Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Michigan Psych ReportT H E M I C H I G A N A S S O C I A T I O N O F S C H O O L P S Y C H O L O G I S T S
V. 38No. 1
Winter 2010
Making Tier II Interventions Work: One Story from the TrenchesCheryl Somers and Sandra Blome
As we all know, there has been extensive and timely policy being developed around the need to improve core instruction and intervene with struggling students at Tiers I and II (loosely known as “general education—core” and “general education—at risk”, respectively). These policies continue to be shaped as we write this document. However, there is much less anecdotal description of how the implementation of Tier II interventions can work. The purpose of this article is to describe our recent experience with delivering Tier II interventions in a public elementary school. The goal of writing this is simply to share what we found successful, to possibly stimulate ideas, and to encourage others to write up their anecdotes for MASP as well.
Of course, there are many ways that these interventions can be accomplished. This is by no means a prescription. But when several of our 3rd and 4th grade teachers approached our problem solving team with a list of 11 students who were not doing well in their classrooms with reading, we knew that to evaluate them all for special education was not warranted. For one, they had never been given a run at empirically-based, well-implemented interventions. Our district is quite progressive in changing paradigms, but change is not fast. We also knew that if we waited for a district or even a building level initiative, these kids would have had to wait too long to get the needed interventions. Therefore, we decided to press forward with a small, grade level initiative at the Tier II level. We looked at DIBELS data that the school collects routinely for universal screening, we conducted additional curriculum-based measures (CBM) using AIMSweb, and we examined other classroom products/work samples and assessments (e.g., Qualitative Reading Inventory) to determine if students had mastered phonics and fluency.
Of the 11 students, we found that three of the 3rd graders, two of whom were new to the district, actually needed intensive service in phonics, and were taken in for intervention 30 mins/day, four days/week by the Learning Specialist who used Explode the Code and PALS (Peer Assisted Literacy Strategies) as the primary intervention tool, both of which have been found to be efficacious in research studies. Those children were progress monitored biweekly. The rest of the students were found to be well-grounded in phonics but very weak in oral reading 13-15
What’s Inside…Message from the President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Who are Psychologists?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
In the Spotlight...Heather Lackey. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Cultural Competence in Vivo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Legislative Update . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Conference Summaries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13-15
fluency. We selected Read Naturally as an evidence-based intervention for these eight remaining students (there are other repeated reading focused interventions as well and are straightforward to learn and implement). Repeated readings, which has been shown to be critical to fluency improvement, is central to this intervention. Read Naturally includes a series of passages at each grade level. You find students’ instructional level and set goals within that level, progressing to higher levels as goals are met. At any level, the routine for the intervention was the same—a “cold read” on the passage, read out loud and timed by an adult (“cold” because child had never seen it before), followed by listening to several “experienced” recorded reads under head phones, then four or more practice reads without the head phones, and finally followed by a timed “hot read” (“hot” because the student is now warmed up to the passage) out loud to the same adult. The cold reads are the index used to determine progress within the program. We also administered AIMSweb CBMs.
Several parent volunteers, plus a principal’s retired husband and Sandra (author and a University of Toledo practicum student at the time with an intervention caseload) were recruited to deliver the paper-based version of the intervention. We hoped for a 4-day-per-week intervention (best practice guidelines are 4-5 days/week) per student, but had to settle for 3 days per week due to the volunteers’ availability and other classroom constraints such as the “specials” schedule (e.g., physical education, art, computers, etc.).
We first identified the volunteers’ availability and then worked with the teachers regarding what content students would be missing during each possible volunteer time slot throughout the week. Finally, we determined which content was the “least worst” for the students to miss.
Continued on page 6
2 Winter 2010
President’s Message…Three-Tier Model of Advocacy
As school psychologists, we often work to help students to develop advocacy skills for themselves. This typically involves helping students to identify their own strengths and needs, and to speak up for the things that they need to be successful. Helping ourselves as professionals to develop those same skills is equally important, to ensure that students in Michigan continue to benefit from the full range of particular skills that school psychologists have to offer. MASP is occasionally asked to respond to situations when local decisions have caused concerns about the erosion of these services. Advocacy, however, begins well before a concern is identified.
Those familiar with Response to Interventions models of service delivery are well versed in the use of a triangle to visualize a three-tier system of support. The same visual model can easily be applied to advocacy activities. At the universal level are the steps that each school psychologist should take. Just as we work to support the provision of a solid core academic curriculum to students, we should engage in actions that help all of the stakeholders in education to understand how the skills that school psychologists have can benefit all students. Some of the activities in the universal support category include presentations to parents, teachers, school board members and administration regarding the range of roles that school psychologists are performing in schools. Other activities have involved newsletter articles, websites, and materials in any other form that provide information to the community. The Public Information Committee of MASP has produced a one-page information sheet outlining a few of the highlights of our practice, which is included with this issue of the Michigan Psych Report. This will be provided to each member of the new state congress as part of our statewide advocacy initiative. It also makes a perfect handout for members to use when promoting our field at home. Additional resources, including PowerPoint presentations, handouts, and newsletters, are available online at our website (http://www.maspweb.com/about/advocacy).
Just as strategic and intensive supports are used to support children who struggle academically, it is important to have levels of supports for advocacy when specific concerns arise. At the strategic level, these generally involve the local school psychologists making more personalized contact with important decision makers regarding specific actions that are being taken at the local or ISD level. MASP can provide ideas and networking with other members who have undertaken this effort in their own districts to support members. At the most intensive level, MASP has provided letters of support and resources to substantiate the messages that are being delivered by local members.
Whether your job is providing well planned and effective assessments that lead to services for children with disabilities, or involvement in academic, behavioral and emotional interventions for students with and without disabilities, school psychologists can take tremendous pride in their field. Advocacy is really just about sharing that pride with others who count in your district.
Rod Teeple
MASP LeadershipDirectory 2010-2011
Executive BoardPresident Rod Teeple [email protected] President Tracy Hobbs [email protected] Elect OPENSecretary Sharon Dusney [email protected] Sharon Petty [email protected]
Regional DirectorsRegion 1 Director Sarah Marshall [email protected] 2 Director Elizabeth Maddalena [email protected] 3 Director Tanya Uganski [email protected] 4 Director Yolanda Mojica [email protected] 5 Director Melissa Nantais [email protected] 6 Director OPENRegion 7 Director Michelle Showers [email protected] 8 Director Shannon Panetta [email protected] 9 Director Jennifer Pohlmann [email protected] 10 Director Katie Lamb [email protected] 11 Director Donna Sprague [email protected] 12 Director Susan Templin Wehrenberg [email protected] 13 Director Therese Allen [email protected]
Committee ChairsLegislative Action Yolanda MojicaProfessional Standards Cheryl SomersFinancial Advisory Sharon PettyMembership Katie Williams Katie Lamb (alternate)Public Info/Communications Shannon PanettaNominations & Elections Therese AllenConferences & Workshops Paul RobbStudent Nathan von der EmbsePublications Donna SpragueSB-CEUs Sharon PettyWebsite Jason SinesUniversity Relations Cheryl Somers/WSUSEAC Representative Paul RobbNASP Delegate Steve SchwartzDatabase Manager Nancy Korbel
MASP NominationsIt is again time to nominate the leaders of our organization. Included in this publication of the Michigan Psych Report is a Nomination Ballot. As you will note, there are several positions requiring nominations. Please consider yourself or someone else for these positions.
