesson resources available (rather than counting on the student with ADHD to find them); and provide direct instruction and coaching on how to obtain additional help, monitor one’s attentiveness, and reinforce for academic responding.

• Use materials that draw attention to the relevant stimuli. • Have students repeat instructions before getting started on assignments. • Assign highly distractible or inattentive students to study buddies who can assist in keep-

ing them on task. • Find activities that will give active students something to do, within the confines of task

expectations. • Teach organizational and study skills. • Try organizing the material into smaller chunks, if this is feasible. • Be predictable. Follow a similar schedule in presenting lessons and organizing the daily

activities. • Use technology that serves an instructional purpose and doesn’t become yet another source

of distraction. • Reinforce all efforts at concentrated work, including collaborating with parents on rein-

forcing their child’s productivity and accuracy.

supporting students with Mental Health and behavioral disturbances

Students with emotional and behavioral problems usually exhibit an excess of behaviors that are disruptive and a deficit of behaviors that promote a calm environment and healthy relationships (Rhode, Jenson, & Reavis, 2010). These students typically do not do well in school; they are unable to focus their energies on learning. Abused and neglected students, those experiencing the trauma of family conflict and possible divorce, those who have not attained an appropriate level of social skills, and those being raised by parents who have passed on their own disturbed view of the world to their children are all at risk for school failure because of their behavior disorders and/or emotional disturbance (Kauffman, 2001). As discussed in Chapter 6, there is growing awareness that many youth experience mental health problems that go untreated. Extreme irrita- bility, sadness, inattentiveness, or big mood swings could signal the need to seek help from a mental health provider. Chapter 6 contains many other suggested interventions for students who exhibit behavior disorders.

Activity 7.9

Many students with behavioral deficits also have academic deficits. The behavioral deficits result in disciplinary actions (referral to the office, suspension or expulsion from school) that reduce ALT. Conversely, poor academic skills (as will happen when ALT is minimized)

can lead to increased behavior problems as schoolwork becomes more difficult and aver- sive. How can you break the cycle of behavior problems being both the cause and the result of academic problems? Does it matter which came first?

Chapter 7 • Consulting About Students with Academic Skill Problems 191

Identification and Interventions for students with learning disabilities

In 2004, children identified as having a specific learning disability (LD) made up 4.2% of the total school population and almost half of all U.S. children identified as having disabilities (U.S. Department of Education, 2009). Thus, many children who aren’t doing well in school may be considered for, and are found to have, a learning disability (Heward, 2000; Lerner, 2000). The variability in the identification rates suggests the identification process is fraught with confusion and inconsistency. For example, the disability rate among districts in one state varied from 7.2% to 23.8%, with no discernible pattern in socioeconomic prevalence to explain this wide variation (Sternberg & Grigorenko, 2002). There is some evidence that identification rates have more to do with whether schools provide quality instruction and a data-based, tiered approach to intervention rather than with the actual presence of a learning disability (Burns, Christ, Boice, & Szadokierski, 2010). For example, implementing RtI/MTSS activities reduced the number of kindergarteners identified as having a learning disability by 81% in the Florida Reading First schools (Torgesen, 2007). A meta-analysis of RtI/MTSS studies found that implementing an RtI/MTSS model reduced the number of students identified as having a learning disability to 2%, which is much lower than the 4% national rate (Burns, Appleton, & Stehouwer, 2005).

Most researchers and educators agree that learning disabilities exist; however, there is debate about the best way to identify and treat students with LD. There are two main camps: those that emphasize cognitive processing deficits and interventions and those that emphasize academic skill deficits and interventions. Both groups agree that a strong RtI/MTSS is the first step; however, member of the former seek to understand the lack of response to intervention or need for intensive intervention (Tier 3) from a cognitive processing strength and weakness (PSW) perspective in order to develop cognitive-based interventions, which is theoretically con- sistent with the definition of LD but empirically flawed (Arter & Jenkins, 1979; Kearns & Fuchs, 2013). Attempts to find a relationship between cognitive assessments, interventions derived from those assessment results, and improved student outcomes have largely failed. A more promising approach is to provide evidence-based interventions to improve the academic skills (rather than underlying cognitive processing) that are languishing (Burns et al., 2012; Hagans & Powers, 2013). Intervention-based (rather than cognitive-based) assessments are even more critical in schools that have not fully implemented RtI/MTSS to ensure the most intensive interventions are provided to the students with the greatest need.

Activity 7.10

Stage a debate between supporters of the cognitive-processing/processing strength and weakness (PSW) perspective on identifying and intervening for students with LD and the skill- based/problem-solving (PS) perspective. Each side can consider the following papers, which are easy to find on the Internet: The 2010

Learning Disabilities Association of America’s White Paper on Evaluation, Identification, and Eligibility Criteria for Students with Specific Learning Disabilities and the rebuttal offered by the Consortium for Evidence-Based Early Intervention Practices (2010). Find additional articles to bolster your position.

Suggested interventions:

• Modify the curriculum to allow students with learning disabilities to have more learning trials. Teach the targeted skills directly and monitor progress toward desired learning goals.

• Increase academic learning time by scaffolding general education lessons (i.e., previewing vocabulary, adaptive technology, advance organizers, thinking maps, cooperative group- ing, etc.). A challenging lesson is appropriately modified if the student’s responses are correct over 90% of the time.

• Provide tiers of interventions to match the intensity of the student’s needs. More intense interventions can be provided in small groups and led by a professional trained in specialized teaching techniques, such as Reading Recovery (What Works Clearinghouse, 2013) and Lindamood-Bell, (What Works Clearinghouse, 2008). These interventions should occur frequently, be closely monitored, and be based on a

192 Chapter 7 • Consulting About Students with Academic Skill Problems

functional analysis of the student’s needs (i.e., brief experimental analysis, error analy- sis, classroom observation, etc.).

• Reinforce approximations to complete success; don’t require perfect papers from those for whom this goal is stress-inducing.

• Students with learning disabilities benefit from good coordination and collaboration between and among all the teachers who teach them. If a pull-out model is used, careful consideration should be provided about what the student will miss during his special education pull-out instruction. Teachers in both settings want to try to teach and rein- force the same skills and strategies in both contexts. Older students with LD should learn about what accommodations help them to achieve (e.g., audio books, more time on test, a calculator, etc.) and how to request these accommodations in high school, in college and at work. See Chapter 8 for more information on self-determination and transition planning.

data-based sPecIal educatIon elIgIbIlIty assessMent

In a problem-solving model, the referral concern guides the assessment processes, and the assessments begin with review, interview, and observations. Together, the consultant, teachers, and parents of the referred student evaluate the potential contributing factors to an academic skill deficit.

Consider, for example, these referrals from a third-grade teacher. She has two students of the same age with reading problems. The standard scores in total reading for these two stu- dents are about 85, in a school in which the average standard score is about 100. The consult- ant may find that, in one case, the student has had uncredentialed substitute teachers for the past two years, has experienced a moderate and uncorrected hearing loss in both ears, achieves poorly in all academic areas, and comes from a home in which neither parent graduated from high school. In the second case, the student is hyperactive and impulsive but does very well in math and art; in fact, he has written his own computer game for smartphones. His parents, both college graduates, have insisted on no special education assistance for their boy since the first grade.

It is clear from the information that we have on these two referrals that the reasons for poor achievement in reading vary considerably, as should the interventions suggested for each case. Yet what is known about each case is spotty and rather subjective. To be more systematic, the consultant should employ RIOT (see the list below), which breaks the assess- ment process into four subparts. Each consultant decides for him- or herself which subparts are appropriate in each case. The National Association of School Psychologists (2010) ethics standards indicate that school psychologists do not need parental consent to “review a student’s educational records, conduct classroom observations, assist in within-classroom interventions and progress monitoring, or to participate in educational screenings conducted as part of a regular program of instruction” (p. 4). School psychologists and other consult- ants do need parental permission to conduct assessments that are likely to be extensive, be ongoing, and/or lead to significant intrusion on the student or family beyond the typical school activities.

RIOT is an acronym that stands for records review, interview observation, and testing:

Records review. The consultant often starts an analysis of a referral with a look at the cumulative, health, and special education files if there is one. These documents should give some indication of the student’s past history of grades, attendance, standardized test scores, and teacher comments. In the case of a student receiving special education services, there may be documentation of functional behavioral assessments and posi- tive behavioral intervention plans in addition to previous formal assessments and the individualized education program (IEP) itself. It is often useful to review the stu- dent’s medical record in the nurse’s office to see if the child has hearing or vision problems or is taking some medication that may have side effects that interfere with learning. The referring teacher(s) can provide samples of the student’s work. A writ- ing sample may provide some ideas about what type of errors the student makes and

Chapter 7 • Consulting About Students with Academic Skill Problems 193

how much he produces. Portfolio materials may also be available to give some sense of how well the student’s skills are improving over time. The referred student’s work should be compared to that of his classmates to get a sense of how “exceptional” he may actually be.

Interview. Techniques for interviewing consultees and other adults were discussed in Chapter 4. The main focus of the interview is to begin to define the problem and get a sense of its severity and the adult’s willingness to change his behavior in order to help the child. A student interview can be useful as well. The student interview can provide information on how well the student thinks he is doing in school, different learning strategies he employs or fails to employ, what types of attributions the student makes, and his willing- ness to change his behavior. Because most children are rather reticent when speaking with unfamiliar adults, it is best to avoid questions that can be answered with either a yes or a no. Figure 7.4 indicates some possible questions that might be asked in the case of an achievement problem.

Observation. Look at the way the classroom is set up and the whole-class atmosphere for learning. Observation has three main purposes: (a) Collect data that verifies or con- tradicts the information obtained during the teacher interview, (b) collect information on student–teacher interactions that occur naturally in the classroom, and (c) assess the amount of academic learning time the student is engaged in during class (Shapiro, 2011). A consultant can conduct descriptive observations by writing general impres- sions about what she observes. She can also conduct more empirical observations, if properly trained, by counting how often a particular academic behavior or set of behav- iors occurs during a specific interval. Event, momentary time sampling, and whole and partial interval are different types of empirical observations (Skinner, Rhymer, & McDaniel, 2000).

Testing. Testing may be both formal and informal. The extent to which more testing is required is based on how much assessment data currently exist and district policies of special education eligibility. In a full RtI/MTSS implementation school, little formal testing may be needed to verify that a student has a disability that cannot be addressed adequately without special education support. In an RtI/MTSS model, special education is the mechanism by which schools provide the most resource-intensive interventions to those who have failed to profit sufficiently from less-intensive interventions (Burns et al., 2010). However, some schools continue to operate under the cognitive achievement

fIgure 7.4 Sample interview questions for a student referred because of an achievement problem

Hello _______________; my name is _______________.

I am the _______________ here at _______________ school.

I’d like to talk to you about school, especially about ways that we can help you get better at some of your schoolwork. If I ask you a question that you don’t understand or can’t answer, tell me and I’ll try to ask it in another way.

Tell me about school in general. What are some of the parts of school that you like the best? _______________

What are some subjects you don’t like so well? What is it you don’t like about _______________?

(Focusing on the referral areas) What happens when you try _______________?

What are some of the parts of _______________ that seem difficult for you?

What are some things people have done to help you with _______________?

Do you feel they helped you? _______________

What are some ways you have found that make _______________ go better or easier for you?

What would you like us at school to do to help you with _______________?

Are there any questions you want to ask me about school? _______________

194 Chapter 7 • Consulting About Students with Academic Skill Problems

discrepancy and/or the cognitive processing disorder model of learning disability, which results in formal testing of cognition, achievement, and processing in order to qualify a student for special education under the LD category. Regardless of the service delivery model, tests should be selected based on their likelihood of answering an important question about the student’s learning. Tests that require a low level of inference (i.e., directly measure the academic behavior in question) are preferable to tests that require a high level of inference about how the results apply to the academic behavior (i.e., tests of traits or processing skills that are hypothesized to underlie the academic deficit; Christ, 2008).

Here is an outline of questions and suggestions for conducting the RIOT assessment, which may apply to either a learning or a behavior/adjustment problem:

1. Refine the reason for referral. What do the consultees really want to find out? What exactly are the learning or behavior/adjustment problems? Get diagnostic information (for example, typical in-class behaviors; typical behavioral difficulties) from the refer- ring party.

2. Is this referral a 3-year reevaluation (i.e., triennial evaluation)? If so, get up-to-date information on the progress of the student in her special education and general educa- tion program that has been provided during the last year and since the last complete evaluation. Data should be available on the student’s attainment of the IEP goals and objectives. Use an interview plus a review of the student’s records and whatever testing data are necessary.

3. What are the goals of this assessment? These are usually the goals of the referring person and other interested parties (the parent, you, the student). Some systems put goal statements in their reports, for example, “The purpose of this assessment is to determine the reasons for the student’s slow reading progress” or “One of the purposes of this assessment is to determine the amount of improvement in the student’s math ability.” These goal statements add focus to the assessment.

4. Once you’ve determined what the problems and goals are, determine sources of informa- tion that will clarify the problems and achieve the goals. Again, use all four aspects of the RIOT and focus on collecting data that require low levels of inference (i.e., direct measures of the skill of interest).

5. You probably should start with some observation of the student in an important area with- out letting the student know you are observing her. Discuss with the teacher how he wants you to observe in his classroom. If he has no preference, observe as a participant: Circulate around the room, observing how all the students react to the materials. This gives you a frame of reference against which to judge the behavior and/or responses of the referred student. If possible, try to get the teacher to show you what is being done currently to deal with the student’s learning problem. Again, try to have this done unob- trusively. Be sure to have something positive to say to the teacher about his work after every observation. This requires you to become a good observer of what people are doing well. Be sincere, of course.

6. Discuss your observations with the teacher. Was this a typical day? If not, what is a typical day? How is the current intervention working? If it is not working well, how does the teacher want to change it? What else is needed?

7. Presumably the referral (if it is an original one and not a 3-year referral) is made because the student isn’t progressing adequately. This prompts questions such as the following:

a. What interventions is the teacher trying? b. How well are they being done? c. How might they be improved? d. Is the teacher amenable to assistance? Is she willing to try something new? e. What can you offer? This is the point at which consultation often spins off from

assessment and becomes the collaborative problem-solving process described throughout this text.

Chapter 7 • Consulting About Students with Academic Skill Problems 195

Summary The school-based consultant is often asked to assist con- sultees in planning interventions for students who are experiencing academic delays. These students may be in general or special education. No matter the setting or the circumstances, these students are not doing well academ- ically relative to their peers, district benchmarks, or Common Core State Standards. The hope is that their teachers will ask for help from the school-based consult- ant and work collaboratively with her, the SST, or other

service delivery personnel or systems to ensure the development and implementation of evidence-based interventions. The consultant should be working to get past the attitude that the problem always lies within the child (or his parents), and to replace that with the idea that differentiated instruction, and targeted and intensive interventions can be very effective in assisting students to do better in school.

References Archer, A., & Hughes, C. A. (2010). Explicit instruction: Effective

and efficient teaching. New York, NY: Guilford. Arter, J. A., & Jenkins, J. R. (1979). Differential diagno-

sis: Prescriptive teaching: A critical appraisal. Review of Educational Research, 49(4), 517–555.

Ball, A. F. (2000). Empowering pedagogies that enhance the learning of multicultural students. Teachers College Records, 102(6), 1006–1034.

Barkley, R. (2005). Attention deficit-hyperactivity disorder: A handbook for diagnosis and treatment (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Guilford.

Boykin, A. (1994). Harvesting culture and talent: African American children and educational reform. In R. Rossi (Ed.), Schools and students at risk (pp. 116–130). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

Brody, N. (1997). Intelligence, schooling, and society. American Psychologist, 52, 1046–1050.

Burns, M. K., Appleton, J. J., & Stehouwer, J. D. (2005). Meta- analytic review of responsiveness-to-intervention research: Examining field-based and research implemented models. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 23(4), 381–394.

Burns, M. K, Christ, T. J., Boice, C. H., & Szadokierski, I. (2010). Special education in an RtI model. In T. A. Glover & S. Vaughn (Eds.), The promise of response to intervention (pp. 267–285). New York, NY: Guilford.

Burns, M. K., Riley-Tillman, T. C., & VanDerHeyden, A. M. (2012). RTI applications: Academic and behavioral interven- tions. New York, NY: Guilford.

Bursuck, W. D., & Damer, M. (2010). Teaching reading to students who are at risk or have disabilities (2nd ed). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2014). Attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Retrieved from http://www.cdc. gov/ncbddd/adhd/

Christ, T. J. (2008). Best practices in problem analysis. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school psychol- ogy (Vol. 4, pp. 159–176). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.

Daly, E. J., Witt, J. C., Martens, B. K., & Dool, E. J. (1997). A model for conducting a functional analysis of academic performance problems. School Psychology Review, 26(4), 54–74.

Dynarski, M., Clarke, L., Cobb, B., Finn, J., Rumberger, R., & Smink, J. (2008). Dropout prevention: A practice guide (NCEE

2008–4025). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved from http:// ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc

Echevarria, J., Vogt, M. E., & Short, D. (2008). Making content comprehensible for English learners: The SIOP model. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

Freedom Writers. (1999). The Freedom Writers diary. New York, NY: Random House.

Gleason, M., Archer, A., & Colvin, G. (2002). Interventions for improving study skills. In M. Shinn, H. Walker, & G. Stoner (Eds.), Interventions for academic and behavior problems (Vol. 2, pp. 651–680). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.

Goldenberg, C. (2008). Teaching English language learners: What research does—and does not—say. American Educator, Summer Edition, 8–44.

Good, R. H., Simmons, D. C., & Smith, S. B. (1998). Effective academic interventions in the United States: Evaluating and enhancing the acquisition of early reading skills. School Psychology Review, 27(1), 45–56.

Gravois, T. A., & Gickling, E. E. (2008). Best practices in instructional assessment. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology (Vol. 4, pp. 503–518). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.

Gruwell, E. (2007). The Freedom Writers diary teacher’s guide. New York, NY: Random House.

Hagans, K., & Powers, K. (2013). Multi-tiered systems of support: Recommendations for the elimination of barriers to implemen- tation fidelity in California. Napa, CA: California Services for Technical Assistance and Training.

Hart, B., & Risley, T. R. (1995). Meaningful differences in the everyday experience of young American children. Baltimore, MD: Brookes.

Harvey, V. S., & Chickie-Wolfe, L. A. (2008). Best practices in teaching study skills. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology (Vol. 4, pp. 1121– 1136). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.

Hemphill, L., & Tivnan, T. (2008). The importance of early vocabulary for literacy achievement for high poverty schools. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 13, 426–451.

196 Chapter 7 • Consulting About Students with Academic Skill Problems

Herman, K. C., Riley-Tillman, T. C., & Reinke, W. M. (2012). The role of assessment in a prevention science framework. School Psychology Review, 41, 306–314.

Heward, W. L. (2000). Exceptional children: An introduction to special education (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill/Pearson.

Hidi, S., & Harackiewicz, J. (2000). Motivating the academically unmotivated: A critical issue for the 21st century. Review of Educational Research, 70(2), 151–179.

Hosp., J. L., & Madyun, N. H. (2007). Addressing disproportion- ality with response to intervention. In S. R. Jimerson, M. K. Burns, & A. M. VanDerHeyden (Eds.), Handbook of response to intervention: The science and practice of assessment and intervention (pp. 172–181). New York, NY: Springer.

Hughes, C. (2013). Poverty and disability: Addressing the chal- lenge of inequality. Career Development and Transition for Exceptional Individuals. 36, 37–42.

Ikeda, M. J., Neesen, E., & Witt, J. C. (2008). Best practices in universal screening. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology (Vol. 4, pp. 103–114). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.

Jimerson, S. R., & Ferguson, P. (2007). A longitudinal study of grade retention: Academic and behavioral outcomes of retained students through adolescence. School Psychology Quarterly, 22, 314–339.

Kauffman, J. (2001). Characteristics of emotional and behavioral disorders of childhood and youth (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill/Pearson.

Kearns, D. M., & Fuchs, D. (2013). Does cognitively focused instruction improve the academic performance of low-achieving students? Exceptional Children, 79, 263–290.

Lee, C. (2001). Is October Brown Chinese? A cultural mod- eling activity system for underachieving students. American Educational Research Journal, 38(1), 97–142.

Lee, J. (2002). Racial and ethnic achievement gap trends: Reversing the progress toward equity? Educational Researcher, 31(1), 3–12.

Lerner, J. (2000). Learning disabilities (8th ed.). Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.

Lynch, E., Lewis, R., & Murphy, D. (1993). Educational services for students with chronic illnesses: Perspectives of educators and families. Exceptional Children, 59, 210–220.

Madaus, J. W., Gigal, M., & Hughes, C. (2014). Promoting access to postsecondary education for low-income students with dis- abilities. Career Development and Transition for Exceptional Individuals, 37, 50–59.

Marsh, H., & Craven, R. (1997). Academic self-concept: Beyond the Dust Bowl. In G. D. Phye (Ed.), Handbook of classroom assessment: Learning, achievement and adjustment. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

Marston, D., Muyskens, P., Lau, M., & Canter, A. (2003). Problem- solving model for decision making with high incidence dis- abilities: The Minneapolis experience. Learning Disabilities: Research and Practice, 18, 187–200.

Martin, A. J. (2009). Age appropriateness and motivation, engage- ment, and performance in high school: Effects of age within cohort, grade retention, and delayed school entry. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101, 101–114.

Martin, S. D., & Zirkel, P. A. (2011). Current issues in eligibil- ity decisions for students with ADD: What the courts say. Communique, 40(4), 4–6.

Meisels, S. J., & Liaw, F. R., (1993). Failure in grade: Do retained students catch up? Journal of Educational Research, 87, 69–77.

National Association of School Psychologists (2008). Appendix VI—NASP position statements: Ability grouping and tracking. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best prac- tices in school psychology (Vol. 4, pp. lxiii–lxiv). Bethesda, MD: Author.

National Association of School Psychologists (2010). Principles for professional ethics. School Psychology Review, 39(2), 302–319.

National Center for Educational Statistics. (2009). The condition of education (Rep. No. NCES 2002–025). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.

Newell, M., & Kratochwill, T. R. (2007). The integration of response to intervention and critical race theory–disability studies: A robust approach to reducing racial discrimination in evaluation decisions. In S. R. Jimerson, M. K. Burns, & A. M. VanDerHeyden (Eds.), Handbook of response to intervention: The science and practice of assessment and intervention (pp.  5–79). New York, NY: Springer.

No Child Left Behind Act. (2001). 34 CFR Part 200. Parrett, W., & Budge, K. (2009). Tough questions for tough

times. Educational Leadership (October). Retrieved from www.ascd.org

Powers, K., & Mandal, A. (2011). Tier 3 assessments, data-based decision making, and interventions. Contemporary School Psychologist, 16, 25–35.

Reynolds, C., Lowe, P., & Saenz, A. (1999). The problem of bias in psychological assessment. In C. Reynolds & T. Gutkin (Eds.), The handbook of school psychology (pp. 549–596). New York, NY: Wiley.

Rhode, G., Jenson, W., & Reavis, H. (2010). The tough kid book: Practical classroom management strategies (2nd ed). Eugene, OR: Pacific Northwest Publishing.

Salvia, J., Ysseldyke, J. E., & Bolt, S. (2009). Assessment: In special and inclusive education (11th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

Schofield, J. (1995). Promoting positive intergroup relations in school settings. In W. D. Hawley & A. W. Jackson (Eds.), Toward a common destiny: Improving race and ethnic relations in America. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Seligman, M. (1975). Helplessness: On depression, development and death. San Francisco, CA: Freeman.

Shapiro, E. S. (2011). Academic skills problems: Direct assess- ment and intervention (4th ed.). New York, NY: Guilford.

Sheets, R. H. (2003). Competency vs. good intentions: Diversity ideologies and teacher potential. Qualitative Studies in Education, 16(1), 111–120.

Skinner, C. H., Rhymer, K. N., & McDaniel, E. C. (2000). Naturalistic observation in educational settings. In E. S. Shapiro & T. R. Kratochwill (Eds.), Conducting school-based assessments of child and adolescent behavior (pp. 21–54). New York, NY: Guilford.

Slavin, R. (1997). Educational psychology: Theory and practice. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

Sroufe, A. (2012). Ritalin gone wrong. New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/29/ opinion/sunday/childrens-add-drugs-dont-work-long-term. html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

Sternberg, R. J., & Grigorenko, E. L. (2002). Difference scores in the identification of children with learning disabilities: It’s

Chapter 7 • Consulting About Students with Academic Skill Problems 197

time to use a different method. Journal of School Psychology, 40(1), 65–83.

Stillwell, R. (2010). Public School Graduates and Dropouts from the Common Core of Data: School Year 2007–08 (NCES 2010-341). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/ pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2010341

Stodolsky, S., & Grossman, P. (2000). Changing students, chang- ing teachers. Teachers College Record, 102(1), 125–172.

Thorell, L. B., & Dahlstrom, K. (2009) Children’s self-report on taking stimulant medication for ADHD. Journal of Attention Disorders, 5, 460–468.

Torgesen, J. K. (2007). Using an RtI model to guide early read- ing instruction: Effects on identification rates for students with learning disabilities. Tallahassee, FL: Florida Center for Reading Research at Florida State University.

U.S. Department of Education. (2004). Teaching children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder: Instructional strategies and practices, Washington, DC: Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services, Office of Special Education Programs.

U.S. Department of Education. (2009). 28th Annual Report to Congress on the Implementation of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, 2006 (Vol. 1). Washington, DC: Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services, Office of Special Education Programs.

VanDerHeyden, A. M., & Witt, J. C. (2008). Best practices in can’t do/won’t do assessment. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology (Vol. 4, pp. 131–140). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.

Vanderwood, M. L., & Nam, J. E. (2007). Response to interven- tion for English language learners: Current development and future directions. In S. R. Jimerson, M. K. Burns, & A. M. VanDerHeyden (Eds.), Handbook of response to interven- tion: The science and practice of assessment and intervention (pp. 408–417). New York, NY: Springer.

Vasquez, J. (1993). Teaching to the distinctive traits of minority students. In K. M. Cauley, F. Linder, & J. McMillan (Eds.), Annual editions: Educational psychology 93/94. Guilford, CT: Dushkin.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind and society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

What Works Clearinghouse. (2008). Lindamood phonemic sequencing: What Works Clearinghouse intervention report. Princeton, NJ: US Department of Education.

What Works Clearinghouse. (2013). Reading recovery: What Works Clearinghouse intervention report. Princeton, NJ: US Department of Education.

Ysseldyke, J., & Christenson, S. (2002). Functional assessment of academic behavior. Longmont, CO: Sopris West.

Transition Planning By Kristin Powers and Edwin Achola

8

Amitola is an outgoing 17-year-old with a large network of friends and family. She attends a local public high school and has made lots of friends there. At four months, she was diagnosed with sickle cell anemia associated with episodes of crises that cause joint pain, severe and chronic anemia, limited strength, painful blood clots, and shortness of breath. As a result, Amitola is hospitalized frequently, often every other month. Although she has trouble keeping pace with grade-level material, Amitola is on track to graduate with a standard diploma and hopes to get a degree in sports and fitness management after high school. Her transition team helped her get a weekend job at the local gym because she has indicated an interest in working in the fitness industry. Amitola’s warm personality and basic computer knowledge makes her a good fit for her position as a front desk operator at the local gym. However, her parents are apprehensive about the possibility that she will lose her social security disability benefits if she continues working at the gym.

Learning Outcomes

8.1 Describe the transition planning process as it applies to students with disabilities in high school.

8.2 Highlight key factors influencing transition outcomes across different groups.

8.3 Explain the legislative reforms that have an impact on transition planning.

8.4 Discuss the evidence base for transition planning.

Postsecondary outcomes for students with disabilities

The purpose of transition planning is to provide young people with the services and supports they need to move successfully into adult life. Through this process, decisions are made about future living arrangements, further schooling, career choices, and the like, often by the young adult with the input of teachers, school personnel, service agency representatives, and parents (Kramer & Blacher, 2001). Transition planning should be the focus of individualized education program (IEP) meetings for secondary students (Landmark, Roberts, & Zhang, 2013). The con- cept of transition planning in the field of special education is fairly recent. However, almost 90% of secondary school students receiving special education services have transition planning under- way on their behalf, with about two-thirds beginning the process by age 14 (Cameto, Levine, & Wagner, 2004).

Activity 8.1

Watch this 6-minute video overview of transi- tion planning: https://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=sdA92E4ggzk. Identify and discuss

major themes that emerge around transition planning.

Even though a great majority of students with disabilities have transition planning underway, too many students fail to attain the desired adult outcomes stated in the transition plans. For example, students with disabilities attend postsecondary education programs at

198

Chapter

rates much lower than their peers without disabilities. In fact, data from the National Longitudinal Transition Study–2 (Newman et al., 2011) indicate that the patterns of disparate postschool outcomes remain true even for those who enroll in postsecondary education. In general, only 41% of students with disabilities report completing postsecondary education programs, compared to 52% of their peers without disabilities. Students with disabilities are far less likely to attain competitive employment after leaving high school; even when employed, many earn markedly less income than their peers without disabilities (Blackorby & Wagner, 1996).

Perhaps more intriguing are the transition experiences and outcomes for culturally and linguistically diverse (CLD) youth, particularly those who come from economically disadvan- taged households. First, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) and, by exten- sion, the transition process have been established alongside values such as individualism, equity, and choice (Kalyanpur & Harry, 2012, p. 39). Such ideals have been defined as Eurocentric (Banks & McGee Banks, 2010; Spindler & Spindler, 1990) and thus may not always be shared by CLD families. Consequently, many CLD families report the burden of having to “act White,” which affects their in-school and postschool outcomes and transition visions (Goff, Martin, & Thomas, 2007). In fact, parents of students from culturally diverse backgrounds and from low- income households tend to be less satisfied than other parents with their level of involvement in the transition planning process (Cameto et al., 2004), and they report struggling to access com- munity resources that are available to them (Cartledge, Gardner, & Ford, 2008). Their contribu- tions to the transition planning process may be undervalued by school professionals because they fall outside the realm of school-based planning, and take place in homes and communities (Geenen, Powers, & Lopez-Vasquez, 2001).

African American and Latino/Latina youth with disabilities have greater difficulty than White youth with disabilities finding employment, and when they do work, they earn signifi- cantly less than White workers (Blackorby & Wagner, 1996). Similar outcomes have also been reported in the transition domain of postsecondary education and training. Data from the second National Longitudinal Transition Study found African American, Hispanic, and low socioeco- nomic status (SES) to be associated with lower rates of high school graduation and college enrollment for this sample of students with disabilities (Wagner, Newman, & Javitz, 2014). However, the impact of SES and race on postsecondary outcomes was small once parental expec- tations, high school GPA, and credits earned in general education were taken into account, which points to the importance of providing good guidance counseling and fostering within parents the expectation that their child will graduate (Wagner et al., 2014).

Parental expectations appear to have a profound effect on students’ postsecondary out- comes. Parents of students with disabilities and low SES have lower expectations about their child attending college (Madaus, Grigal, & Hughes, 2014). Poverty and disability can have a cumulative, deleterious effect due to higher teacher turnover, limited access to high-quality resources, lack of highly trained teachers, and diminished expectations and information about college attendance in many high-poverty schools(Madaus et al., 2014). School-based consultants can counter these risk factors by promoting the expectation that all students should consider col- lege and providing current information about college options and opportunities to youth with disabilities (Madaus et al., 2014).

Females with disabilities generally experience less favorable postsecondary outcomes than males with disabilities do (Lindstrom, Harwick, Poppen, & Doren, 2012). They are underem- ployed (i.e., they work fewer hours and are less likely to work high-skilled jobs) and make less money than men with equivalent education (Lindstrom et al., 2012). Researchers have found that women with disabilities report lack of opportunities to explore careers, particularly those domi- nated by men; insufficient self-confidence or social assertiveness; and a paucity of female role models as reasons for them to be less competitive in the job market (Hogansen, Powers, Geenen, Gil-Kashiwabara, & Powers, 2008; Lindstrom et al., 2012; Powers, Hogansen, Geenen, Powers, & Gil-Kashiwabara, 2008). They concluded that young women with disabilities face a double jeopardy in the form of gender stereotyping and disability discrimination.

School-based consultants need to be aware of these systemic inequalities and continually reflect on their own potential biases. For example, do you tend to bring up science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) careers more often for certain students based on their race or gender? Critics of current transition practices argue that bias against students with

Chapter 8 • Transition Planning 199

200 Chapter 8 • Transition Planning

disabilities results in narrowing of their career options to the “three Fs”—food, flora, and filth. Examples of jobs in these areas include food preparation, gardening, and cleaning.

Some of the challenges yet to be addressed in current transition programs include (1) a narrowing of the curriculum, where students are placed on either a diploma or a nondiploma track, rather than provided with a full range of curricular opportunities; (2) limited access to postsecondary education and to employment and independent living opportunities; (3) insuffi- cient student and family participation in developing and implementing the plans; and (4) lack of collaboration and system links at all levels (Johnson, Stodden, Emanuel, Luecking, & Mack, 2002). Seeking to improve transition planning and the postschool outcomes for individuals with disabilities, the U.S. Congress provided several new requirements to strengthen the transition- planning mandate stipulated in the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (2004). In the next section, we present an overview of changes to the transition requirements in IDEA 2004.

LegaL Mandates

Since 1990, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) has required IEP teams to engage in transition planning for students with disabilities over the age of 14. Since then, subsequent reauthorizations of the law have introduced several important changes to the transition- planning process. First, by redefining transition service, IDEA now states that activities should focus on

improving the academic and functional achievement of the child with a disability to facilitate the child’s movement from school to post-school activities, including post- secondary education, integrated employment (including supported employment), continuing and adult education, adult services, independent living or community participation. (IDEA, 2004, Sec. 602(34)(A))

The definition has been expanded to include a requirement that the transition services be based on the student’s strengths and needs as well as her or his preferences and interests. The most recent reauthorization of IDEA also requires transition planning to begin no later than the first IEP to be in effect when the child turns 16, or younger if determined suitable by the IEP team, and the IEP must include appropriate measurable postschool goals based on age-appropriate transition assess- ments related to training; education; employment; and, where appropriate, independent living skills. Many students with disabilities reach the age of majority during the transition process and are therefore expected to assume control over their persons, actions, and decisions, thereby termi- nating the legal control and legal responsibilities of their parents or guardian over and for them. Consequently, the law requires local education agencies (LEAs) to include a statement that the child has been informed of the child’s rights that will transfer to the child on reaching the age of majority, beginning not later than one year before the child reaches the age of majority under state law. More important, LEAs are required to invite a student with a disability to attend the student’s IEP team meeting if the student’s postsecondary goals and transition services will be discussed.

