We have learned how useful evidence-based data can be to a School Psychologist. This chapter discusses how the School Psychologist plays an essential role in assisting other school staff in understanding and using that data. School Psychologists are described as “knowledge brokers” (Schaughency, 548) because they communicate information about evidence-based assessments.
Data based decision making is key to improving outcomes and it is essential to the RTI model. Evaluation data supports delivery of services and decision making by aiding with communication to parents and teachers, known as internal stakeholders, as well as administrators, known as external stakeholders.. To evaluate evidence-based competence-building practices summative and formative evaluations are used. Summative evaluations are used after the intervention to answer the question “was the intervention effective?” Formative Evaluations are conducted during the intervention to evaluate if the intervention is having the desired effect so that plan can be adapted to accomplish the outcome.
The interpretation of the data is essential. The person presenting the information needs to be cognizant of the audience who will be presented with the data. When explaining data it is important to remember that basic statisticial concepts known to psycholigists may not be easily understood by other school personell or parents. The information should be conveyed in a way that is understood by all involved. It is suggested that the school psychologist eliminate jargon and utlize graphs to convey information.
While data can be very useful, it is only useful if it is readily available. The availability of data at the time of decision making is essential. The authors cite the example of a student's achievement tests being sent out for processing and not returning until after the school year has ended, rendering the data useless.
During your practicum experience you have probably witnessed decisions having to be made quickly. How does the fast-paced atmosphere of a school (including demanding teachers and parents) allow for evaluation data? What is the likelihood of the data being available when you need it? Is the majority of decision making that you've seen in your practicum been based on evidence-based data?
There are two major foundational elements that underlie implementation of the problem-solving model; the problem solving methods and the problem-solving framework. In the problem solving method, four main questions posed are: 1. “what is the problem?” which involves exploring the discrepancy between what is expected of the student and what is occurring, 2. “Why is the problem occurring?” which is referred to as the problem analysis, 3. “What should be done about the problem?” relating to reducing problem magnitude, and 4. “Is what we are doing working?” which examines data on the student’s progress over time and the degree to which the problem has lessened over time. Out of these questions, which do you think is the most important/influential in the process? Do you think that there is any one question, that without, the problem-solving model would not be able to function efficiently?
In the late 80’s and early 90’s, a problem-solving framework used was called The Heartland approach. This approach had no specific rules for students to move from one phase to the next, and the problem-solving logic was applied to individual cases, based on the student’s educational environment (Tilly III, Niebling, Rahn-Blakeslee, p.583). This model had limitations; it was reactive rather than proactive, teachers had trouble implementing a large number of individual plans while also teaching a class, and teachers viewed the model as a way to place students into special education. The new framework that supports the problem-solving method is systems framework, the model we are all familiar with, RTI. The systems framework encourages psychologists to hold five assumptions, which are: 1. the scientific method guides decision making, 2. direct, functional assessments provide the best information for decision- making, 3. learning is an interaction between curriculum, instruction, and the environment, 4. all students can learn, and 5. effective interventions are matched to unique student needs. After reading about Heartland approach and the systems framework and encouraged assumptions, do you think there are any positives that the Heartland approach exhibited that you would like to see implemented into the systems framework/RTI approach? In your practicum experiences, have you seen a model with characteristic of the Heartland approach implemented, or does the school psychologist stick more closely to the RTI method?
Daly, E.J., Ervin, R.A., Merrell, K.W., & Peacock, G.G. (2010). Practical Handbook of School Psychology. New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
This Blog was created by: Alison Stratthaus & Jessica Maneri
Who's Outside the Box
.jpg)
Posts
2 comments:
Relative to all the shared response, it seems that we can all agree on the fact that fast-paced environments make it difficult to ascertain most informative data. As we previously discussed in class, it sometimes seems that interventions are discussed informally, as a quick fit to the problem. At my placement, I often saw teacher come into the office of the school psychologist, and present a problem. The school psychologist would suggest different things that could be done to address the issue. The teacher and school psychologist would agree that they would discuss progress/lack of profess if any changes were noted. Throughout this process I saw, I didn't see any documentation noted, although the school psychologist did eventually obtain information on the student's status. Therefore, I think that school psychologist seem to adapt to this fast pace to the best of their ability. However, I could see how easily it could be to not follow up with teacher, or undermining the students that don't cause any overt behavioral issues.
During my practicum experience I have witnessed decisions being made quickly. So far, I have noticed that test results are readily available because he does not need to send them anywhere until he is done using them. However, it is questionable whether the decisions he makes are always based on evidence-based data. In one IEP meeting I sat in on, the CST created a plan for a student from brain storming and working together to come up with the best possible plan of action. They did mention that it is not a path typically traveled and I do not believe there is any evidence data to support it. However, they were primarily concerned with the child’s best interest and did what they full hearted thought was best for his specific situation.
In response to the question of which part of the problem-solving model is most important, I would have to say the first question is the most influential. If we do not know what the exact and correct problem is, we cannot form a proper plan of action from there. In order to provide the best care and services, we must accurately understand what the problem is we are dealing with. Once we know what the problem is we can determine why it is occurring, what should be done about it and if what we choose to do is working. Knowing what the problem is in the foundation to figuring out the rest of the questions in this method.
Post a Comment