Therese Allen, Nominations and Elections Committee See pages 9 and 10
Who are School Psychologists?by Shannon Panetta, Chair, MASP Public Information Committee
3Winter 2010
School psychologists help children succeed academically,
socially, and emotionally. They collaborate with educators,
parents, and other professionals to create safe, healthy,
and supportive learning environments for all students.
School psychologists are highly trained in both psychology
and education, and have degrees at the Master’s and
Doctoral level. They must complete a minimum of a
Specialist-level degree program (60 graduate semester
credits) that includes a 1200-hour internship and
emphasizes preparation in the following: data-based
decision making, consultation and collaboration, effective
instruction, child development, student diversity and
development, school organization, prevention, intervention,
mental health, learning styles, behavior, research, and
program evaluation.
What do School Psychologists do?
School Psychologists Work With Students and Their
Families to:
• Providecounseling,instruction,andmentoringfor
those struggling with social, emotional, and behavioral
problems
• Increaseachievementbyassessingbarrierstolearning
and determining the best instructional strategies to
improve learning
• Promotewellnessandresiliencebyreinforcing
communication and social skills, problem solving,
anger management, self-regulation, self-determination,
and optimism
• Enhanceunderstandingandacceptanceofdiverse
cultures and backgrounds
School Psychologists Work With Students to:
• Identifyandaddresslearningandbehaviorproblems
that interfere with school success
• Evaluateeligibilityforspecialeducationservices(within
a multidisciplinary team)
• Supportstudents’social,emotional,andbehavioral
health
• Teachparentingskillsandenhancehome-school
collaboration
School Psychologists Work With Teachers to:
• Identifyandresolveacademicbarrierstolearning
• Designandimplementstudentprogressmonitoring
systems
• Designandimplementacademicandbehavioral
interventions
• Supporteffectiveindividualizedinstruction
• Motivateallstudentstoengageinlearning
School Psychologists Work With Administrators to:
• Collectandanalyzedatarelatedtoschool
improvement, student outcomes, and accountability
requirements
• Implementschool-widepreventionprogramsthathelp
maintain positive school climates conducive to learning
• Promoteschoolpoliciesandpracticesthatensure
the safety of all students by reducing school violence,
bullying, and harassment
• Respondtocrisesbyprovidingleadership,direct
services, and coordination with needed community
services
• Design,implement,andgarnersupportfor
comprehensive school mental health programming
School Psychologists Work With Community
Providers to:
• Coordinatethedeliveryofservicestostudentsand
their families in and outside of school
• Helpstudentstransitiontoandfromschooland
community learning environments, such as residential
treatment or juvenile justice programs
Date: 11/29/2010
SPOTLIGHT •
4 Winter 2010
Meet Heather Lackey
What is your educational background and when did you start in the profession?My Bachelor degree is in Psychology from the University of Michigan. I received my Masters in School and Community Psychology from Wayne State University in 2000, and began working in the Port Huron Area School District thereafter. In 2002, I obtained employment in the Berkley School District, which is where I currently work.
Describe your current position and how it evolved from the ”traditional” role of a school psychologist.To say that my role as a school psychologist has evolved is an understatement! I began my career utilizing the discrepancy model for SLD determination. This model always made me uneasy, because I didn’t feel like I was making as helpful of recommendations as I wanted. Rather, I felt like my sole purpose was to provide numbers and proclaim if the magic difference between ability and achievement was present. In the Berkley School District, I have felt general support from most administrators to listen to new ideas regarding best practices. I started out by taking one case where I implemented a reading intervention while collecting progress monitoring data within the 30 school days of a special education evaluation. I also began to have more conversations with both my special education and general education teachers and offered to help them with their data collection and classroom interventions. Instead of only doing assessments for special education eligibility, I offered my evaluation and analysis skills early on to guide appropriate instruction and interventions and prevent a special education referral. For example, my training in human development and learning helped to guide teams to look at the developmental progression of reading skills. By doing so, we are more informed regarding what specific skill deficit to target in which order. Over time, I have gained more acceptance from my general education peers as a partner in helping students to achieve rather than a gatekeeper to help. I have also been lucky enough to work with principals who understand best practice. In one of my buildings, the principal schedules in intervention time at every grade level, so the child assistance team isn’t left wondering who is available to deliver the intervention or how time will be found to implement it. By freeing up time that used to be spent doing special education evaluations, I now have time to be an integral part in PBIS teams and provide direct interventions both academically and socially. I’ve conducted targeted math interventions and have worked with classrooms on anti-bullying initiatives.
What is the most rewarding part of your job?The most rewarding part of my job is the relationships with
students that I now have that were not possible when I was only the “tester” of the building.
What is the most challenging part of your job?At times it feels like the pace of change is slow in education. There are so many variables and current obstacles that hinder the complete endorsement of RTI. It is sometimes frustrating when continuing to advocate for best practices, though the student outcomes are well worth it.
What changes have you seen in the profession since you began your career as a school psychologist?As I mentioned above, when I first started my career, others really seemed to only want to know my IQ numbers. I distinctly remember the day I saw one of my principals and her husband out shopping. When she introduced me, she said, “This is Heather. She is our tester at our building.” Now, I find that my principals finally understand the spectrum of services I have to offer. I am called on to provide guidance for both behavioral and academic interventions for all students regardless of eligibility. At the district level, I am called on to provide input and guidance for every type of learner.
What resources do you rely on most?I have learned so much from colleagues at the ISD level (Oakland Schools). In particular, Susan Koceski and Bill Barley, two school psychologists, have been instrumental in keeping me abreast of current research. The NASP EBSCO online library has been a good investment that I access frequently for current research. The Florida Center for Reading Research has been a great tool to find research-based interventions and to serve as a means to communicate with general educators. Finally, AIMSweb is a tool I go to almost daily for progress monitoring. I’ve been working closely with my special education teachers to enter progress monitoring data and use the data to write more measurable IEP goals.