To monitor the implementation of the special education law, the U.S. Department of Education requires states to develop state performance plans around 20 indicators, on which data

Activity 8.2

In teams of two to six students, discuss the “three Fs” stereotype. Review the career objec- tives of some transition plans provided by the instructor or found online in terms of this

potential bias. If you find evidence of this bias, is it more prominent for students with more severe disabilities?

Activity 8.3

Watch the 5-minute video on employment of an individual with Down syndrome at https:// www.youtube.com/watch?v=PhPIi9KF4Cw.

Discuss what David adds to the work setting and ways his employer supported his training.

Chapter 8 • Transition Planning 201

are submitted annually in annual performance reports. Indicators 13 and 14 are the two quantita- tive indicators that directly assess transition planning as well as transition outcomes. The 13th indicator relates to transition services for students; the 14th indicator concerns itself with the outcomes that youth with disabilities achieve once they exit high school. The current measure- ment language for indicator 13 states:

Percent of youth with IEPs aged 16 and above with an IEP that includes appropriate measurable postsecondary goals that are annually updated and based upon an age appropriate transition assessment, transition services, including courses of study, that will reasonably enable the student to meet those postsecondary goals, and annual IEP goals related to the student’s transition service needs. There also must be evi- dence that the student was invited to the IEP team meeting where transition services are to be discussed and evidence that, if appropriate, a representative of any partici- pating agency was invited to the IEP team meeting with the prior consent of the par- ent or student who has reached the age of majority. [20 U.S.C. 1416(a) (3) (B)]

Thus, school-based consultants involved in transition planning must invite the student as well as the parents. The consultant or other educator should prepare the student for the meeting so he or she can participate fully.

The school-based consultant can also help to draft measurable postsecondary goals and develop or suggest services that are likely to help the student reach her or his goals. Research on current transition practices does indicate a need for improvement. For example, a review of 399 transition plans found little evidence that the students’ preferences had been taken into account, very little interagency collaboration (only 15% were signed by a community agent), and poorly articulated goals and activities (Powers, Gil-Kashiwabara, Powers, Geenen, Balandran, & Palmer, 2005). The activities of 14% of the 1,747 postsecondary goals reviewed were to be carried out exclusively by the student, even though the student had not signed the IEP and presumably was not involved in articulating the goal. Actual transition goals from the study are presented in Figure 8.1.

Activity 8.4

Review the transition plan goals and activities listed in Figure 8.1. Do they meet IDEA

requirements? Write more detailed goals and activities for the second and third students.

figure 8.1 Examples of transition plan goals and activities for three students

Goal for Student 1: Attend nursing school (bachelor’s degree).

Action Steps: Continue to pursue graduation by June of this year. Apply for financial aid in early January. Researching various nursing schools and requirements or prerequisites should be on the top of her to-do list. She will have to go to the nearest public library to use the Internet, but she can also use the phone to talk with nurses in the profession for the information. She should also be willing to participate in any job shadows/intern- ships that Mr. N., her job coach, and the team that is working with her feel would benefit her with getting first- hand experience. She can also talk to Mr. K., the school counselor, for any of the above information. The local community college has a two-year associate degree in nursing, which may be more open and flexible for her to start with than the local 4-year university, given her medical concerns. She should also contact Luke S., the SAT coordinator, for SAT information.

Goal for Student 2: Wants to attend college.

Action Steps:

—Enroll in community college of choice.

—Apply for financial aid/student loans

—Contact office of disabilities to explore support services available

—Determine career/study direction within two years.

Goal for Student 3: Become a veterinarian.

Action Steps: Babysitting

202 Chapter 8 • Transition Planning Chapter 8 • Transition Planning 203

Although it is common for professionals involved in transition planning to focus on fulfill- ing the legal requirements of the transition law, perhaps due to fear of litigation and sanctions, this stance misses the spirit of the law. For example, transition coordinators might verify that teachers select and document the use of age-appropriate transition assessments as required by the law. However, some age-appropriate assessments are not culturally appropriate. For instance, the Employment/Life Skills Assessment (Weaver & DeLuca, 1987), which is designed for children between ages 6 and13 years, measures effective communication based on indicators such as eye contact, turn taking, and a child’s ability to ask questions. Even though behaviors such as ques- tioning and eye contact are helpful in many western societies, in some cultures, such behaviors are perceived as disrespectful when displayed by children and, in fact, are very much discour- aged. Unfortunately, a transition assessment that is age-appropriate would still satisfy compli- ance requirements even if it is not culturally appropriate. Under such circumstances, the actual intent of the law is lost. The increased focus on satisfying legal requirements may lead profes- sionals to find ways of exploiting technicalities, loopholes, and the somewhat general language— leading to less meaningful transition plans. Given that the transition-planning process was conceived as a means of ensuring a good quality of life for individuals with disabilities, it is crucial for school-based consultants to have a thorough understanding of the youth and families with whom they work, and more important, the families’ perception of quality of life.

transition Planning with students and families

Among middle-income families in many western societies, the dominant perspective on quality of life is one that values a heightened focus on individual child outcomes related to employment, postsecondary education, and independent living. For these families, a comprehensive transition process is one that designs the high school experience to ensure that students gain the skills, experiences, and connections they need to achieve goals related to competitive employment; postsecondary education; and living independently, often outside the family residence.

School-based consultants should exercise caution in assuming that everyone holds the same perspectives about quality of life. The World Health Organization Quality of Life (WHOQOL), for example, defined quality of life as “individuals’ perceptions of their position in life in the context of the culture and value systems in which they live and in relation to their goals, expectations, standards and concerns” (Bonomi, Patrick, Bushnell, & Martin, 2000; World Health Organization, 1994).

Current research shows that many young adults and their families hold perceptions of quality of life that vary from those espoused in the field of secondary transition planning, particularly around areas such as employment, personal choice, friendships, independence, and equality of opportunity. A study of culturally based attitudes, beliefs, and meanings of transition among Latina mothers of young adults with developmental disabilities revealed a lack of a shared perspective between these mothers and the system designed to help them and their children (Rueda, Monzo, Shapiro, Gomez, & Blacher, 2005). For example, the mothers in this study felt that their children should not be free to make their own decisions merely because they are considered adults under the law. Additionally, the notion of having one’s young adult living independently, on his or her own, was not part of the mind-set of these mothers, regardless of whether a developmental disability was involved. Instead, the home was seen as the appropriate residential setting for the young adult with developmental disabilities. For the mothers who participated in this study, employment, at present or in the future, was not a major aspiration for their young adults with disabilities. Rather, when employment settings were discussed, it was with reference to an extension of school and an oppor- tunity to continue basic skills training. Given that perceptions of what constitutes transition out- comes and, by extension, quality of life vary widely across families, a flexible approach to transition planning is necessary, particularly when working with families whose home cultures differ signifi- cantly from that of the mainstream or school culture. Unfortunately, it is with this very population of families that schools have often been most challenged in developing effective collaborative rela- tionships when planning for transition (Povenmire-Kirk, Lindstrom, & Bullis, 2010).

maximizing the Participation of students and families

Student involvement in transition planning is critical to keeping the plans and goals connected to the student’s future aspirations. Student-led transition planning provides the opportunity for the student to learn and practice self-advocacy and self-determination. Self-determination is a set of

202 Chapter 8 • Transition Planning Chapter 8 • Transition Planning 203

skills that includes being able to access resources and express one’s needs and preferences in order to achieve desired outcomes (Washington, Hughes, & Cosgriff, 2012). Self-determination has been found to be associated with many positive outcomes, including more positive academic achievement, employment experiences, and quality of life (Wehmeyer, Palmer, Shogren, Williams-Diehm, & Soukup, 2013). Numerous instructional programs have been developed to promote self-determination skills among students with disabilities including Whose Future Is IT Anyway? by Wehmeyer and Lawrence, and Take Charge for the Future by Powers and colleagues (Martin & Williams-Diehm, 2013). Self-determination skills are commonly taught through direct instruction, modeling, verbal rehearsal, and role play, and they are associated with increased student participation in IEP meetings (Griffin, 2011). Teaching self-determination has been criti- cized by some for being too rooted in individualistic values that are counter to more collectivistic values held by many non-Caucasian cultures. However, there is a lack of empirical research to confirm this assertion. One study did find that CLD students benefitted from self-determination training (Griffin, 2011).

The consultant may consider whether self-determination training should be modified to emphasize interdependence and communal responsibility. For some students, consultants should promote independence without autonomy for students with certain CLD backgrounds because families who believe in the predominance of group identity tend to be more accepting of some independent behavior exercised within the confines of group expectations. For example, young adults from CLD families may be encouraged to pursue individual careers that ultimately allow them to support their siblings financially. The primary goal for self-determination training for CLD young adults however, should be less individualistic and more collectivistic, with a focus on seeking to promote collective obligations such as advocating for the family. Thus, instead of orienting a child to set individual goals, advocate for him- or herself, and make choices based on individual desires, consultants can work with CLD children on how to align personal goals with those of the family, build advocacy skills in order to advocate for their families and communities, and make choices in concert with families while considering the implications of those choices to family well-being.

School consultants can help ensure that students with disabilities play an active role in their transition planning by teaching students transition-planning terminology, concepts, and processes (Martin & Williams-Diehm, 2013). Secondary students should be very familiar with their IEP and transition goals and be able to work toward those goals on a daily basis.

Activity 8.5

Visit a high school special education class. Once you receive permission from the school adminis- trator, special education teacher, students, and the students’ parents, ask students to volunteer to share their IEP and transition goals with you.

How knowledgeable are they about their IEPs and transition plans? Do they seem invested in achieving the goals? Do they know how to achieve their goals? Ask them how involved they were in developing their plans.

Parental involvement in transition planning is viewed widely by parents and educators as essential to the process, yet parental engagement in transition varies (Landmark, Roberts, & Zhang, 2013). Some of the barriers to parental participation in transition planning for CLD families include (a) divergent goals (independent versus interdependent) for adulthood, (b) school personnel undervaluing family-promoted non-education-related transition activi- ties, (c) logistical barriers such not being able to take time off from work to attend transition meetings, and (d) lack of parental knowledge about their rights and the transition procedures (Geenen, Powers, & Lopez-Valsquez, 2001; Landmark et al., 2013). School-based consultants may be able to increase CLD parental involvement by acknowledging and accentuating the benefits to the student of the family- and/or community-based transition activities rather than highlighting a lack of participation in the formal transition planning in the schools (Geenen et al., 2005).

Landmark, Roberts, and Zhang (2013) examined educators’ beliefs and practices about parent involvement in transition planning from two school LEAs, one that had high rates of parental involvement as documented on students’ IEP and a second district that had low levels of parental involvement in transition planning. Teachers from the low parental

204 Chapter 8 • Transition Planning Chapter 8 • Transition Planning 205

participation district were more likely to shift the responsibility to initiate and maintain involvement in the transition planning to the parents, and they were more focused on barri- ers to participation such as parents not being able to leave work early, being intimidated by school staff members, and indifference to their children’s transition planning. Teachers from the high parental involvement LEA were more likely to acknowledge a wider range of activities that parents may engage in to participate in transition planning and sympathized with parents’ general lack of knowledge or understanding of transition planning. The authors concluded that many educators do not feel competent enough in transition planning itself, much less able to explain it to parents. They also suggest that the LEA leadership should establish a cultural norm of inclusion of parents in transition planning through sys- tems change (see Chapter 9 for suggestions on systems change). This could be an important role for a school-based consultant.

the transition Planning Process

The transition planning process can be separated into five distinct components that include the following: (a) appropriate transition assessments; (b) development of present levels of academic achievement and functional performance; (c) development of measurable postsecondary and annual goals; (d) determination of transition services, including courses of study, activities, and linkages; and (f) achievement of desired outcomes.

appropriate transition assessments

One of the primary purposes of transition planning is to define the student’s postsecondary goals clearly by assessing and defining student strengths, needs, and desires in order to develop an appropriate curricular plan, including academic and functional coursework and community- based instruction necessary to meet postsecondary goals (Test, Aspel, & Everson, 2006). Transition assessments allow school practitioners, families, and agencies opportunities to under- stand the youth’s and families’ strengths, needs, and preferences with regard to postsecondary life. Even though the practice of gathering data relevant to transition outcomes is generally per- ceived as an initial step in the planning process, it should be an ongoing process that guides deci- sion making throughout the planning process. Assessment data serve as the common thread in the transition process and form the basis for defining goals and services to be included in the IEP (Sitlington, Neubert, & Leconte, 1997).

Through the assessment process, young adults with disabilities and their families learn about new options and ideas that they may not have considered previously. For example, the Student Dream Sheet survey (Aspel, 2005) requires young adults to respond to the question, “What type of pay and benefits do you want from your future job?” This question allows the respondents to consider not just the option of finding employment but also think about important advantages associated with gainful employment. Although transition assessments vary in type, form, and scope, they most commonly include measures of vocational interests and skills, post- secondary education interests, self-determination skills, independent living skills, ecological assessments, and other transition-related skills. The Division of Exceptional Children on Career Development and Transition has developed guidelines for age-appropriate transition assessments that involve assessing the student and his or her environment, and then examining the match between the student and the environment (Neubert & Leconte, 2013). Effective transition assess- ments incorporate the following:

• Use of multiple types and levels of assessment (both formal and informal assessments). • Involvement of all stakeholders, including the youth with a disability, families, peers,

teachers, and other service providers. • Organization of data to make it user-friendly for students, parents, and other support per-

sonnel. • Culturally appropriate modifications if necessary. • Identification of desired, attainable, and measurable postsecondary goals. • Data-based decision making to develop IEP goals and summary of performance (SOP)

documentation that facilitates connection to postsecondary supports.

204 Chapter 8 • Transition Planning Chapter 8 • Transition Planning 205

Ultimately, transition assessments should be able to answer three questions:

Where is the student and his or her family presently?

Where are the student and his or her family going?

How does the student get there?

Activity 8.6

Watch the video clip at https://www. youtube. com/watch?v=NsIhh0aVMVY and record the questions that were asked. What purpose do

they serve? How do the students respond to the questions? How will the information help guide the transition-planning process?

development of Present levels of academic achievement and functional Performance

As part of the transition-planning process, IDEA requires that each individualized transition program (ITP) must include a statement of the child’s present levels of academic achievement and functional performance (PLAAFP). Traditionally, this part of the IEP has been commonly referred to as the present levels of performance (PLOP). However, the most recent reauthoriza- tion of the law adds clarity by distinguishing the two areas of performance considered necessary for transition planning. Academic achievement generally refers to a child’s performance in aca- demic areas (e.g., reading, math, and science), while functional performance is often used in the context of routine activities of everyday living that are not academic in nature. The major com- ponents of PLAAFP include the following:

• A summary of the student’s evaluation related to current academic achievement and func- tional performance, which must be stated in objective and measurable terms. The data provided in this section include but are not limited to test scores pertinent to the child’s diagnosis, results from curriculum-based assessments, and results from transition assessments.

• Strengths of the student, which should reflect specific skills or behaviors that the student has mastered with regard to the transition domains targeted.

• Areas of growth, which detail the student’s needs resulting from the disability. The needs are generally determined by considering important skills and behaviors deemed critical for the student to learn in order to be able to participate and make progress in the general curriculum.

It is important for transition professionals to note that, even though test scores from the initial and three-year special education evaluation are very useful in developing PLAAFP, they may not provide the most up-to-date information regarding the student’s academic and functional perfor- mance. Practitioners should avoid vague descriptions of how the disability affects involvement and progress in the general education curriculum. On the whole, PLAAFP must be current, rel- evant, objective, measurable, and stated in a language that is understandable to all members of the ITP.

measurable Postsecondary and annual goals

Once the assessment information has been gathered, reviewed, and summarized in the PLAAFP, the next step is writing measurable transition goals. The members of the multidisciplinary transi- tion planning (MTP) team, which includes the student, his or her family, agency representatives, peers, and school professionals, engage in a collaborative process to determine appropriate post- school and annual goals, which are updated annually. A postsecondary goal reflects a young adult’s aspirations for life after completing high school (Test, Aspel, & Everson, 2006). Postsecondary goals are achieved only after the student graduates from high school. On the other hand, annual goals are short term in nature, often achievable within the current school year. More important, the annual objectives must be aligned with postschool goals. Here is an example:

Postsecondary Goal: Upon graduation from high school, Polamalu will attend Stanford University and graduate with a bachelor of science degree in computer engineering.

206 Chapter 8 • Transition Planning Chapter 8 • Transition Planning 207

Annual Objective: After meeting with a guidance counselor, Polamalu will list all the aca- demic requirements of pursuing a bachelor of science degree in computer engineering at Stanford University.

This postsecondary education goal is measurable for four reasons: (a) participation in training is the focus of the goal; (b) it is based on successful admission into and completion of a bachelor of science degree program, which is observable with Polamalu enrolling and graduating or not; (c) the expectation or behavior is stated explicitly because Polamalu will enroll and attain the degree or not; and (d) it is stated that admission into the bachelor of science program will occur after high school graduation. The supporting annual objective is aligned with the postsecondary education and training goal for Polamalu. Clearly defined goals and objectives provide the mul- tidisciplinary team with specific direction in the process of identifying the types of opportunities and areas of training students need in order to transition successfully into postschool life.

Activity 8.7

Watch the 7-minute video about Ben’s transi- tion to adulthood at https://www.youtube. com/watch?v=WXqkuZkJ5Xo. Discuss how some of the themes related to transition plan- ning are addressed (e.g., independence, choice,

interagency support, employment, etc.). In a small group, draft some postsecondary goals for Ben based on this video. What more would you like to know about Ben to write better goals?

transition services

After establishing appropriate postsecondary goals and objectives, the multidisciplinary team needs to consider both in-school, and out-of-school experiences and services relevant to the achievement of transition goals. The experiences and services should enable the student to meet postsecondary goals and may include, but are not limited to, related services (e.g., occupational therapy, physical therapy, audiology service, orientation mobility), advanced placement classes, community experiences, job shadowing, instruction in daily living, career and technical educa- tion, and work-study.

Research on evidence-based transition practices is quite thin (Mazzotti, Rowe, Cameto, Test, & Morningstar, 2014). Most of the research is based on correlational research rather than experimental research (i.e., randomized controlled trials [RCTs]). For example, Rabren, Carpenter, Dunn, and Carney (2014) found five variables to be significant predictors of postsec- ondary employment for a group of 500 young adults with either learning disabilities or intellec- tual disabilities: (1) gender, (2) race, (3) spending greater time in general education classes, (4) having a job in high school, and (5) vocational education courses. Test, Mazzotti, and col- leagues (2009) found inclusion in general education, paid employment, independent living skills, and student support from family and friend networks to be correlated with higher levels of educa- tion, employment, and independence in adulthood. Daviso, Denney, Baer, and Flexer (2011) found that transition-age students with disabilities valued activities such as career and technical education, independent paid work, extracurricular activities, college classes, and job shadowing.

It is helpful to know these predictors and preferences when engaged in transition planning; however, a correlational study leaves much in question. Why do females experience poorer out- comes than males? Is it the result of sexism? Do females have more significant disabilities than males? Are career programs not designed with them in mind? Likewise, spending greater time in general education may simply be a proxy variable for having less severe disabilities. Experimental studies, like the RCT of the mentoring program Check and Connect (Sinclair, Christenson, & Thurlow, 2005), provide better evidence that implementing a particular program or service will lead to more positive outcomes.

Test, Fowler, and colleagues (2009) reviewed the literature on transition practices by applying the Council on Exceptional Children’s standards for evidence-based intervention (EBI) and concluded that only two practices—teaching life skills and teaching purchasing skills—have a strong level of evidence, while 28 (e.g., self-determination training, student-led IEPs, community-based instruction of employment and life skills, teaching youth and families about transition) have a moderate level of support in the existing literature. Consultants

206 Chapter 8 • Transition Planning Chapter 8 • Transition Planning 207

involved in transition planning should familiarize themselves with the literature on effective transition practices but be aware that moderate or low empirical support may indicate only that the research has yet to be completed on a particular strategy and is not indicative that the strat- egy will not work.

The National Secondary Transition Technical Assistance Center (NSTTAC) publishes a list of evidence-based and promising practices on their Web site. School-based consultants are encouraged to review the list periodically to generate ideas for high-quality transition planning, even if most of the suggestions are deemed “promising” rather than “evidence-based.” Some of the practices include (a) community-based training, (b) forward and backward chaining to teach a skill, and (c) mnemonics to remember concepts or procedures.

Activity 8.8

Search the Web for the NSTTAC’s evidence- based practices and predictors of postsecond- ary success. Assign two or three of the practices

to a group member to research and share with the group.

Despite these transition supports and services, students with disabilities, as a group, continue to experience poorer postsecondary outcomes compared to individuals without dis- abilities (Mellard & Lancaster, 2003; SRI International, 2005). Contributing to the undesira- ble outcomes are inadequate transition services, which regularly exclude student input and often deter students from transitioning successfully (Hitchings, Luzzo, Ristow, Horvath, Retish, & Tanners, 2001). It is therefore critical for school professionals to consider thought- fully the evidence base of selected transition services and, more important, collaborate mean- ingfully with all stakeholders in making decisions regarding transition services. School-based consultants should consider and discuss with the families the unique needs of students based on socioeconomic status, gender, ethnicity, and culture. For example, Lindstrom and col- leagues (2012) suggest providing girls with female role models, self-advocacy training, and more frequent and varied career experiences. Similarly, transition professionals must make the best of efforts to ensure that transition goals for youth from CLD families are aligned with family priorities.

transition outcomes

Overall, the transition planning requirements of the IDEA have evolved from accountability for services to accountability for postschool outcomes such as education and employment (Flexer, Baer, Luft, & Simmons, 2008). In fact, indicator 14 of the IDEA mandated reporting requires states to report the percentage of youth who are no longer in secondary school, had IEPs in effect at the time they left school, and were

a) Enrolled in higher education within one year of leaving high school b) Enrolled in higher education or competitively employed within one year of leaving high

school c) Enrolled in higher education or in some other postsecondary education or training pro-

gram, or competitively employed or in some other employment within one year of leaving high school

While indicator 14 focuses on a narrow range of postsecondary outcomes (i.e., enroll in higher education; participate in competitive employment, postsecondary education, or training; and other employment options), an outcome-oriented transition process should address a broader spectrum of outcomes. Young adults and their families have diverse view- points regarding what constitutes a satisfactory life after school. For many, a successful life after school is defined by attainment of postsecondary education, self-determination, gain- ful employment, and independent living, while for others, a satisfactory life after school entails meeting family obligations, living with family, and assuming responsibility in the community.

208 Chapter 8 • Transition Planning Chapter 8 • Transition Planning 209

collaborative consultation with stakeholders

Thus far, we have emphasized the importance of students’ and families’ contributions to the transition-planning process. Effective transition planning is complex and requires the participa- tion of multiple stakeholders from multiple contexts at both the individual and systems level.

consultation with school Personnel

Successful attainment of the postschool outcomes hinges on collaborative relationships devel- oped among families, agencies, and relevant school personnel. Unfortunately, not all profession- als responsible for providing services to students with special needs participate in the collaborative planning process. For example, student support or related service personnel (i.e., school psy- chologists, speech and language therapists, occupational therapists) are unlikely to be actively involved in transition planning. In fact, only 18% to 20% of students have related services per- sonnel participate in their transition planning (Cameto et al., 2004; Powers et al., 2005). Student support personnel are underutilized, though their contributions are highly valued in the transi- tion-planning process when they participate (Mankey, 2011). School-based consultants may be able to increase the participation of support staff by facilitating greater communication between and among the different personnel about each other’s discipline and potential contributions to the transition-planning process (Mankey, 2011). Some schools and districts have transition special- ists who have expertise in transition planning. They may serve multiple sites or one school, and they may be involved in direct services or operate only as a consultant to the transition-planning process. They can be a valuable resource for identifying various services and opportunities in the community.

consultation with community members

Transition to adulthood is multifaceted; it involves different professionals and family members collaborating across multiple settings. A young adult may need support from school personnel, vocational rehabilitation providers, developmental disability centers, postsecondary trainers, physicians, and her or his employer in order to develop a coherent plan for the next year. One of the most promising practices is creating and sustaining community transition teams, which work to improve transition services for youth in a local community (Noonan, Erickson, & Morningstar, 2013). Community transition teams require real and sustained systems change, including clarity of purpose, frequent meetings to make data-based decisions, focused effort over several years, commitment from diverse stakeholders, and accountability (Fixsen, Blasé, Horner, & Sugai, 2009; more detail on systems change is presented in Chapter 9). A community transition team can reduce duplication of services, help match services to individual needs, seek ways to estab- lish services that are unavailable in a community, and influence local politics and practices. Specifically, the team may hold community fairs, share resources, build one-stop centers, and produce public service announcements like the one at https://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=K3SQWxXO7mU by the LaCross County Transitional Advisory Council. A study of 16 community transition teams found establishing the teams was associated with improved col- laboration, including an increase in shared vision, the variety of partnerships, time together, and joint planning (Noonan et al., 2013).

Activity 8.9

A range of transition agencies, including state, regional, and community transition teams, oper- ate at different levels within your state. Discuss how such teams can support the efforts of

school-based individualized transition-planning teams to improve transition outcomes for youth with disabilities.

Even if a community transition team or transition council does not exist in your area, it is important at the very least to invite representatives and caseworkers from outside agencies, as well as families and their supporters, to transition-planning meetings. At the meeting, the school- based consultant can facilitate community resource mapping, in which resources are identified

208 Chapter 8 • Transition Planning Chapter 8 • Transition Planning 209

and mapped onto the student’s transition goals. A short video on resource mapping can be found at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ikn3SrGR4DI Many resources in a student’s life go unnoticed, particularly families’ informal support networks (Ordoñez-Jasis & Myck-Wayne, 2012). An extensive analysis of the community should be completed to ensure that all programs and services are identified (Wehman, 2013). Crane and Mooney (2005) describe four steps to the community resource mapping process:

1. Pre-mapping: Allows stakeholders to lay the foundation for productive collaboration and to establish a clear vision and goals for building a system.

2. Mapping: Determines which resources to map and how best to map them. The collection and analysis of data at this time helps stakeholders to identify strengths and challenges.

3. Taking action: Allows stakeholders to determine the most useful plan of action for effec- tively addressing the data findings and established goals. Communicating and disseminat- ing information are vital throughout the implementation step.

4. Maintaining: The final step involves maintaining, sustaining, and evaluating the efforts outlined in the map by continuously evaluating progress, making necessary changes to the plan, and learning from experiences.

In sum, the mapping process should provide the transition team with information regarding, the range of agencies and organizations available within the community, roles and functions of each organization and agency, and the criteria necessary to gain acceptance into these programs.

collaborative consultation transition Planning in action

As earlier defined in this text, collaborative consultation takes place between or among two or more people, with the role of expert shifting periodically among participants. A main goal of col- laborative consultation in transition planning is to establish a process that allows all participants to contribute meaningfully to the transition process. Consultants can establish such a process in two ways. First, school-based consultants work with schools in training the transition team to establish professional behaviors that contribute to collaborative partnerships, such as respect, reciprocity, communication, and commitment. Such training may include a series of facilitated dialogues between families and professionals, with the intention of achieving greater clarity, and progress toward more satisfying relationships. Discussions between families and school profes- sionals in each community or school setting are important because they provide an opportunity for clarification of the meaning of terms like respect, trust, and commitment in the context of the given community (Blue-Banning, Summers, Frankland, Nelso, & Beegle, 2004). Second, school- based consultants can establish a meaningful and collaborative transition process by assisting the transition team in developing an approach to service delivery that is best suited to address the unique needs of families. The approaches that are more common in transition literature and prac- tice include person-centered planning, family-centered planning, and person-family-centered planning.

In person-centered planning (PCP), the transition planning begins with explaining the stu- dent’s distinct preferences, skills, and needs (Greene & Kochhar-Bryant, 2003) and developing a unique program around those personal characteristics. Typically, the young adult with a disabil- ity and his or her circle of support (e.g., peers, family members, community members, profes- sionals) develop a transition plan based on the individual youth’s interests and areas of need. This process may involve community mapping, in which the transition planning team (TPT) members explore all the possible resources and opportunities in a school, neighborhood, and community before developing the transition plan. Interagency collaboration also promotes expanded opportunities for developing highly personalized transition plans. Unfortunately, agen- cies often do not collaborate as often or as well as we would like due to any number of structural,

Activity 8.10

View the video https://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=pzxeLS6Tuh0 of a student who did not receive sufficient transition planning to

prepare him to meet the demands of college. Discuss the gaps in service and how the stu- dent became more self-determined.

210 Chapter 8 • Transition Planning Chapter 8 • Transition Planning 211

funding, and personnel barriers (Johnson et al., 2002). PCP represents a departure from the more traditional approach, in which the TPT selects a preexisting program and attempts to make the student fit the program.

Family-centered planning (FCP), on the other hand, is a broadly defined practice philoso- phy in which families and service providers work in partnership, and supports and services coin- cide with the changing needs and priorities of the family (Hodgets, Nicholas, Zwaigenbaum, & McConnell, 2013). Unlike person-centered planning, family-centered transition plans give prominence to priorities set by the family and do not focus on the individual child’s interests and desires. The family-centered approach is based on the assumption that both the child and the family are affected by the process and outcomes of transition, and that, in some families, deci- sions regarding transition outcomes such as future career and living arrangements are determined by the family, not necessarily by the young adult. More important, the transition team makes an evaluation of how every transition service affects the well-being of other family members. For instance, before recommending an after-school job-shadowing activity for a child, the transition team gathers information about the child’s roles at home. If it is clear that the young adult is expected to support the family after school by babysitting and preparing meals, the transition team has to consider offering the job-shadowing activity within time frames that do not conflict with the child’s roles at home. Also, it is important for professionals to note that the definition of family must be inclusive of, and respectful of, each child’s family structure and therefore should not be limited to parents or legal guardians and the nuclear family unit. For example, a family may also include a close friend who is intricately involved in the life of the child with a disability.

While it is true that the family-centered approach has been linked with increased parent satisfaction, decreased parent stress, and improved child outcomes (King, King, & Rosenbaum, 2004), it is not without challenges. Often, disagreements between or among family members add another layer of challenges to be addressed by the transition team. Focusing on priorities set by the family may imply overlooking the child’s desires, particularly those desires that are not aligned with family priorities. Given these challenges, transition teams may consider an interde- pendent approach that merges person-centered and family-centered approaches.

Person-family-centered planning emphasizes thinking about transitions into adulthood from the perspectives of persons with disabilities, their parents, and other family members (Kim & Turnbull, 2004). The aims of person-family transition planning include finding consensus, strengthening the capacity in young adults with a disability and their families, addressing family needs, and building formal and informal support circles that ensure that the young adult will accomplish personal goals while contributing meaningfully to the family and community.

Here are some general guidelines for establishing a meaningful transition process:

1. Prior to the transition-planning meeting, arrange to meet with school professionals and families to get a sense of expectations, awareness of key issues in transition, and the value systems that each group brings to the process. It is best to conference with each group separately.

2. The meeting with school professionals should focus more on the process. This is when consultants together with the school professionals explore the service delivery approaches that match family background and needs.

3. The consultant should work with school professionals in exploring multiple alternatives, particularly in cases where competing interests are anticipated. For example, when consid- ering postsecondary education options, the special education teacher may suggest vocational/trade education for a child who exhibits patterns of academic underachievement; however, the family may be intent on enrolling their child at a four-year college. A compromise may include community college with the option of transferring to a four-year college. Consultants must always be prepared to provide face-saving ways out of a dilemma.

4. When meeting with the family, the consultant should take note of family structure, resources, and the roles played by each family member; these often give clues about the social and cultural orientation of a family unit.

5. The discussion with family members should focus more on desired outcomes and less on how to get there.

6. Encourage families to consider bringing a trusted person such as a spouse, partner, relative, neighbor, or friend to the transition meeting.

210 Chapter 8 • Transition Planning Chapter 8 • Transition Planning 211

Summary

This chapter summarizes the transition planning process and postsecondary outcomes for students with disabilities, and highlighted key factors influencing transition outcomes (e.g., parental expectations, involvement, gender) and the dispari- ties in outcomes across different groups. The barriers noted in this chapter have important implications for consultants. First, school-based consultants need to be aware of the systemic inequalities and obstacles in order to anticipate potential problems, and work with transition professionals on identify- ing strategies best suited to address the challenges listed in this chapter. Further, the transition accountability measures have been progressively focusing on student outcomes such as rates of participation in competitive employment and post- secondary education, in addition to how well students with disabilities are doing in core subjects such as math and read- ing tests. Consultants can assist transition professionals in identifying data-collection strategies that match the current accountability measures.

This chapter also refers to the changes to the transi- tion requirements in IDEA 2004. Many of these changes reflect a focus on improving the academic and functional achievement of the youth with disabilities to facilitate the successful movement from school to postschool activities. School-based consultants must keep abreast of these changes in order to remain compliant with the law. Many transition professionals and school administrators often worry about developing legally defensible transition IEPs. The chapter concludes with a discussion of what collabora- tive consultation in transition planning looks like in prac- tice. Overall, consultants should be able to establish a collaborative transition process that allows every partici- pant to contribute meaningfully to the transition process, while keeping a focus on outcomes desired by the youth and his or her family.

References Aspel, N. P. (2005). Student dream sheet. Retrieved form http://

www.dlc-ma.org/_manual/Forms/13-Dream-Sheet.pdf Banks, J. A., & McGee Banks, C. A. (2010). Multicultural

education: Issues and perspectives (7th ed.). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley.

Blackorby, J., & Wagner, M. (1996). Longitudinal post-school outcomes of youth with disabilities: Findings from the national longitudinal transition study. Exceptional Children, 62(5), 399–413.

Blue-Banning, M., Summers, J. A., Frankland, H. C., Nelson, L., & Beegle, G. (2004). Dimensions of family and profes- sional partnerships: Constructive guidelines for collaboration. Exceptional Children, 70(2), 167–184.

Bonomi, A. E., Patrick, D. L., Bushnell, D. M., & Martin, M. (2000). Validation of the United States’ version of the World Health Organization Quality of Life (WHOQOL) instrument. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 53, 19–23.

Cameto, R., Levine, P., & Wagner, M. (2004). Transition planning for students with disabilities: A special topic report of findings from the National Longitudinal Transition Study–2 (NLTS2). Washington, DC: Department of Education, Office of Special Education Programs.

