Who's Outside the Box

Locations of visitors to this page
Showing posts with label data-driven. Show all posts
Showing posts with label data-driven. Show all posts

Monday, November 19, 2012

How do you solve a problem without evidence?



As the trend of role expansion in school psychology continues, the role as “problem solver” has created a dilemma for school psychologists. According to Ysseldyke et al. (2006), “school psychologists should possess the ability to use problem-solving and scientific methodology to create, evaluate, and apply appropriately empirically validated interventions at both an individual and systems level” (p.14). School psychologists are increasingly being held accountable for the intervention programs they choose. More than ever, the pressure for school psychologists to effectively and efficiently choose an intervention is increasing; school administrators expect school psychologists to make these decisions as quickly and accurately as possible.

Fortunately, organizations such as the APA and the US department of Education have created guidelines and criteria to help facilitate this decision making process. The guidelines serve to help school psychologists and other school personnel distinguish effective vs. ineffective intervention programs. The documents provide criteria that determines what an effective intervention entails. Below are links to the guidelines in detail:

● http://www.apa.org/practice/guidelines/evaluating.pdf
● http://www2.ed.gov/rschstat/research/pubs/rigorousevid/rigorousevid.pdf
● http://evidencebasedpolicy.org/docs/Evid-based_educ_strategy_for_ED.pdf.


The guidelines and criteria provide school psychologist with assistance in choosing effective interventions. However, the guidelines do not guarantee that the program will be implemented in the school. At the school and district level, there are other influences that affect how an intervention is implemented and if it is applied effectively. According to Peacock (2010) teacher acceptance, commitment, and site-based administrative support can impede on intervention implementation (p. 214, p.228). Why would teachers and administrators be opposed to implementing effective interventions? In regards to implementing an intervention program, how can a school psychologist advocate their case and what evidence can they provide to teachers and administrators to prove their plan is beneficial?

Unfortunately, some of the most effective interventions can be costly and difficult to implement in schools, especially with limited resources. These poorer school districts may shy away from effective interventions and opt for an inexpensive program with less efficacy. On the contrary, costly programs such as DARE are still being used in schools even after being proved ineffective years ago. How do you feel about these decision on implementation? What would you do if you were the administrator in a poor school district? Do these decisions worsen school and student outcome or provide some kind of benefit? Have you seen or know of any programs scientifically proven ineffective yet still utilized within a school? How much accountability should be put on school personnel-who implement these programs whether they agree with them or not- when programs fail to produce positive results?

References:

Peacock, G. G., Ervin, R. A., Daly III, E. J., & Merrell, K. W. (2010). Practical handbook of school psychology. New York, NY: The Guilford Press.

Ysseldyke, J. E., Burns, M., Kelley, B., Morrison, D., Ortiz, S., Rosenfield, S., et al. (2006). School psychology: A blueprint for training and practice: III. Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.

This Blog was created by: Tanushree Mehta, Heather Newman, Krista Johnson, Derrick Wilson, and Amanda Elliott

Monday, April 13, 2009

Improving the Evidence-Based Practice Movement

We know that a problem solving approach is outcome-focused, data-driven, integrally linked to intervention, and context-specific.

Evidenced-Based Practice (EBP) as a problem solving approach “refers to a body of scientific knowledge, defined usually by reference to research methods or designs, about a range of service practices (e.g., referral, assessment, case management, therapies, or support services)”. It is directly related to applying data-orientated problem solving to students’ mental health and social-emotional needs. When deciding which type of EBP is appropriate in the school setting, we can take into consideration some of the most effective strategies:

· Parent Management Training (PMT)
· Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT)

(For additional information on PMT and CBT please see the link below:)
http://draweb.njcu.edu:2048/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=pdh&AN=ccp-60-5-733&site=ehost-live
· Psychopharmacology (using psychostimulants/medication)

These are only three of many new approaches developing among contemporary literature. With all the different types of methods of intervention and prevention under the EBP umbrella, how do we decide which one will work best for us? Seeing that this method of practice is fairly new, how can we begin to shift the paradigm from traditional to an EBP approach? Do you agree that practicing school psychologists traditionally trained (i.e., relying on clinical judgment rather than the scientific method or the empirical literature) are the primary offenders of underidentification and misidentification of mental health problems in school settings?


This blog was created by Jamie Cowan and Tahina Reyes