Do you have a favorite intervention, project, or unique technique you can share?I am most proud of my anti-bullying projects that I have conducted with 3rd and 4th grade classrooms. Fourth graders worked on a project focusing on diversity, acceptance, and service. Students earned points for their classroom by engaging in nine different tasks, each with different point values. Examples included inviting someone new to sit with them at lunch or play with them at recess. The most popular was “Drop-a-Note”. Students dropped anonymous notes giving a compliment to someone in their class with whom they normally didn’t play, and the teacher
Continued on page 12
By: Vivian Dermyer
5Winter 2010
Cultural competence is a vital tool for school psychologists as the United States becomes an increasingly diverse society. With a projection of 28% of the Michigan population self-described as persons of color (U.S. Census Bureau, 2010) and diverse ethnic groups increasingly represented among students, the proportion of ethnic minority educators is shrinking (Ysseldyke, Burns, Dawson, Kelly, Morrison et al., 2008). These demographic trends are relevant to the work of school psychologists and have implications for the training context of school psychology trainees. Trainees and practitioners are expected to have foundational competencies in diversity awareness and sensitive service delivery (Ysseldyke et al, 2008). The supervisor-supervisee relationship within the practica and internship experiences provides an excellent opportunity to meet the needs of the changing face of schools. For ethnic minority trainees, trainees who work with culturally different supervisors, and trainees who work with culturally diverse school populations, supervision provides a platform to explore issues for effectively working within diverse school contexts.
The supervisor provides a significant contribution to the development of the school psychology trainee and a cross-cultural model of supervision can help to extend the growth of cultural competence. Cultural competence is defined as (a) the ability to recognize and understand the dynamic interplay between the heritage and adaptation dimensions of culture in shaping human behavior; (b) the ability to use the knowledge acquired about an individual’s heritage and adaptational challenges to maximize the effectiveness of assessment, diagnosis, and treatment; and (c) internalization of this process of recognition, acquisition, and use of cultural dynamics so that it can be routinely applied to diverse groups (Whaley & Davis, 2007). Through cross-cultural supervision, racial, ethnic, and/or cultural differences that exist between at least two members of the client-trainee-supervisor triad are factors that are brought out in the analysis of contents, processes, and outcomes in supervision (Estrada, Frame, and Williams, 2004). This kind of framework can play a significant role in multicultural supervision with ethnic minority trainees as well as in school systems where practitioners and trainees are involved in culturally diverse client relationships. Moreover, when supervisors are responsive to exploring cultural issues during supervision, students tend to feel supported and validated in exploring cultural issues with clients (Burkard, Johnson, Madson, Pruitt, Contreras-Tadych et al., 2006). While issues of race as well as the interaction of ethnicity, social class, language fluency, education, and race can be anxiety-arousing topics, they do appear to impact behavior and academic achievement such that the cross-cultural supervision model is a worthwhile guide
for creating space for discussions to occur around these issues. The onus of a framework for supervision can often seem to rest with the supervisor, yet there are ways in which the trainee can also be active in the process during practica and internship experiences. Estrada and colleagues (2004) provide some suggestions for enhancing cultural competence through supervision: (1) Making Supervision Safe. The duty of the supervisor is to raise issues of racial and ethnic difference, of expectations, and fears; (2) Conducting Supervisor and Supervisee Self-Assessment. Supervisors and supervisees consider their own racial and ethnic backgrounds and belief systems and how these may impact the supervisory relationship, and the effectiveness of the work they do through cultural genograms or racial identity inventories; (3) Embracing Learning Opportunities. Supervisors and supervisees mutually undertake the task of learning about clients’ racial and ethnic context through conversations with colleagues of a similar racial background, reading professional literature, and through immersion in the stories, music, and community of clients of color.
Cultural competence is essential to meeting the needs of diverse school populations, yet the literature highlights that it is a process (Miranda, 2008) that develops over time and through several experiences. The practica and internship experiences are along the continuum of opportunities for trainees to hone this skill. The supervisor-supervisee relationship within a cross-cultural supervision framework provides a platform for an active process of exploring how culture impacts the trainee as well as how it is relevant to the presenting issues of school-aged clients. ReferencesBurkard, A.W., Johnson, A.J., Madson, M.B., Pruitt, N.T., Contreras-Tadych, D.A., Kozlowski, J.M., Hess, S.A., & Knox, S. (2006). Supervisor cultural responsiveness and unresponsiveness in cross-cultural supervision. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 53, 288-301.Estrada, D., Frame, M.W., & Williams, C.B. (2004). Cross-Cultural supervision: Guiding the conversation toward race and ethnicity. Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development, 32, 307-319.Miranda, A.H. (2008). Best practices in increasing cross-cultural competence. In A.Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.) Best Practices in School Psychology V (pp. 1739- 1750). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.United States Census Bureau. (n.d.). State and county quick facts. Retrieved November 27, 2010, from http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/ states/26000.htmlWhaley, A.L. & Davis, K.E. (2007). Cultural competence and evidence- based practice in mental health services: A complementary perspective. American Psychologist, 62, 563-574.Ysseldyke, J., Burns, M., Dawson, P., Kelly, B., Morrison, D., Ortiz, S., Rosenfield, S., & Telzrow, C. (2008). The blueprint for training and practice as the basis for best practices. In A.Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.) Best Practices in School Psychology V (pp. 37-70). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.
Student Connections Jameel M. Smith, Michigan State UniversityCultural Competence In Vivo: Opportunities for Supervision during Practica and Internship
6 Winter 2010
Then we created a master schedule with set days and times during which pairs or triads of students would be assigned to specific adults for each half-hour intervention (see Figure 1). We arranged the plan so that students did not miss the same class content more than once per week when possible, and balanced missing both academics and specials. It was impossible to consistently schedule each child with the same volunteer each session, but students did have a set schedule allowing no more than two different volunteers delivering their interventions. If the volunteers had to miss, they were given the autonomy to email the classroom teacher to reschedule a given day/time slot. When available, Sandra took on additional students for parent volunteers when rescheduling was not a feasible option. Truthfully, creating a master schedule was probably the single most difficult part of this whole process. However, by taking time to do it well, we ensured regularity in intervention, factoring in what worked best, especially for our volunteers. Even then, we had some transience in volunteers. But when a volunteer dropped out, we kept the students’ schedules the same and found volunteers to who could match them.