Cartledge, G. Y., Gardner, R., & Ford, D. Y. (2008). Culturally responsive community-based interventions. Diverse learners with exceptionalities: Culturally responsive teaching in the inclusive classroom (pp. 188–207). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

Crane, K., & Mooney, M. (2005). Improving secondary education and transition for youth with disabilities: Community resource mapping. Minneapolis, MN: National Center on Secondary Education and Transition.

Daviso, A. W., Denney, S. C., Baer, R. M., & Flexer, R. (2011). Postschool goals and transition services for students with learn- ing disabilities. American Secondary Education, 39(2), 77–93.

Fixsen, D. L., Blasé, K. A., Horner, R., & Sugai, G. (2009, February). Intensive technical assistance (Scaling-up Brief No. 2). Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina, FPG Child Development Institute.

Flexer, R. W., Baer, R. B., Luft, P. & Simmons, T. J. (2008). Transition planning for secondary students with disabilities. City, NJ: Pearson Education.

Geenen, S., Powers, L. E., & Lopez-Vasquez, A. (2001). Multicultural aspects of parent involvement in transition plan- ning. Exceptional Children, 67, 265 – 282.

Geenen, S., Powers, L. E., & Lopez-Vasquez, A. (2005). Barriers against and strategies for promoting the involve- ment of culturally diverse parents in school-based transition planning. Journal for Vocational Special Needs Education, 27, 4–14.

Goff, C., Martin, J. E., & Thomas, M. K. (2007). The burden of acting White: Implications for transitions. Career Development and Exceptional Individuals, 30(3), 134–146.

Greene, G., & Kochhar-Bryant, C. A. (2003). Pathways to success- ful transition for youth with disabilities. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill Prentice Hall.

Griffin, M.M. (2011). Promoting IEP participation: Effects of interventions, considerations for CLD students. Career Development and Transition for Exceptional Individuals, 34, 153–164.

Hitchings W. E., Luzzo, D. A., Ristow, R., Horvath, M., Retish, P., & Tanners, A. (2001). The career development needs of college students with learning disabilities: In their own words. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 16(1), 8–17.

Hodgetts, S., Nicholas, D., Zwaigenbaum, L., & McConnell, D. (2013). Parents’ and professionals’ perceptions of family- centered care for children with autism spectrum disorder across service sectors. Social Science & Medicine, 96, 138–146.

212 Chapter 8 • Transition Planning Chapter 8 • Transition Planning 213

Hogansen, J. M., Powers, K., Geenen, S., Gil-Kashiwabera, E., & Powers, L. (2008). Transition goals and experiences of females with disabilities: Perceptions of youth, parents, and profession- als. Exceptional Children, 74(2), 215–234.

Johnson, D. R., Stodden, R. A., Emanuel, E. J., Luecking, R., & Mack, M. (2002). Current challenges facing secondary educa- tion and transition services: What research tells us. Exceptional Children, 68, 519–531.

Kalyanpur, M., & Harry, B. (2012). Cultural reciprocity in spe- cial education: Building family-professional relationships (2nd ed.). Baltimore, MD: Brookes.

Kim, K., & Turnbull, A. (2004). Transition to adulthood for students with severe intellectual disability: Shifting toward person-family interdependent planning. Research & Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 29(1), 53–57.

King, S., King, G., & Rosenbaum, P. (2004). Evaluating health service delivery to children with chronic conditions and their families: Development of a refined measure of processes of care. Children’s Health Care, 33, 35–57.

Kramer, B. R., & Blacher, J. (2001). Transition for young adults with severe mental retardation: School preparation, parent expectations, and family involvement. Mental Retardation, 39, 423–435.

Landmark, L. J., Roberts, E. L., & Zhang, D. (2013). Educators’ beliefs and practices about parent involvement in transition planning. Career Development and Transition for Exceptional Individuals, 36, 114–123.

Lindstrom, L., Harwick, R. M., Poppen, M. & Doren, B. (2012). Gender gaps: Career development for young women with dis- abilities. Career Development and Transition for Exceptional Individuals, 35, 108–117.

Mellard, D. F., & Lancaster, P. E. (2003). Incorporating adult com- munity services in students’ transition planning. Remedial and Special Education, 24, 359–368.

Madaus, J.W., Gigal, M., & Hughes, C. (2014). Promoting access to postsecondary education for low-income students with disabilities. Career Development and Transition for Exceptional Individuals, 37, 50–59.

Mankey, T. A. (2011). Occupational therapists beliefs and involvement with secondary transition planning. Physical and Occupational Therapy in Pediatrics, 31, 345–358.

Martin, J. E., & Williams-Diehm, K. (2013). Student engage- ment and leadership of the transition planning process. Career Development and Transition for Exceptional Individuals, 36, 43–50.

Mazzotti, V. L., Rowe, D. A., Cameto, R., Test, D. W., & Morningstar, M. E. (2014). Identifying and promoting transi- tion evidence-based practices and predictors of success: A position paper of the Division on Career Development and Transition. Career Development and Transition for Exceptional Individuals, 36, 140–151.

Neubert, D. A., & Leconte, P. J. (2013). Age-appropriate tran- sition assessment: The position of the Division on Career Development and Transition. Career Development and Transition for Exceptional Individuals, 36, 72–83.

Newman, L., Wagner, M., Huang, T., Shaver, D., Knokey, A.-M., Yu, J., et al. (2011). Secondary school programs and perfor- mance of students with disabilities. A special topic report of findings from the National Longitudinal Transition Study–2 (NLTS2) (NCSER 2012-3000). Washington, DC: National Center for Special Education Research.

Noonan, P. M., Erickson, A. G., & Morningstar, M. E. (2013). Effects of community transition teams on interagency collabo- ration for school and adult agency staff. Career Development and Transition for Exceptional Individuals, 36, 96–104.

Ordoñez-Jasis, R., & Myck-Wayne, J. (2012). Community map- ping in action: Uncovering resources and assets for young children and their families. Young Exceptional Children, 15, 31–45.

Povenmire-Kirk, T. C., Lindstrom, L. & Bullis, M. (2010). De escuela a la vida adulta/from school to adult life: Transition needs for latino youth with disabilities and their families. Career Development for Exceptional Individuals, 33(1), 41–51.

Powers, K., Gil-Kashiwabara, E., Powers, L., Geenen, S., Balandran, J., & Palmer, C. (2005). IDEA mandates and effec- tive transition planning practices in IEPs. Career Development for Exceptional Individuals, 28(1), 47–59.

Powers, K., Hogansen, J., Geenen, S., Powers, L. W., Gil- Kashiwabara, E. (2008). Gender matters: A survey of adoles- cents with disabilities and their families. Psychology in the Schools, 45(4), 349–364.

Rabren, K., Carpenter, J., Dunn, C., & Carney, J.S. (2014). Actions against poverty: The impact of career technical edu- cation. Career Development and Transition for Exceptional Individuals, 37, 29–39.

Rueda, R., Monzo, L., Shapiro, J., Gomez, J., & Blacher, J. (2005). Cultural models of transition: Latina mothers of young adults with developmental disabilities. Exceptional Children, 71(4), 401–414.

Sinclair, M. F., Christenson, S., & Thurlow, M. L. (2005). Promoting school completion of urban secondary youth with emotional or behavioral disabilities. Exceptional Children, 71, 465–482.

Sitlington, R., Neubert, D. A., & LeConte, P. J. (1997). Transition assessment: The position of the Division on Career Development and Transition. Career Development for Exceptional Individuals, 20, 69–79.

Spindler, F., & Spindler, L. (1990). The American cultural dia- logue and its transmission. London, England: Falmer Press.

SRI International. (2005). National Longitudinal Transition Study–2. Retrieved from http://www.nlts2.org/gindex.html

Test, D. W., Aspel, N. R., & Everson, M. (2006). Transition meth- ods for youth with disabilities. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Merrill Prentice Hall.

Test, D. W., Fowler, C. H., Richter, S. M., White, J., Mazzotti, V., Walker, A. R., et al. (2009). Evidence-based practices in secondary transition. Career Development for Exceptional Individuals, 32, 115–128.

Test, D. W., Mazzotti, V. L., Mustian, A. L., Fowler, C. H., Kortering, L. J., & Kohler, P. H. (2009). Evidence-based sec- ondary transition predictors for improving post-school out- comes for students with disabilities. Career Development for Exceptional Individuals, 32, 160–181.

Wagner, M. M., Newman, L. A., & Javitz, H. S. (2014). The influ- ence of family socioeconomic status on the post-high-school outcomes of youth with disabilities. Career Development and Transition for Exceptional Individuals, 37, 5–17.

Washington, B. H., Hughes, C., & Cosriff, J. C. (2012). High-poverty youth: Self-determination and involvement in educational planning. Career Development and Transition for Exceptional Individuals, 35, 14–28.

212 Chapter 8 • Transition Planning Chapter 8 • Transition Planning 213

Weaver, R., & DeLuca, J. R. (1987). Employability/Life Skills Assessment: Ages 6–13. Dayton, OH: Authors.

Wehman, P. (2013). Life beyond the classroom. Transition strat- egies for young people with disabilities. Baltimore, MD: Brookes.

Wehmeyer, M. L., Palmer, S. B., Shogren, K., Williams-Diehm, K., & Soukup, J. H. (2013). Establishing a causal relationship

between intervention to promote self-determination and enhanced student self-determination. Journal of Special Education, 46, 195–201.

World Health Organization. (1994). Quality of Life Assessment: An Annotated Bibliography. (WHO/MNH/PSF/94.1). Geneva: WHO.

Systems-Level Consultation: The Organization as the Target of Change

Chapter 9

The superintendent of a small district has noticed a general decline in district test scores over the past 5 years. The more people she talks to, the more ideas she gets about causes and cures. She appoints three people—a curriculum specialist; a general education teacher, who is the head of the teachers’ union; and a special education teacher—as chairs of a task force to look into possible ways of dealing with this issue of declining achievement. How should these three proceed?

The district director of special education has mandated that a multi-tiered system of support (MTSS) be used in any attempt to classify a student as having a learning disability or emotional disturbance. The staff response is mixed, with some members thinking that they are already doing this because they administer curriculum-based measurement in reading (CBM-R) as part of their standard battery. Other members scratch their heads and think to themselves, “This, too, shall pass,” and go about their business in the same way they have for the past 10 years. A handful of school psychologists, counselors, and special education teachers are intrigued. Some are even excited about this directive, but each feels he or she is an island in a sea of resistance. They don’t realize others in the district share their enthusiasm. What should the director do next? Who besides the director might help to promote change? What are some benefits and limitations to such a top-down approach to systems change?

Learning Outcomes

9.1 Summarize the basic concepts involved in facilitating changes within a school or school system.

9.2 Discuss some districtwide and school-level reasons for change.

9.3 Distinguish between formal and informal sources of influence responsible for initiating systems change.

9.4 Identify methods that systems change agents can use to stay current in their professions.

9.5 Describe the steps in the implementation of systems change, and illustrate the steps with a case study.

Activity 9.1

Analyze the two chapter-opening vignettes and indicate how a school consultant might approach each of them. What are some issues to consider

in entry (how can you get started) and initial needs assessment (how should you go about getting information to analyze the problem)?

214

Chapter 9 • Systems-Level Consultation: The Organization as the Target of Change 215

Why SyStemS-LeveL ConSuLtation?

The previous eight chapters of this text have been concerned mainly with consultation involving individuals or small groups of students, with teachers and parents as the consultees. This is appropriate because most of the work of school consultants centers on referrals by consultees who wish to obtain some assistance in dealing with students who manifest difficulties in behav- ior/adjustment or academic achievement. When consulting about individual cases, the school consultant will often encounter situations in which it is apparent that something about the way the individual school or the whole district deals with persistent problems in the delivery of its services to students may be contributing to these problems. Some examples of these systemic problems include (a) tracking students into remedial programs from which there is no escape, (b) the widespread use of grade retention as an acceptable intervention; (c) zero tolerance poli- cies that result in draconian disciplinary actions; (d) allowing only students with autism to receive applied behavioral analysis (ABA); (e) a school climate that endorses antigay senti- ments; (f) failure to deal aggressively with bullying, and (g) very limited opportunities for stu- dents with disabilities to get meaningful, community-based transition training.

Activity 9.2

Discuss the examples of systemic problems just listed. Have you experienced any of these? How explicit (overt) or implicit (covert) are each of these problems likely to appear? What type

of data might you collect to verify that the problem exists? Identify some other types of systemic problems that you have encountered in schools.

Student difficulties do not reside only within the students themselves or even solely within their classrooms or homes. The policies that emanate from federal and state government, local school boards, and districts and schools can have wide-ranging effects, as illustrated by some of the macrosystem events discussed in this chapter. These policies and beliefs can influence the decisions that classroom teachers and schools make regarding curriculum, professional develop- ment, resource allocation, and other important variables.

School districts and individual schools operate under a set of explicit and implicit rules not all that different from the rules teachers establish for their classes. Employees are expected to be at work on time, to carry out their responsibilities, to cooperate, and to strive toward achieving the mission of the district or school. These global expectations, readily understood by all employ- ees, are certainly a good starting point for the kind of mutuality of purpose that is essential for a healthy organization (Illback, Zins, & Maher, 1999). The organizational climate, which is an informal set of expectations that guide individuals’ interactions with each other, is often estab- lished by the leaders within the organization. Within schools, the leaders may be the administra- tors; union representatives; highly respected and experienced teachers; and/or a site-based council comprised of administrators, teachers, and parents. One principal may convey that deci- sions are made by a team of representatives based on data, which encourages input from teachers and problem solving by concerned constituents. Another might adopt a totalitarian approach, discouraging teachers from sharing their observations and opinions and thus appearing to make capricious decisions. A union representative at a school may embrace changes to federal and state laws as a means for improving teachers’ professionalism and skills. The site-based council of a school could be full of conflict and acrimony that results in stalemates throughout the year and last-minute erratic spending decisions at year-end. In this chapter, we discuss organizations almost as living entities because ultimately it is the people within the organizations and their interactions with each other that determine whether systems change occurs and is sustained. Systems change is a complex interaction between micro (individual) and macro (systemic) fac- tors (Kratochwill, Volpiansky, Clements, & Ball, 2007).

maCroSyStemiC infLuenCeS on SChooL innovation

State governments are responsible for public education; however, federal laws, such as the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act, exert powerful influence through financial allocations and by establishing the legal rights of all the individuals involved in the

216 Chapter 9 • Systems-Level Consultation: The Organization as the Target of Change

school. For example, parents have the right to examine any assessment data collected on their child, teachers have the right to a workplace devoid of sexual harassment, and a child has the right to have her counseling records remain confidential. State laws and school boards govern how federal laws are enacted in their state and exert their own influence on how districts operate. Some examples of state-mandated practices include large-scale assessment (i.e., statewide test- ing) of students, giving high school graduation exams, adopting certain textbooks, and teacher licensure requirements. States vary in how much their policies are instituted at the top and the extent to which they support their policies by providing technical assistance to the school dis- tricts and other local education agencies (LEAs).

Common Core State Standards

At the time of this writing, forty-five states, four territories, and the District of Columbia have adopted the Common Core State Standards (CCSS). For an introduction to CCSS, see the video at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z4MEkS3wZxQ. The CCSS are designed to provide a set of clear expectations of what students are expected to learn. The CCSS developers focused on the skills needed to be successful in college and the workforce. They examined the research base on which skills are essential for building desired postsecondary skills. They also considered the types of standards other developing nations embrace, finding nations whose children outperform American students often have fewer but more rigorous standards. The results are standards that require a deep understanding of academic content, as demonstrated through application of the knowledge and skills in real-world contexts (Gramm et al., 2012). For example, the introduction to the English Language Arts standards notes:

Students who meet the Standards readily undertake the close, attentive reading that is at the heart of understanding and enjoying complex works of literature. They habitually perform the critical reading necessary to pick carefully through the stag- gering amount of information available today in print and digitally. They actively seek the wide, deep, and thoughtful engagement with high-quality literary and infor- mational texts that builds knowledge, enlarges experience, and broadens worldviews. They reflexively demonstrate the cogent reasoning and use of evidence that is essen- tial to both private deliberation and responsible citizenship in a democratic republic. (National Governors Association Center for Best Practices & Council of Chief State School Officers, 2010)

The CCSS for mathematics also emphasize deep understanding of concepts. The purpose, according to Phil Daro, one of the contributors to the Math standards, is to develop math- ambitious students who are more concerned with discovering patterns and underlying concepts than in finding the correct answers. For example, a teacher might provide the stu- dents the answer to a math problem and challenge the students to explain in words and pictures why it is the correct answer. Teaching the CCSS should elicit a “productive struggle” within students in which sustained cognitive engagement results in deeper understanding. Two consortiums have developed computer-enabled tests to assess students’ understanding of the CCSS. States have the choice of joining either the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium (Smarter Balanced) or the Partnerships for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers (PARCC). New standards and assessments have also been developed for science (i.e., Next Generation Science Standards) and social studies (i.e., College, Career, Civic Life for Social Studies).

Activity 9.3

Watch the 13-minute presentation by Phil Daro at http://vimeo.com/79916037 and identify major concepts related to developing and teaching common core math standards. Next, watch the math lesson (13 minutes) designed to teach to the CCSS at https://www.

youtube.com/watch?v=UU3ROE4_Ffg. Discuss the strategies identified in the first video that appeared in the second video. To continue the discussion, observe the second video again and look for qualities of effective instruction, which was described in Chapter 7.

Chapter 9 • Systems-Level Consultation: The Organization as the Target of Change 217

Clearly there are many implications for school consultants. Teachers are learning new ways to teach and students are learning new ways to learn. This can be frustrating to both parties. Having long-term goals (because prospects in the short term may not look so rosy) and a coordi- nated system for implementing programs designed to support the CCSS will likely reduce the stress that school staff members and students feel. Implementing CCSS within a multi-tiered system of support (MTSS) has many advantages. The benchmarking, progress monitoring, goal setting, and problem-solving process in an MTSS can identify a lack of instructional match; direct resources to students who are not mastering the CCSS; and measure the effectiveness of various programs, curricula, and instructional strategies in terms of student outcomes (Gramm et al., 2012). Implementing the CCSS is a unique opportunity for promoting MTSS because there will be a reallocation of resources, initial and ongoing professional development, and a renewed emphasis on improving core instruction. The Council of Great City Schools has posted online a comprehensive document on implementing CCSS through MTSS (Gramm et al., 2012).

Statewide technical assistance

The State Implementation and Scaling-Up of Evidence-Based Practices (SISEP) Center was established to assist the states in providing effective technical assistance to districts and schools. SISEP defines the major components of technical assistance (TA) to include providing informa- tion on evidence-based options, disseminating resources and examples of success, providing overview workshops to assist others with planning, and implementing and improving upon exist- ing tools to achieve desired change (Fixsen, Blasé, Horner, & Sugai, 2009a). It suggests that TA can occur at a basic or intensive level, with basic TA applied when educators have the skill set to implement the intervention and simply require some direction. Intensive TA is required when educators need to learn what and how to engage in the new practices. Structures and functions within the school system need to be aligned to support the new practices. The National Center on Response to Intervention (NCRTI), which provides TA to select states, defines TA as occurring at three different levels: (a) universal/general—information available on the NCRTI Web site, or brief communications with NCRTI staff; (b) targeted/specialized—one-time labor-intensive events, such as facilitating a strategic planning meeting; and (c) intensive/sustained—stable, multiyear, purposeful planning and training that results in change at more than one system level (Woodruff, Mellard, & Rose, 2010). Thus, the NCRTI’s TA is aligned to the three levels of ser- vices typically found in a school-based RtI model.

The SISEP works through implementation teams (ITs) that concentrate on approximately 125 schools within one geographic region (Fixsen, Blasé, Horner, & Sugai, 2009c). These teams help to identify which effective educational interventions to focus on, act as a liaison between the schools and the state management team, and help to establish policy-enabled practice (PEP) and practice-informed policy (PIP) through a continuous process of adjusting the infrastructure, pol- icies, and funding streams to produce more effective programs. Fixsen et al. (2009c) describe these teams as creating transformation zones. In contrast to pilot and demonstration projects, transformation zones focus on implementing new interventions and adjusting the infrastructure to support the new practices. They wrote, “From the beginning, issues related to sustainability, quality improvement, and scalability are considered and decisions are made with the future in mind” (p. 2).

Activity 9.4

In the video at https://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=i3ghprQF6D8, Fixsen and Blasé contrast two possible approaches to innova- tion, one that has a 80% success rate within

3 years and another than has a 14% success rate in 17 years. Discuss the key differences between the two approaches.

Through their work of providing TA to states, Fixsen and colleagues have developed a systems-change model that may be applicable to building-wide or districtwide innovations as well as to state departments of education. Their model describes the following six stages of implementation (Fixsen, Blasé, Horner, & Sugai, 2009b):

218 Chapter 9 • Systems-Level Consultation: The Organization as the Target of Change

1. Exploration: A person or system must in some ways be ready to change. Preparing for change begins with first establishing a need for change and learning about possible inter- ventions or solutions; learning how systems change happens (to the extent that we know this); and identifying and developing stakeholders and champions (i.e., people willing to dedicate effort and time to facilitating change), some of whom may become part of the implementation team. This stage ends with a decision to proceed.

2. Installation: Establish the resources necessary to implement an innovation with fidelity. A major emphasis in this model is that new practices can be maintained only if the infrastruc- ture supports them, which may require new policies, redefining professional roles, and modifying funding streams.

3. Initial implementation: This is sometimes referred to as the awkward stage because schools in this phase experience some success and some “teachable moments,” where things may not go quite as planned as newly trained educators try to implement the innova- tion in their own school.

4. Full implementation: Schools have fully implemented an innovation when it is skillfully integrated into the daily activities of the school and is routinely supported by school and district administrators. Typically, schools require between 2 and 5 years to achieve full implementation.

5. Innovation: As educators analyze data on the outcomes of their systems change, including variations across the system in how scientifically based practices are put in place, they become more knowledgeable and skilled, making connections that improve their efficacy and efficiency.

6. Sustainability: Continuous improvements are made through data-based decision making and unwavering support for educators who are using an innovation effectively, with each cohort of teachers achieving better results than the last.

As indicated by the last sentence, this is a model developed to assist state departments that want to help districts in implementing evidence-based practices. Thus, scaling up of innovative practices from one school to the district or one district to other districts is imperative to a state- wide reform effort. Similarly, a consultant wishing to improve practices in his school may identify a few highly effective teachers and contemplate how he might work to make their practices more widespread. Of course, the first step is to identify what practices are making a teacher or group of teachers particularly effective. Nationwide, there has been considerable attention lately to identifying the characteristics of highly effective schools, particularly those that are effective with students historically at-risk for school failure, in order to replicate this success in other schools.

Activity 9.5

Consider the six stages of implementation. How do they compare with the notion that everything we do in education is recycled (i.e., “This is just experimental teaching that we learned about in the 1970s repackaged as something new”)? How do the six stages of

implementation compare to the idea that things come and go in education but every- thing stays pretty much the same (i.e., “This, too, will pass”)? What do these two assump- tions about education innovation tell us about schools and school systems?

high-Poverty, high-Performing Schools

In 1966, James Coleman released a report that suggested schools had relatively little influence on the educational outcomes of children compared to the effects of their families, including their fami- lies’ economic condition. Ronald Edmonds (1979) vehemently disagreed, citing examples of schools that produced excellent outcomes despite serving students experiencing poverty. His com- parative studies of these schools sparked the effective-schools research movement. Edmonds wrote:

How many effective schools would you have to see to be persuaded of the educabil- ity of poor children? If your answer is “more than one,” then I submit that you have reasons of your own for preferring to believe that pupil performance derives from family background instead of school response to family background. (p. 15)

Chapter 9 • Systems-Level Consultation: The Organization as the Target of Change 219

From his research, Edmonds identified the following seven characteristics he called correlates of highly effective schools: clear and focused school mission, safe and orderly environment, high expectations of students and staff, opportunity to learn/time on task, instructional leadership, frequent progress monitoring, and positive home–school relations (National Center for Effective Schools, Research, Development Foundation, 1995). Many of these correlates, such as opportunity to learn and frequent progress monitoring, have been described in previous chapters. Reeves (2003) defined high-poverty, high-performing (HP2) schools as those where 90% or more of the students receive free or reduced-cost lunch, 90% or more are ethnic minorities, and 90% meet or exceed the district or state standards in reading or some other academic area. From his study of these 90/90/90 schools, Reeves (2003) concluded that, “while economic deprivation clearly affects student achieve- ment, demographic characteristics do not determine academic performance” (p. 1). Based on a review of the school effectiveness literature and their own work with effective schools, Parrett and Budge (2009) generated a list of questions associated with effective schools, including the following:

1. Do we have a data system that works for classroom and school leaders? As discussed in previous chapters, data-based decision making is only as good as the type of data collected. If the current data system does not provide answers to questions such as “Which incoming kindergarten students are at risk for becoming struggling readers?,” then some of the cur- rent assessment systems may need to be replaced. Likewise, if teachers are gathering data but do not know how to interpret or apply the data to their practices, professional develop- ment may be necessary.

2. Do we provide targeted interventions? Frequent, relevant assessment is critical to being able to identify students in need of assistance and to ensure that the intervention addresses the need. Given limited resources, interventions need to be targeted to the right students to be effective. As is commonly observed, students cannot benefit from interventions they do not experience. A tiered system that is focused on essential skills like reading and provides evidence-based interventions, including adjusting the interventions when the desired out- come is not achieved, will likely provide targeted interventions.

3. Are all students proficient in reading? Parrett and Budge (2009) observed that reading is second only to safety; ensuring that all students learned to read was a priority in most of the HP2 schools they studied. Often reading is not a focus in the upper grades; yet HP2 schools teach reading across the curriculum because poor literacy skills are a significant barrier to accessing information in textbooks and other resources.

4. Is our school safe? Students who are stressed because of bullying, gang fighting, and teachers screaming at them have a difficult time concentrating on learning the curriculum. Implementing the universal positive behavioral supports described in Chapter 6 may bring order and calm to a disruptive school if the key elements, such as administrator support and 80% of faculty members being committed to the program, are present (Sugai, Horner, & McIntosh, 2008).

5. Have we fostered a bond between students and educators? Developing a personalized learning environment in which teachers know their students well and provide academic, behavioral, and social encouragement is associated with academic persistence and reduced dropout rate (Dynarski et al., 2008). Students are more likely to take academic risks (such as raising their hands to answer questions when they are uncertain of the correct answer) and remain motivated to achieve if they have a bond with their teachers. The National Research Council (2004) described some of the strategies for creating a personalized learn- ing community: creating an ethic of trust, communicating shared responsibility for student learning, and holding high and attainable expectations.

6. Do we engage parents, families, and the community? Parental support for learning is more predictive of academic achievement than family socioeconomic status (Miller & Kraft, 2008). Children spend the vast majority of their time outside school, and the more their families support their learning, the more they will learn. HP2 schools have innovative practices for engaging with families and communities, such as using the school as a com- munity center, staffing a parent ambassador, providing parenting classes, and providing counseling and mentorship to adults in the community (Parrett & Budge, 2009).

220 Chapter 9 • Systems-Level Consultation: The Organization as the Target of Change

7. Are we eliminating policies and practices that manufacture low achievement? School- wide reform requires dismantling practices and policies that may have been in place for a long time. Discontinuing one program or practice in order to begin a new one often means someone experiences a loss of power. For example, deciding to stop the practice of retaining low-achieving students and replace it with tiered interventions removes the power of decid- ing whether to retain from the teacher. Understandably, people resist losing powers. HP2 schools are somehow able to overcome the natural uneasiness of changing practice by keep- ing a laserlike focus on student outcomes. HP2 schools confront practices that lower achievement, such as low expectations, capricious funding, retention, tracking, and over- representation in special education, head on (Parrett & Budge, 2009). Recall from Chapter 7 that tracking and differentiated instruction differ in significant ways. In short, tracking segregates students of similar skill levels into classes, programs, or groups for extended periods of time, resulting in students who have underdeveloped skills having less access to good modeling of the skills, being exposed to lowered expectations, and being potentially subjected to behavioral grouping (something to be avoided at all costs, as discussed in Chapter 6). Differentiated instruction uses progress-monitoring data to form and re-form groups to receive targeted supplemental instruction. The small groups may be homogene- ous teacher-directed or heterogeneous cooperative learning groups. Consultants may want to examine whether tracking or effective use of differentiated instruction is employed at their school.

8. Have we extended learning time for underachieving students? HP2 schools provide extended learning time to assist students living in poverty. Economically poor students have less access to enriching summer and after-school programs than their middle- and upper-class counterparts. Providing instruction after school, and during summer and intersession breaks to students fits nicely into a tiered intervention model (e.g., MTSS), particularly if these programs are carefully evaluated to ensure they are providing high- quality, direct instruction on academic content.

9. Have we reorganized time to better support professional learning? HP2 schools reallo- cate time traditionally set aside for faculty meetings to be dedicated to collaborative prob- lem solving (Parrett & Budge, 2009). Whether in a student study team (SST) or grade-level meetings, groups of teachers review student work, analyze the errors and rate of progress, and develop interventions and progress-monitoring systems. By sharing ideas, their capac- ity increases.

Activity 9.6

In a small group, discuss the nine questions HP2 school personnel ask of themselves to craft their innovation plans. Which seem most critical? Are they all interrelated, or could you target two or three initially? How might you get consensus

and commitment to work collaboratively on improving in some of these areas? For more information watch the 12- minute presentation by Kathleen Budge at https://www.youtube. com/watch?v=bkPTwarGriM.

The members of an implementation team might confront or reflect on these issues as they prepare to embark on school reform. The team may pick two or three of the issues embed- ded in the nine questions to bring forward to all staff members to discuss. Of course getting the 80% buy-in suggested by Sugai et al. (2008) takes some effort, time, and maybe even an out- side force. An example of an unexpected external influence is described in the next section on value-added modeling.

value-added models of evaluating teacher Performance

On Saturday, August 14, 2010, the Los Angeles Times (Felch, Song, & Smith, 2010) published the first in a series of articles on a value-added model (VAM) for evaluating teachers. Value- added modeling produces a score for each teacher based on his students’ increase or decrease in test scores relative to those same students’ prior year test results. (A brief explanation of VAM

Chapter 9 • Systems-Level Consultation: The Organization as the Target of Change 221

can be found at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=925RnyfzbjU.) Thus, variations in stu- dent characteristics strongly associated with achievement, such as limited English proficiency, having a disability, or being raised in an economically poor family (all of which typically make comparisons between teachers impossible), are actually controlled for to a large extent. The jour- nalists sparked a vociferous debate by identifying some teachers as either effective or ineffective (including front-page pictures of the teachers) and publishing a database where the public can look up the value-added score of any third- through fifth-grade teacher in the Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD). In short order, the teachers’ union called for a boycott of the paper, Secretary of Education Duncan proclaimed that parents have the right to know this infor- mation, and the LAUSD school board ordered the superintendent to include value-added infor- mation in the way teachers are evaluated.

Critics of the value-added approach to evaluating teachers note that the scores are not sta- ble from year to year, are best able to discriminate among teachers at the very top and bottom of the scale but not in the middle, assume students are randomly assigned to classrooms (which is very rarely the reality), and overlook other influences on learning that occur within (e.g., access to student support services, collaborative culture of the school) and outside school (Baker et al., 2010). Many argue that making student performance on state tests high stakes for teachers will result in a narrowing of the curriculum as teachers focus exclusively on teaching content covered on the tests. Others, including the journalists, argue that this focus is good for education because the tests purportedly assess students’ mastery of the state content standards.

Despite the many misgivings, the value-added model is likely to become a component of how teachers are evaluated in many school districts, which will introduce major implications and opportunities for systems change. Teachers may suddenly become very willing to evaluate and modify their teaching practices in the face of low value-added scores. Conversely, teachers with high scores may become models or coaches or consultants to other teachers. School structures could be changed with, for example, after-school tutoring programs, special and general educa- tion teachers sharing planning time, implementation of a problem-solving student study team, and “promotion” of students to their next teacher after the standardized testing occurs. Schools that continuously problem-solve at the systems level may take this value-added model in stride: They might see it as just one more piece of data to inform their ongoing decision-making pro- cess. The implementation of CCSS may stall VAM as statewide tests are replaced with CCSS tests (i.e., the Smarter Balanced Consortium or Partnerships for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers) and new models need to be built and tested.

Activity 9.7

Form two groups and hold a debate on VAM, with one side arguing for and the other against using VAM to evaluate teachers. What are the

larger issues inherent in this debate? Do you think VAM will lead to more collaboration and consultation, or will it lead to less?

miCroSyStemiC infLuenCeS on SChooL innovation

Implementation science is the study of conditions that lead to successful implementation of an evidence-based practice in a typical school. Kratochwill and colleagues (2007) identified some of these conditions, which include teacher and administrator support for the program, adopting programs that are aligned to other interventions or programs in place in the school as well as the school context, ongoing technical support or coaching, and providing sufficient funding to imple- ment and sustain the practice.

School Characteristics

Much of the research on HP2 schools was conducted to identify school-based practices that produce unexpectedly positive outcomes in order to replicate them in other buildings. All schools, even charter schools (which were established to free schools from some of the state and district statutes and regulations), must respond to external pressures. As in the case of the Los Angeles Times article, the pressure to change, innovate, or improve may come from a source other than the federal or state government or district administration. Curtis, Castillo,

222 Chapter 9 • Systems-Level Consultation: The Organization as the Target of Change

and Cohen (2008) described ineffectual schools as those that are either too rigid or too open in their responses to external pressures. A school that is too rigid runs the risk of acting like an ostrich with its head in the sand when it comes to problems or challenges, ignoring the pres- sure until it either dissipates or boils over. Conversely, a school system that is too open attempts to respond to too many initiatives or to address too many problems at once. In this case, the system is overwhelmed and constantly in flux. Curtis and colleagues describe healthy systems as those that, “based on their identified goals, screen environmental information, accepting that which is important, rejecting that which is not, and responding in a manner that is appro- priate for the information received” (p. 889).

Illback and Pennington (2008) described adept systems as those involved in “small, fre- quent and targeted adaptations” (p. 229). Based on organizational development work conducted in the business sector, systems involved in continuous change were identified to be more suc- cessful than those that engaged in episodic change. The continuous-change firms made frequent modifications based on demands exerted at all levels while keeping a focus on the long-term goals. Perhaps this long view keeps continuous-change organizations from becoming too “open.” In contrast to the continuous-change organizations, episodic organizations respond to exigencies slowly and with more disruption to the routines; they change only due to external pressure and the true desire is to return to a state of equilibrium (Illback & Pennington, 2008). In an episodic school, you might hear the statement “That’s the way we’ve always done it” quite frequently. To achieve continuous school improvement, school personnel need to abandon the “project mental- ity” for a long-term vision (Adelman & Taylor, 2007). Thus, problem-solving systems change should not be done once and then discontinued (i.e., “Mission accomplished! Let’s pack up and go home”). Ideally it is an ongoing process in which school personnel examine data, set priori- ties, and change practices and infrastructure in order to improve constantly. Knoff (2008) described this best when he wrote, “Organizational change and strategic planning should be natural, necessary and ongoing components of any healthy, evolving school” (p. 905).