We then provided direct instruction training to the volunteers, including demonstrations and watching their administrations of the intervention and their data recordings. Booster sessions were necessary in some instances when volunteers were unsure of certain aspects of the intervention and when specific questions were posed. We would be remiss if we did not mention how critical it is that interventions/treatments be monitored for the integrity/fidelity of their implementation. Despite our training up front, we still found breeches in the implementation delivery. For example, we realized a short time into the project that several volunteers thought that it was OK to skip the repeated readings portion of the intervention (which is clearly the central feature of the oral reading fluency intervention). Without integrity of implementation we did not feel confident in our ability to make sound decisions regarding program effectiveness in students failing to make sufficient progress. In response, we created a fidelity checklist (see Figure 2), which the volunteers completed each time they worked with their assigned students. We did not end our supervision of implementation fidelity here; we kept supervising the work of the volunteers on a regular basis in a nonthreatening fashion, and our follow ups using the fidelity checklist indicated solid implementation integrity. Once fidelity was reliable, variability in student progress from differences in implementation could no longer be assumed, and gains (or lack of), were more likely attributed to intervention effectiveness rather than confounding factors.
We progress monitored all students every other Friday or Monday (depending on the school schedule) throughout the intervention using both the Read Naturally “cold read
data” and AIMSweb oral reading fluency probes. Students graphed their own progress on Read Naturally cold reads using colored pencils and a grid as a visual of their own progress. We also graphed both sources of data in Excel and examined the data approximately every 6 weeks. We reviewed this data at our problem-solving meetings with the students’ teachers and the school principal. Based on each individual’s progress toward benchmark goals, as well as teacher reports and DIBELS data, any necessary changes to the intervention were decided. For many students, this meant discontinuance in our Tier II intervention due to the consistent progress in attaining benchmark goals (50th percentile). After approximately 5 weeks in the program, we were able to dismiss our first student due to progress. By approximately the eighth week of interventions, we were able to dismiss our second student, and by the eleventh week, we were able to dismiss three more students. Eleven weeks in the program, five of the eight students who were identified as struggling readers, and who teachers were talking about referring for a learning disabilities evaluation, were now reading at benchmark. They were removed from the intervention and we continued to progress monitor each of these students on a monthly basis to ensure that gains in progress were maintained without the support of the intervention. Four of the five students maintained their progress outside of the intervention. The student who did not maintain gains was placed back into the intervention for two days per week. After 4 more weeks of intervention, oral reading fluency was back to benchmark levels and above, and the student remained in the program for an additional three weeks for maintenance.
Although the intervention appeared to be effective and relatively quick for the majority of the students in our Tier II groups, the sixth and seventh of the original eight students made slower progress. They also had difficulties generalizing reading improvements in the classroom. Thus, they remained in the program through the end of the school year. Periodic increases and decreases to the Read Naturally reading levels were made, based on their data, to determine each student’s appropriate instructional reading level, allowing for a greater degree of mastery and success. Both of these students were able to make significant gains in oral reading fluency, especially toward the final months of the intervention. The team discussed plans to help identify possible support for the following school year to encourage maintenance of skills. The final student was more of a puzzle. She made some gains with oral reading fluency, reaching the 25th percentile, but her generalization difficulties appeared to lie more in her knowledge of vocabulary, which was affecting overall comprehension. She had a small range of vocabulary exposure and general life exposures that facilitate knowledge of broader
Making Tier II Interventions Work: One Story from the Trenches – cont. from page 1
Continued on next page
Making Tier II Interventions Work: One Story from the Trenches – cont. from page 6
vocabulary. At a problem-solving team meeting, which included the Learning Specialist, it was decided that this student was in need of explicit vocabulary instruction. The team decided that this would now be the most appropriate means of support, and the student was to discontinue Read Naturally for the time and begin receiving a vocabulary intervention (“Wordly Wise”) with the Learning Specialist. It was not an evidence-based program that we could determine, but came with teacher anecdotal support, and was the best we could do quickly as our district worked toward building capacity for delivering evidence-based programs in all skill areas. We decided to do this while waiting for other options.
At the close of the school year, we were pleased to see how many students we were able to help through our Tier II support. Seeing these positive results was motivating to everyone involved. Of the eight students identified as struggling readers and placed in the Read Naturally intervention, none resulted in a special education evaluation at this time. We continue to monitor the weaker responders to determine if they are maintaining gains or are in need of more intense of different supports, including the possibility of a special education evaluation. However, although variations in effectiveness were observed among students, all made great increases in their oral reading fluency, and these changes were able to be generalized to the classroom to varying degrees. In addition, our close monitoring and collaboration with teachers made it
possible to identify additional difficulties (i.e., vocabulary) and problem-solve accordingly. Similarly, only one of the three who stayed with the Learning Specialist for phonics interventions required further evaluation for potentially more intense intervention.
Clearly, there is no single way to accomplish implementation, progress monitoring, integrity monitoring, decision-making based on data, and so on, regarding Tier II interventions. There is no best way to “institutionalize” the process. There are many options, determined by the unique constraints and dynamics of each school district, and even each building. This was a small scale intervention, and we had quirks in our example, such as volunteers not implementing with integrity in the beginning, three days of intervention versus four or five, students having to miss various other school content, etc. However, we developed a prototype of sorts that will work for our building again and perhaps generalize to other buildings. It is important to recognize that while Tier II intervening is not a perfect science, we cannot wait for it to be. We have to start grade-by-grade, even student-by-student, and come up with ways to make it work. Most of these students are not disabled in their capacity to learn. We have to give them the interventions that they need in order to be successful. We hope that reading about our experience may inspire others to find ways to make it happen in their buildings. We also know that MASP would like to hear others share their anecdotes as well. Thanks for reading!
7Winter 2010
Figure 1. Master Schedule.
MONDAY WEDNESDAY FRIDAY
Implementer - Sandra: Implementer-Volunteer #1: Implementer - Sandra:
9:45-10:15 AM (3rd grade class: during Art) 9:30-10:00 AM (3rd grade class: during read/write) 9:45-10:15 AM (4th grade class: During Science)
Student: J.H Student: C.W Student: M.W
Student: C.W 10-10:30 AM (3rd grade class: during read/write) Student : B.P
Student: A.D Student: J.H 10:30-11:00 AM (3rd grade: during read/write)
Student: A.D Student: C.W 10:30-11:00 AM (4th grade class: during Soc. Studies)
Student: M.W Implementer- Volunteer #2: Implementer-Volunteer #2:
Student : B.P 12:30-1:00 PM (4th grade class: during writing) 9:45 -10:15 AM (4th grade class: During Science)
Student: M.W Student : B.O
Implementer - Volunteer #1: Student : B.P Student: S.F 10:30-11:00 AM (4th grade class: during Soc. Studies) 1:00-1:30 PM (4th class grade: during Writing) Student: F.K
Student : B.O Student : B.O 10:30-11:00 AM (3rd grade class: during read/write)
Student: S.F Student: S.F Student: J.H
Student: F.K Student: F.K Student: A.D
Figure 2. Implementation Checklist.
IMPLEMENTATION CHECKLIST Name:
Date:
Check List Completed (Yes/No)
1. Checked students folder for appropriate level
2. Students did 1 cold read
3. Cold reads were timed by parent volunteer
4. To determine goal: students folder sheet suggestions were checked and current cold read were considered
5. Students listened to tape using headphones
6. Students listened to stories on tape two times through.
7. Students practiced reading stories to self at least 4 times through without headphones
8. Students passed or met goal on hot reads
9. If goal was not met, student went back and practiced story until goal was passed
10. Hot reads were timed by parent volunteer
11. If student met or passed goal on first hot read, reinforcement (i.e. candy) was offered.
12. Students completed at least 4 of 5 comprehension questions correctly
8 Winter 2010
MASP Fall Conference 2010 Excellent presentations! Good friends! Great give-aways! And we even remembered to snap a few pictures!
Charlie Deupree, Past President of NASP and MASP. Cheryl Somers wins a give-away from NASP Delegate Steve Schwartz.
Eleanor White, State Director of Special Education.
Rod Teeple, MASP President.
Paul Robb, Conference Chair, and Steve Schwartz, NASP Delegate.Dr. George McCloskey answering questions following his
presentation.
Call for Nominations 2011-2012
9Winter 2010
It is the time of year to look for leadership and support from membership. Consideration of leadership roles is of utmost importance to the vitality of our organization. This is your opportunity to be involved by nominating qualified individuals to represent you and your colleagues.
At this time, we are looking for nominations for President, President-Elect and Secretary as well as Regional Directors and Alternates for Regions 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12 and 13.
President: The term of this office is one year, beginning July 1; however it is a two year commitment. The President serves as the Chairperson of the Executive Council and the Executive Board and presides as chairperson at all meetings of the Association. The President serves as the major spokesperson of MASP positions or delegates this role to other MASP members. The second year is spent as Past-President.
President-Elect: This position is a three-year commitment. The first year is served as President-Elect, the second as President and the third as Past-President. Each year the fulfillment of specific duties is expected. The President-Elect is a voting member of the Executive Board and Executive Council. The President-Elect assists the President in carrying out the organizational activities of MASP. The President-Elect serves as a member of the Fiscal Advisory Committee and as an ex-officio member of all of the Committees of the Association. The President-Elect serves as a representative of MASP in meetings of other organizations upon request and performs duties incidental to this office and other duties as determined by the President.
Secretary: The term of this office is two years, beginning July 1. The Secretary is a voting member of the Executive Board and the Executive Council. The Secretary is responsible for accurately recording the events and information at official MASP meetings, maintaining official records, and writing official correspondence. Other responsibilities include sending notices of all Executive
Board meetings to each board member, recording and distributing minutes of meetings, taking attendance at meetings, and keeping copies of all materials distributed at meetings. The Secretary is responsible for keeping an up-to-date version of the MASP By-laws and notifying the Planning and Development Committee of changes to the Constitution and By-Laws.
Regional Director: This position is a two-year commitment. Regional Directors are voting members of the Executive Board and must be members of the Association and elected by the specific region they represent. The duties of the Regional Director include attending all Executive Board meetings, submitting annual Regional goals, objectives and budget requests, keeping Region members informed of MASP issues, working to increase MASP membership within the Region, encouraging participation in the Association and submitting at least one Region report for publication in the MASP Psych Report.
Alternate Director: This position is a two-year commitment. One Regional Director Alternate will be recognized as such by the Executive Board only if the Alternate was elected by the members of the Region on the same ballot with the current Regional Director. The Alternate will exercise voting privileges in the absence of the Regional Director.
Ballot on reverse side. Tear out and mail to the address provided.
If you are not sure of your Region number, please check the number included in your mailing address. That is the Region number we have on file for you based on your last reported employer’s location. If this information is not correct, please contact Nancy Korbel (Database Manager) at [email protected].
Therese Allen, ChairNominations & Elections Committee
Correction to last issue:
The author of “The Kalamazoo Model for SLD Determination” was
Linda Campbell, Ed.S., School Psychologist, Kalamazoo Public Schools.
SAVE THE DATE
Critical Issues Conference 2011 March 18th, 2011 - Lansing
Fall Conference 2011 October 16-18
Amway Grand, Grand Rapids
10 Winter 2010
Michigan Association of School Psychologists
NOMINATION BALLOT FOR 2011 – 2012
I nominate the following:
President: ___________________________________________________ Please print
President-Elect: ___________________________________________________ Please print
Secretary: ___________________________________________________ Please print
Only members in Regions 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12 and 13 will elect Regional Directors
and Alternates. Your region number can be found in your mailing address on this newsletter.
Please circle your Region affiliation: 1 2 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 12 13
Regional Director: ___________________________________________________ Please print
Alternate: ___________________________________________________ Please print
PLEASE NOTE:
• Only members of the Association may be nominated to hold office.
• Regular, retired and special members are permitted to hold and vote for office.
• Before placing an individual’s name in nomination, be sure the individual is
willing to serve if elected.
• Only the two most frequently nominated individuals for a specific office will
appear on the election ballot.
NOMINATION BALLOTS MUST BE POSTMARKED ON OR BEFORE
FEBRUARY 15, 2011.
Please mail to: MASP
c/o Therese Allen
10120 Eagle Pass
Stanwood, MI 49346
11Winter 2010
Legislative UpdateBy: Ellen Hoekstra, Capitol Services, Inc.
School Psychologists in EDP’sLegislation sponsored by Senator Nancy Cassis (R-Novi) at MASP’s request passed the Senate but did not make it through the House, which met until 6:30 am on its last day but still left a number of bills untouched. The legislation, SB 1421, would have restored a provision in the School Code stating that a school psychologist should participate in developing, reviewing, and revising a student’s EDP if the student receives special education service. Without the passage of the legislation, school psychologists will need to be more proactive at the local level to remind administrators of what they can bring to this process.
No Reform for Parity or Autism InsuranceThe mental health and substance abuse parity bills (HB 4597-4600) were reported out of the House Health Policy Committee in early November. The recently enacted federal parity law covers only employees in self-insured plans, usually large employer plans. Michigan is one of only eight states with no “parity” law. “Parity” means that health insurers cannot have different standards regarding mental health and substance abuse services than for physical health services, such as limits on numbers of visits to a provider.