Activity 9.8

In a high school, two major projects are under way concurrently. One has to do with giving support to regular education teachers to enable their efforts to include more stu- dents with disabilities. The other has to do with modifying the structure of the day so

that more flexible times can be given to sub- ject areas as the semester progresses. What possible problems could arise as a result of trying to implement both of these reform efforts at the same time? How might strate- gic planning help?

Reform efforts that fail to consider the school context are likely to be met with a poor reception (Ervin & Schaughency, 2008; Fullan, 1991; National Research Council, 2004). For example, a schoolwide positive behavioral intervention program successfully implemented at an elementary school cannot be transported to a high school without taking into account some key differences. Flannery (2010) described some of the differences between elementary and high school to be (a) size—high schools are typically much bigger; (b) infrastructure—there are often multiple administrators, teachers are arranged by departments rather than grade level, leadership is more distributive (communication team, data team, discipline team, etc.), and the school day is longer as teachers and students are involved in extracurricular activities; (c) students’ age— adolescents are more autonomous and influenced by their peers compared to younger children; and (d) teachers’ philosophies—many high school teachers consider themselves “content experts” and if students “can’t make it in my class, they should go somewhere else.” A consultant can capitalize on these and other characteristics of high schools if she understands them well. For example, students’ autonomy and peer influence can be used to promote an innovation by having students produce infomercials, participate on transformation teams, and provide feedback on how well an innovation is working. Consultants or coaches from an elementary or middle school will lack credibility in a high school setting unless they are clued into the sociocultural context of the high school (Flannery, 2010). Even with high school experience, it may take some special consultation and leadership skills to initiate and sustain systemwide problem solving. These leadership skills are considered next.

Chapter 9 • Systems-Level Consultation: The Organization as the Target of Change 223

Leadership Characteristics

We often think of successful leaders as very powerful and charismatic, but people with a more subdued manner can lead as well. More important than personality are the actions that a leader or consultant for systems change employs. Porras and Hoffer (1986) surveyed 42 organizational consultants and identified nine actions that promote change:

1. Communicating openly 2. Collaborating 3. Taking responsibility 4. Maintaining a shared vision 5. Generating participation 6. Leading by vision 7. Functioning strategically 8. Promoting information flow 9. Developing others

Most of these activities require well-developed interpersonal skills. However, possessing good interpersonal skills is a necessary but not sufficient condition for improving schoolwide prac- tices. Many of the leaders of HP2 schools describe their leadership style as governed by a sense of moral responsibility that evokes in their staff members and students a feeling that they are part of something important and bigger than themselves (Bell, 2001). Likewise, Parrett and Budge (2009) describe the budget at HP2 schools as a “moral document” because it reflects the school’s commitment. A leader will probably have to take some risks, including the potential erosion of her power base, to bring about change. The political will to innovate may derive from a deeper moral commitment. Finally, good social skills and strong commitment will not get the job done unless a systematic method for making data-based decisions is in place. Thus, problem-solving or data-based planning skills are required (Curtis et al., 2008). Successful leaders bring political will, problem-solving skills, and moral fortitude to the change process.

The description of the core features of intensive technical assistance offered by Fixsen et al. (2009a) applies to the role of the innovation drivers because such consultants are essentially providing technical assistance to their own school or district. The core features are as follows:

1. Clarity—Purposeful activity; mutually established needs, roles, responsibilities, and goals; and agreement about how to create the new structures to support the innovation.

2. Frequency—Regularly scheduled in-person meetings and regular review of the data to correct errors and solve problems quickly.

3. Intensity—Key individuals engage in collective reflection to align policies and practices, including aligning the infrastructure to alleviate the new demands placed on the educators, numerous opportunities to introduce and support new skills, routine on-site coaching and assessment of training outcomes, direct observation of innovation implementation, and episodic long-distance planning sessions.

4. Duration—Doing whatever it takes to create desired changes, including resolving prob- lems and increasing capacity and systematic, focused change effort over a period of several years, usually two to five.

5. Integrity—Commitment to integrating current activities, roles, and functions to create more effective and efficient systems; comprehensive work with the whole system (not tak- ing a piecemeal approach); and collecting and applying data for decision making.

6. Accountability—Taking responsibility for actively providing information and supports to ensure that goals are met in a timely manner, using negative feedback and setbacks as opportunities to create new practices, partners, and knowledge; the success of the consultation is defined in terms of the outcomes of students, families, teachers, and the educational system as a whole.

Activity 9.9

What are some additional ways that high schools differ from elementary schools? How do middle schools compare? Are they more like

elementary or high schools? How do these characteristics impede or support consultation and systems change?

224 Chapter 9 • Systems-Level Consultation: The Organization as the Target of Change

Who initiateS SyStemS Change, and Where doeS it Come from?

In the typical school, as in other organizations, the formal leaders are generally expected to decide what changes are needed and how the school or organization should implement them. Although this traditional model of paternalistic leadership is still honored, the trend over the past few decades has been toward a decentralization of power and authority. Today both the formal leaders (superintendents, principals, union leaders, and so on) and other constituency groups (teachers, parents, and so on) have powerful voices, if not equal ones, in matters of organization, philosophy, method, and goals (Fullan, 1991). This change follows the spirit of collaboration that has been stressed throughout this text, with the caveat that if the administrators who oversee the budget, personnel decisions, and policy approval process give an initiative low priority, imple- mentation fidelity and outcomes will be significantly compromised (Sugai et al., 2008).

Change often begins with some type of event or confluence of events. These key trigger incidents often cause influential people to notice the situation and decide that it is a problem (or opportunity or challenge). The event can be dramatic, such as a student committing suicide, which prompts the school principal to organize a crisis response team and to consider hiring another school counselor. Or it might be the state’s announcement of a serious drop in math scores, prompting the board of education to order a review of the math curriculum. Some trigger events simply happen in the minds of influential people; these people decide on their own, usu- ally after information about a situation has been brought to their attention, that something should be done about it. It is then officially a problem to be solved.

The impetus for change may come from the bottom up or the top down. Those who are closest to the problem may be in the best position to initiate change because they understand the context in which the problem is occurring. However, they may also be least likely to change because they lack either the skill or the motivation to do so. Conversely, change that emanates from the top (i.e., federal, state, district, or principal level) may result in the provision of techni- cal assistance to develop the necessary skills to implement and sustain change. However, change from above can be subtly if not overtly rejected by those closest to the problems because these individuals don’t feel that they were part of the problem-solving process, or they may see the change as unnecessary. Without ownership of the solutions, educators and other practitioners may lack the sense that they are personally needed to see that these solutions are carried out cor- rectly or successfully (Fullan, 1995; Safran & Safran, 1997).

implementation teams

A solution to the bottom-up/top-down quandary is to develop implementation teams that include a wide range of stakeholders who share responsibility for (a) policymaking, adaptation, and operationalization; (b) decision making based on continuous collection of fidelity of implemen- tation and student outcomes data; (c) staff development; (d) funding and political support; and (e) implementation coordination and management (Sugai, Horner, Fixsen, & Blasé, 2010). The team could include administrators, teachers, support staff, parents, district representative, union representative, and so on. Knoff (2008) points out that any person with the skills and knowledge to serve in a staff development capacity should be encouraged and allowed to do so. A resource teacher, for example, may be the best person to assist a new teacher in matters of classroom man- agement; a team of three people, two ancillary and one regular-grade teacher, may be the best group to plan an evaluation program for the school; a psychologist or counselor may be in the best position to offer staff development in the area of conflict management, anger management, and social skills training, all of which are designed to improve the school climate. To maximize impact, however, these individuals should work in a coordinated manner to achieve a coherent model of school change (Stollar et al., 2008).

Team members must work collaboratively, among themselves and with the school as a whole. Knoff (2008) notes that “process determines outcome”; the scientific basis for an innova- tion is irrelevant if the people are not willing to implement it with “integrity, enthusiasm, com- mitment, collaboration and consistency” (p. 904). Habit, after all, is comforting. The desire to change emerges best from within. As McAdams (1997) indicates, “Convincing a critical mass of teachers to adopt a major reform project, especially one directly affecting instruction, is a time- consuming process fraught with practical and political difficulties” (p. 240). As long as those

Chapter 9 • Systems-Level Consultation: The Organization as the Target of Change 225

most responsible for the needed changes at the student–teacher level feel powerless about their roles in the reform process, they will tend to avoid a serious implementation of handed-down ideas, they will engage in the process in minimal ways, and they will avoid real change. Reform leaders need to understand the difference between power and influence. Because of their positions, those in charge of many reforms have the power to establish reform policies and to fund them, but they may not know how, or be able, to influence those who need to carry out the policies at the classroom level.

One way to ensure that policies and practices align is to establish an operational feedback loop in which the outcomes and experiences from practice implementation inform policy decisions (practice-informed policy [PIP]) and policy-enabled practice (PEP) through careful examination of data and knowledge of systems change (Sugai et al., 2010). It cannot be assumed that the implementation team, whether working with a state or district management team or autonomously at the school level, has the skills to engage in this feedback loop. Team members may require technical assistance from a consultant who can teach and even model the PEP-PIP feedback loop (Sugai et al., 2010). The feedback loop is necessary for creating a professional development plan to support the targeted reform efforts. Personnel time and funds for profes- sional development are limited. Professional development for systems change should prepare educators to enact the new policies and adapt to the new structures while taking into account the skills they currently possess and those they need to learn.

ProfeSSionaL deveLoPment

How do teachers and other school staff members improve the teaching or other services that they provide to students? Once their formal, credential-earning training is behind them and they are becoming more experienced in their work, what can they or their district do to maintain and enhance their skills? How can teachers avoid a barnacles-on-a-boat approach to professional development in which unrelated topics are introduced superficially one after the other through- out the year and years? Keeping teachers current, continuously motivated to improve, and focused on systems change is one of the challenges that district personnel need to accept.

Activity 9.10

Consider the following professional develop- ment (PD) plan that the principal designed for the Barnacles Boat Elementary School: September—information about students’ learning and behavior/adjustment difficulties; October— laws relating to special education; November— teaching to students’ preferred modalities; December—cultural differences in celebrating the holidays; January—the development of behavior support systems; February—effective parent conferencing; March—mediation and

due process procedures; April—strategies and tactics for inclusion; May—accommodating English language learners; June—to be announced. Each topic is presented during two of the weekly staff meetings for the month by the school psychologist, counselor, administra- tor, and/or curriculum specialist. Following the 20-minute presentation, staff members form small groups to discuss implications for their own practices. How might this PD plan be made more effective?

Professional development (PD) is considered to be any effort ranging from personally developed and conducted activities to districtwide, week-long trainings. PD can consist of any formally established approach that has an agenda, a structured set of goals and activities, and a method of evaluation. The time period can vary considerably. For example, PD can be a brief half-hour, one-time meeting of a team or a larger staff group in which the consultant presents some new information, or it can be a semester-long, 3-hour-per-week informational and data- analysis seminar supported by daily coaching and performance feedback. Knoff (2008) noted that, among effective schools, professional development occurs formally and informally every day for all staff members as they problem-solve and plan instruction.

PD may occur in the teacher’s lounge, in a separate facility rented specifically for the purpose, or online. It is not devoted to clinical (that is, one-child) issues, as are most indi- vidual consultation meetings or team meetings such as SSTs or individualized education pro- grams (IEPs). Its value has been noted by many researchers, including Darling-Hammond

226 Chapter 9 • Systems-Level Consultation: The Organization as the Target of Change

(1997, 1999), who demonstrated the connection between training in effective teaching tactics and improved student achievement.

Professional development and technology

In August 2012, teachers around the world gathered for hundreds of virtual PD events designed to prepare and energize them for the new school year. The goal of Connected Educator Month (CEM), now in existence for much longer than a month, is “through connected teaching, educa- tors have constant access to data, digital content, and resources, as well as experts and one another to meet the challenges of daily classroom practices and to learn and grow as profession- als” (U.S. Department of Education, 2013, p. 1). CEM provides teachers with the freedom to pursue topics of importance to them in formats of their choosing. For example, a teacher may join a forum or follow a particular hashtag on Twitter to gather information. CEM offers access to newsletters, book clubs, massive open online courses (MOOCs), resource centers, interactive real-time webinars, and workshops to allow teachers to personalize their PD. Currently, the cal- endar lists over 400 events that can be sorted by topic, and educators can earn virtual badges to show their progress. Organizations, such as school districts or schools, can join to create com- munities to direct the PD toward an organizational goal, which may be useful in promoting sys- tems change.

Another online resource for PD is the IRIS Center, hosted by Vanderbilt University. The Web site offers a wide array of modules on topics related to instruction, intervention, school leadership, systems change, special education, and so on. Each IRIS STAR Legacy Module begins with a short video clip presenting a challenge that can occur in a typical classroom or school (e.g., a teacher realizes that her English language learners are not doing as well academi- cally as her other students). Following the clip, a number of questions are posed to stimulate thinking and discussion about the scenario (the participants can pause the module for this discus- sion). Next, research-supported resources and perspectives on the topic (i.e., the content) are presented. The wrap-up presents the major points and prompts the participants to engage in a discussion comparing the content to their initial responses to the scenario. The module concludes with an assessment of the participants’ knowledge on the topic. The IRIS modules may be used by an entire staff, grade level or a professional learning community (PLC) to develop skills and knowledge to meet an identified need.

Activity 9.11

Visit the IRIS Center resource list and pull down the options under “Collaboration.” At the time this text was written, there were 11 modules, including: (1) collaborating with families, (2) effec- tive school practices: promoting collaboration and monitoring students’ academic achievement, and

(3) school counselors: promoting the transition of students with disabilities from high school to postschool settings. Individually or in small group, complete one of the modules contained in the “Collaboration” menu, including pausing to answer the questions.

Teachers also need help with integrating technology into their teaching. One method to assist teachers in becoming more technologically literate is to flip the professional development by starting with the teachers’ needs and interests to identify the skills or programs that will be most useful for them. A flipped PD involves much more hands-on activities and less passive lis- tening, as demonstrated by the testimonials in this clip at https://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=yzMFdDT6FSA. It is important both to personalize PD and to understand the level of technological knowledge among one’s audience member and/or consultees when embarking on an innovation that involves new technology (Johnson, Becker, Estrada, & Freeman, 2014).

Coaching and mentoring

To avoid the train-and-hope-it-works approach to professional development, school personnel should only engage in training that is paired with coaching on how to implement the new prac- tice within the social context of the school (Horner, 2010). The term coaching has moved from

Chapter 9 • Systems-Level Consultation: The Organization as the Target of Change 227

the athletic field to all aspects of help-giving or assistance. In the context of PD, it may refer to work with an individual teacher or a small group. Its purpose is to develop skills and assess treatment integrity. In a series of experiments conducted by Noell and his colleagues (see, for example, Noell et al., 2000), providing in-class coaching and performance (i.e., structured) feedback to teachers was found to result in greater treatment integrity over time compared to simply meeting weekly to review student data or emphasizing the personal and social signifi- cance of the intervention. Showers (1990) conducted a controlled study in which teachers coached each other in the use of teaching strategies they had learned in staff development activities. After 1 year, 80% of the teachers who had used the peer-coaching services were using the new strategies, while only 10% of those who had not used the peer-coaching methods had integrated the new strategies.

A combination of workshops followed by coaching may be a cost-effective PD method. For example, the Incredible Years Teacher Classroom Management (IY TCM), which is one of very few training programs to be evaluated through randomized control trials, includes six full-day workshops and regular, individual meetings with coaches (Webster-Stratton, Reinke, Herman, & Newcomer, 2011). The routine coaching was critical to the fidelity of the PD.

Coaches or mentors may be either internal or external personnel. Coaches and mentors have overlapping responsibilities; however, coaching is generally more short-term and focused on accomplishing specific tasks, and mentoring lasts longer and focuses on deepening the men- tee’s understanding and problem-solving skills (Rocks & Donde, 2013). Coaching can take a number of forms, including the following:

• Individual coaching—Another professional (peer, supervisor) conducts observation and/ or assessment in the classroom, and works with the teacher to establish goals for improve- ment (as appropriate) and monitor progress toward the goals. The coach returns to provide ongoing performance feedback and direct instruction (modeling, rehearsing, etc.) on any practices that are not implemented with fidelity. Video-recording and debriefing after a les- son can provide a wonderful medium for coaching, as demonstrated in this clip at https:// www.youtube.com/watch?v=gRTlAIOuARo.

• Whole-group coaching—Here the target is larger groups (departments, grade levels, etc.), which are given information, tools, materials, and so forth, that are designed to improve the skills of the whole group. The group and coach discuss exemplars and non- exemplars or (i.e., behaviors that are not consistent with) targeted practices. The coach may even model some of these practices and display data (e.g., decrease in number of office discipline referrals, increased homework completion) that may result from the new practices. Team members may role-play the practices and then implement some of the new practices (e.g., problem-solving student study teams) as a group, as well as act as coaches or consultants to each other by observing each other and providing feed- back. Horner (2010) insisted that it is best to train teams rather than individuals because sustainability is based in part on creating a “social self-confidence,” in which educators believe they are changing their practice not because someone told them to but because they are members of a capable team that is working in the best interest of students. Effective professional development not only builds skills and knowledge; it simultane- ously transfers the capacity to teach and sustain those skills and knowledge to practi- tioners within the system (Stollar et al., 2008). In some cases, the consultant might need to provide individual coaching if the team did not have the capacity or influence to help shape the practices of some of its members, but the goal again is to achieve social self-confidence.

• Multisystem-level coaching—Representatives from state and district departments and schools can receive coaching or technical assistance from organizations like the State Implementation and Scaling-Up of Evidence-Based Practices (SISEP) Center and the National Center on Response to Intervention (NCRTI) on how to work in a coordinated and collaborative manner. The technical assistance may include forming different types of teams (state management group team, state transformation team, regional implementation teams, etc.), helping to define the teams’ roles and responsibilities, and initially coaching them on the PIP and PEP feedback process.

228 Chapter 9 • Systems-Level Consultation: The Organization as the Target of Change

Coaching is a valuable role for the school consultant. How and to what extent coaching is done is a function of time, accessibility, and interest, issues that usually can be worked out to some degree. Like so many things, following up by providing structured feedback is a question of values: If the need to follow up is considered important, people find time to do it. Classroom visits to observe a new skill that has been modeled and practiced, meetings with small groups of teachers to discuss their use of the skill, brief refresher seminars, and reports of successes at weekly staff meetings are some of the ways in which consultants monitor skills applications. Whatever can be done to reduce isolation in teachers’ efforts to learn new skills is helpful. Learners, both children and adults, like to know that they are sharing the experience of learn- ing with others. The support they give each other has ramifications for staff morale and for the collaborative team-building efforts so necessary in this era of school reform. Whatever admin- istrators can do to encourage the use of new skills will be noticed by staff members. Release time for planning and consultation, public recognition of efforts, private conferences for rein- forcement, continuing education credits for PD, and so on, are all ways in which administra- tors and other consultants can show their acknowledgment of efforts at service delivery improvement.

The authors of the IY TCM program attribute some of the success of their program to the following principles of PD:

1. Collaboration and relationships are critical to teacher learning. Avoid the “expert” stance and strive for a truly reciprocal relationship.

2. Begin with short-term and long-term PD goals and reflect on progress at each workshop. 3. Explicitly define key principles of the innovation to provide a road map for the content

of the PD. Identify the underlying principle when it emerges in vignettes, role plays, or observations.

4. Build participants’ confidence and self-efficacy by celebrating success, continuously deep- ening teachers’ knowledge base, and increasing teachers’ autonomy in implementing the new strategies.

5. Acknowledge cognitions, emotions, and behaviors that may affect adoption and mainte- nance of the innovation. For example, a teacher’s defeatist attitude could stall an innova- tion if it is not addressed with one of the strategies outlined in Chapter 4.

6. Emphasize experiential learning over didactic methods through reflection and role plays, and eventually provide feedback on classroom practices.

7. Increase generalization of the innovation by using group problem solving to address a vari- ety of scenarios that occur in multiple settings.

data-team discussions

Discussing student data is critical to improving teaching either through coaching, mentoring, or professional learning communities (see Chapter 2). School consultants can assist by identi- fying good sources of student data, helping to display the data in a meaningful way, and facil- itating the discussion to be very collaborative and goal-oriented. Commercially available data-management systems, such as the School Wide Information System (SWIS) discussed in Chapter 6 and the Formative Assessment System for Teachers (FAST), which was discussed in Chapter 7, provide assessments and data displays that can assist teams if they need help iden- tifying areas needing improvement. This process can be used both at the individual teacher level and the gradewide or schoolwide level to guide professional development. A good exam- ple of a grade-level data-team discussion can be viewed at https://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=DDPtzr9NUgE.

Professional development to Promote and Sustain an mtSS

As described in Chapters 1 and 3, MTSS is a systems approach that includes tiered services (so interventions are proportional to need), continuous data collection, and data-based decision making through data-team discussions, problem-solving consultation, and scientifically based practices. Unfortunately, few educators, administrators, and support staff members have the skills and knowledge to implement MTSS (Stollar et al., 2008). MTSS is good policy, but thoughtful and prioritized pre-service and in-service professional development is necessary to

Chapter 9 • Systems-Level Consultation: The Organization as the Target of Change 229

implement this multifaceted service delivery model in both academic and behavioral arenas (Sugai et al., 2010). Implementing an MTSS requires significant change to the current prac- tices. Thus, a well-designed coaching and mentoring program is essential to successful MTSS implementation.

Activity 9.12

Unfortunately, it is common for school per- sonnel to confuse adopting one or two of the MTSS practices as equivalent to establishing MTSS. For example, observe this video at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v= -CZCvZUY5x0. Discuss whether the teams

described by the principal really meet the MTSS criteria detailed in Chapter 3 or whether it is a student study team that she is calling an MTSS. Discuss the differences and similarities between an SST and an MTSS implementa- tion team.

Stollar and colleagues (2008) describe beginning the process of moving to an MTSS in Ohio by holding data-team discussions (they call it collaborative strategic planning [CSP]) with school personnel during training sessions where ongoing modeling and coaching on system- level problem solving were provided. After establishing leadership support, identifying potential coaches, and building leadership teams, a year-long coordinated training series was implemented in which key features of a three-tiered model were discussed and linked to schools’ action plans. Schools were directed to identify research-based practices that have evidence for closing achieve- ment gaps. Sustainability was made more likely by providing ongoing support through profes- sional networking opportunities that (a) encouraged the transfer of strategies and resources among educators, (b) provided support for role-specific issues, (c) celebrated success, and (d) developed communities of practice for improving implementation. Sugai and colleagues (2010) wrote that MTSS practices can be “sustainable and scalable because they are relevant, prioritized, effective and accurate” (p. 294). An example of such a systems change is provided in the following section.

SyStem-Change PhaSeS: the mtSS examPLe

We incorporate a variety of models of systems change in the following suggested phases, includ- ing Welch’s (1999) DECIDE, Adelman and Taylor’s (2007) systems change framework, and the work of Fixsen and colleagues (2009b). Problem solving is incorporated into the process, as well as the organizational and psychological work that must be done to avoid falling into a project mentality and to succeed with large-scale, enduring change.

determining a need and Creating readiness

The first phase is for an individual or group to identify the need to do something different because the current outcomes are not acceptable or new problems have cropped up (Sugai et al., 2010). Systems change (reform, renewal, restructuring) starts with an identified problem. For our pur- poses, a situation becomes a problem to be solved when someone in authority decides that it (the situation) is impeding her goals for the system. Although there may be many situations that someone is unhappy about, it is not likely that any strong, organized effort to fix them will occur until someone with the authority to command resources, direct people, and focus energy decides to do so.

This phase is characterized by data collection, which can include a combination of quanti- tative and qualitative methodologies. These data can serve as baseline for comparing the results of any subsequent innovations. Establishing readiness among a critical number of stakeholders, especially the principal, is critical to long-term success (Adelman & Taylor, 2007). Consultants must resist the temptation to rush through this phase to get to the implementation phase. Conversely, consultants want to avoid getting stuck in this fermentation phase. When examining the history of a problem, one often finds sporadic efforts to deal with it in the past, but probably there hasn’t been a sustained effort, perhaps the interventions were inappropriate, or leadership changes (which happens so often in government and schools) led to diminished interest in solv- ing the problem.

230 Chapter 9 • Systems-Level Consultation: The Organization as the Target of Change

determining a Long-term vision and desired alternative Practices

The next phase involves developing the long-term vision for the school. This vision needs to be meaningful and motivating. Raising the test scores by 5 points is not meaningful or motivating. “Creating a school environment that is safe, supportive, and promotes academic excellence for all” would be a better example. The vision statement suggests the rationale for change and how it may come to fruition (Adelman & Taylor, 2007). Sustained systems change requires stakehold- ers to believe they are working in concert with their colleagues toward an important goal and that they are becoming more skillful throughout the process. The desired outcomes of the change, in terms of both amended educator practices and improved student functioning, should be defined as clearly as possible. These goals may change over time; in fact, schools engaged in continuous improvement will abandon practices that don’t work effectively or efficiently in the context of their school and adopt new ones. In identifying alternative practices, the extent to which the prac- tices are based on research that is efficient, relevant, sustainable, and scalable should be dis- cussed (Sugai et al., 2010). Current practices that are effective should be identified and maintained. As Fixsen et al. (2009b) wrote. “Change should supplement what already works, not supplant efforts that are valued” (p. 3).

Developing and implementing a systems change plan is where the emphasis shifts from a need (something needs to be done) to content (what will be done, under what conditions, by whom, when, how, and where). Strategic planning should include the following:

1. Goal setting: The development of specific, meaningful, objective, attainable, and ambi- tious goals is critical to system reform. The goal(s) should be derived from the determining- the-need phase, and over 80% of the staff (and ideally parents) should be committed to working toward the goals. Short-term and long-term goals should be defined explicitly.

2. Defining the essential features of the change: The critical components of the new system should be well defined to avoid the very human tendency to drift back to old behaviors,

Case Study: MTSS at Muir Elementary

At Muir Elementary, the school psychologist, Mr. Roach, and reading spe- cialist, Ms. Vanderwood, were concerned by the disproportionately high number of African American students in special education. They gath- ered referral and placement rates by ethnicity for the past 5 years, which showed a dramatic increase for African American youth, a slight decrease for Latino/Latina students, and a slight increase for White students (and taking into account each group’s proportional representation in the school). They interviewed some teachers, the principal (Dr. Murillo), and the counselor (Mr. Sieler) and drew the following hypotheses: (a) The district increased the promotion standards 4 years ago, which led some teach- ers to refer students to special education as an alternative to retention; (b) middle-class students with achievement problems did not experience this overreferral to special education as much because their parents found outside help to assist their children in meeting the promotion standards; and (c) a recent high-profile court case that found the district to employ biased assessments in determining eligibility of English language learners (ELLs) led to an increase in prereferral interventions for ELLs and an unwrit- ten and informal policy to test as few ELLs as possible.

Thinking larger than just a project to reduce disproportion in spe- cial education placements, Mr. Roach and Ms. Vanderwood examined the school’s overall reading achievement on the statewide test by various groups and compared those to comparable schools through a statewide database). They found that there was a significant gap between African American and Latino/Latina students’ achievement and the achievement of

their White counterparts; they also discovered there were schools nearby producing much better results with a similar population. They called a few of these schools and found that some, not all, were early adopters of MTSS. While knowledge of MTSS/RtI varied among the staff member, they decided this might be an avenue to explore.

Mr. Roach and Ms. Vanderwood shared these findings with Principal Murillo, who asked them to present the findings to the entire staff and to convene a team to work on addressing the achievement gap at Muir Elementary. Mr. Roach was thrilled to have the principal’s support, but he didn’t want to rush into anything. He proposed a series of presentations at the next few staff meetings to create readiness and the groundwork for substantive change. He asked Ms. Murillo if she was willing and able to make major changes based on the team’s eventual recommendations, including adjustments to resources, personnel responsibilities, policies, professional development, and the school improvement plan. She replied, “Yes, but I better join your team.” Over the next 3 months, Mr. Roach, Ms. Vanderwood, and Ms. Murillo formed an innovation team that included “champions” of the reform and various representatives, including an active member of the teacher’s union. Members of the team made presentations, conducted focus groups, and raised the issue of the achievement gap at every opportunity. By mid-December, Ms. Vanderwood overheard one of the more recalcitrant teachers say to her colleague, “We keep talking about the achievement gap, but when are we going to get down to business and do something about it?”

Chapter 9 • Systems-Level Consultation: The Organization as the Target of Change 231

procedures, and belief systems. People are generally more interested in adopting small changes that are consistent with current practices than making large changes, so the key features of the innovations need to remain crystal clear (Burns, 2007). Defining the new actions and events in concrete, observable, and measurable terms will also make it easier to gauge the fidelity of the preparation and outcome of innovation implementation.

3. Resource allocation: Six types of resources should be considered: human (Who will do it?), informational (What do we need to know in order to proceed?), technological (What tools are needed?), physical (Where will this change occur?), financial (How will we reallocate funding?), and time (How long will it take? What will be left undone if time is devoted to this innovation?). Resources such as paraprofessionals, parent volunteers, and specialists can often be underutilized. Resource mapping, wherein a team reviews a checklist of potential resources that may be reallocated to further the innovation, can help to identify some poten- tially untapped or underutilized resources. A good set of resource mapping surveys has been made available online by the Center for Mental Health in the Schools at UCLA (2007).

4. Timelines: When will the various steps begin, how long will they be operative, and when will they end? Adelman and Taylor (2007) recommend identifying short-term, intermedi- ate, and long-term processes. Implementing the plan should occur in logical phases.

Cost-benefit analysis: It may be necessary to attempt to determine if the benefit associated with this change will be worth the costs of the change. Difficult as it is to answer questions of value when it comes to human services, there may be times when the intervention-planning team will need to face some hard realities: Not all interventions can be fiscally supported.

5. Continuous improvement cycle: In the development of the strategic plan, it is necessary to go back repeatedly to determine if there is a close alignment among the short-term goal(s), the current version of the strategic plan, and the long-term vision for the school. The imple- mentation team should specify how input on new processes, professional development, and other adult activities are proceeding, as well as how the impact on student outcomes related to the goals will be collected and analyzed. How often will the team meet? How will team members assess the progress of the innovation and identify setbacks and suc- cesses? How will the first attempts at implementation inform future policy and PD? An implementation team with an a priori plan for a consistent routine of examining data and developing next-steps for attaining the goals will have more success than one that fails to plan logistically and conceptually for this important problem-solving process.

In poorly organized systems lacking systems change infrastructure, there will be sugges- tions for quick fixes; reliance on old, previously used remedies; efforts to bury the problem; or the generation of excuses about why nothing can be done. Resistance within the system can occur at this time; those who see the possible solutions as a threat may want to deny the reality of the problem. In a well-functioning system, constituents will be interviewed, records will be reviewed, task-specific groups will consider what is known, and tentative plans will be discussed. The purpose of these plans is to improve the way in which the system operates now and in the foreseeable future.

Case Study: MTSS at Muir Elementary (continued)

At Muir Elementary, the innovation team decided on this vision statement: “All students will achieve high standards through data-based decision making, effective instruction, and tiered interventions.” The team identi- fied the key MTSS practices that were missing in their school (i.e., univer- sal benchmarking, systematic assessment and performance feedback on teachers’ teaching practices, interventions proportional to students’ needs, and intervention integrity monitoring). They decided to focus on reading

first, with behavioral assessments and interventions organized in an MTSS fashion to follow a year later. They identified their current reading curricu- lum as largely effective, with some underutilization of the supplemental materials that are provided to each teacher. A detailed plan for staff devel- opment, including coaching, developing and implementing new policies and activities, and evaluating their results, was developed with short- and long-term timelines.

232 Chapter 9 • Systems-Level Consultation: The Organization as the Target of Change

Case Study: MTSS at Muir Elementary (continued)

At Muir Elementary, the innovation team examined the results of the needs assessment and resource mapping and decided to make the following changes based on each tier they wanted to improve:

Tier 1—(a) Based on value-added modeling, one teacher at each grade level was identified as highly effective and will serve as a peer con- sultant to the other teachers. These teachers will be relieved of recess duty and will have a substitute one day each month so these peer con- sultants can coach their fellow teachers. They will receive training on problem-solving consultation and coaching from the school counselor. (b) Principal Murillo will conduct 10 unannounced, 20-minute class- room observations per week in a random order and provide feedback in writing to the teachers. She will discontinue her practice of conferenc- ing with each teacher individually four times a year and will confer- ence only with those teachers who display ineffective teaching during two or more observations. (c) All students will be benchmarked every fall, winter, and spring with Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy (DIBELS) by the classroom teacher, aides, and parent volunteers. (d) Students below the benchmark will receive supplemental instruction using materials provided by the reading curriculum.

Tier 2—(a) The special education teacher will provide an in-service to the entire staff on peer-assisted learning strategies—reading (PALS-R) and train a team of teachers to implement PALS-R in the classroom through modeling and coaching when she is serving students with disabilities in their general education classrooms. (b) The SST will receive training and coaching on problem-solving SSTs for a district consultant. (c) The SST will meet on all students who fail benchmarks after 6 to 8 weeks of Tier 1 intervention. (d) Half of the school psychologist’s time will be devoted to collect- ing treatment-integrity data and providing performance feedback to

the interventionists. She will no longer test children whose parents request testing; rather, these referrals will be directed to the SST.

Tier 3—(a) Reallocate the two reading-recovery teachers to con- duct small-group reading interventions for students who fail to meet benchmark after 6 to 8 weeks of Tier 2 intervention. (b) The reading specialist will consult with the teachers and run some groups. (c) Special education may be considered for students who fail to meet benchmarks after 6 to 8 weeks of Tier 3 intervention if the interventions were delivered with good fidelity.