The autism reform legislation had a somewhat better chance of making it through the full legislature this year. State Representative (and Lieutenant Governor-elect) Brian Calley (R-Portland) sent the Senate a 5-minute videotaped plea for the Senate to approve legislation that would require insurers to cover the cost of autism. In the video, sponsored by the Autism Alliance of Michigan and Autism Speaks, he indicated that he was speaking both as the father of a child with autism and for taxpayers, who would save $14 billion. Although he had realized early in his daughter’s life that there were problems, he did not identify them as autism until a House Health Policy Committee hearing, when he heard a young boy describe his life prior to autism treatment. Calley has indicated he will continue to work on the issue in the new legislature.
State Board Approves New and Improved Anti-bullying PolicyOn November 9, the State Board of Education updated and enhanced its policy and the model policy for school districts on combating bullying. The revised policy, available on the Michigan Department of Education website, includes new language specifically addressing cyber bullying.
Unfortunately, despite strong support from MASP, the anti-bullying legislation, HB 4580 (Rep. Pam Byrnes, D-Chelsea) was not taken up by the Senate, meaning that school
districts still are not required to have policies regarding bullying. School Jobs Bill Signed by the GovernorThe Governor has now signed a supplemental school aid bill, now PA 217. Michigan had been awarded $316 million from the Federal Education Jobs Fund to save 4700 education employee jobs. The funding may be used for any position—including school psychologists-- providing educational and related service for early childhood, elementary and secondary schools in 2010-11 and 2011-2012 school years, with funds spent by September 30, 2012. Portions of a previous bill did not meet federal standards and thus were line-item vetoed by the Governor.
Representative Terry Brown (D-Pigeon) introduced HB 5887, a bill designed to meet federal scrutiny for the remainder of the federal funding. This legislation distributes the $246 million under what is called a 2x distribution formula: when added to existing school aid appropriations, the current per pupil increases of $23-46 per pupil would increase to a total of $111 to $222 per pupil. The bill also uses other School Aid funds to increase the original per pupil reduction from $154 to $170 per pupil, of which $25.6 million is used to fund nearly half of the Adair v. State of Michigan costs.
Leadership Races and Committees Begin to FormThe House and Senate legislative caucuses have all chosen their leaders. Representative James Bolger (Marshall) was unanimously voted in by House Republican members as the Speaker of the House, with Representative Jim Stamas (Midland) as majority floor leader and Representative John Walsh (Livonia) as Speaker Pro-Tempore. The Minority caucus voted Representative Rick Hammel of Mount Morris Twp. to lead the Democratic House members, with Kate Segal (Battle Creek) as the Minority Floor Leader.
In the Senate, Senator Randy Richardville (Frenchtown Twp) was chosen by incoming Republican senators as Majority Leader and Senator-Elect Arlan Meekhof (West Olive) as Majority Floor Leader. The Senate Minority caucus chose Senator Gretchen Whitmer (East Lansing) as Minority Leader and Senator Tupac Hunter (Detroit) as Minority Floor Leader.
Regarding committees, it appears that Senator Roger Kahn (R-Saginaw) will chair the Senate Appropriations Committee and Senator-elect Phil Pavlov (R-St. Clair Twp.) will chair the Senate Education Committee.
Election OverviewRepublican candidate Rick Snyder was overwhelmingly
Continued on page 12
12 Winter 2010
Legislative Update – cont. from page 11
victorious in the race for governor. In his victory speech he stressed the need for a bi-partisan agenda in Michigan. Republican Secretary of State, Ruth Johnson, and Republican Attorney General, Bill Schuette, both won their seats.
Republicans captured the State House by picking up 20 seats to give them a 63-47 majority. Nine Democratic incumbents were defeated, and Republicans also won all but two of the open seats that were considered “in play.” This historic victory for Republicans also gave them the largest margin of Senate control in 64 years (26-12) and the biggest gain of seats in a single election in 28 years.Republicans now hold a super-majority in the State Senate. Continuing a span of control of the Senate that is nearing three decades, Republicans now control that chamber 26-12. Although no incumbent senator lost his or her seat, most incumbents’ seats (29 of the 38 seats) were open due to term limits.
The Supreme Court now has a majority of Republican nominated justices. Two key seats were won by GOP candidates- incumbent Justice Robert Young Jr. and Judge Mary Beth Kelly. As a pair, they beat out incumbent Justice Alton Thomas Davis, appointed by Granholm in August.
Department of Ed May Be Hit By Staff ReductionThe deadline has now passed for state employees to accept their early retirement deal. 44% more state workers took the state retirement deal than expected, including a whopping 1306 from DHS, 565 from Community Health, and 439 from Corrections; the state is expecting to save $60 million, and we should all expect more time on hold. The Michigan Department of Education has already indicated that a shrinking budget and workforce may result in less technical assistance to school districts and inability to apply for any more grants.
Spotlight - Meet Heather Lackey – cont. from page 4
read the notes aloud at the end of the week. Students who were typically ignored felt seen and appreciated, and “popular” students gained a better appreciation of everyone in their class. The third graders eventually completed a video that can be seen at lackeypsych.weebly.com and was presented to the entire school body.
What do you find helpful as a member of MASP?I appreciate the thought that is put into finding meaningful presentations at the MASP conferences. The Psych Report is also a nice snapshot of critical issues in the field.
Tell us a little bit about you personally and what you enjoy in your free time.Last fall, I began a graduate program through Grand Valley State University to obtain my administrator endorsement for Supervisor of Special Education, and I am finishing my coursework this semester. In my free time, I like cuddling up on the couch with my husband, my dog, and a good
movie. I enjoy reading fiction and have started teaching myself how to play the piano. Any words of wisdom for new people coming into the field?
“Opportunity is missed by most people because it is dressed in overalls and looks like work.”
Thomas Edison
Don’t hesitate to get into the classroom and get your hands dirty. Offer to help out in classrooms without anything “psychological” in mind. By demonstrating that you are someone that wants to help and not just consult on the sidelines, you are establishing your place in the system. I was reassigned from one building this school year. My biggest compliment came from a general education teacher who said she was going to miss me and the help I offered teachers. That respect took time and meant work on my part to get into the classrooms and really get a feel for classroom demands.
Is there an important event happening in your region of the state? A training seminar? Conference? Meeting? Let our members know! Submit your calendar item to
Donna Sprague at [email protected]
13Winter 2010
Executive Functions and Classroom Learning and ProductionSummary by Todd Dollar
George McCloskey, Ph.D. delivered a presentation titled Executive Functions and Classroom Learning and Production. He described executive functions as: (1) directive capacities of the mind; (2) multiple in nature, not a single capacity; (3) a cue to the other mental abilities; (4) direct and control perceptions, thoughts, actions, and to some degree emotions; and (5) part of neural circuits that are routed through the frontal lobes. He stated that the concept of executive function is not synonymous with traditional concepts of intelligence or IQ and are not directly assessed with intelligence tests. Further, executive functions are not a unitary trait. Others have used metaphors to explain executive functions as the “CEO of the Brain” or the “Conductor of the Orchestra.” He posits, rather, that executive functions should be thought of as “a team of conductors and co-conductors of a mental ability orchestra” or “the coaching staff of a mental ability football team.”
Executive functions are used to guide cognitive processing involved in new learning and are also required for demonstrating what has been learned. Differences, delays, and deficiencies in executive functioning may be especially salient during educational transitions such as preschool to kindergarten, kindergarten to first grade, middle school to high school, or high school to college. Moreover, students’ executive functions do not develop evenly, and there is a good deal of variation between individuals. This uneven and variant development can often have an impact on learning—especially in the areas of written expression and reading as well as math.
Citing Martha Denckla, M.D, Dr. McCloskey posited that severe executive functioning difficulties do not result in “learning disabilities”; rather, they result in “producing disabilities.” He presented Denckla’s General Model for Conceptualizing Learning and Producing Difficulties which posits that learning difficulties by themselves are not often recognized as a Learning Disability (LD) unless an evaluation involving processing is conducted (e.g., learning difficulties due to deficits in basic mental processes). Producing difficulties (e.g., students’ lack of producing work) by themselves, even when severe, are usually thought of as a lack of motivation, character flaws, or behavioral and/or personality problems. But when learning and producing difficulties occur together, these students are usually identified as a LD.
For classroom instruction, stating clear goals is important to free up executive functioning. By not overloading executive functioning capacities of students, they are better able to engage the thoughts, perceptions, emotions, and/or actions required to achieve a given goal. In the elementary years, teachers serve as students’ frontal lobes. Modeling good
executive functioning helps children see how they can self-regulate their own thoughts, perceptions, emotions, and/or actions. From elementary through graduate school, effective teachers provide executive function prompts and model good executive function use. Providing feedback is one example. Feedback enables students to engage executive capacities more effectively to learn from their mistakes and improve subsequent performance.
For problem behaviors, a functional behavior assessment (FBA) is typically employed. However, Dr. McCloskey postulated that the same antecedent does not trigger the same undesirable behaviors in all students in the same situation. FBAs ignore internal considerations such as perceptions, emotions, and cognitions and focus on external control to change behavior. An executive function-driven FBA considers the executive functions between the antecedents and behavioral response to the antecedents. Being cognizant of executive functioning, problems can be clearly defined in terms of perceptions, emotions, thoughts or actions, and effective interventions can be implemented. Using this approach facilitates understanding of the nature of the problem for the parents, teachers, and student. Dr. McCloskey suggests that the source of the problem is most likely a result of a less than optimal nonconscious brain function rather than a conscious choice to act.
The key to successful intervention for executive function difficulties is the proper framing of the problem. First, do not attribute the executive functioning problem to negative characteristics such as irresponsibility, lack of motivation, apathy, passive aggressiveness, or oppositional defiance. Rather, state the problem in clear behavioral terms that indicate a behavior that can be changed while taking into account the executive function processes. Identify how to help the student facilitate behavioral change from positive to negative. Finally, rewards should be used with caution. Rewards do not teach students how to reflect on and alter the behavior. Rather, they reward the presence of the desired behavior.
This was a detailed presentation, full of information and ideas. This summary is just a sample of what Dr. McCloskey covered. For additional information, see some of the following readings:
Bodrova, E., & Leong, D. J., (2007). Tools of the mind: The Vygotskian approach to early childhood education (2nd ed). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Bronson, P., & Merryman, A. (2009). Nurture shock: New thinking about children. New York, NY: Twelve Hachette Group. McCloskey, G. (2010). Essentials of executive function assessment. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.McCloskey, G., Perkins, L. A., & Van Diver, B. (2009). Assessment and intervention for executive function difficulties: School-based practice in action. New York, NY: Routledge.
14 Winter 2010
The Neuropsychology of Math Disorders: Diagnosis and InterventionBy: Sara Leggett
Dr. Steven Feifer is a practicing school psychologist in Frederick County Public Schools in Washington D.C who utilizes a neuropsychological perspective in practice. Through a presentation of international mathematical trends, common mathematical myths, mathematical language comparisons, salient features of executive functioning, neural coding, and mathematical disorders and interventions, Dr. Feifer represented a neuropsychological perspective on math disorders and their linked interventions.
Mathematical TrendsIn a test administered by the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) in 2006, the direct application of mathematical principles was measured. Dr. Feifer stated that U.S. students were actually outperformed by 31 countries in math and 22 countries in science. In 2006, the average U.S. score in mathematics literacy was 474, while the international average was a score of 498. Interestingly, the U.S. mathematics literacy scores did not significantly change from 2003 to 2006 which Dr. Feifer explained with four possible reasons for this discrepancy: 1) building number connections around a base-10 principle is critical in the development of mathematical efficiency when problem solving, 2) mathematical skill building needs to be fun and should be presented in the format of games and activities, 3) students should practice multiple methods of problem solving from a visual-spatial and verbal approach, and 4) most elementary math instruction occurs in the afternoon, which is when students are least alert and attentive, and often, instruction is limited to only 45 minutes per day. Many of these facts are not typically incorporated into the mathematical curriculum in the U.S. or to practice in the schools.
Mathematical MythsDr. Feifer also presented common fallacies associated with math in order to help professionals overcome common pitfalls when working with students who have mathematical difficulties: 1) Math abilities are strictly a by-product of IQ and formal education, 2) math is solely a right hemispheric task, 3) boys outperform girls in math, and 4) math is independent of language. In reality, numeric abilities are evident in most animals (Lakoff & Nunez, 2000) and numeric abilities in babies include the ability to discriminate up to four objects the first week of life (Antell & Keating, 1983), both of which contrast with the notion that math abilities result from IQ and formal education. Dr. Feifer went on to note that there is no evidence at the elementary level that boys outperform girls in math and that the gaps between the two at the high school level is quite small (NAEP, 2000).
The Language of Math, Features of Executive Functioning, and Mathematical Disorders & InterventionsDr. Feifer made three key points about the language of math: 1) Mathematics is a verbally encoded skill for younger children, 2) most European derived languages such as English or French are not founded around a base-10 number
system, and 3) children who demonstrated a math disability often had delays in their overall language development skills as well. An interesting international comparison can be made between the United States and Asian countries when the differences between each country’s languages are explored. For example, most Asian languages have linguistic counting systems past ten (e.g., ten-one, ten-two, etc) whereas the English language deviates from this base-10 system and often has confusing language (e.g., we say “twenty-one” but we also say “fifteen”).