The team developed a year-long professional development plan based on activities that involved staff meetings and individual and group consultation and coaching. A cadre of coaches was formed. They vis- ited the neighboring schools to observe their MTSS processes; reviewed Internet resources on the activities, including What Works Clearing House and webinars on the IRIS Center Web site; and received some intensive training and coaching from faculty at a local university who specialize in MTSS service delivery models. Some of the adjustments made along the way included having the reading specialist assist the principal with class- room observations (10 per week was too ambitious) and moving one of the reading-recovery teachers back to the classroom when a teacher left the school. In addition, two staff meetings were diverted from MTSS train- ing to discuss the school crisis intervention plan due to a district mandate. Data collected during the year indicated that some activities (e.g., the benchmark testing) were conducted with good fidelity and others (employ- ing PALS-R) were implemented sporadically. The team continued to meet weekly to address challenges to implementation. Using a problem-solving process (i.e., problem identification, problem analysis, plan development and implementation, and evaluation) short- and long-term actions to improve the current practices were identified.

installation and initial implementation

The next step is to install adequate resources for the change (Fixsen et al., 2009b). A needs assessment based on both formal and informal methods (e.g., students’ test scores or office disciplinary referrals [ODRs], questionnaires, surveys, checklists, interviews, supervisors’ formal evaluations of teachers, and so on) should be conducted. In addition, resource mapping, which identifies the skills and materials that exist within the school to promote the targeted change, should be completed. Based on the needs assessment and resource mapping, the team identifies ways to reallocate resources to allow the new practices to be implemented and sus- tained. The initial implementation can be a bit bumpy as educators get adjusted to a new way of behaving. The emphasis at this phase should be on building capacity through intensive coaching (Ervin & Schaughency, 2008). Implementation evaluation should be included upfront to determine whether the new practices are effective, efficient, relevant, sustainable, and scal- able (Sugai et al., 2010).

Activity 9.13

Staff turnover, particularly of leaders, is one of the biggest threats to school reform. How can you minimize the effect of a principal,

consultant, or some other innovation team member being transferred to another school?

Chapter 9 • Systems-Level Consultation: The Organization as the Target of Change 233

Case Study: MTSS at Muir Elementary (continued)

At Muir Elementary, Mr. Roach, Ms. Vanderwood, and Ms. Murillo are beginning to feel a sense of relief and calm. The high volume of requests for consultation, coaching, and training has ebbed as more and more of the staff members demonstrate real confidence and competence in the MTSS reading model. The innovation team continues to meet to examine data, including student outcome and treatment-integrity data, to ensure PEP and

PIP. There is discussion of merging the innovation and leadership teams because they consist of mostly the same people engaged in similar activi- ties (data-based decision making). The librarian, Mr. Restori, has emerged as one of the biggest proponents of the program, although he was one of the biggest detractors originally, and has begun some supplemental read- ing groups as well as joined the innovation team.

Institutionalization

What is your formative evaluation telling you? Where are the bottlenecks or breakdowns in deliv- ery of the intervention? Are the consultees and other involved personnel implementing the innova- tions correctly? Are the reactions of those whose behavior is the target of the intervention appropriate for the goal? Are the planned-for resources available and being used advantageously? The degree to which these problems are worked out determines the fate of the remainder of the process. Some of the problems may be mechanical (equipment breaks down), financial (other demands intrude, state funding decreases, inflation increases), personal (resistance becomes evi- dent, or knowledge and/or skill gaps that prohibit implementation appear), and/or administrative (the administration decides that another problem is more important and decides to pull back its support). The characteristics of the system (i.e, closed, open, data-based, etc), described previously in this chapter, exert their influence at this point. The hope is that the system is strong enough to withstand these potentially destructive factors and can proceed with a successful change effort.

Other possibilities include formative data that suggest that the interventions are being imple- mented correctly but are not having the desired effect. This is often very discouraging to those who designed and/or are implementing the interventions. Getting past the all-too-common finding that plans need to be changed in midstream is a major challenge to those who are personally involved in wanting to see the interventions be successful. If the planners and implementers are willing to change their practices and remain committed to the short- and long-term goals and the change process, then the reform has become institutionalized. Adelman and Taylor (2007) define the institutionalization stage as “ensuring the infrastructure maintains and enhances productive change” (p. 61). In this phase, enough structural stability and support are provided to allow the innovation to be well integrated and skillfully implemented in the day-to-day functioning of the school personnel (Fixsen et al., 2009b).

Ongoing Evolution

The final phase includes innovation and sustainability of the reform. By engaging in continuous (rather than episodic) reform, schools can evolve based on changing demands and new knowl- edge and resources (Fixsen et al., 2009c). Ideally, school personnel feel a sense of renewal as practices are modified and improved over time (Ervin & Schaughency, 2008). The capacity of an organization to reassess student and implementation fidelity outcomes continuously over time is critical to sustainability (Sugai et al., 2010).

Case Study: MTSS at Muir Elementary (continued)

After 3 years of implementing the RtI for reading, Muir faculty and staff members were rewarded with increased test scores and the district’s Distinguished School award. Principal Murillo was transferred to another school in order to “work her magic” there. While sorry to see her leave, most remained confident that the school reform could continue in her absence. The new principal seemed genuinely interested in RtI/MTSS and used the first staff meeting to put it to a vote. After a 20-minute discussion,

all the staff members voted on whether to continue each portion of the new model (benchmarking, classroom observations, supplemental instruc- tion, etc.) one at a time, using clickers that instantly tallied each vote. Ms. Vanderwood and Mr. Roach felt initial trepidation and then relief (and a bit of pride) as each program sailed through with large numbers of supporters. The meeting ended with a discussion on how to develop a similar system to deal with behavioral concerns.

234 Chapter 9 • Systems-Level Consultation: The Organization as the Target of Change

Activity 9.14

Consider the case study about Muir Elementary that was presented in this chapter. What were some actions or fortuitous events that made systems change possible? What type of

resistance do you think the change agents met? How might they overcome this resist- ance? Why do you think Mr. Restori changed his mind about the initiative?

Summary

This chapter reviewed scientifically based considerations for consultants and others in the schools who are interested in systems change. It is crucial that the constituents of the prob- lem are involved at every step beyond initial discussions so that they will feel some ownership of the solutions that are determined to be the best for the local situation. Real systems change takes time, commitment to a long-term goal, and a continuous program improvement cycle. Long-term systems change takes years of focused effort, but the more focused the effort is on data-based decision making, collaboration, and evidence-based interventions, the shorter the time it takes to take hold. The beginning practitioner may want to concentrate on the initial phases (creating readiness, identifying desired

alternative practices, implementation, and evaluation) and a more limited scope (i.e., a project targeting one grade level or group of students, rather than fundamentally changing how a school operates).

One example of school personnel engaging in a systems change was presented in this chapter. Another example appears in Chapter 10. Each demonstrates the critical role that the consultants play in bridging the research- to-practice divide, keeping stakeholders focused, employing interpersonal and communication skills to build consensus and forward momentum, and using data and the problem-solving processes to achieve sustainable systems change.

References Adelman, H. S., & Taylor, L. (2007). Systemic change for school

improvement. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 17(1), 55–77.

Baker, E., Barton, P. E., Darling-Hammond, L., Haertel, E., Ladd, H. F., Linn, R. L., et al. (2010). Problems with the use of student test scores to evaluate teachers. Washington, DC: Economic Policy Institute.

Bell, J. A. (2001). High-performing, high-poverty schools. Thrust for Educational Leadership, 31(1), 8.

Burns, M. (2007). Reading at the instructional level with chil- dren identified as learning disabled: Potential implications for response-to-intervention. School Psychology Quarterly, 22, 297–313.

Center for Mental Health in the Schools at UCLA. (2007). A resource and aid packet on addressing barriers to learning: A set of surveys to map what a school has and what it needs. Los Angeles, CA: Author.

Curtis, M. J., Castillo, J. M., & Cohen, R. M. (2008). Best practices in system-level change. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology (Vol. 5, pp. 887–902). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.

Darling-Hammond, L. (1997). Principals and teachers must devise new structures to meet the challenges of education in the 21st century. Principal, 77(1), 5–11.

Darling-Hammond, L. (1999). Target time towards teachers. Journal of Staff Development, 20(2), 31–41.

Dynarski, M., Clarke, L., Cobb, B., Finn, J., Rumberger, R., & Smink, J. (2008). Dropout prevention: A practice guide (NCEE 2008–4025). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education

Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved from http:// ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc

Edmonds, R. (1979). Effective schools for the urban poor. Educational Leadership, 37(1), 15–18, 20–24.

Ervin, R. A., & Schaughency, E. (2008). Best practices in accessing the systems change literature. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology (Vol. 5, pp. 853–874). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.

Felch, J., Song, J., & Smith, D. (2010, August 14). Who’s teaching L.A.’s kids? Los Angeles Times. Retrieved from http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-teachers-value- 20100815,0,258862,full.story

Fixsen, D. L., Blasé, K. A., Horner, R., & Sugai, G. (2009a, February). Intensive technical assistance (Scaling-up Brief No. 2). Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina, FPG Child Development Institute.

Fixsen, D. L., Blasé, K. A., Horner, R., & Sugai, G. (2009b, February). Readiness for change (Scaling-up Brief No. 3). Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina, FPG Child Development Institute.

Fixsen, D. L., Blasé, K. A., Horner, R., & Sugai, G. (2009c, February). Scaling up evidence-based practices in education (Scaling-up Brief No. 1). Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina, FPG Child Development Institute.

Flannery, B. (2010, July). Hot topics in behavior support in schools. Symposium conducted at the 2010 OSEP Project Directors’ Conference, Washington, DC.

Fullan, M. (1991). The new meaning of educational change. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

Fullan, M. (1995). Change forces: The sequel. Levittown, PA: Falmer.

Chapter 9 • Systems-Level Consultation: The Organization as the Target of Change 235

Gramm, S., Elliot, J., Wright Halbert, J., Price-Baugh, R., Hall, R., Walston, D., Uro, G., et al. (2012). Common Core State Standards and diverse urban students: Using multi-tiered sys- tems of support. Washington DC: The Council of The Great City Schools.

Horner, R. (2010, July). Hot topics in behavior support in schools. Symposium conducted at the 2010 OSEP Project Directors’ Conference, Washington, DC.

Illback, R. J, & Pennington, M. A. (2008). Organization develop- ment and change in school settings. In W. P. Erchul & S. M. Sheridan (Eds.), Handbook of research in school consultation (pp. 225–245). New York, NY: Routledge.

Illback, R. J., Zins, J. E., & Maher, C. A. (1999). Program planning and evaluation: Principles, procedures, and planned change. In C. Reynolds & T. Gutkin (Eds.), Handbook of school psychol- ogy (3rd ed., pp. 907–932). New York, NY: Wiley.

Johnson, L. A., Becker, S., Estrada, V., & Freeman, A. (2014). NMC horizon report: 2014 higher education edition. Austin, TX: The New Media Consortium.

Knoff, H. M. (2008). Best practices in strategic planning, organiza- tional development, and school effectiveness. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology (Vol. 5, pp. 903–916). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.

Kratochwill, T.R., Volpiansky, P., Clements, M. & Ball, C. (2007). Professional development in implementing and sustaining mul- titier prevention models: Implications for response to interven- tion. School Psychology Review, 36, 618–631.

McAdams, R. P. (1997). A systems approach to school reform. Phi Delta Kappan, 78, 138–142.

Miller, D. D., & Kraft, N. P. (2008). Best practices in com- municating with and involving parents. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology (Vol. 5, pp. 937–952). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.

National Governors Association Center for Best Practices & Council of Chief State School Officers. (2010). Common Core State Standards. Washington, DC: National Governors Association Center for Best Practices, Council of Chief State School Officers.

National Research Council. (2004). Committee on Increasing High School Students’ Engagement and Motivation to Learn. Engaging schools: Fostering high school students’ motivation to learn. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

Noell, G. H., Witt, J. C., LaFleur, L. H., Mortenson, B. P., Ranier, D. D., & LeVelle, J. (2000). Increasing intervention implemen- tation in general education following consultation: A compari- son of two follow-up strategies. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 33(3), 271–284.

Parrett, W., & Budge, K. (2009). Tough questions for tough times. Educational Leadership (October). Retrieved from www.ascd.org

Porras, J., & Hoffer, S. (1986). Common behavior changes in suc- cessful organization development efforts. Journal of Applied Behavioral Sciences, 22(4), 477–495.

Reeves, D. B. (2003). High performance in high poverty schools: 90/90/90 and beyond. Center for Performance Assessment. Retrieved March 22, 2011, from High Performance 90/90/90 and Beyond (PDF) at www.sjboces.org/nisl/

Rocks, D., & Donde, R., (2013). Leadership coaching and mentor- ing for new directions: It’s about systems change. Addressing barriers to learning, 18(4), 8–10.

Safran, S. P., & Safran, J. S. (1997). Prereferral consulta- tion and intervention assistance teams revisited: Some new food for thought. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 8(1), 93–100.

Showers, J. (1990). Aiming for superior classroom instruction for all children: A comprehensive staff development model. Remedial and Special Education, 11(3), 35–39.

Stollar, S. A., Schaeffer, K. R., Skelton, S. M., Stine, K. C., Lateer-Huhn, A., & Poth, R. L. (2008). Best practices in pro- fessional development: An integrated, three-tier model of academic and behavior supports. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology (Vol. 5, pp. 875–886). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.

Sugai, G., Horner, R., Fixsen, D. L., & Blasé, K. A. (2010). Developing systems-level capacity for RTI implementation. In T. A. Glover & S. Vaughn (Eds.), The promise of response to intervention: Evaluating current science and practice (pp. 286–309). New York, NY: Guilford.

Sugai, G., Horner, R., & McIntosh, K. (2008). Best prac- tices in developing a broad-scale system of school-wide positive behavior support. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology (Vol. 5, pp. 765–780). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.

U.S. Department of Education. (2013). Connected Educator Month report: Learning with connected and inspired educa- tors. Washington, DC: Author.

Webster-Stratton, C., Reinke, W. M., Herman, K.C., & Newcomer, L. L. (2011). The incredible years teacher class- room management training: The methods and principles that support fidelity of training delivery. School Psychology Review, 40, 509–529.

Welch, M. (1999). The DECIDE strategy for decision making and problem solving: A workshop template for preparing profes- sionals for educational partnerships. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 10(4), 363–377.

Woodruff, D., Mellard, D., & Rose, T. (2010). The National Center on RtI’s TA services: State selection, activities and outcomes to date. Paper presentation at the annual OSEP Project Directors’ Conference, Washington, DC.

Case Studies in Collaborative Consultation

Chapter 10

236

Learning Outcomes

10.1 Summarize the steps used in the case studies of Maria, a high school girl experiencing serious academic achievement problems, and Don, a boy with high-functioning autism.

10.2 Understand the need for a sequential approach to problem solving and how a school-based consultant must keep the process moving through these sequential steps.

10.3 Explain the differences between an individual student case study and a system-change case study. What sources of resistance might have to be dealt with in each situation?

10.4 Reflect on the content of previous chapters, especially Chapter 3 (where problem solving within an MTSS service delivery model was presented) and Chapters 6 and 7 (which discussed issues in consultation regarding behavior and academic problems); demonstrate how a consultant can use the ideas and information presented in these chapters.

IntroductIon to the cases

Problem solving within a multi-tiered system of support (MTSS) service delivery model helps the consultant and consultees follow an organized system designed to generate solutions and to persist in consultative activities until the situation has improved to a reasonable degree because they can apply consultation-based interventions that are scaled to the need and persistence of the problem. However, the problem-solving steps may not be followed in a linear fashion. Rather, as illustrated with the cases presented in this chapter, problem solving may be more of an iterative process so that more information is gleaned along the way to refine the problem analysis and to develop, implement, or modify the intervention(s).

The following two cases are not presented as perfect examples of how consultation should be done. Depending on one’s theoretical orientation and the process one chooses to fol- low, it is certainly possible that these cases could have been handled quite differently, with different possible results. Rather, we present a series of steps, interventions, and decision points, primarily embedded in a behavioral approach, to represent typical realities in schools, including both positive and negative aspects of these realities. The cases were culled from our experiences as a special education teacher and as school psychologists/consultants. Neither the names of the students nor any other participants are real. Think of them as composites of stu- dents and school personnel who could very well be in the schools in which you are, or will soon be, working.

Embedded within the cases are sequential numbers in brackets that are attached to com- ments, revelations, or questions located at the end of each scenario. They are designed to stimu- late discussion about the consultative process. Readers are encouraged to pause at these points and write or discuss their impressions in light of their own perceptions of these cases and others with which they may be familiar.

The first case describes a 15-year-old Latina female who has poor grades and attendance. As an adolescent, Maria can be more involved than a younger student in the planning and deliv- ery of the interventions. She also has many more teachers than an elementary student has, which can be a blessing and a curse. The second case in this chapter concerns a 9-year-old boy (Don)

Chapter 10 • Case Studies in Collaborative Consultation 237

who presents with high-functioning autism spectrum disorder. In this case, a school psychologist provides consultation support to Don’s teacher and to a team of ancillary staff members. There is a good degree of success in this case, although perhaps not as much as the consultant and the staff members might have hoped for. This case is presented within the context of a larger system- change example.

Case One: Academic Difficulties for Maria

InItIal RefeRRal

Maria Fuentes, a 15-year-old sophomore at Carter High school, does not care for school. She was identified in the third grade as a student with a learning disability in the area of reading. Spelling and writing were also not strong. She was seen by special education teachers, on primarily a consultation-based model, from the third through the seventh grade and experienced some improvement.

As far as her credits are concerned, Maria is still a freshman. At this rate, it will take her another 3 years to graduate. In November, her social studies (history) teacher put in a referral for assistance. Maria is currently taking math fundamentals, social studies (American history), general science (for the second time), family consumer science (home economics), Spanish, and physical education (PE). She is failing the first three and barely passing the other three due to poor homework comple- tion and attendance.

Initial thoughts about the Referral

My name is Ms. Suiter, and I am one of two resource specialist teachers here at Carter. I’ve been here for 9 years. During that time I’ve seen our school population include much more diversity. Nine years ago, 75% of our students went on to some sort of postsecondary education, but that figure is now down to about 40%, and almost all of those matriculate in com- munity colleges. Also, our dropout rate has risen from about 15% to 32%. Maria seems, in many ways, typical of these changes; she comes from a home where neither parent graduated from high school. Her one older brother transferred from here to our continuation school a year ago. Maria’s family speaks primarily Spanish at home. Her grandparents emigrated from Mexico about 50 years ago.

Our teacher population has also changed somewhat. Our older staff members continue to teach the academics through largely a lecture style, while our younger staff members seek ways that provide for more student involvement, including adoption of more technology-based instruc- tion. These contrasting methods sometime make for interesting discussions among the faculty members. Much of the discussion focuses on implemen- tation of Common Core English language arts and mathematics standards and the next-generation science standards, with teachers clearly pitching their tents in one of two camps: either for the new rigorous standards that emphasize critical thinking skills and application to real world problems or against them. [1]

The assistant principal (AP) screens the referrals and decides to whom they should go. The AP sent the referral to me because it might have special education implications.

Review of Records

Maria’s school file indicates that this semester, she has received a zero for half her history homework assignments, as well as less than 40% correct

on all in-class quizzes. Her progress in her other classes is slightly better, but the same trend is prevalent: poor performance on tests and low com- pletion rates in homework. I also note that her parents have not set up an account on School Loop, an online application for secondary students and parents to communicate with teachers. Therefore, they don’t have access to current information about her school progress.

Initial Interview with the teachers

Because I know Maria is in academic trouble in more than just her history class, I decide to hold a student support team meeting with five of her teachers. They inform me that she is failing math, history, and science and barely passing family consumer science and Spanish. This is consistent with the data I gathered from School Loop. My ques- tion to each is, “Why is she failing?” Her history teacher, Mr. Petrullo, who will be my main teacher consultee, says that it’s simple: Maria is often absent, and when she’s there, she may as well not be because she isn’t prepared in any way. His efforts to get her involved have not been successful. The math and science teachers concur. Dr. White, the science teacher, says that Maria has failed every test she has taken this semester and acts as if she couldn’t care less. He thinks she will probably be a dropout. The family consumer science teacher gives a slightly better report, as does the PE teacher. Apparently, she does better on in-class projects that involve working with peers. “How can they motivate her when she appears to be so indifferent?” they ask. Of course, she’s not the only student like that, they unnecessarily inform me. They want  to know if I care to hear about some others. I suggest we focus on Maria. What we learn from her may help us deal with other uninvolved students.

The teachers agree that Maria has erected a barrier of indifference and they don’t have time in class to get around it. The science and math teachers inform me that they didn’t come to the meeting to be asked to try harder. They see her as a future dropout, and it is up to her to turn herself around. Could I refer her to her counselor so he could counsel her into trying harder? [2] Dr. White, the science teacher, asks about special education. He knows she used to be in that program and was wondering if she belongs there again.

I respond that the records indicate that Maria was exited from special education 3 years ago because she was able to meet grade-level standards. I also mention that we don’t know enough about her skills or the types of accommodations that might be appropriate, nor have we tried any systematic and targeted in-class interventions. The teachers agreed that it isn’t a question of her ability to read the material or do the written work; some have heard her read aloud, and her portfolio materi- als from last year indicate that she can write fairly well. The teachers see the problem as motivational. The largely anecdotal evidence does not convince me. She may be able to read aloud well enough, but can she comprehend, synthesize, and apply what she has read? How “polished”

238 Chapter 10 • Case Studies in Collaborative Consultation

was the writing sample in the portfolio? Was it produced by Maria alone or only after multiple edits provided by her peers or teacher? Teachers often assume a lack of motivation when the culprit is a skill deficit (VanDerHeyden & Witt, 2008). Many students, adolescents in particular, would rather it appear that they “won’t” do something instead of admit- ting that they “can’t” do it. If it is a lack of motivation, I ask the teachers, “How can we deal with this problem?” Again, answers are not forthcom- ing. The teachers wonder, “Aren’t counseling and special education the only approaches?”

I remind them that Maria’s special education support was through indirect consultation, which resulted in accommodations in general edu- cation. I asked Maria’s general education teachers what accommodations they were willing to make. This query was met with a silence only broken by the chirping of crickets.

Obviously, this has been a challenging meeting. It is sometimes difficult to get a group of teachers to think of ideas for accommodations. They can get tied up in some group conspiracy of either passivity or “It’s us versus them [the students], and we have standards to uphold.” The teach- ers did not offer ideas about ways to differentiate their instruction such as modifying her homework, previewing materials with a peer when she has been absent, or providing more time on tests, which are standard accom- modations. I’m pretty sure that improving Maria’s achievement will require changing her teachers’ behaviors, but overtly stating this now would likely be met with resistance. [3]

The questions I believe I need to answer in this case are the following:

1. What is Maria like as a person, and how does this affect her schoolwork?

2. What are her academic levels? Is she able to read the 10th-grade texts, as the teachers reported? Can she write at a level commen- surate with the expectations of her teachers and the core stand- ards? What is her cognitive and academic language proficiency (CALP) in English?

3. What happens in Maria’s classrooms and in her home to either encourage or discourage her academic engagement?

4. Should we make program changes that will be more appropriate for her? What does appropriate mean?

ClassRoom obseRvatIon

The students at Carter High are familiar with me dropping into class- rooms to observe, so my visiting a classroom is not regarded as remark- able or suspicious. Mr. Petrullo’s classes are always fun. He has a lot of energy, and his classes are characterized by lively interactions, brave arguments, and the kind of enthusiasm that is characteristic of engaged adolescents. His style has earned him accolades from a variety of sources over the years.

During my visit, Maria is not involved with the discussion on tariffs. One of her peers tries to get her involved in the discussion, but she demurs. [4] After class Mr. Petrullo tells Maria that he wants to see her after school. No problem, just a brief talk about her work. I ask if I could sit in; Maria looks at me suspiciously but passively agrees. When she leaves, I ask Mr. Petrullo if he could see me before the afternoon meeting. He is eager to meet with me.

UsIng PaRents as allIes In the ConsUltatIon PRoCess

Before the after-school meeting I call Maria’s mom, Mrs. Fuentes. She is at home. She works 3 days a week at a grocery store and is able (and eager) to come to school to discuss Maria. She is glad I have called because she and her husband are both very worried about Maria. Mr. Fuentes works as

an auto mechanic all day and can’t come to a daytime meeting, but she is glad to come in on Thursday at 11:10, Mr. Petrullo’s free period. I’ll inform him of the meeting. [5]

the follow-UP meetIngs

When I meet with Mr. Petrullo, I ask him what might be effective in getting Maria more involved with his class: What has worked with other students in the past? He says that he has been thinking about the problem since our last meeting and wants to run three ideas past me:

1. Contact her parents and see what they can do about it. 2. Set up some sort of contract with her that spells out very clearly

what she has to do to earn a passing grade. 3. See her after school today and tomorrow to review the material

with her and give her some sort of boost.

I tell him that every one of his ideas has merit and is worth pur- suing; in fact, I’ve moved forward on his first idea already by arranging the parent meeting. He’s pleased by this. We then talk about a possible contract. I suggest, “We are talking about a student whose present level of involvement is so low that we probably ought to stick to very basic acting- like-a-student behaviors such as attendance, returning homework, and responding at least once per period.” He agrees and says we should talk to Maria about it after school. [6]

I’ve learned how to do this job better over the past few years. Before, I used to take over meetings like this, but by doing so, I gave the impression that I was the main person there and that it was all right for the teacher to take a back seat and let me do all the work. Now I make it clear that our coming meeting is between the teacher and the child (and/or parent). I monitor and facilitate as necessary, but I’m in a secondary role.

I close our meeting by asking Mr. Petrullo if he feels okay about the contract or wants to discuss it further. He says that he is ready to go with it, so we part company until the after-school meeting with Maria. Note that I’m not telling him how to write the contract.

The after-school meeting goes as I expected. Mr. Petrullo is very friendly, encouraging, and enthusiastic. Maria is reticent, quiet, and compliant, but generally noncommittal. She denies that there is any real problem, then says that the work is too hard, and then asks to transfer out of math and science class. At this point, Mr. Petrullo looks at me for help.

I say that we are here to start a process of helping Maria be successful in her classes and that this process is going to involve her teachers, myself, her parents (she looks at me with astonishment and concern when I mention her parents), and especially herself. Is she willing to work with us to help her be more successful in school? This can be a risky question. Some children will say no or talk around the question. I gamble with Maria because she seems to be basically compliant. I am right. I ask Maria if she will give us a commitment to try harder.

Maria says that she is willing but doesn’t know why her parents have to be involved. Mr. Petrullo replies, “We always try to get parents involved, even if the student is a senior. You’re lucky to have parents who want to get involved.” Maria looks dark; I think she sees this business of getting her parents involved as a dirty trick on our part.

Mr. Petrullo says that for now he wants Maria to look at the con- tract that he wrote during his prep period (see Figure 10.1). If she agrees, she can sign it.

Most high school teachers are not about to ask a student what she would like to earn for being a good student. Grades and mild praise are potential reinforcers in high school for those who are not invested in

Chapter 10 • Case Studies in Collaborative Consultation 239

learning as a goal in itself. But Mr. Petrullo has stuck with grades as his reinforcer in this case.

Maria seems pleased with the contract. I believe she thought it was going to be something awful, but it isn’t. She signs it and then wants to know what we are going to talk about with her mother. I tell her that we will ask her parents to review Maria’s status in all her classes on School Loop once per week to verify that Maria is keeping up with assignments and quizzes. If Maria’s family does not have Internet access at home, we will help them find a local library where they can log onto School Loop.

Mr. Petrullo then asks Maria why she misses school so often on Monday. She says she is sick a lot. He suggests that she come to school even if she isn’t feeling like it, that we want her here, and that we will talk to her mother about it. [7] Mr. Petrullo and I have no time to meet before Mrs. Fuentes comes in on Thursday.

Because we have only about 20 minutes for this conference with Mrs. Fuentes, my main goal is to keep the discussion solutions-oriented. Mr. Petrullo wants to start with the contract, so he brings it out and gives Mrs. Fuentes a copy. She says that Maria has shown it to her and that she thinks it’s fine. She wants Maria to finish high school and will support anything we want. We mention to her about her talking every day with Maria about her work, checking the homework, and so on. We are in my office and I am sitting next to my computer. so I can log onto School Loop and help Mrs. Fuentes establish an account and describe each of the screens as we examine Maria’s current record. Mrs. Fuentes is astonished by the information, confessing she suspected her daugh- ter was less than truthful all those times she reported that she did not have homework. “What about the absences?” I ask. Mrs. Fuentes says that she often gives in to Maria when she says she is too sick to go to school.

assessment of the stUdent

The following week, I meet with Maria for a half hour during her study hall. After I greet her, I ask about the contract and how it is going. She says her parents have been on her case about it and keep bugging her to do her homework and show it to them. I silently thank them for showing this concern and say, “I think that’s a sign of their concern for you.”

functional assessment of academic behavior

I have not been able to discern, based on the review of records, inter- views, and observations, whether Maria has the prerequisite skills to access the information in her textbooks. I decide to ask her some of the

student interview questions on the functional assessment of academic behavior (FAAB) (Ysseldyke & Christenson, 2002) and discover that she is unaware of what is expected of her on most assignments. She says that she doesn’t read her textbooks because they are too difficult. I ask her to pull her history book out of her backpack and we review the reading for tomorrow. She begins by reading the first line of the text. Her reading is labored and slow. I stop her and point out the header— American Expansion into the West—and ask her what she thinks the chapter title means and what the chapter might be about. After a few questions she becomes animated as she draws ideas and projections from her recollections of the movie Lonesome Dove and the stories that came with her once beloved Josephina American Girl doll. I conclude that there is interest there, at least on this topic, and she might become more engaged in the curriculum if it can be made more relevant to her. Next I point out the vocabulary preview box on the right-hand side of the page. Maria indicates she always skips this box and we discuss how previewing the vocabulary will make reading and comprehension easier. After quickly reviewing a couple of other comprehension strate- gies she learned in middle school but had failed to employ recently, I tell her I want to get a better understanding of her reading, writing, and mathematics skills.

Curriculum-based assessment

I begin the curriculum-based assessment (CBM) with a survey-level assessment of Maria’s reading skills by starting with a 10th-grade oral reading fluency probe and continuing down the grade levels until she reads the probe at a rate that meets the instructional-level standards. She is able to read a sixth-grade probe at 102 words correct per min- ute (WCPM). In mathematics, she comprehends the concepts (integers) targeted in her current class but she makes a lot of multiplication fact errors. I give her two writing prompts (fiction and nonfiction) and analyze her fluency (correct word sequence per minute) and sentence structure (where she makes mistakes in English that are consistent with Spanish syntax). I tested the motivation hypothesis by offering her an incentive (movie tickets donated by the local movie theater) to beat her 102 WCPM on another sixth-grade probe by reading 120 WCPM or more. She quickly read 125 words; however, she made many more mistakes, reading only 98 correctly. Based on her performance on the CBM and a review of her schoolwork (what little I could locate), I conclude that Maria requires sig- nificant academic interventions in all three areas, but we might want to target reading first. [8]

I share my concerns about Maria’s reading limitations with her and I inquire about either of her parents helping her with her read- ing. She thinks maybe her mother will help her; her father doesn’t read

FIgure 10.1 Contract

I, Maria Fuentes, agree to come to class each day (unless excused for illness by my parents). I will be sure to have my book and a notebook and a pencil for taking notes. I will also make at least one appropriate comment or answer at least one question during each class period. I will study the material and do my best on the weekly exam on Thursdays.

Each week, on Friday, Mr. Petrullo will give me a weekly report card based on these behaviors. I will take it home and have my parents read and sign it. I will return it to Mr. Petrullo on the following Monday.

For every signed form Mr. Petrullo receives, I will receive five bonus points toward my next class grade.

Signed:

Mr. Petrullo _________________________________________________

Maria Fuentes ________________________________________________

Ms. Suiter (consultant) __________________________________________

240 Chapter 10 • Case Studies in Collaborative Consultation

much. She’s not sure he can read. “At least not 10th-grade books,” she says with a sigh.

“So,” I say, “would you ask your mother to sit with you for a half hour every night and go over your schoolwork with you?”

“Yeah, okay, I’ll ask her,” says Maria. Great! I say to myself, even while I know that many students will

promise anything to get out of a difficult situation. “And we will be having a meeting soon with your parents and teachers to find some ways we can all help you to succeed.”

Maria looks surprised by this announcement. “Oh!” she says. “Yes, by all working together, including you, I think we will find

some creative solutions to help you do better in school so that you can graduate on time. [I pause for Maria’s reaction, but I am met with silence.] The meeting is next Monday. Let’s brainstorm some ideas about what your short- and long-term goals are and how we might help you achieve them.”

By asking Maria about her goals, we begin some basic self- determination training. I ask Maria to imagine her ideal life 1 year, 5 years, and 10 years down the road. Vague goals about doing better in school, graduating, and attending community college emerge. As we talk further, her interests in becoming a chef and starting a family emerge. I’m careful not to interject my opinions or values into her self-exploration but use my consultation skills in reflective listening and goal-directed problem solving to help her solidify her aspirations for the future. We conclude by preparing a goal statement that she will read at the upcoming student study team (SST) meeting. My hope is that she will be able to participate actively in the SST, but it can be an intimidating event and Maria has a history of fading into the wallpaper. We will see. [9]

Consultation with school Psychologist

I check with the school psychologist, Ms. Olaya, to review the results of the reevaluation that occurred 3 years ago. We meet in her office for 10 minutes, and she reviews the report, noting Maria’s cognitive and achievement test results were in the low average range across the board. Thus, no discrepancy was found and Maria no longer qualified for special education services. The report indicated that Maria was offered testing in Spanish but that she preferred English. We discuss refram- ing Maria’s difficulties from an intelligence–achievement discrepancy model to a continuum of need model. [10] We agree that we will try to put into place the most robust, evidence-based interventions that can be implemented feasibly in general education to determine if Maria can be successful without special education support. The key will be to get con- sistent support from the teachers in implementing the interventions as well as finding resources for supplemental instruction. Ms. Olaya shares her frustration with how some of our faculty members refuse out-right to provide needed interventions in the classroom. She says that she has talked with the principal about it but feels like she hasn’t made much impact. She asks, “Would you be willing to help bring our administra- tion and faculty to the realization that the old days are gone and that we need to make curricular and teaching-method changes if we are to provide our students with the kind of school experiences that will be meaningful to them?” [11]

ConjoInt ConsUltatIon

We have everyone in the same room. We meet early in the morning so Mr. Fuentes can join us if only for a few minutes before he leaves for work. After introductions, I review the main concerns (Maria’s underde- veloped skills in reading, math, and writing and her difficulty access- ing content in textbooks); her current levels of functioning, including attendance, homework completion, and class participation; and the interventions (contracting with Mr. Petrullo and homework checks by

her mother). We discuss which interventions are being implemented as planned (the contract was reinforced four out of five days last week) and which have not been effective. (Mrs. Fuentes was unable to look up Maria’s records on the computer at her sister’s house because she couldn’t remember her password.) Mrs. Fuentes says that she would have started checking Maria’s work a long time ago if she thought she knew enough to help. But she thought parents weren’t supposed to interfere. I reply that there a lot of ways parents can support school achievement at home. Parental support is not only acceptable; it is essential to student success. I suggest that Mrs. Fuentes can assist Maria by ensuring that she has a quiet space and sufficient time to complete homework; she can assist with word recognition and compre- hension by prompting Maria to go back to the text for possible defini- tions and themes.

Mrs. Fuentes laughs, saying that she hopes she understands it her- self; after all, she never finished high school.

I say, “I think you’re doing very well. The main thing is your interest and your willingness to show Maria that you feel that education is very important.”

Next Maria shares her goal statements and we discuss what each of us can do to help her achieve her short- and long-term goals. I share some of the results of my curriculum-based and functional assess- ments, noting that Maria’s difficulties do not stem solely from a lack of motivation. Some of her teachers look surprised and dubious, but they refrain from expressing their disbelief aloud, probably because Maria and her parents are present. We all agree that Maria’s reading needs to improve if she is going to graduate and attend a culinary school. Maria is able to express that she doesn’t like to read but she sees how impor- tant it is to reaching her goals. She agrees to stay 30 minutes after school each day to work with me on vocabulary, decoding, and compre- hension skills. In addition, Mr. Petrullo and Dr. White agree to provide Maria with a peer tutor to preview/review textbook assignments for at least 10 minutes every day. I volunteer to collect progress-monitoring data using sixth-grade probes for the next 6 weeks and to assist with implementing and monitoring the integrity of the peer-tutor interven- tion. During the meeting, our counselor, Ms. Spears, has been docu- menting the entire plan. As the meeting concludes, Ms. Spears reviews the plan, the short-term goals (increase oral reading fluency from 102 to 120 WCPM), and the long-term goals (graduate from high school and attend culinary school) and prints a copy of the plan for each person, including Maria.

As we are saying our good-byes, Mrs. Fuentes asks quietly, to no one in particular, “What about . . . Maria is crying so much. She won’t tell me why.” We all pause and look at Maria, who looks like she would like to disappear right about now. Tears well up in her eyes and she puts her head down on her arms. A few of the teachers murmur comments that indicate that Maria has appeared despondent, or maybe even depressed, and offer encouraging words such as “We really care about you” and “You can talk to me anytime.” Ms. Olaya pats Maria’s arm sympathetically and says, “This is a lot for Maria to absorb at one time. Why don’t we end the meeting and I will talk with Maria privately. She may need some help adjusting to all the changes in her life. Let me get a consent form for counseling for the Fuenteses to sign.” [12]

monitoring Intervention fidelity and student outcomes

During the next several weeks, I have to cancel one or two of my ses- sions with Maria each week due to individualized education program (IEP) meetings, but her progress when we meet is strong. The peer tutoring got off to a rocky start, but it is going very well in Mr. Petrullo’s class (he paired all his students using a method similar to the peer- assisted learning program described in Chapter 7). Dr. White is having

Chapter 10 • Case Studies in Collaborative Consultation 241

less success because he feels pressure to adhere to the district pac- ing chart and he can’t find 10 minutes to spare to have a peer review the text material with Maria. After observing one of his classes, we meet to discuss some ways to speed up his transitions to find time for cooperative learning groups. I also guest-lecture in his classroom on what behaviors to do and not to do when assisting a fellow student, and then I stop by a few more times to coach the students and reinforce Dr. White’s efforts.

Conclusion

We meet again 6 weeks after the initial SST to review Maria’s progress and our interventions. Maria attended. Mr. Petrullo reports that the con- tract is successful. Her attendance is now almost 100%. Her Thursday exam grades are now at the C level. Mr. Petrullo has so far sent home four weekly report cards, all of which have been signed and returned, twice by both parents. With the bonus points they have agreed to, Maria could earn a B for this quarter. The peer tutoring is going well in Mr. Petrullo and Dr. White’s classes; the next step is to introduce it in Maria’s math class, in which she continues to struggle.

Mrs. Fuentes says that she is holding firm on the homework checking. We discuss the level of support Maria will need, includ- ing establishing and monitoring peer-assisted learning in her other classes, and we conclude that Maria’s learning disability, first iden- tified in third grade, still qualifies her for special education services because interventions in general education alone failed to produce sufficient academic achievement. We discuss the implications of the disability diagnosis, including how Maria will learn to advocate for accommodations so that she can reach her goals, and we schedule a meeting to develop her individualized education program. I explain that I will be her case manager, and that we will be discussing transition planning.

A couple of days later, Maria and I meet to begin discussing student- led IEPs, self-determination, and self-advocacy, and it is like I’m meeting with a different Maria. I ask her, “How are you doing?”

She answers enthusiastically, “Just great, Ms. Suiter. I’m having a lot of success in my classes . . . not math, but my grades in the other classes have really improved. And finally I feel like I’m starting to get to know who I really am and what I want to do with my life.”

I respond, “That must feel good. You’ve had quite a couple of  weeks. Tell me about how you are making sense of all that has happened recently.”

“Ms. Olaya has really helped me understand what it means to  have a learning disability. I’m realizing I can do anything I want to do, it just might require more effort or I may need to ask for help sometimes.” [13]

dIsCUssIon QUestIons foR maRIa

1. What are the implications for dealing with a changing school population? How does this change influence approaches, teachers’ expectations of their students, support services, staff development needs, and so on? What are the implications from the effective schools literature reviewed in Chapter 9? What needs to happen in Maria’s school for it to become high performing? How can differences in teaching style lead to productive conversations and improved teaching effectiveness? What are some implications for developing and implementing curricula to meet the new standards? What types of support do ELLs need to benefit from the curriculum? How can all these changes be managed for the good of the students?

2. It is interesting to note that some of these teachers believe that a counseling approach is the way to improve academic achieve- ment. What is the evidence to suggest that a counseling approach or technique increases academic motivation? What prerequisite skills do the teachers assume Maria has but fails to employ due to lack of moti- vation? What if it is not a lack-of-motivation problem but some other adjustment problem or a skill deficit? What are the implications for changing teachers’ behaviors if it is assumed that a motivation deficit is the underlying culprit?

3. What are some methods for getting teachers to generate ideas at an SST meeting or case conference? Why might they be resistant to doing so? Chapters 3 and 4 review some strategies for generating ideas within SST meetings.

4. A common mistake in teaching is calling on only those students who raise their hands. Typically, those students know the answer. How might the teacher “check for understanding” among students like Maria who don’t raise their hands?

5. While all of Maria’s teachers expressed concern about her attendance and achievement, none reported contacting her parents to collaborate on a solution. What are some reasons for this oversight? How might a consultant increase home–school collaboration in this school?

6. Chapter 6 has information about contracting. Remember that a common problem with contracting is the tendency to make the contract either too complicated or too labor-intensive for the teacher. Either of these concerns is especially true for high school teachers. How might you develop an in-service meeting to review contracting to make it appealing to teachers? In pairs, devise a learning problem for which a contract might be useful. Then draft a simple positive contingency contract. Discuss these contracts in class.

7. If Maria’s Monday-absence pattern continues, what should the school do about it? What systems do your local schools use to deal with excessive absences?

8. Why pick reading as a priority for Maria? What interventions can be attempted in high school to address low reading skills? Refer to Chapter 9 for a brief description of the unique infrastructure of high schools. How can the context of high school be used to leverage interventions that might help Maria’s skills?

9. What are the potential benefits and limitations to having stu- dents participate in the SST or IEP? How might you respond if the students, parents, or teachers express goals or interventions that are either unrea- sonably high or depressingly low?

10. How does reframing Maria’s prior and current achievement dif- ficulties from an intelligence–achievement deficit model to a continuum of need model potentially help or hurt her?

11. How might you get a buy-in to response-to-intervention (RtI) service delivery models when staff members have overlearned and feel really comfortable with a refer–test–place way of addressing undera- chievement?

12. Depression can appear in many different forms, including dis- tractibility and withdrawal. Students can become depressed because they are failing academically at school or their depression may be causing their failures. How might you discern (or is it unimportant to do so) what came first, the depression or the academic difficulties?

13. The problem-solving steps were not strictly adhered to in this case study about Maria. Was the iterative processes of gather- ing information and acting the most expedient, culturally sensitive, feasible, and effective way of consultation, or would a more struc- tured approach be more expedient, culturally sensitive, feasible, and effective?

242 Chapter 10 • Case Studies in Collaborative Consultation

Case Two: System Change and Inclusion of Student (Don) with Autism Spectrum Disorder

The second case in this chapter consists of two overlapping parts: that of an individual student who will be included in a general education setting, and a system-change project that was co-occurring at that student’s elementary school. The following case study combines a case study of the system-change project and the case study of the student.

PRoblem statement foR the system-Change PRojeCt

King Elementary is a K–6 school in the Middletown School District and has 900 students. The teachers and administrators have been concerned for some time about issues surrounding the special education delivery service for their students who have been diagnosed with autism spec- trum disorder (ASD). As the name suggests, students with ASD range from those having significant delays in cognitive, language, and social behavior to those with more mild forms, such as Asperger syndrome. Students with Asperger syndrome usually have average to above-average intelligence and their language tends not to be as delayed as those with more severe autism, although it may be idiosyncratic, and their primary area of difficulty is in social interactions. (While many people continue to use the term Asperger syndrome, the term has largely been removed within the scientific community after it was dropped from the fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders [DSM-5; American Psychiatric Association, 2013]. In this chapter, we use the term high-functioning autism [HFA] to describe students with mild ASD.) Students on the high-functioning end of the autism spectrum, even those with mild intellectual disabilities, may require less support and less restrictive environments than students who are more impaired. (See Chapter 6 for more information on autism spectrum disorder.) [1]

The concerns of the staff members at the King Elementary School include the following:

1. Due to their separated placements, students with ASD were not being given the same chances for socialization or educational achievement that students in general education were receiving.

2. The scheduling for these students was often confusing and resulted in too many students missing too much of the general education program.

3. The stigma attached to being in the program was problematic for many of the targeted students and sometimes led to bullying by other students.

4. The two Special Day Class (SDC )teachers who teach 14 students with ASD stated that 9 or 10 of their students, those they regard as being on the mild end of the ASD spectrum, could be included in general education classes, with consultative assistance from their SDC teachers and other school personnel.

Schools, like all large, well-established institutions, have a culture, a set of norms and habits that guide their everyday activities. Because SDC for students with moderate-to-severe degrees of disabling conditions, many in the category of ASD, have been part of that culture, people have come to expect that this system will always exist and will provide some extra, or “special,” education for students with disabili- ties. Parents are generally comforted to know, and sometimes are very insistent, that their child receives this special treatment. At the same

time, there have always been voices within the system, including some parents, who have questioned the value of this form (i.e., SDC) of special education. Since the 1990s, the number and strength of the voices ques- tioning the status quo in special education have grown steadily, partly because of a lack of supporting empirical evidence for SDCs, and partly because of a strict interpretation of the intent of the “least restrictive placement” provisions of Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA; Heward, 2013). [2]

The history of the concern at King Elementary School is based only somewhat on these national concerns about special education as a separate system. The school staff members at King Elementary are more concerned about their own students than national agendas. They feel that students with HFA attending the SDC are missing out on the general education curriculum and socialization effects of the general education programs. Also, these SDC teachers believe the students with HFA may not be making enough gains in these separate classes, in spite of com- petent teachers, to justify the continued existence of these programs for these students.

ConCeRned PaRtIes (ConstItUents)

Any change in service delivery affects general and special education as well as the targeted students. Thus, it is no exaggeration to say that all persons concerned with the school will be potentially affected by a change in this area. Naturally the targeted students will be affected, as will their parents. Some teachers and ancillary staff members can expect a significant change in how they work. For example, general education teachers used to the idea that there is a program for dealing with students who manifest mild to moderate learning and behavior problems (in this case, students with HFA) need to consider the fact that these students may no longer go leave the general education class- room but will stay to whatever extent is feasible. The general educa- tion teacher will be expected to deal with the students’ learning and adjustment challenges with the help of a collaborating staff of admin- istrators, special education teachers (who may no longer have a class- room of their own but may spend most of their day assisting general education teachers as they modify instruction for students with disabili- ties), and ancillary staff members. If this plan is to be successful, these ancillary staff members (school psychologists, counselors, and speech and language specialists) will also experience a major change in their expected daily activities. The thought of all this change, based on what many consider to be an unsubstantiated premise—that students with mild to moderate disabilities will do better in general education if they are provided accommodations and modifications—may seem over- whelming to some staff members but can signify positive potential to others. [3]

PRoblem statement foR the Case of don

Don Foy is a nine-year-old boy who was identified at age 3 as being on the autism spectrum. Although highly verbal, he was stubbornly insist- ent on having things and activities always in a prescribed order, includ- ing the placement of silverware, bedroom toys, and the location of the family car in the garage, and he obsessed about dinosaurs. He surfed the Internet endlessly to find information about dinosaurs, and the only

Chapter 10 • Case Studies in Collaborative Consultation 243

books he read were the dozens he owned on dinosaurs. He was not able to play with other children unless he dominated the play, which had to focus on dinosaurs. Throughout kindergarten and first grade, he contin- ued with this set of behaviors and would also engage in rage behaviors (the school staff called them meltdowns) if he didn’t get his way with others. He had no friends and seemed disinterested in having them. A subsequent referral and IEP meeting was made, and participants decided his educational needs would be best met through a separate placement in an SDC with designated services in counseling and consultation with the school psychologist.

PRoblem solvIng foR don

My name is Gustavo Lopez, and I am the school psychologist at King Elementary School. I have known Don since he was in first grade and have had many conferences with his parents and teachers. Don is currently nine years old. He is of average height, weight, and intelligence. The primary reason he is placed in an SDC is because of his social/interpersonal limita- tions, his obsessive references to dinosaurs, and his inability to tolerate changes in classroom routines.

Our staff members work in a collaborative fashion to try to build the most appropriate learning placements and opportunities for our students. While Don has made progress in his SDC, his teacher, parents, and I have been discussing a possible transfer to the regular fifth grade next year. He can do the academic work at grade level, except for his spelling and hand- writing, which remain poor.

Our problem-solving team (PST) consists of the following members, in addition to myself:

Ms. Foy, Don’s mother Ms. June Peterson, Don’s SDC teacher Dr. Howard Plass, school counselor Ms. Hagans, school principal Ms. Shelby, future fifth-grade teacher for Don if he is to be fully included next year

Our team met together in the spring of Don’s fourth-grade year to discuss Don’s issues and to plan our response to them. Ms. Peterson noted that we shouldn’t lose sight of the fact that Don has ASD and that his social and behavioral problems are a result of that condition. I asked her and the others if we could focus on what we can do to alter conditions and thus encourage more appropriate behaviors. Ms. Hagans reminded the group that we have a problem-solving approach to academic and behavioral concerns at King Elementary School. She emphasized that we focus on the positive and therefore wanted to start the discus- sion by noting Don’s positive attributes. Ms. Peterson said that Don has a pleasing affect when he is calm and involved in his schoolwork. She also noted that his academic progress is generally good. He has problems in handwriting and now is only doing printing; he refuses to write in cursive because he knows it’s messy. Neither Ms. Peterson nor Don’s parents have a problem with that. Dr. Plass agreed with these comments and added that Don is articulate and makes a strong case for his beliefs, even though the other students criticize him for his dinosaur comments and his argumentative nature. Ms. Hagan noted that, when Don is sent to the office for a brief time away from the class, he is quiet and polite.

Don’s mother, Mrs. Foy, said that Don can be loving and affec- tionate, can be responsible for (indeed, obsessive about) chores, and loves to acquire new information and share it with the rest of his family. She said that he does not exhibit obtrusive social problems at home with others because he isolates himself from neighborhood children and generally also from his parents and other relatives. He has no sense for how to get along with them. When he is with his parents, he is

demanding and insists on everything going his way. Mrs. Foy said that she and her husband ask Don to stop if he starts a dinosaur discussion; they allow him to talk about dinosaurs for 10 minutes every evening. If he persists at other times, he is sent to his room, where he usually entertains himself with the Internet or his dinosaur books. In regard to his getting upset about changes, she said that this is not as serious a problem as it had been, but he still gets upset if the family routine changes significantly.

Problem Identification

I noted Don’s positive attributes and suggested that we discuss how we might obtain the important data: Just how often do we see the behaviors of concern? I asked Ms. Peterson and Dr. Plass to keep records on the num- ber of social problems (defined as arguing loudly, pushing others, crying over some small incident, self-isolation, refusing to participate in class); times when Don obtrusively called out information about dinosaurs; and times when he loudly objects to changes in routines, such as changes in groupings of students, changes in classroom tasks, or fire drills. These occurrences of the behaviors of concern were to be tracked for the week preceding another planned team meeting.

A week later, Ms. Peterson reported the following: social inci- dences: 12, dinosaur comments: 14, and upsets about changes in routine: 4. Dr. Plass, who sees Don twice weekly in a counseling group, reported the following: social incidences: 8, dinosaur comments: 6, and upsets about changes: 4. Ms. Hagans, who receives a report on playground behavior from the supervising aides, was told the following: social prob- lems: 18, dinosaur comments: 0 (they may be directed to other students but not loud enough to hear), and upsets about changes: 3. These data would serve as baseline information to be discussed during the problem analysis stage of the case study.

I asked the group to formulate goals based these data. Ms. Shelby suggested that, because we were all familiar with the standards we use  when having our students set goals for themselves, it would be convenient for us to use the same system based on the acronym SMART, which stands for specific, measurable, attainable, realistic, and timely. They agreed that these criteria would serve as convenient guidelines for their goals.

Although the dinosaur comments were annoying (they wanted a 75% reduction in these comments), they were most concerned about Don’s social adjustment issues. They wanted a 50% reduction in these problems, and a concomitant increase in conflict-free social interactions, which were estimated to be only two a day in the classroom, none in Dr. Plass’s group, and none on the playground. Positive social interactions were defined as speaking in a friendly way to his peers, taking part in class discussions, offering to help others, and waiting his turn. Ms. Peterson and Ms. Shelby agreed that Don should be engaging in at least five positive social interac- tions a day if inclusion in a fifth-grade class is to be considered. Dr. Plass said that he would like to see at least two positive social interactions per session, and Ms. Hagans said that she would be happy if two positive social interactions per day were reported to her. The group acknowledged that, because obtrusive overreactions to changes in routines were largely a function of how often these often-unexpected changes occurred, it was difficult to ask for a percentage of improvement. Therefore they decided that a zero occurrence of these reactions would be the goal. Lopata et al. (2012) have provided an overview of data-based school interventions for students with HFA. [4]

the student Interview

That afternoon, I took Don from his class for a little chat. Ms. Peterson had told him that I would be doing that to forestall any meltdown that

244 Chapter 10 • Case Studies in Collaborative Consultation

might occur because of a change in routine. He came easily; he remem- bered me from previous meetings that we had in past years. I told him I wanted to get to know him little better because I hadn’t talked to him in a while. His conversation was guarded but not unhelpful:

Gustavo Lopez (GL): Don, I was just in your class, and I noticed that things seemed to be going well for you.

Donald Foy (DF): Yeah. I didn’t do anything wrong. I don’t like to be out of class. Can I go now?

GL: Whoa, hold on, Don. I won’t keep you long. I know it isn’t easy to be taken out of class without much warning. And you’re right, you didn’t do anything wrong. As you know, your teachers and parents and Dr. Plass are all working hard, as you are, to make school a happier place for you.

DF: (Interrupting) School’s not happy. Ms. Peterson won’t let me talk about dinosaurs. Dr. Plass’s group is stu- pid. I hate it.

GL: So you’re feeling that school is not happy for you. Let’s talk about that, maybe one piece at a time. First, you say that Ms. Peterson won’t let you talk about dinosaurs. Does she never let you talk about them?

DF: Yeah, well sometimes she does, in science, but then not much either. Did you know that Stegosaurus has those plates on his back that work like air condition- ers to keep him cool?

GL: Don, I’ll give you some time to talk about dinosaurs after we finish our other business today. Now, I think Ms. Peterson, just like your previous teach- ers, let you know that having toy dinosaurs in class and talking about them when they are not what Ms. Peterson is teaching is distracting to the other students and to yourself. Would you agree that that might be so?

DF: No. (At that point, Don looks away and stops talking.)

GL: Well, Ms. Peterson is the teacher and she has to decide what works best in her classroom. I think your parents would agree with me about that. Perhaps we can talk more about the dinosaurs when we meet again next time. Now, tell me about Dr. Plass’s group. You said it was stupid. What’s stupid about it?

DF: All we do is talk to each other, and Dr. Plass keeps showing us how to do it better. I know how to talk a lot better that some of those other kids. Some of them are dumb.

GL: Don, You’re seeing Dr. Plass so he can help you get along with other kids by helping you to understand where they’re coming from when they say things to you, even some things you might find hurtful. He’s trying to help you learn how to talk with other kids so you won’t find yourself getting in arguments with them. I remember you told me once last year that kids always want to get in arguments with you. Do you see how what Dr. Plass is working on in your group could be useful to you in helping to make more friends?

DF: I got friends. Can I go now?

GL: I’m glad to hear that you have friends this year, Don. Who are the friends you have in school or on the playground?

DF: Billy Carlson and . . . some others. I don’t know their names.

GL: Don, I know Billy and he is a good choice for you to have as a friend. Now, could you help me with just one more thing before we go? Ms. Peterson tells me she would like to find a way to help you stay calm when there are changes in classroom routines. Do you have some ideas about what she can do to help you get through those rough spots?

DF: I just lay my hands on the top of my desk and shut my eyes while I count from one to five. That’s what Dr.  Plass told me to do, but sometimes it doesn’t work and I get all mad. They shouldn’t be changing things at school.

GL: So the good news is that you have found a way to gain good control of yourself.

DF: Yeah, maybe. You said that was the last thing. Can I go now?

GL: Yes. Don, I’ll be meeting with you again from time to time, and I’ll be talking with Ms. Peterson and Dr. Plass and also with your parents. I know that in another month or so, they will be telling me about how much better you are getting in controlling some of your feelings when you are upset. They will be helping you to think about what’s happening around you and how you can help yourself to stay in control. Okay, partner? Is there anything else you want to talk to me about today?

DF: Yeah. Dinosaurs, and get me out of Dr. Plass’s group.

GL: How about this: I’ll talk to him about how he can make the group more fun for you and for them. How’s that?

DF: Yeah, Okay. Can I talk about dinosaurs now? You said I could.

GL: Yes, tell me one fact you think I don’t know about dinosaurs and then we have to go.

DF: Did you know that there are some dinosaurs that are so big they could break their own bones trying to walk?

GL: Well, you got me there. I didn’t know that. We’ll talk more the next time I see you. Bye, now. [5]

Key tRIggeR InCIdents

In the King Elementary School case, three incidents occurred simultane- ously that together served as triggers to promote a systemwide shift toward more inclusive classrooms.

1. The principal attended a district workshop in which inclusion was briefly discussed.

2. The school psychologist attended a national convention where he heard about special education teachers without classrooms and

Chapter 10 • Case Studies in Collaborative Consultation 245

who spent the majority of their time in general education classes serving students with disabilities. He also heard about SDC teach- ers who spent only half of their time in their SDC classes, with the rest of their time being spent in general education classes assisting with the inclusion of students with disabilities.

3. Two of the special education teachers, fully expecting to be discouraged by their general education peers, found a number of them supportive of the idea of more inclusion of students with mild to moderate disabilities (“within limits,” the special education teachers were advised), particularly if more resources followed.

In a few weeks, an idea once regarded as unlikely to flourish rapidly became a hot topic. The impetus for change had formed. It just needed to be promoted and nurtured. From this point on the school psychologist (consultant) found himself gauging the reactions of the faculty members and administrators.

develoPIng InItIal Plans foR Change

To follow up on the trigger events, the principal called a meeting to dis- cuss how King Elementary School could meet the challenges inherent in this change. The two special education teachers, who had all 14 of the students with ASD, attended, as did the district director of special educa- tion, support staff (school psychologist, counselor, etc.), a representative from the union, paraprofessionals, and one teacher from each of the grade levels. This group developed the following list of concerns and questions:

• This new model calls for collaboration. Who exactly is going to do the collaborating? Will it be others in addition to the SDC teachers, school psychologist, and the general education teachers who have a child with HFA in their class?

• Students with HFA often have a very difficult time maintaining them- selves for 5 hours in a general education class. Might they need some type of escape valve (such as the special education room)?

• What will this collaborative model look like? How will any given child with ASD get the assistance he needs, according to his IEP, while he is in a general education classroom?

• Aren’t some of the parents going to be upset when they hear that their children aren’t going to be getting “special” education with an SDC teacher in a separate classroom any more? Conversely, what happens if a parent insists on a general education placement but their child’s needs are too great? How do we decide who can be supported in general education, who needs an SDC class, and who needs a combination of both?

The committee realized that developing answers to some of these questions would require careful deliberation. The principal asked for volunteers to work on a subcommittee to develop some tentative answers and then to meet together again in a week.

Based on the answers received from the subcommittee and dis- cussed by the whole committee, they decided that the idea was worth pursuing. The subcommittee confirmed that there were 10 students with ASD who would be good candidates for inclusion because their degree of autism was mild to moderate. Don is one of them. These students would be included in six different classrooms, ranging in grade levels from first to sixth. One of the SDC teachers, along with her paraprofessional and the school psychologist, would serve as the in-class consultants or coteachers to the regular education teachers who would have the targeted students. The other SDC teacher, with her paraprofessional, would teach the remaining four students with ASD in an SDC class.

The committee put together a statement to be sent to the parents of the children who would be involved. Another meeting was to be held in 2 weeks. Prior to that meeting, the letters to the parents were sent, and some parents responded by phone or e-mail. Some responded (with alarm) to members of the board of education. Also, the members of the board of education met, and some questions about this proposal came up at their meeting. (The superintendent had briefed the board members. Their response to questions from parents was that a new service delivery system was being studied, but that it was only in the preliminary stages. No decisions had yet been made; their input would be sought as the process unfolded.)

Problem analysis for don

To begin to understand the reasons for Don’s social/interpersonal chal- lenges, I turned to the people who know him best, his parents. I met with Mr. and Mrs. Foy to seek their ideas about why Don manifested the problems discussed above. Naturally they attributed them to ASD and wondered if I still hadn’t understood “the problem” (by which they meant the diagnosis of ASD). I told them that I was aware of the challenges that ASD presented, but I thought it would be useful if we tried to analyze components of the problem to see where we could gain some leverage for dealing with them. I was trying to determine what some of the antecedents and reinforcers might be. I asked them if they had noticed any time when Don manifested more or fewer of the issues of concern. Mrs. Foy thought he was especially difficult to get along with when he came home complaining, “The kids at school are picking on me.” Her requests for more information about these incidents were met with silence or Don’s screaming at her, “Leave me alone.” Mr. Foy said that he is often afraid to bring up any topic with Don unless it is dinosaur- related because Don will often cut off the conversation, saying that he is not interested. Although Mr. Foy is able to play simple catch games (baseball, football, etc.) and chess with Don, he has not been successful in encouraging Don to play any organized sport. He recalled that they referred Don to a private counseling clinic, but Don refused to cooperate with the process. Don informed his parents that he hated the counseling clinic but was okay with seeing Dr. Plass. Dr. Plass registered surprise when informed of his relative popularity.

I informed the support staff members of my discussions with Mr. and Mrs. Foy, and we moved forward into our own discussion about why Don behaved as he did. Ms. Peterson (again) reminded the group that Don carried a diagnosis of ASD, and his behavior was consistent with that diagnosis. She also noted in a positive way that his behavior had improved over the previous year, when data showed about a 20% higher level of the three targeted behaviors. She believed this indi- cated progress in the SDC and was an argument against moving him into more of an inclusive setting. She also noted that some days he met the goal of five positive interactions. I commented that she was correct as far as the data were concerned, but maybe we could hope for more if he were in a setting where he would have models that exhibited behaviors more appropriate for fifth-grade students. Ms. Peterson pressed her point by saying that he had these models on the play- ground, where he still had social and behavioral difficulties. I asked the other group members for their thoughts. Ms. Shelby indicated that she had noticed that in the fifth grade, the students were getting mature enough to monitor each other’s behaviors, and they were quick to correct the others when they misbehaved. She thought this was something that Don could benefit from if the students were given some guidance.

246 Chapter 10 • Case Studies in Collaborative Consultation

Dr. Plass said that he was aware of the diagnosis and he certainly observed the behaviors we were all concerned with, but he believed that, while the behaviors are consistent with the diagnosis of ASD, they are also likely habit-driven and triggered by certain antecedent events and reinforced by either intentional or unintentional consequences. Dr. Plass said that the diagnosis of ASD will not change, but we can control, at least to some extent, the antecedents and consequences of the behaviors attributed to that condition. As an example, he went on, Ms. Shelby men- tioned how fifth-graders provide corrective feedback to students whose behaviors are not appropriate, and that these consequences help control the targeted behaviors. The benefits for Don of a general education set- ting over an SDC, Dr. Plass suggested, is that expectation of appropriate behavior is built into fifth-graders’ approaches to school. These expecta- tions may not be as strong for students in SDC, where all the students exhibited some degree of autistic symptoms and some exhibited serious forms of those symptoms.

I replied that I thought the group was ready to think of Don’s prob- lems as not being a function of some uncontrollable entity called ASD but rather a set of negative behaviors that can be reduced or extinguished through intensive interventions. And, I added, this included the develop- ing and nurturing of positive behaviors. Ms. Peterson wondered if we could just focus on the positive behaviors and try putting the ones we want to discourage on some form of ignoring or extinction, including get- ting the class members not to react to these behaviors and to reinforce the students when they do not react to the inappropriate behaviors. She said that she was always working on that goal, but her students in her SDC were often unresponsive to it, so Don did get a lot of attention when he reacted inappropriately. I said, and Dr. Plass agreed, that attention for misconduct can be a powerful reinforcer, and we would need to develop plans for controlling attention both for inappropriate behaviors and for positive reactions from Don, in addition to controlling setting events. Ms. Hagans said that she was sensing that at least part of the conditions that influenced Don’s inappropriate behaviors were habit strength (he has a long history of his current behaviors) and reinforcement by peers in the form of either laughter at him or provocation by them. Dr. Plass said that additional factors could be Don’s belief that he needs to dominate social conversation or other interactions and his constant fear that his peers will rebuff him because of his behaviors. Dr. Plass described Don as engaging in negative self-talk because he perceives many situations, particularly social situations, as threatening or beyond his control. Yelling out dinosaur information puts him in control, albeit briefly. He also seeks control when there are changes in his environment by loudly insisting that events be returned to normal. I asked Dr. Plass if Don’s negative self-talk wasn’t one of those issues that he could work with in his coun- seling sessions but perhaps was something too time-consuming for a classroom teacher to deal with. Dr. Plass laughed and said that, although he believed that self-talk was a powerful determinant of behavior, he conceded the point and acknowledged that, in the classroom, teachers have to work on a broad array of social interaction issues and could leave self-talk, including developing strategies for tolerating stress, for the counseling sessions.

I tried to summarize where the group was in terms of problem analysis by suggesting that the antecedents included mild provocation from other students, some degree of habit strength that Don did not seem inclined to overcome, and (possibly) self-talk about Don’s perceived role with his peers. The reinforcement for his behavior came from his ability to control events in the classroom, possibly to reduce anxiety, and to avoid social interactions with his peers that he finds aversive. Ms. Peterson said that she would accept these “speculations” as long as they led to workable interventions. We all agreed, and we were ready to move to the next stage in the problem-solving process, intervention development and implementation. [6]

feRmentatIon PeRIod

The fermentation period is that time between official meetings when people air their views in the lunchroom, hallway, parking lot, and neighborhood. Ms. Hagans knew it was time to get the interested parties together to discuss moving to a more inclusive school before false rumors became solidified. It was clearly time for the leaders to take control, clarify issues, and seek consensus. Otherwise, groups with different opinions would continue to polarize, and the proposal could die.

In April, three weeks after its initial meeting, the committee— now expanded to include any interested staff member and three parents of students with HFA who wanted to be included—convened again. To the displeasure of some of the staff members, meetings were moved to evening to accommodate the new parent members. Three dif- ferent opinions seemed to be represented across the committee: one in favor of the inclusion of students with HFA into general education classrooms with consultative support, one of middle-of-the-road peo- ple who thought that inclusion might be good for some of the students with HFA but not for all of them, and a small offshoot of parents and staff members opposed to the idea altogether. The questions and prob- lems mentioned above were discussed, with each group answering the questions from its point of view. Each group claimed to be advocating for the best interests of the children; and, like the blind men and the elephant, each supported its own perspective, unable or unwilling to admit that the other side might have a better perspective. The meet- ing lasted an hour. At the end, after summarizing what she heard, the principal asked for a straw vote from the group. She asked, “Should we pursue this proposal further or continue providing service in our current model?”

The vote was 14 to 7 in favor of moving forward with the pro- posal, “within limits,” added a few of the still doubtful committee members. The principal said that she was prepared to move ahead to the plan development stage, with September of the following year as the target date of implementation. She asked for volunteers to serve on the planning committee; eight people, including two parents, volunteered.

All things considered, this was a very effective meeting. Although there was not complete unanimity (there rarely is in public education), there was enough support to encourage the principal to go forward.

Now the real work began and consisted of the following elements:

1. Planning the logistics: job descriptions; possible time allocations; possibility of additional staff time; materials purchasing, if needed; and so on. Ms. Hagans said that she would coordinate this step with assistance from me (Mr. Lopez).

2. Contacting all constituents with information on an ongoing basis. 3. Holding IEPs this academic year for all involved students with HFA

to indicate that future special education services will be provided in the general education classroom, with consultative and staff assistance to the regular teacher by Ms. Peterson, Dr. Plass, and me (Mr. Lopez).

4. Creating a series of staff development workshops on information about students with ASD and inclusion issues, including having the staff complete the IRIS Center modules (IRIS Center, 2014) on inclu- sion in general education.

5. Contacting the special education department of the local state college to see if any of the faculty members were interested in working collaboratively on this project. (One faculty member was delighted to do so and waived her fee in exchange for permission to use this project as a case example for her upcom- ing textbook.)