Dr. Feifer spoke about three subtypes of mathematics disabilities: verbal dyscalculia, procedural dyscalculia, and semantic dyscalculia. Verbal dyscalculia can occur when there is a deficit in counting, rapid number identification, retrieval of stored facts, addition and multiplication facts, and possibly co-existing reading and writing difficulties. Interventions for this type of disorder include distinguishing between reciting number words and counting, developing a base-ten counting strategies and reinforcing the language of math by re-teaching quantitative words (e.g., more, less, equal, etc). Procedural dyscalculia can occur when there is a deficit in writing numbers from dictation, lining up math problems, math computational procedures, syntactical rules of problem solving, and in the division and regrouping procedures in subtraction. Interventions for procedural subtypes include freedom from anxiety in class settings, talking aloud all regrouping strategies, using graph paper to line up equations, attaching number-line to desk, and providing manipulatives. Finally, Semantic Dyscalculia can occur when there are deficits in magnitude representations, transcoding math operations, higher level math proofs, conceptual understandings of math, and estimation skills. Interventions for semantic subtypes include teaching students to think in “pictures” as well as in “words,” reinforcing basic pattern recognition skills by sorting objects by size and shape, and having students write math sentences from verbal sentences.
In summary, Dr. Feifer’s presentation on the neuropsychology of mathematics highlighted the importance for school psychologists to understand the interrelated processes that produce mathematical skills, the links between mathematical disorders and executive functioning, the importance of systems level expectations for mathematical curriculums, and the possible applications of this knowledge to mathematical interventions. Dr. Feifer’s presentation was filled with information about mathematics interventions, assessments, within student characteristics, and links between neuropsychological theory and practice. This is important information for school psychologists to be aware of when collecting data to determine students’ current skills and instructional needs and then in implementing the interventions deemed necessary by the data. Dr. Feifer recommended many references, including some of his own materials. He can be reached at [email protected].
15Winter 2010
Summary of Kathleen Minke’s Presentation MASP 2010Megan Marshall, Jennifer Hickox & Carmon Bens
Kathleen Minke, Ph.D., current NASP president, gave the general session presentation on Tuesday morning at the Fall 2010 MASP Annual Conference. Dr. Minke’s presentation, titled Family-School Collaboration: Building Positive Parent-Teacher Relationships at the School-wide Level, focused on incorporating family-school collaboration into school-wide plans. Dr. Minke overviewed strategies for teaching systems concepts and encouraging a positive approach to working with families. She discussed the communication strategies that teachers can use to support development of good working relationships with families, and school-wide strategies that make a school more “family friendly.” The heart of her presentation was the CORE model of collaboration. This model involves thinking differently, talking differently and overall, behaving differently in order to create a more Connected, Optimistic, Respected, and Empowered feeling between the families and members of the school team.
Dr. Minke highlighted the importance of family-school relationships, citing research supporting the critical role of families in “children’s academic, social, and emotional development.” She explained the essential need to have collaboration, which results in a cooperative and balanced relationship between parents, educators, and students. Going beyond just parent involvement, family-school collaboration incorporates a transactional approach where families and educators work together toward a shared goal. The collaboration also involves a multiple expertise approach, where everyone involved has important information to share, and lastly, an individualized approach. This approach focuses on the unique experiences of every child and tailoring an intervention to the uniqueness of the child.
Within the CORE model of collaboration, “thinking differently” refers to viewing the system as a whole--as educators there are multiple perspectives from which to view the same situation, and each perspective leads to different alternatives in the search for solutions. “Talking differently” consists of seven communication strategies that help increase the chances that you understand what the other person is saying, and that he or she understands you. Also essential to this model, “behaving differently” focuses on using proactive outreach strategies in order to gain information from families and build positive relationships. This approach may involve changing the way that parent-teacher conferences are conducted. Parent-teacher conferences are conducted so the parent and the teacher can collaborate in order to support the student’s continued success. It is important to identify the roles that each party has in the student’s life and how those roles impact the student’s future. Dr. Minke highlighted some helpful suggestions on how changing the ways that
the conferences are conducted can help to achieve these goals more efficiently. It is important for all parties to prepare for the conference in advance. Additionally, the student should be involved as an active participant and, the teacher should acknowledge the family’s strengths and concentrate on receiving information from the family instead of giving the information. These strategies create more of a conversational atmosphere and help students to gain ownership over their learning. Each participant has the opportunity to be both the teacher and the learner. Throughout the presentation, Dr. Minke emphasized relationship building activities and the importance of written communication, which encourages and facilitates continuous parental involvement. Relationship building activities can include anything from a start of the year questionnaire and newsletters to orientations and workshops. Written communication should be specific and “non-institutional.” Concerns should be communicated early and directly, for example, email messages and notes home should be avoided when communicating about problems.” It is essential for teachers and parents to realize that written communication often can send the wrong message when not conveyed properly.
In summary, positive relationships between students, educators, and parents are an essential part of the school process. As educators there will always be barriers to overcome. In an effort to improve school-family collaborations, school psychologists are in an ideal position to share this knowledge with colleagues. They have the training and knowledge to communicate, and implement, positive changes in a way that will benefit the school, students, families and community as a whole. Dr. Minke’s presentation was engaging and complete with numerous activities that participants could implement within their respective schools. She had the entire room captivated, and humor at times with jokes and examples from her experiences in the field. For more information regarding this presentation, Dr. Minke can be contacted at the University of Delaware by email at [email protected].
2205 Kewaunee Dr., Traverse City, MI 49686 www.maspweb.com
Editor’s Note…The Michigan Psych Report is published during the Fall, Winter, and Spring as the official newsletter of the Michigan Association of School Psychologists.
Items for publication will be considered on the basis of general interest to the membership, relevance to the practice of school psychology, and significance of the subject matter. The editor reserves the right to alter submissions to conform to space and format requirements, and to improve clarity.
The opinions expressed in articles, letters, and editorials are not necessarily the views of the Michigan Association of School Psychologists.
Permission is granted to other school psychology associations to reprint articles, so long as the author and source are acknowledged.
Submit articles, comments and corrections by email attachment to: Donna Sprague – [email protected]
MASP Calendar of Events:
February 15, 2011 Nominations for Election Ballot Deadline for Postmark
February 28, 2011 Spring 2011 Michigan Psych Report Deadline for Submissions
March 17, 2011 Board of Directors Meeting Lansing, MI
March 18, 2011 Critical Issues Conference Lansing, MI
October 15-16, 2011 Board of Directors Meeting Grand Rapids, MI
October 16-18, 2011 Fall Conference Grand Rapids, MI
Volunteer Opportunity!
The Michigan Psych Report is looking for one or more photographers who would be willing to take photos of speakers and people attending the Fall and Critical Issues conferences. If you are interested, please email Donna Sprague at [email protected].