Chapter 10 • Case Studies in Collaborative Consultation 247

6. Networking with other districts to see which had moved toward a collaborative model, and find out how they did it. I (Mr. Lopez) vol- unteered to do this. [6]

desCRIPtIon of Changes In PRaCtICes and Roles

During the remainder of the academic year, the committee, with some changes in composition and now usually including five concerned parents, met monthly to put final touches on the plan scheduled to start in the fall of the next school year. All parents of students with HFA were asked to attend an IEP meeting about their child, in which the following plan for inclusion with consultative help was outlined to them:

The needs of the students with HFA will be met by including them with age-appropriate peers in general education classes. An inclu- sion team consisting of one of the SDC teachers, her aide (who is a board-certified behavior analyst), school psychologist, school coun- selor, and general education teachers will be formed. The inclusion ieam members will provide direct and indirect support to the stu- dents with HFA so they are able to meet the academic, behavioral, and social expectations of the general education classrooms. In this way, their special education needs will be met, and they will be included in general education. The inclusion team will meet at least twice a month to problem-solve any challenges to the progress of the students with HFA.

All but one set of parents agreed with the plan. The IEPs on the students whose parents supported the change were modified to reflect  their children’s full inclusion with consultative assistance on a regular basis.

ImPlementatI on of the PRogRam

The inclusion program began the following September. The inclusion team meetings were held Mondays, Tuesdays, and Wednesdays from 8:00 to 8:45 on the first and third week of the month, with three students discussed at each meeting. Although the structure of these 15-minute sessions varied somewhat depending on needs, the general plan was to devote 5 minutes to a review of the current plan and 10 minutes to the development of a new bimonthly plan, copies of which were sent home to the parents. This allowed for all nine included students to have their plans reviewed on a regular basis. As more students either entered or exited the program, the schedule would be adjusted.

Once every 2 months, the principal provided substitutes for the gen- eral education teachers who had an HFA student to allow the team to meet for the day. The team observed selected members of the team deliver a lesson in one of the inclusion classrooms. After each observation, the team discussed the success of the lesson and ways it could be improved. A local university faculty member knowledgeable about inclusive programs led the discussion. It took some time before the general education teachers felt confident enough to model a lesson, so initial lessons were taught by the special education teacher, school psychologist, and school counselor.

Intervention Implementation and evaluation for don

During the spring semester, Don’s IEP team reconvened. He had kept up well with his academics, even improving his spelling and handwriting. He had shown some improvement in his behavior and social interactions. His calling out information about dinosaurs was reduced by about 50% by occasional reminders and a response-cost program, in which Don started each day with 10 points. Every time he said something out loud about dinosaurs, he would lose a point. After two weeks of Ms. Peterson keep- ing track of the points, she taught him to monitor himself. The amount of points he had left at the end of each day (10 minus the number of dinosaur

infractions) was added for a weekly total, and this information was sent home to his parents. They kept track of the points. When he earned 100 points, he was allowed to buy a reward costing no more than five dollars. He could save his points for a bigger reward if he wanted to. It took him five weeks to earn the first reward, then three weeks, then four weeks, then for the rest of the spring semester it stayed at three weeks. At first he bought models of dinosaurs or books about dinosaurs. At the end of the spring, he started buying other items. Concurrent with this point- earning program, Dr. Plass was helping Don to think about self-control, what it meant, and how to turn his impulse to make dinosaur comments into something he could say only to himself rather than out loud. Don was happy about it because it was helping him earn money toward something he really wanted. He asked me if he could get points for all the school subjects. I told him that’s how he earns his grades, which, by the way, were really getting better, but that he should discuss other ways of earn- ing rewards with his parents. Note: A similar response-cost program was implemented as part of an experiment conducted by Lopata et al. (2012), where students were awarded points for learn- ing the specific social skills being taught in the program; they had points removed when they were disruptive or uncooperative. The students’ parents provided reinforcement at home for the points the students earned. This program resulted in improvements in the students’ learning the specific skills being taught. This study was briefly reviewed with the team and encouraged Ms. Peterson to use the response-cost method with Don in her classroom.

The team decided to use the following interventions and monitoring strategies for the first four weeks of the fall semester to help Don improve his social skills:

1. Ms. Shelby will explain to Don’s new fifth-grade classmates what HFA is; that it is a disability; and that Don has a hard time controlling some of his behaviors that are likely due to stress, confusion, or fear. It would be helpful to Don if his new class- mates made an effort to help him by not laughing when he gets overly excited about things that happen in the classroom.

Strategy: Ms. Shelby will guide the students through the IRIS module: What Do You See? Perceptions of Disability, which is designed to encourage students to explore their own perceptions about disability and highlights the abilities of students with dis- abilities. Ms. Shelby will reinforce Don verbally or through a sign to him (e.g., smile, thumbs up) when he engages in appropriate social behaviors. Ms. Shelby will keep track of the number of positive interactions engaged in by Don two mornings per week.

2. Ms. Shelby will capitalize on Don’s academic strengths by using him as a peer tutor to selected classmates. She will monitor the lengths of time Don is able to engage with his tutee.

Strategy: The special education teacher’s aide will monitor the tutoring sessions and record instances when Don is positive and helpful to his tutee.

3. Dr. Plass will directly teach Don to interpret social cues and be espe- cially sensitive to Don’s tendency to mislabel positive cues from his peers as negative. Dr. Plass will provide Don with a repertoire of responses to use in conversation with others. They will role-play potentially disruptive situations and various appropriate responses. Also, Don will be taught to understand why certain reactions are not appropriate.

Strategy: These sessions may be expanded to include other stu- dents with ASD who could benefit from this instruction. Dr. Plass will record the number of successful social interactions that Don engages in during this four-week training period.

4. With an agreement between Don and a peer (or two), the peer will be taught to help Don calm down and to deal with social errors when they occur.

248 Chapter 10 • Case Studies in Collaborative Consultation

Strategy: Ms. Shelby, or the special education aide, or Don will signal to the peer to sit next to Don and assist him when these situations seem immanent. Ms. Shelby, the aide, or the peer will keep track of these occurrences.

5. It was decided that Don might benefit from being able to engage in some physical or calming activity when he is feeling stressed.

Strategy: Again, through concentrated help from Dr. Plass and with practice at home, Don will be taught specific physical actions he can take when he is upset, such as putting his hands on the top of his desk for 10 seconds, counting backwards from 10 to 1, breathing deeply and slowly three times, saying the alphabet backward from F through A three times, and so on. Don would be asked to suggest other stress-reducing activities he has found helpful. These ideas would be listed on an index card and placed inside Don’s desk to act as easy reminders for him. After one week of reminders to keep track of these instances by Ms. Peterson, Don will be taught to keep a record of them himself.

6. A manifestation of Don’s social limitations is his inability or unwill- ingness to approach others and initiate conversation with them.

Strategy: Direct instruction, coordinated by Dr. Plass, will be helpful. Don needs to learn to identify positive social interactions, practice engaging in them, and be reinforced for approximations of these behaviors. He should be encouraged to keep a record of students with whom he was friendly and how successful his efforts were. Dr. Plass will be using the visual clues provided in the iPad app Autism Xpress, which is designed to teach students with autism to recognize emotions in the facial expressions of others.

7. The third area of concern for Don’s team is his overreaction to changes in routine. Our team considered these reactions to be related to Don’s hypersensitivity and attempts to control the envi- ronment by restoring it to that with which he was comfortable. Dr. Plass indicated that, once again, Don’s self-talk was related to his generalized anxiety, was self-defeating, but was a symptom commonly seen in people with HFA. But, he pointed out, Don’s reactions can also be seen as learned responses to stimuli.

Strategy: During his counseling sessions, Dr. Plass was using a desensitization method to assist Don in exchanging a relaxed attitude for his current overreactive responses. This consisted of Don identifying those changes in routine, such as scheduling changes, fire drills, pop quizzes, and so on, that caused him to become upset to the point of his yelling out his objections. Dr. Plass then had Don list these situations in order from most disturbing to least and, starting with the least disturbing, he had Don close his eyes, imagine it, and then tell himself that he didn’t like it but he could handle it and react with calm breathing. Then they worked their way up the hierarchy imagining these situations and “talking and breathing” their way up to and including the most disturbing situation. After the fourth week, Dr. Plass intended to take the training into the classroom (during the lunch period) and rehearse the “talking and breathing” in a more realistic setting. I asked Ms. Shelby how she might be of use in this area, and she said that she could give the class prior warning about changes she knew would occur (when feasible) and she could ask Don’s “buddy” to assist when it seemed Don was overreacting to changes or unanticipated events. She also said that she would keep track of the days Don did not react badly to changes in a classroom event and inform Don’s parents of these.

The planning team decided that simple verbal reinforcement would be used to back up Don’s progress in all the areas discussed

above, unless it appeared that verbal reinforcement was not sufficient to maintain progress, at which point they would discuss the use of more tangible reinforcement. [8] (Note: In a study by Stichter, O’Connor, Herzog, Lierheimer, and McGhee (2012), which I summarized for the team, these researchers found significant improvements in a variety of components of social skills with an HFA cohort of students at the elementary school level.)

monItoRIng and evalUatIng the system-Change PRogRam

The question of evaluating the inclusion program had been discussed throughout the plan’s development. Teachers and parents were concerned about the following:

1. Will these students profit academically as much from an inclu- sion program as they will from the self-contained classroom placements?

2. How accepted will these students be when fully integrated into general education classes?

3. How will included students feel about themselves when they are in the general education classes full time? How do these feelings compare to those they held about themselves when they were in the special education classrooms?

To answer question 1, staff members gave all students with HFA curriculum-based assessments in reading, writing, and math in January and June of the planning year. These data were to be used as baseline to be compared to data gathered with the same assessment instruments 2 months into the first year of the plan’s implementation.

Question 2 was answered using a sociometric measure during the fourth week of the fifth-grade year in which children were asked to select students they would most like to work with on school projects and would be most likely to invite to a party. Gresham and Elliott (1989a, 1989b) have reviewed the use of these techniques with students with disabilities.

To address question 3, Dr. Plass interviewed each student individu- ally. Most of the newly included students with HFA said that they were happier in their general education classrooms and that these rooms were quieter than the SDC rooms had been. Some complained about being teased by specific students. The names of these students were conveyed to their teachers.

system Change from the teachers’ and Parents’ Perspective

Although no formal evaluation of the teachers’ opinions was conducted during the fall semester, the general feeling was that the program was working well. They appreciated the consultative help given to them, and they experienced a general feeling of relief that the HFA students were easier to integrate into their classrooms than some of them had anticipated. One family requested that their child be moved back to the SDC because they believed he received more individual attention in that setting. The other families continued to support the new program.

Intervention evaluation for don

The plan for Don was evaluated both formally and informally. The formal evaluation consisted of comparing data collected during the previous spring semester (fourth grade) with that available two months into the following fall semester (fifth grade). Ms. Peterson reported 12 incidences of calling out in class or responding poorly to a change in routine in the spring during the week data were kept, but only four during the week in November when the intervention plans had been in effect. She also reported an average of three conflict-free social interactions per day

Chapter 10 • Case Studies in Collaborative Consultation 249

during the fall semester. Dr. Plass had observed eight negative social/ interpersonal events in the spring and three in the fall. He also reported an average of two positive interactions during the fall data-gathering period. Ms. Hagen’s data indicated a smaller percentage of decrease in social/interpersonal difficulties on the playground, from a total of 18 in the spring to 13 in the fall; however, she was able to report an average of two positive social/interpersonal interactions during the fall data- gathering period.

The second area of concern was Don’s habit of calling out infor- mation about dinosaurs. Ms. Peterson (fourth grade) had reported 14 of these incidences; Dr. Plass, 6; and Ms. Hagens, 0. During the fall (fifth grade) data-gathering period, the data were Ms. Shelby, 2; Dr. Plass, 2; and Ms. Hagans, 0. It would appear that the combination of reminders to control his impulsivity and the response-cost system had served to control this behavior, thus making it less obtrusive in the classroom.

The third area of concern was Don’s tendency to protest loudly or shut down his participation in class if he perceived changes in class- room routines. The data showed a general improvement in this area, with incidences in Ms. Peterson’s class dropping from 4 to 1; in Dr. Plass’s group, 4 to 0; and on the playground, from 3 to 1. This overall positive improvement in Don’s ability to tolerate changes seemed largely due to his being alerted to possible changes and to Dr. Plass’s work with Don on relaxation training and self-talk about the meaning of changes and how to react to them.

As part of the schoolwide inclusion program, curriculum-based measurement (CBM), sociometric, and interview data were collected and reviewed. The CBM data indicated Don met grade-level benchmarks for winter and spring in fourth grade and fall in fifth grade in both reading and math. His writing results indicated he was below grade-level, and an error analysis revealed he had difficulty staying on topic (Ysseldyke & Christenson, 2002). The sociometric data were mixed. None of the students in his class listed Don as a child they would like to invite to a party, but four students did include him on their list of people they would like to work with on a project. The interview Dr. Plass conducted suggested that Don feels a lot of pressure to conform to the behavioral expectations of the classroom but Don thinks the trade-off is a good one because the students in his fifth-grade general education class make less “annoying” noises compared to his peers in his fourth-grade special education class. Given these findings, the team and I discussed which interventions to fade because they are no longer needed, and we brainstormed interventions to address Don’s current

needs; thus, the problem-solving continues in an iterative cycle at both the individual and the system level. [9]

dIsCUssIon QUestIons foR don and foR system Change

1. The United States Office of Education has reported continued growth over the last 10 years in the incidence of children identified as hav- ing ASD. Discuss the reasons for this increase.

2. From your experiences in schools, discuss the reasons for a stu- dent to be placed in an SDC. Are there reasons other than intra-child and environmental reasons that should be considered?

3. What experience have you had with system-change efforts in your school, district, workplace, or city? How did the change process unfold and what were the results?

4. In the problem identification step, the group identified some specific behaviors of concern with regard to Don and collected data on them prior to developing or implementing formal plans for dealing with them. Did they identify the right problems? How might this phase have been carried out differently?

5. Comment on the interview you read in this case study. Would different questions, probes, or responses by the school psychologist have been more fruitful? What do Don’s responses tell us about him and his beliefs about the world?

6. In the problem analysis step in this case study, a tension existed between those who believe that a DSM-V diagnosis (e.g., ASD) is an intra-child entity that causes specified behaviors (e.g., in the case of Don, an obsession with dinosaurs and an inability to tolerate change) versus those who prefer a behavioral approach. Discuss a possible melding of these two points of view.

7. Comment on the steps taken during the fermentation period. What interventions were effective? What might have been done differently? What potential problems have not been dealt with adequately?

8. Listed in the case study are many interventions designed to deal directly with Don’s behaviors that are disruptive to the classroom and/or interfere with Don’s social and academic progress. Discuss these interven- tions and suggest alternative or additional interventions.

9. How realistic is this case study? How did the system change toward more inclusion reflect what was occurring with Don? Was the sys- tem change a success? Was Don’s inclusion in general education a suc- cess? What role did collecting assessment information play in determining if success had been achieved?

References American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical

manual of mental disorders (5th ed.). Washington, DC: Author. Gresham, F. M., & Elliott, S. N. (1989a). Social skills assessment

technology for LD students. Learning Disability Quarterly, 22, 141–152.

Gresham, F. M., & Elliott, S. N. (1989b). Social skills deficits as a primary learning disability. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 22, 120–124.

Heward, W. H. (2013). Exceptional children: An introduction to special education (10th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill/ Prentice Hall.

IRIS Center. (2014). Accessing the general education cur- riculum: Inclusion considerations for students with dis- abilities. Retrieved from http://iris.peabody.vanderbilt.edu/ module/agc/

Lopata, C., Thomeer, M., Volker, M., Lee, G., Smith, T., Smith, R., et al. (2012). Feasibility and initial efficacy of a compre- hensive school-based intervention for high-functioning autism spectrum disorders. Psychology in the Schools, 49(10), 963–974.

Stichter, J. P., O’Connor, K. V., Herzog, M. J., Lierheimer, K. & McGhee, S. D. (2012). Social competence intervention for elementary students with Aspergers syndrome and high functioning autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, (42), 354–366.

VanDerHeyden, A. M., & Witt, J. C. (2008). Best practices in can’t do/won’t do assessment. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology (Vol. 5, pp. 131–139). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.

Ysseldyke, J., & Christenson, S. (2002). Functional assessment of academic behavior. Longmont, CO: Sopris West.

This page intentionally left blank

Index

A Academic learning problems. See also Academic

skill problems consultation about, 182–183 determining strengths/weaknesses, 62 Maria’s case study, 238–241

Academic learning time (ALT) explanation of, 175 instructional strategies and, characteristics of, 175–177 learning disabled students and, 191

Academic skill problems, 173–194 data-based special education eligibility

assessment, 192–194 explanation of, 173 intensive interventions for, 187–191 universal effective instruction (Tier 1), 175–184

Acceptance, as parents’ reaction, 155 ACCEPT method, 4 Acquisition deficit, 167–168 Active (reflective) listening, as communication skill, 84–85 Adaptive instruction, 177 Addictive disorders, 144 Adelman, H. S., 222, 229–231, 233 ADHD. See Attention-deficit hyperactivity

disorder (ADHD) Admiring the problem, 54 Advancement via Individual Determination (AVID), 182 Advice giving, 90 Advocacy, in consultation practice, 134–135 African Americans

stereotyping of, and achievement, 119 transition planning for disabled, 199

Aggression, 55, 140, 141 AIMSweb, 175 Alberto, P. A., 20–22, 25, 103, 138, 151 Albin, R., 138, 151, 154, 158, 159 Alfonso, V. C., 69 Algozzine, R., 117 Allen, J. P., 142 Allen, M. D., 25 Allergies, 189 ALT. See Academic learning time (ALT) Alternative explanations, exploring, 39–40 Alternative strategies, 56 American Counseling Association code of ethics, 125 Americanization, 118 American Psychiatric Association Diagnostic and Statistical

Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV), 22, 149 American Psychological Association, 15

code of ethics, 125 Amistead, L., 127 Andersen, M., 55 Anger, as parents reaction, 155 Antecedents, 55, 138, 152 Anxiety, 184, 246

Appleton, J. J., 142, 191 Appleton, V., 32 Applied behavior analysis, 20, 147, 159–160 Archer, A., 176, 181 Aronson, J., 119 Arra, C. T., 120 Arter, J. A., 177, 191 Ashbaker, B. Y., 34 Asian Americans, 179 Aspel, N. P., 204 Aspel, N. R., 204, 205 Asperger’s disorder, 146 Assertiveness, in communication, 87 Assessments

biophysical problems, 71 functional behavioral, 71 instructional/achievement, 71 in multi-tiered system of support, 69–71 psychoeducational, 71–72 by specialists, 73 for transition, 204 treatment integrity, 77–79

Atkins, M. S., 32, 142 Attending skills, in communication, 84 Attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), 189–190

IDEA on, 149 psychopharmacological approach to treating, 189 suggested interventions, 189–190

Authority, and behavior problems, 156 Autism spectrum disorder (ASD), 146–148 Autism Xpress, 146 Aversive consequences, 21 AVID. See Advancement via Individual

Determination (AVID) Axelrod, S., 24, 101

B Baer, R. B., 207 Baer, R. M., 206 Baker, E., 221 Balandran, J., 201 Ball, A. F., 179 Ball, C., 215 Bamonto, S., 68 Bandura, A., 20, 54 Banks, C. A. M., 117, 118 Banks, J. A., 199 Barlow, J., 139 Baruch, B., 54 BASC-2. See Behavior Assessment System for

Children (BASC) Basham, A., 32 Bauwens, J., 102 Bebee-Frankenberger, M. E., 148 Becker, S., 226

251

252 Index

Beegle, G., 209 Beginning teachers, 32–33 Beginning Teacher Support and Assessment (BTSA)

program, 32–33 Behavioral analysts, 147 Behavioral and Emotional Screening System (BESS), 157 Behavioral consultation model

basic paradigm, 20 current thinking about, 24–25 stages of, 23–24 summary, 25

Behavioral disturbances, intensive intervention for, 190 Behavioral grouping, 168 Behavior Assessment System for Children (BASC),

145, 157 Behavior contract, 165–166 Behavior intervention plan (BIP), 151, 168 Behavior modification, 20 Behavior Observations of Students in Schools

(BOSS), 158 Behavior problems, 137–169

applied behavior analysis, 159–160 classroom observations, 158–159 functional behavioral assessment, 151–153 intervention evaluation, 161–162 interviews, 153–157 introduction, 137–138 key assumptions to understanding, 138 rating scales, 157–158 reasons for (See Reasons for behavior problems) records review, 153 schoolwide positive behavior support, 162–168 targeted behavioral interventions, 165–168

Behavior-specific praise, 166–167 Bell, J. A., 223 Benjamin, A., 88 Benn, J. R., 89 Bergan, J. R., 9, 20, 51, 52, 88 Berry, B., 24 Biophysical assessment, 71 BIP. See Behavior intervention plan (BIP) Blacher, J., 198, 202 Blackorby, J., 199 Blasé, K. A., 208, 217, 224 Blue-Banning, M., 209 Body language, assertive, 87 Boice, C. H., 190 Bolt, S., 10, 35, 187 Bonner, D., 142 Bonner, M., 31, 32 Bonomi, A. E., 202 BOSS. See Behavior Observations of Students in

Schools (BOSS) Botvin, G. J., 140 Bovaird, J. A., 65 Boykin, A., 179 Boyle, C. L., 139 Bradley, J. R., 25 Brainstorming, 39, 56

Brennan, E. M., 25 Brent, D., 39 Brief experimental analysis (BEA), 183, 185 Briesch, A. M., 157, 158 Brock, S. E., 150 Brody, N., 187 Bronfenbrenner, U., 31 Brooks-Gunn, J., 140 Brown, D., 2 BTSA program. See Beginning Teacher Support and

Assessment (BTSA) program Budge, K., 180, 219, 220, 223 Bull, M. H., 55, 152 Bullis, M., 202 Bullying, among students, 140, 141 Burns, M. K., 13, 37, 40, 59, 61, 66, 70, 73, 174, 176, 177,

187, 190, 191, 193, 231 Bursuck, W. D., 176, 178 Burt, J., 29, 114, 115 Bushnell, D. M., 202 Busse, R. T., 15, 69

C California Education Code, 131 Cameron, C., 141 Cameto, R., 198, 199, 206, 208 Cancelli, A. A., 97 “Can’t do/won’t do” assessment, 182 Canter, A., 16, 180 Capacity building, through consultation

process, 2–3 Caplan, G., 6, 8, 25–29, 64, 106 Caplan, R. B., 6, 25–29, 64, 106 Carkhuff, R. R., 84 Carney, J. S., 206 Carpenter, J., 206 CARS-2. See Childhood Autism Rating Scale-2

(CARS-2) Cartledge, G. Y., 199 Case, L. P., 69 Case studies

Maria’s, 238–241 MTSS at Muir Elementary, 230–233 systems change, 242–249

Castillo, J. M., 221 Cautili, J. T., 101 Cavazos, L., 33 CBC. See Conjoint behavioral consultation (CBC) CCC. See Consultee-centered

consultation (CCC) CD. See Conduct disorder (CD) CEC. See Council for Exceptional

Children (CEC) Ceja, M., 119 Chafouleas, S. M., 157, 158 Champion, J. E., 139 Check-in/check-out (CICO), 166 Chenier, J. S., 107

Index 253

Chickie-Wolfe, L. A., 181 Childhood Autism Rating Scale-2 (CARS-2), 157 Child-rearing practices, and behavior problems, 139–141 Christ, T. J., 55, 60, 70, 190, 193 Christenson, S. L., 55, 62, 65, 116, 117, 142, 151, 175,

177, 206, 239, 249 CICO. See Check-in/check-out (CICO) Clarification-seeking, in active listening, 85 Clarke, B. L., 29, 114, 115 Classroom

environment, 176 management, 142–143 observations, 63–64, 158–159

Classwide problem, 174 Cleary, M., 65 Clements, M., 215 Cleven, C. A., 52 Client-centered case consultation, 26 Client welfare, 125–126 Closed question, 88 Coaching, 33, 226–228 Cobern, W., 96 Codding, R. S., 75 Coercive pain control, 22, 139–140 Coffee, G., 2, 79, 103, 166, 167 Cognitive-achievement discrepancy criteria, 11 Cognitive emphasis, 176 Cohen, J., 29 Cohen, R. M., 222 Coleman, J., 218 Collaboration, explanation of, 2, 3. See also Collaborative

consultation Collaborative consultation. See also Consultation;

School-based consultation ACCEPT method, 4 author’s personal view regarding, 3–4 case studies in, 236–249 characteristics and expectations of, 5–7 expert power in, 7–8 explanation of, 1–2 first author personal view regarding, 3–5 goal of, 6, 15 as indirect service, 2–5 intervention suggestions, 4–5 limits to, 4 power in, 96–100 problem solving and, 3 transition planning, 208–210

Collaborative strategic planning (CSP), 229 Collins, T. A., 107 Colvin, G., 181 Common Core State Standards (CCSS), 9,

174, 216–217 Communication skills, 84–93. See also

Interpersonal skills active (reflective) listening, 84–85 assertiveness, 87 attending, 84 autistic students and, 146

electronic communication etiquette, 92–93 empathy, 86 evaluation of, 91–92 goal orientation, 86–88 interview format, 111–113 potential difficulties in, 90–92 questioning, 88–89 reframing, 85

Communication technologies, 92–93 Community transition teams, 208 Compas, B. E., 139 Competence, 95–96 Conderman, G., 149 Conditional probability, 159 Conduct disorder (CD), 139, 150 Confidence, 95–96

lack of, in consultees, 27–28 Confidentiality, ethics and, 125, 126, 133 Conjoint behavioral consultation (CBC), 29–30

explanation of, 29 partnership-centered approach to, 29–30 phases of, 29

Connected Educator Month (CEM), 226 Connor, C. M., 59 Conoley, C. W., 20, 25 Conoley, J. C., 20, 25, 65 Consequences, 152

behavioral consultation, 21 explanation of, 21

Consultants advice by, 87, 90 assertive body language, 87 and belief system of consultee, 100, 102 characteristics of, 5–6 in consultation triad, 8 empathetic behavior, 86 as habit-change coordinators, 45 instructional consultation, 30–31 internal, 50–51 misdirected questions, 90–91 “partnership-driven” condition, 99 professional development activities of, 225–229 resistance to (See Resistance, in consultative

relationship) responsibilities, for implementation of strategy, 56 school-based (See School-based consultants)

Consultation. See also Collaborative consultation case studies in, 238–249 configurations/settings, 32–47 consultee-centered, 31 content in, 7 explanation of, 2 models (See Models of consultation) problem severity and, 8–9 research, 15–16 school-based (See School-based consultation) student study teams (See Student study

teams (SSTs)) transition planning team, 201

254 Index

Consultation contract, 133 Consultee-centered administrative consultation, 27 Consultee-centered case consultation, 26 Consultee-centered consultation (CCC),

29, 31–32 Consultees

as adults, 96 belief system of, 100, 102 collaborative consultation to, 108 comfort levels of, 102, 108 in consultation triad, 7 four “lacks” of, 27–28 parents as, 3 personal problems of, 5, 6 psychological deficits in, 102 resistance as escape function for, 117

Content, in consultation, 7 Continuous-change organizations vs. episodic

organizations, 222 Continuous improvement cycle, 231 Cook, C. R., 69, 107 Cook, L., 2, 8 Cooperative learning experiences, 183 Cormier, D. C., 2, 29 Correa, V. I., 32 Cosgriff, J. C., 203 Cost-benefit analysis, 231 Coteaching for inclusion, 34–35 Council on Exceptional Children (CEC), 15 Council of Great City Schools, 217 Council on Exceptional Children (CEC) code of

ethics, 125, 128 Cowan, R. J., 74 Cramer, S. F., 32 Crane, K., 209 Craven, R., 183 Credibility gap, 91 Cross-cultural consultation, 117–120

conceptual framework for, 118–119 literature on, 118 Mexican-American families and, 118 research on, 120 socially just, 119 tracking students, 119–120

Crowe, E. C., 59 Cultural diversity, school-based consultation

and, 117–120 Culturally diverse students, 179–180

transition planning and, 199 Curtis, M. J., 221–223 Cyberbullying, 140

D Dahlstrom, K., 189 Daily behavior report cards (DBRCs), 74, 166 Daly, E. J., 55, 184 Damer, M., 176, 178 Daniel R. R. v. State Board of Education, 11

Darling-Hammond, L., 225 Daro, P., 216 Dart, E. H., 75, 107, 166 Data-based special education eligibility

assessment, 192–194 Data-team discussions, 228 Davenport, C., 139 Daviso, A. W., 206 Day, C., 139 DBR. See Direct behavior rating (DBR) DBRCs. See Daily behavior report cards (DBRCs) DeBoer, A., 32 Decker, D. M., 6, 12, 44, 125–128, 130, 134 Deitz, S., 150 Delamatre, J., 37 DeLuca, J. R., 202 Demaray, M. K., 162, 166 Denial, as parents’ reaction, 155 Denney, S. C., 206 Deno, S., 57, 59 Dettmer, P., 65 DeVoe, J., 141 Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders

(DSM-IV), 22 IDEA vs., 149–151

DIBELS Next, 175 Diehm, K., 203 Differentiated instruction, 144, 180–181 DiGennaro, F. D., 23, 159 Direct behavior rating (DBR), 157–158 Direct block in resistance, 101 Direct instruction, in positive behavior

support, 162–163 Direct observation in context, 158 Direct question, 88–89 DiStefano, C., 71, 144 Divergent thinking (brainstorming), 39 Division of Exceptional Children on Career Development

and Transition, 204 Dobey, L. M., 79 Dolan, L., 8 Doll, B., 44 Dominance, 99–100 Dominance debate, 99–100 Donde, R., 227 Dool, E. J., 185 Doren, B., 199 Dowdy, E., 71, 144 Doyle, M. B., 34 Dretzke, J., 139 DSM-IV. See Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental

Disorders (DSM-IV) Due process, 12 Duncan, A., 221 Dunn, A. R., 71, 144 Dunn, C., 206 Dyck, N., 65 Dykeman, B. F., 149 Dykeman, C., 32

Index 255

Dynamic Indicator of Basic Early Literacy, 13, 60, 68, 174, 232

Dynarski, M., 176, 219 Dynda, A., 118 Dziewolska, H., 101

E Eagle, J. W., 74 Early intervention, 10 Easton, J. E., 78 Eber, L., 9 EBIs. See Evidence-based interventions (EBIs) Echevarria, J., 78, 177 Eckert, T. L., 159 Ecobehavioral consultation, 31 Ecological observation, 63–64 Edmonds, R., 218, 219 Effectiveness, of treatment, 5 Effective schools, High–poverty, high–performing

(HP2) schools Egalitarianism, 2, 96 Eklund, K., 144 Electronic communication etiquette, 92–93 Elementary and Secondary Education Act, 1965, 10 Eliezer Williams v. State of California, 134 Ellingsen, K., 25 Elliott, S. N., 248 Emanuel, E. J., 13, 200 Emotional behavioral problems (EBPs). See Behavior

problems Emotional disturbance, 148 Emotional problems. See Behavior problems Empathy, in communication, 86 Employment/Life Skills Assessment, 202 English Language Arts standards, 216 English language learners, 177–179

comprehension strategies, 178 SIOP model, 177–178

Enthusiasm, interpersonal skills and, 95–96 Episodic organizations, continuous-change

organizations vs., 222 Erchul, W. P., 5, 16, 25, 28, 29, 31, 59,

97, 99, 124 Erickson, A. G., 208 Ervin, R. A., 222, 232 Esler, A. N., 65, 117 Espin, C., 57 Estrada, V., 226 Ethical guidelines, for consultation, 5 Ethics

client welfare, 125–126 codes of ethics and standards for professional practice,

NASP, 127–128 competencies, confrontations, and advocacy,

134–135 confidentiality, 125, 126 example situations, 130–132, 135–136 formal training, 125

potential conflict areas, 133–134 principals of, 125–127 problem-solving model for dealing with

issues, 130 purpose of, 124 social and moral responsibility, 127 sources of, 125

Eurocentrism, 118 Evaluation

of communication skills, 91–92 intervention evaluation, 161–162 plan evaluation, 24 progress evaluation, 177 teacher performance, 220–221

Event (frequency) recording, 161 Everson, M., 204, 205 Evidence-based interventions (EBIs), 206 Evidence-Based Interventions in School Psychology

(EBI Task Force), 15 Expert power, 97–98

F FAAB. See Functional Assessment of Academic

Behavior (FAAB) Fabiano, G. A., 74, 166 FACILITATE acronym, 111 Fadiman, A., 118 False reassurances, 90 Family-centered planning, 210 Family consultations, 114–117. See also

Parents/parenting Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act

(FERPA), 126, 129 FAO. See Functional Assessment Observation

Form (FAO) FAPE. See Free and appropriate public education (FAPE) Farah, M. J., 139 FBA. See Functional behavioral assessment (FBA) Feabiano, G. A., 113 Feedback

delivering, 113–114 informed feedback, 176–177 operational feedback loop, 225

Felch, J., 220 Feldman, K., 33–34 Females with disabilities, transition planning

for, 199, 207 Ferguson, P., 173 Ferrara, D. L., 36 Filene, J. G., 139 Fixsen, D. L., 208, 217, 223, 224, 229, 230, 232, 233 Flanagan, D. P., 69, 118 Flannery, B., 222 Flexer, R. W., 207 Ford, D. Y., 199 Forehand, R., 139 Formative Assessment System for Teachers

(FAST), 175, 228

256 Index

Fowler, C. H., 206 Frank, J. L., 8, 16, 56, 57, 77 Frankland, H. C., 209 Frazier, S. L., 32, 142 Free and appropriate public education (FAPE), 12

individualized education program team and, 35–36

special education laws and, 12 The Freedom Writers Diary, 183 Freeland, J. T., 14, 55 Freeman, A., 226 Freeney-Kettler, K. A., 144 French, J. R. P., 96 Friedrich, A., 145 Friend, M., 8, 102 Fuchs, D., 13, 14, 58, 68, 69, 191 Fuchs, L. S., 13, 14, 57, 58, 68 Fuligni, A., 118 Fullan, M., 222, 224 Fun, motivation and, 143 Functional Assessment Observation Form (FAO), 159 Functional Assessment of Academic Behavior (FAAB),

55, 175, 186 Functional behavioral assessment (FBA), 12, 71

analysis of behavior and, 151–162 applied behavior analysis, 159–160 classroom observations, 158–159 explanation of, 151–152 intervention evaluation, 161–162 interviews (See Interviews) rating scales for, 157–158 records review, 153 schoolwide positive behavior support,

162–168 Functional consultation models, 29–32

conjoint behavioral consultation, 29–30 consultee-centered consultation, 31–32 ecobehavioral consultation, 31 instructional consultation, 30–31

Furlong, M. J., 142

G Gadow, K. D., 145 Gallesich, J., 100 Gamm, S., 59 Gansle, K. A., 14, 55 Garbacz, S. A., 2, 16, 29, 65, 75 Gardner, R., 199 Gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender, and questioning

(GLBTQ), 141 Gay-straight alliances (GSAs), 141 Gebhardt, S. N., 70 Geenen, S., 13, 199, 201, 203 Gelzheiser, L. M., 35 Germann, G., 68 Gersten, R., 8, 13 Getty, K. C., 99 Giangreco, M. F., 34

Gickling, E. E., 38, 176 Gil-Kashiwabara, E., 199, 201 Ginott, H., 84 Glaser, D., 15 Glasser, W., 143 GLBTQ. See Gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender,

and questioning (GLBTQ) Gleason, M., 181 Glover, T. A., 65 Goal orientation, 183, 184 Goals

in communication, 86–88 postsecondary, 204, 205–206 qualities of “good,” 53–54

Godber, Y., 65, 117 Goff, C., 199 Gofoth, A. N., 118 Goldenberg, C., 179 Gomez, J., 202 Gonzales, N. A., 118 Good, R. H. III, 13, 68, 188 Gordon, T., 84 Gortmaker, V., 55 Graber, J. A., 140 Gradewide problem, 174 Gramm, S., 216, 217, 141 Grandin, T., 148 Gravois, T. A., 30, 44, 176 Greene, G., 209 Gregory, A., 142 Gresham, F. M., 13, 16, 69, 107, 148, 152, 157,

167, 168, 248 Grievances, 128 Griffin, M. M., 203 Grigal, M., 180, 199 Grigorenko, E. L., 190 Grissom, P. J., 99 Gritter, K. L., 79 Grossman, P., 179 Group-oriented learning experiences, 183 Gruwell, E., 183 GSAs. See Gay-straight alliances (GSAs) Gutkin, T. B., 16, 21, 27, 31, 52, 70,

99, 144

H Habit strength, as cause of resistance, 102 Hagans, K., 11, 15, 59, 69, 71, 191 Hagans-Murillo, K., 74 Hagermoser Sanetti, L. M., 20 Hamlett, C. L., 68 Hammitte, D., 117 Handbook of Research in School Consultation (Erchul &

Sheridan), 16 Harackiewicz, J., 182 Harris, A. M., 97 Harris, K., 94 Harry, B., 199

Index 257

Hart, B., 139, 187 Hart, S. R., 150 Hartshorne, T. S., 6, 12, 44, 125–128, 130, 134 Harvey, V. S., 181 Harwick, R. M., 199 Health

behavior problems and, 145 poor school achievements and, 188–189

Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPPA), 126, 129

Hemmeter, M., 144 Hemphill, L., 188 Henning-Stout, M., 16 Herman, K. C., 2, 59, 74, 141, 142, 184, 227 Herzog, M. J., 248 Heward, W. H., 242 Hidi, S., 182 High-poverty, high-performing (HP2) schools, 218–220 Hineline, P., 101 Hintze, J. M., 55, 152, 158 Hitchings, W. E., 207 Hodgets, S., 210 Hodgson, J. R., 71 Hoffer, S., 223 Hofferth, S., 140 Hogansen, J. M., 199 Hook, J. C., 139 Horner, R. H., 8, 58, 70, 138, 151, 154, 158, 159,

208, 217, 219, 224, 226, 227 Horvath, M., 207 Hosp, J. L., 180 Hoyson, M., 147 HP2 schools. See High-poverty, high-performing

(HP2) schools Hughes, C., 60, 176, 180, 199, 203 Hunt, N., 151 Hurdle help, 164 Hypoglycemic behavior, 145

I iCommunicate, 146 IDEA. See Individuals with Disabilities Education

Improvement Act (IDEA) IEP team. See Individualized education

program (IEP) Ihlo, T., 162, 165 Ikeda, M. J., 187 Illback, R. J., 215, 222 Implementation evaluation, 232 Implementation science, 221 Inclusion, of students with disabilities,

11–12 case study, 242–249 coteaching for, 34–35

Incredible Years Teacher Classroom Management,142, 227

Indicated interventions, 68 Indirect question, 88–89

Individual coaching, 227 Individualized education program (IEP),

35–36 formal consultations and, 7 transition planning, 198, 200–202

Individualized transition program (ITP), 205 Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement

Act (IDEA), 10–13, 131 on attention deficit disorder with hyperactivity, 149 on autism spectrum disorder, 146–148 vs. DSM-IV, 149–151 on emotional disturbance, 148 IEP requirements, 36 mandates on students with behavior problems, 151 on mental illness, 144 students with behavior/social/emotional problems and,

145–149 transition planning mandate, 200–202 on traumatic brain injury, 149

Informational power, 97, 98–99 Information technology. See Communication

technologies Informed feedback, 176–177 Ingraham, C. L., 31, 118, 120 Innovations, school

macrosystemic influences on, 215–221 microsystemic influences on, 221–223

Institionalization, system-change model, 233 Instructional consultation (IC)

consultants, 30 manuals, 30 stages of, 30–31

Instructional expectations, 176 Instructional match, 175–176 Instructional presentation, 176 Integrity

in professional relationships, 127 of treatment, 5. See Treatment integrity

Intellectual disabilties, intensive interventions for, 187–188

Intensive interventions, 168, 182, 187–191 Intensive level interventions (Tier 3),

8–9, 68–69 for health and sensory impairments,

188–189 for intellectual disabilities and language delays,

187–188 for learning disabilities, 190–191 for students with ADHD, 189–190 for students with mental health/behavioral

disturbances, 190 Interest boosting, 164 Interpersonal skills, 93–96. See also

Communication skills competence and confidence, 95–96 following through with enthusiasm,

95–96 leadership characteristics, 223

258 Index

Interpersonal skills (continued) optimism, 95 positive relationship, 94 resistance, 100–111 social power in, 96–100 treating consultees as adults, 96 trust, 96

Interruptions, 91 Intervention-based assessments, 11, 13, 71 Intervention evaluation, 161–162 Intervention resources, 40 Interventions

criteria, 5 indicated, 68 planning or modifying, 72–73

Interviews format, in communication, 111–113 in functional behavioral assessment,

153–157 note keeping, 113 parents, 155–156 special ed eligibility assessment, 192 student, 156–157 teacher, in problem-solving process,

153–155 IRIS Center, 36, 73, 187, 226 IRIS STAR Legacy Module, 226 Irvin, L., 155

J Jacob, S., 6, 12, 44, 125–128, 130, 133, 134 Jakobsons, L. J., 32, 142 Javitz, H. S., 199 Jenkins, J. R., 177, 191 Jenson, W. R., 22, 139, 190 Jimerson, S. R., 173 Joftus, S., 33 Johns, S. K., 162 Johnson, D. R., 13, 200, 210 Johnson, L. A., 226 Johnson, L. J., 90 Jones, G. W., 89

K Kaiser, A. P., 144 Kalyanpur, M., 199 Kame’enui, E., 13 Kaminski, J. W., 139 Kaminski, R. A., 13, 68 Kamphaus, R. W., 71, 144, 145, 157, 158 Kampwirth, T. J., 3, 70 Kaniuka, M., 25 Kanive, R., 71 Katsiyannis, A., 149 Kauffman, J. M., 148, 190 Kazdin, A., 138 Kearns, D. M., 69, 191 Keith-Spiegel, P., 126, 130

Kekway, A. J., 143, 144, 152, 166 Kelleher, C., 2, 8, 94, 99 Kettler, R. J., 144 Kim, K., 210 Klein, S. A., 77, 113 Klingbeil, D. A., 2, 29, 143, 144,

152, 166 Knoff, H. M., 222, 224, 225 Knotek, S., 25, 29, 31 Knowledge, lack of, in consultees, 27 Kochlar-Bryant, C. A., 209 Koegel, L. K., 147 Koegel, R. L., 147 Koocher, G. P., 126, 130 Kovaleski, J. F., 38 Kraft, N. P., 219 Kramer, B. R., 198 Kramer, J. J., 29 Krasner, L., 22 Kratochwill, T. R., 2, 8, 16, 20, 23, 29, 51, 52,

56, 57, 74, 77, 79, 88, 103, 144, 166, 167, 180, 215, 221

Kurpius, D. J., 83 Kwon, K., 2, 16, 65, 75

L Lancaster, P. E., 207 Landmark, L. J., 198, 203 Language delays, intensive interventions

for, 187–188 Latino/as, transition planning for disabled,

199, 202 Lau, M., 16, 180 LAUSD. See Los Angeles Unified School

District (LAUSD) Lawson, G. M. L., 139 Leadership characteristics, 223 Learning, Experiences; Alternative Program

(LEAP), 147 Learning disabilities

intensive intervention for, 190–191 RtI/MTSS activities for, 190–191

Learning problems. See Academic learning problems

Learning Walk, 33–34 Least restrictive environment (LRE),

11–12 Leconte, P. J., 204 Lee, C., 179 Lee, J., 179 Lee-Tarver, A., 39 Legal issues, 128–129

autistic students and, 147 example situations, 130–132 parental rights, 129 problem-solving model for, 130 providing legal testimony, 129

Lehman, C., 155 Lekwa, A. J., 2, 29

Index 259

Levine, P., 198 Lewis, R., 188 Li, C., 119 Liaw, F. R., 174 Lierheiemer, K., 248 Limber, S., 141 Lindamood Phoneme Sequencing (LiPS)

program, 72–73 Lindstrom, L., 199, 202, 207 Linguistic diversity, school-based consultation

and, 117–120 Liontos, S. B., 117 LiPS program. See Lindamood Phoneme Sequencing

(LiPS) program Listening skills, 84–85 Lobato, E. J., 149 Long-term vision, 230–231 Lopata, C., 243, 247 Lopez, E. C., 36, 120 Lopez-Vasquez, A., 199, 203 Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD),

221 Lovaas, O. I., 146, 147 Lovaas program, and autism, 146–147 Love, S. R., 157 Lovo, P., 33 Lowe, P., 187 Low income students, 179–180 Loyalty, 133 LRE. See Least restrictive environment (LRE) Luecking, R., 13, 200 Luft, P., 207 Luzzo, D. A., 207 Lynch, E., 188 Lynch, M., 74 Lynne, S. D., 140

M Mack, M., 13, 200 MacMillan, D. L., 148 Madaus, J. W., 180, 199 Madden, N. A., 8 Maddox-Dolan, B., 33 Madyun, N. H., 180 Maeroff, G. I., 32 Maher, C. A., 215 Mainstream (term), 11 Maki, K. E., 71 Malecki, C. K., 162, 166 Malgeri, C., 16 Mandal, A., 186 Manifestation determination (MD), 12 Mankey, T. A., 208 Margo, P., 140 Mariñez-Lora, A. M., 32, 142 Marsh, H., 183 Marshall, K., 151 Marston, D., 16, 151, 180

Martens, B. K., 5, 23, 28, 31, 124, 159, 185 Martin, A. J., 173 Martin, J. E., 199, 203 Martin, M., 202 Martin, R., 97, 98 Martin, S. D., 189 Mastropieri, M. A., 11, 35 Mather, N., 67 “Matthew effect,” 182 Mazzotti, V. L., 206 McAdams, R. P., 224 McConnell, D., 210 McCulley, L., 35 McDaniel, E. C., 53, 158, 193 McDuffie, K. A., 35 McGee Banks, C. A., 199 McGhee, S. D., 248 McGrew, K. S., 67 McIntosh, K., 219 McKenna, S. A., 32, 44 McNamara, E., 149 McNamara, K., 37, 44 MD. See Manifestation determination (MD) Media influence, in behavior problems, 140 Medical problems, students with,

188–189 Medication, 145 Meisels, S. J., 174 Mellard, D. F., 207, 217 Mental Health Consultation and Collaboration

(Caplan & Caplan), 25 Mental health disturbances, intensive intervention

for, 190 Mental health model, 25–29

behavioral consultation model vs., 25 current approaches to, 29 key concepts of, 26 types of, 26–27

Mental illness, and behavior problems, 144–145

Mentoring, 33, 226–228 Merrell, K. W., 154 Merritt, E. G., 141 Mexican-American families, school-based

consultation and, 118 Meyers, B., 10, 39 Meyers, J., 9, 10, 35, 39, 107 Michael, C., 36 Michael, R. S., 141 Michalowski, J., 145 Michelson, D., 139 Mickelson, W., 74 Microaggressions, 119 Mikami, A. Y., 142 Miles, P., 9 Miller, D. D., 219 Milner, R. H., 141 Mintzberg, H., 134 Misdirected questions, 90–91

260 Index

Model of school consultation, 29–32 conjoint behavioral consultation, 29–30 ecobehavioral consultation, 31 instructional consultation, 30–31

Models of consultation behavioral (See Behavioral consultation model) mental health (See Mental health model) rationale for, 19–20

Molloy, D. E., 69 Monzo, L., 202 Mooney, M., 209 Moral responsibility, 127, 223 Morgan, J., 34 Morningstar, M. E., 206, 208 Morrow, H., 38 Morsink, C. V., 32 Motivation

assumptions, 55 behavior problems and, 143–144 improving, 182–184 Premack’s principle and, 183

Motivational strategies, 177 Moyer, L., 24 Multidisciplinary teams. See also Student study

teams (SSTs) transition planning, 205–206

Multisystem-level coaching, 227–228 Multi-tiered system of support (MTSS), 13–14, 58–73

assessment, 69–71 explanation of, 59 goals, 15 intervention levels in, 8 Muir Elementary case study, 230–233 professional development to

promote/sustain, 228–229 Tier 1 (universal prevention), 59–61 Tier 2 (targeted intervention), 61–68 Tier 3 (intensive interventions), 68–69 types of, 59

Murawski, W. W., 60 Murphy, D., 188 Muyskens, P., 16, 180 Myck-Wayne, J., 209 “Mystery rewards,” 163

N Nam, J. E., 179 Nantais, M., 162, 165 Nardo, A. C., 141 NASP. See National Association of School Psychologists

(NASP) Nastasi, B. K., 9 National Association of School Psychologists (NASP)

codes of ethics and standards for professional practice, 125

cyberbullying awareness, 140 educational records reviews and, 192

National Center on Response to Intervention (NCRTI), 217

National Longitudinal Transition Study, 199 National Professional Development Center

(NPDC), 148 National Reading Panel, 15 National Secondary Transition Technical Assistance Center

(NSTTAC), 207 National Standards Project (NSP), 148 Naylor, J., 74, 113, 166 NCLB. See No Child Left Behind (NCLB) NCRTI. See National Center on Response to Intervention

(NCRTI) Needs assessment, 232 Neesen, E., 187 Negative reinforcement, 21 Nelson, C. M., 9 Nelson, L., 209 Neubert, D. A., 204 Neutral consequences, 21 Nevin, A., 16 Newcomer, L. L., 74, 142, 227 Newcomer, L. S., 2 Newell, M., 180 Newman, D., 31, 32 Newman, L. A., 199 Nicholas, D., 210 Nichols, T., 140 No Child Left Behind (NCLB), 10 Noell, G. H., 14, 55, 57, 74–77, 227 Noncompliance, 153 Nonhierarchical, 2 Noonan, P. M., 208 Note keeping, 113

O Oakes, J., 119 Objectivity, lack of, in consultees, 28 Observations

classroom, 63–64, 158–159 direct observation in context, 158 ecological, 63–64 special ed eligibility assessment, 193

O’Connor, K. V., 248 ODD. See Oppositional defiant

disorder (ODD) Office discipline referrals (ODRs), 15 Olweus, D., 141 Onedownmanship, 32 O’Neill, R., 138, 151, 154,

158, 159 One teach, one assist model, 35 Ongoing evolution, 233 Open question, 88 Operational feedback loop, 225 Oppositional defiant disorder

(ODD), 139, 150 Optimism, and interpersonal skills, 95 Ordonez-Jasis, R., 209 Organizational climate, 215 Ortiz, S. O., 69, 118

Index 261

O’Shea, D., 117 O’Shea, L., 117

P Palmer, C., 201 Palmer, S. B., 203 Paraphrasing, in active listening, 85 Paraprofessionals, 34 Parent interview, during functional behavioral assessment,

155–156 Parents/parenting

as allies, in problem-solving consultation, 64–66 behavior problems and, 139–141 consultation with, 114–117 interviews, regarding behavior problems, 155–156 resistance by, 117

Pariseau, M. E., 74, 113, 166 Parker, J., 78 Parrett, W., 180, 219, 220, 223 Parsons, R. D., 39, 107 Partnerships for Assessment of Readiness for College

and Careers (PARCC), 216 Patrick, D. L., 202 Patrick, J. A., 162 PBS. See Positive behavior support (PBS) PD. See Professional development (PD) Peers, influence of, and behavior problems, 141 Pennington, M. A., 222 PEP. See Policy-enabled practice (PEP) Performance deficit, 168 Perry, D. F., 25 Person-centered planning (PCP), 209–210 Person-family-centered planning, 210 Peterson, R. L., 141 Petscher, Y., 59 Peugh, J. L., 141 Philosophical belief conflicts, as cause of

resistance, 103 Pianta, R. C., 141, 142 Picture Exchange Communication System

(PECS), 146 Piersel, W. C., 16 PIP. See Practice-informed policy (PIP) PITS. See Prereferral intervention teams (PITS) Pivotal response, 147 Plan evaluation, in behavioral consultation model, 24 Plan implementation

in behavioral consultation model, 24 synergism and, 3

Planned ignoring, 164 Planning/delivery, in causes of resistance, 103–106 PNRTs. See Published norm-referenced tests (PNRTs) Policy-enabled practice (PEP), 217, 225 Politylo, B. C., 77, 113 Poppen, M., 199 Porras, J., 223 Porter v. Manhattan Beach Unified School District, 147 Positive behavioral interventions and supports

(PBIS), 8, 162

Positive behavior support (PBS), 12, 132 Positive comments, 164 Positive reinforcement, 21, 163 Positive relationships, forging, 94 Povenmire-Kirk, T. C., 202 Power

expert, 97–98 informational, 97, 98–99 in interpersonal relationships, 96–100 referent, 96, 97

Power, T. J., 2, 94, 99 Powers, K., 11, 13, 15, 37, 43, 59, 69, 71, 74, 186, 191,

199, 201, 208 Powers, L. E., 13, 199, 201, 203 Practice gap, 15 Practice-informed policy (PIP), 217, 225 Prasse, D. P., 47, 151 Prater, M., 118 Premack’s principle, 183 Prereferral intervention teams (PITS), 66 Preschool Behavior Screening System, 144 Present levels of academic achievement

and functional performance (PLAAFP), 205

Primary level of intervention, 8 Principals, 107 Proactive school, 107 Problem analysis, 23 Problem identification, 23 Problem severity, levels of, 8–9 Problem solving

brainstorming, 39 in consultee-centered consultation, 31 ethical, 133–136 intervention summary, 41–42 student study teams and, 39–43 teacher interview, 153–155

Problem solving consultation. See also Multi-tiered system of support (MTSS)

establish rapport, 52 evaluate effectiveness of interventions, 58 explanation of, 50 intervention development and implementation,

56–58 parents as allies in, 64–66 planning/modifying interventions, 72–73 problem analysis, 54–56 problem identification, 52–54 in RtI system (See Response-to-

intervention (RtI)) steps/major activities, 51–58

Problem-solving teams (PSTs), 66 Procedural standards, 128–129 Processing strength and weakness (PSW)

model, 11 Professional development (PD), 225–229

coaching and mentoring, 226–228 data-team discussions, 228 technology and, 226

262 Index

Professional learning communities (PLCs), 33–34

Program-centered administrative consultation, 27

Progress evaluation, 177 Progress monitoring, 57–58, 166 Prompts, in active listening, 85 Proximity control, 164 Pryzwansky, W., 2 PSTs. See Problem-solving teams (PSTs) Psychoeducational assessment, 71–72 Psychological deficits within consultees, as cause

of resistance, 106 Public education

federal laws influence on, 8–12 high-poverty, high-performing schools, 218–220 leadership characteristics, 223 statewide technical assistance, 217–218

Published norm-referenced tests (PNRTs), 67 Pugach, M. C., 90 Pulles, S. M., 71 Punishment, 22

Q Quality of life perspectives, 202 Questioning, in communication, 88–89

direct/indirect, 89 misdirected questions, 90–91 open/closed, 88 purpose of, 88 single/multiple, 88, 89

Questioning, in intervention development, 56

R Rabren, K., 206 Racism, 119 Rashee, H., 37 Rating scales, for FBA, 157–158 Raven, B. H., 96–98 Reactive schools, 107 Reading skills (core), 15 Reasons for behavior problems, 139–145

classroom management practices, 142–143 family and community, 139 health and safety issues, 145 media influence, 140 mental health disorders, 144–145 motivation, 143–144 parenting, 139–140 peers, 141 school climate, 143 teacher-child relationships, 141–142

Reavis, H., 139, 190 Reback, R., 145 Records, student

functional behavioral assessment, 153 review of, 192

Reeves, D. B., 219

Referent power, 96, 97 Reflective listening. See Active (reflective) listening,

as communication skill Reform, and school context, 222 Reframing, 85 Reinforcement, 21, 183 Reinforcing consequences, 21 Reinke, W. M., 2, 59, 74, 141, 142, 184, 227 Reio, T. G., 141 Relevant practice, 176 Reschly, D., 14 Research taxonomy, 16 Research to practice gap, 15 Resistance, in consultative relationship,

100–111 causes of, 102–107 overcoming, 107–111 by parent-consultees, 117 types of, 101–102

Resistance to intervention, 13 Resource allocation, 231, 232

choosing best course of action with limited resources, 133

Resource mapping, 209, 232 Resource services program (RSP), 15 Response cost, 167 Response-to-intervention (RtI), 8, 11, 59, 162

indicated intervention (See Indicated interventions)

system-change phases (See Systems-change model) Responsibility, 133 Responsiveness to intervention, 13 Restori, A. F., 69 Retish, P., 207 Reynolds, C. R., 145, 157, 158, 187 Rhode, G., 22, 139, 140, 154, 163, 190 Rhymer, K. N., 53, 158, 193 Riley-Tillman, T. C., 2, 40, 59, 70, 73, 74, 94, 99,

141, 157, 158, 174, 184, 187 Rimm-Kaufman, S. E., 141 RIOT acronym, 70, 192–194 Risk-benefit analysis, 132 Risley, T. R., 139, 187 Ristow, R., 207 Rivers, K. O., 149 Roach, A., 10, 35 Roberts, E. L., 198, 203 Rocks, D., 227 Rose, T., 217 Rosenfield, S., 13, 30–32, 44, 89 Rowe, D. A., 206 Rowley v. Department of Education, 128, 147 Rozecki, T. G., 83 RtI. See Response-to-intervention (RtI) Rudasill, K. M., 141 Rueda, R., 202 Rutherford, K. J., 162 Ryan, T. G., 11

Index 263

S Sabol, T. J., 141, 142 Saenz, A., 187 Safran, J. S., 37, 224 Safran, S. P., 37, 224 Salvia, J., 187 Sanetti, L. M. H., 74, 77, 79 Sapolsky, R., 106 Sarason, S. B., 32 Saving face, 86 Schaughency, E., 222, 232 Schofield, J., 180 School-based consultants

activities of, 46–47 consultation with parents/families, 114–117 in culturally/linguistically diverse settings, 117–120 process expertise of, 6, 7–8 roles of, 44–45 skills/knowledge of, 45–46

School-based consultation. See also Collaborative consultation

changes in education affecting, 9–14 collaborative consultation (See Collaborative consultation) consultants in (See School-based consultants) consultation (See Consultation) definitions, distinctions, and characteristics, 1–2 as indirect service, 2–5 overview, 1–16 present status of, 14–15 problem severity and levels of, 8–9 process and content expertise in, 7–8 research on effectiveness of, 15–16 triadic nature of, 7

School climate, and behavior problems, 143 School Wide Information System (SWIS), 228 Schoolwide positive behavior support (SWPBS),

3, 8, 59, 162–168 intensive behavior interventions, 168 targeted behavioral interventions, 165–168 universal behavioral interventions, 162–165

Schopler, E., 157 Schrag, J., 151 Schulte, A. C., 2, 78 Schutz, J. A., 149 Schutz, L. E., 149 Scientific method, 55 Scruggs, T. E., 11, 35 Secondary level, of intervention, 8 Self-advocacy, 202 Self-determination training, 202–203 Self-monitoring, 166 Seligman, M., 95, 180 Selye, H., 106 Sensory impairments, intensive interventions

for, 188–189 Serge, T., 11 Shapiro, E. S., 54, 68, 70, 158, 175, 193 Shapiro, J., 202

Sheets, R. H., 179 Sheltered instruction observation protocol (SIOP)

model, 78, 177–178 Sheridan, S. M., 2, 16, 29, 30, 65, 74, 75,

78, 114, 115 Shernoff, E. S., 32, 33, 142 Shinn, M. R., 55, 68, 73 Shogren, K., 203 Short, D., 177 Showers, J., 227 Shriberg, D., 31 Shriner, J., 15, 38 Signal interference, 164 Sileo, T., 118 Silva, A., 30 Simmons, D. C., 33, 188 Simmons, T. J., 207 Sinclair, M., 142 Sinclair, M. F., 206 SISEP Center. See State Implementation and Scaling-Up

of Evidence-Based Practices (SISEP) Center Sitlington, R., 204 Skiba, R. J., 141 Skills

communication (See Communication skills) hypotheses for poor development of, 185 interpersonal (See Interpersonal skills) lack of, in consultees, 27, 106–107

Skinner, C. H., 53, 158, 193 Slavin, R. E., 8, 180 Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium, 216 Smith, D., 220 Smith, M., 20 Smith, S. B., 188 Smith, W. A., 119 Smythe, C. A., 75 Social influence, 99–100

ethics and, 124–125 Socially just consultation in schools, 119 Social power, in interpersonal skills, 96–100

dominance debate, 99–100 expert, 97–98 informational, 98–99 referent, 96, 97

Social problems. See Behavior problems Social responsibility, in ethical behavior, 127 Social skills training, 167–168 Solis, M., 35 Solomon, B. G., 77, 113 Solórzano, D. G., 119 Song, J., 220 SOS. See Student Observation System (SOS) Soukup, J. H., 203 Special education eligibility

assessment, 192–194 Specific learning disabilities eligibility, 10–11 Speece, D. L., 69 Spindler, F., 199 Spindler, L., 199

264 Index

Sprague, J., 138, 151, 154, 158, 159 Sprick, R., 8, 59, 111, 143 SSTs. See Student study teams (SSTs) Standard protocol to assessment and

intervention, 13 Standards-based education reform, 9 State Implementation and Scaling-Up of Evidence-Based

Practices (SISEP) Center, 217 Stecker, P. M., 68 Steege, M. W., 62, 138, 151, 153, 158, 168 Steele, C. M., 119 Stehouwer, J. D., 191 Sternberg, R. J., 190 Stichter, J. P., 248 Stillwell, R., 179 Stipanovic, N., 141 Stodden, R. A., 13, 200 Stodolsky, S., 179 Stoiber, K. C., 15 Stollar, S. A., 224, 227–229 Stoner, G., 55, 152 Storey, K., 138, 151, 154, 158, 159 Strain, P. S., 147 Strategic planning, 229, 230 Student interview, regarding behavior

problems, 156–157 Student Observation System (SOS), 158 Student study teams (SSTs), 37–43

agenda, 43–44 collaborative consultation and, 3 first meeting of, 66–67 follow-up meeting, 67–70 formal consultations and, 7 importance of structure in, 43–44 initial discussion with teachers, 62–63 initial referral to, 40, 61–62 members, roles of, 37 problem-solving intervention summary, 41–42 purpose of, 37–39 strategies, 39–43

Students with disabilities inclusion of (See Inclusion, of students

with disabilities) postsecondary outcomes for females vs. males, 199 transition planning for (See Transition planning)

Student tracking, 119–120 Student understanding, checking for, 176 Study skills, 181–182 Sue, D. W., 118 Sugai, G., 8, 58, 70, 208, 217, 219, 220, 224, 225,

229, 230, 233 Suldo, S. M., 145 Sullivan, A. L., 146 Summarizing, in active listening, 85 Summers, J. A., 209 Survey level assessment (SLA), 184 Suter, J. C., 34 Swanger-Gagné, M., 2, 16, 75 Swank, P. R., 38

Swanson, E., 35 Synergism, 3 Systems-change model

implementation stages, 217–218 implementation teams, 224–225 inclusion case example, 242–249 installation/initial implementation phase, 232 institutionalization phase, 233 long-term vision development phase, 230–231 need determination/establishing readiness

phase, 229–233 ongoing evolution, 233 phases of, 229–233

Systems-level consultation, 214–234. See also Innovations, school

in high-poverty, high-performing schools, 218–220 macrosystemic influences on school innovation,

215–221 microsystemic influences on school innovation,

221–223 need for, 215 professional development, 225–229 statewide technical assistance, 217–218 value-added models of teacher evaluation, 220–221

Szadokierski, I., 190

T Tanners, A., 207 Targeted behavioral interventions, 165–168

behavior contract, 165–166 behavior-specific praise, 166–167 daily behavior report cards, 166 progress monitoring/self-monitoring, 166 response cost, 167 social skills training, 167–168

Targeted interventions (Tier 2), 8, 9, 14, 61–68, 182, 184–187

student study team referral, 61–62 Taylor, J. E., 141 Taylor, L., 222, 229–231, 233 TBI. See Traumatic brain injury (TBI) TEACCH, 147 Teacher-child relationships, behavior problems

and, 141–142 Teacher interview, in problem-solving process,

153–155 Teacher performance evaluation, value-added models

of, 220–221 Technical assistance (TA)

core features of intensive TA, 223 to states, 217–218

Technology assistive technology, 146 communication, 92–93 improving motivation with, 183 professional development and, 226

Telzer, E. H., 118 Temporary reassignments, 164

Index 265

Tenore, B. F., 141 Tertiary level, of intervention, 8 Test, D. W., 204–206 Testing (special ed eligibility assessment), 193 Theoretical consultation models

behavioral model, 20–25 mental health model, 25–29

Theory and Practice of Mental Health Consultation, The (Caplan), 25

Thomas, C. C., 32 Thomas, L. B., 11 Thomas, M. K., 199 Thorell, L. B., 189 Thousand, J., 16 Threat to role image or security, as cause of resistance,

102–103 Thurlow, M. L., 142, 206 Thurston, L. P., 65 Tier 1 (universal prevention), 8, 13–15,

59–61 Tier 2 (targeted interventions), 8, 9, 14, 61–68 Tier 3 (intensive level interventions), 8–9,

68–69, 187–191 Tillman, C., 101 Tilly, W. D., 14 Timelines, 231 Time wasting, avoiding, 111 Tivnan, T., 188 Token economy, 163 Torgesen, J. K., 13, 16, 174, 177, 191 TPT. See Transition planning team (TPT) Tracking students, 119–120 Transformation zones, 217 Transition planning, 7, 12–13, 198–211

collaborative consultation with stakeholders, 208–210

legal mandates, 200–202 postsecondary outcomes, 198–200, 207 process, 204–207 services, 206–207 with students and families, 202–204

Transition planning team (TPT), 36 Traumatic brain injury (TBI), 149 Treatment acceptability, 75 Treatment effectiveness, 5 Treatment ethics, 5 Treatment fidelity, 74, 75 Treatment integrity, 5, 74–79, 161–162

acceptability, 5, 75 assessing, 77–79 checklists, 75, 76 explanation of, 74 performance feedback, 75–77

Treatment validity, 5 Troutman, A. C., 20–22, 25, 103, 138, 151 Trust, developing and maintaining, 96 Tsai, K. M., 118 Turnbull, A., 210 Turner, A., 55

U Ullmann, L., 22 Union representatives, 107 Universal behavioral interventions, 162–165

class climate, 164–165 direct instruction, 162–163 rewards and consequences, 163–164 rules, 162

Universal effective instruction (Tier 1), 175–184

for culturally diverse/low income students, 179–180

for English language learners, 177–179 high expectations and differentiated instruction,

180–181 for HP2 schools and Rtl/MTSS, 180 improving motivation, 182–184 improving study skills and learning

strategies, 181–182 qualities of, 175–177

Universal interventions, 182 Universal prevention (Tier 1), 8, 59–61

V Valentino, C. T., 39 Valle, L. A., 139 Value-added model (VAM), 220–221 Van Bourgondien, M. E., 157 Vanderbilt University, 226 VanDerHeyden, A. M., 15, 16, 40, 59, 70, 73, 174,

182, 187, 238 Vanderwood, M. L., 15, 16, 38, 179 Vasquez, J., 179 Vaughn, S., 35 Vazquez-Nuttall, E., 119 Viglietta, E., 37, 61 Villa, R., 16 Vision, long-term, 230–231 Vocational Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 149 Vogt, M. E., 177 Volpe, R. J., 145, 157, 158 Volpiansky, P., 215 Vujnovic, R., 74, 113, 166 Vygotsky, L. S., 175

W Wagner, M., 198, 199 Walker, H. M., 55, 73 Walsh, K., 15 Walz, L., 68 Wandering interaction, 91 Wanless, S. B., 141 Washington, B. H., 203 Wasik, B. A., 8 Watson, T. S., 62, 138, 151, 153, 158, 168 Weaver, R., 202 Webster-Stratton, C., 2, 74, 142, 227

266 Index

Wehman, P., 209 Wehmeyer, M. L., 203 Welch, G. W., 2, 16, 75 Welch, M., 229 Wellman, G. J., 157 What Works Clearinghouse (WWC), 40, 72,

147, 189 Whole-group coaching, 227 Wickstrom, K. F., 101 Wilcox, D. D., 15 Wiley, H. I., 37, 61 Wilkinson, L., 114, 115 Williams, B. B., 127 Williams-Diehm, K., 203 Wilson, K. E., 97 Windle, M., 139 Witt, J. C., 14–16, 55, 101, 182, 185, 238 Witte, A., 65 Woodcock, R. W., 67

Woodruff, D., 217 World Health Organization Quality of Life, 202 Wraparound services, 9 WWC. See What Works Clearinghouse (WWC)

Y Yelich, G., 35 Yetter, G., 44 Yosso, T. J., 119 Ysseldyke, J., 2, 13, 14, 15, 29, 31, 38, 55, 62, 143, 144,

151, 152, 157, 166, 175, 177, 187, 239, 249

Z Zhang, D., 198, 203 Zins, J. E., 215 Zirkel, P. A., 11, 12, 128, 129, 147, 189 Zone of proximal development, 175 Zwaigenbaum, L., 210

1. 1. 2019-04-24T21:00:49+0000
   2. Preflight Ticket Signature