president’s podium 2014-2015 - uasp · uasp.sparespace.com . october 2014 page 2 the observer...
TRANSCRIPT
From the Utah State Office of Education ………... 3
Specific Learning Disabilities: Identification Methods Among Utah School Psychologists …...
5
School Psychology Awareness Week ……………... 9
Introducing Aaron Fischer, PhD …………………. 11
School Psychology Students in Uganda ………….. 13
Thoughts from My Summer Break: Searching for Educational Excellence in Helsinki, Finland ………………………………..
14
ISPA Conference 2014 ……………………………. 18
NASP’s Western Regional Meeting ……………… 19
A Few Interesting Facts about the UASP Board ... 21
Greetings members of the Utah Association of School Psychologists, I sincerely hope everyone’s year is off to a great start! As with any school year, there is a great deal of change and adaptation to new job roles, new district or school expectations, and new individual areas of focus. I hope you are all finding ways to navigate these changes and adaptations without too much added stress. I would like to share some of the areas the board of trustees will be focusing on this year that may help you in your current roles professionally and also encourage your involvement in some of the activities the UASP board of trustees is pursuing. Last year the UASP board endorsed the National Association of School Psychologist’s (NASP) practice model. I encourage you to become familiar with it as you are identifying areas of personal focus and areas of strength or possible areas for improvement. I know I have used it to help identify priorities and areas of improvement personally. This is a link to the NASP website with the practice model and related information: http://www.nasponline.org/standards/practice-model/. As another continuation of the efforts begun last year, we are trying to increase membership involvement. We would not only like to include more members from areas outside of the Wasatch front, but we would like to encourage more active participation of all members. I strongly encourage you to look at the list of trustees and find someone you know or someone on a committee you are interested in and reach out to them to get involved. You do not need to be on the board of trustees to be actively involved in UASP. We are also currently looking for people interested in serving as district representatives. If you are interested, contact your district coordinator or someone on the board of trustees. We have many exciting events sponsored by UASP this year, including the annual conference. Sarah Ward will be the speaker and she will be sharing valuable information about executive functioning, how it affects children, and interventions for children with deficits in this area. In addition to the annual conference, we will have two member service afternoon conferences later in the year. We will also be volunteering at a food bank in December and would love to have as many of you there as we can. There are many exciting activities to be involved with and I hope to see all of you at some or all of them!
A Publication of the Utah Association of School Psychologists October 2014 · Volume 30 · Number 1
president’s podium
Julia Hood UASP President
2014-2015
uasp.sparespace.com
October 2014 Page 2
THE OBSERVER
Editor Ellie Young
Assistant Editor Kim Lowe
Contributors Ann-Michelle Argyle Courtenay A. Barrett Joseph M. Cottrell Aaron Fischer Devin Healey Kim Lowe Rob Richardson Sara Susov Rachel Traynor Becky Washburn
Editing/design/layout Matt C. Keener [email protected]
Carrie A. Beach [email protected]
Next Issue of THE OBSERVER March 2015 Submissions due Feb. 15, 2015
THE OBSERVER editorial board invites articles, letters and other items of interest. The editor reserves the right to edit articles. Please include name, address and phone number with submission. Unsigned letters or articles will not be published.
The Observer suffers without submissions from our readership. Seize the opportunity, write and submit.
Membership Dues: $50 for regular members $50 for associate members $15 for students $25 for retired
Utah Association of School Psychologists (UASP) 2014-2015
UASP Executive Committee
President Julia Hood [email protected]
Past President Devin Healey [email protected]
President Elect Rob Richardson [email protected]
Treasurer Lane Valum [email protected]
Recording Secretary Sara Susov [email protected]
Corresponding Secretary
Lora Tuesday Heathfield [email protected]
UASP Board Trustees Term ending
June 30, 2015 Courtenay Barrett, Heidi Block, Julie Daye, Donna Gilbertson, Elizabeth MacDougall, Laura Miller, Bethanie Monsen-Ford
Term ending June 30, 2016
Sean Cunningham, Brittani Howard, Holly Majszak, Linda Phosaly, Virginia Ramos, Ben Springer, Ellie Young
NASP Roles NASP Delegate Fulvia Franco [email protected]
SPAN Coordinator Dan Olympia [email protected]
UASP Committees & Chairs Awards Devin Healey [email protected]
Charitable Contributions
Fulvia Franco & Lane Valum
Conference Julie Daye [email protected]
Credentialing Task Force
Dan Olympia [email protected]
Legislative Lane Valum [email protected]
Membership Lora Tuesday Heathfield [email protected]
Multicultural Affairs
Laura Miller [email protected]
Nominating Rob Richardson [email protected]
Professional Standards
Rob Richardson [email protected]
Public Relations TBA
Publications Ellie L. Young & Kim Lowe
SLD Task Force Fulvia Franco [email protected]
Technology Heidi Block [email protected]
UASP Historian Rob Richardson [email protected]
Web Manager Heidi Block & Kim Lowe
FROM THE UTAH STATE OFFICE OF EDUCATION By Ann-Michelle Argyle and Devin Healey
As school psychologists well know, multi-tiered system of supports (MTSS) is favored in the research and practice literature and considered evidence-based best practice for addressing student’s academic and behavioral needs (National Center on Response to Intervention, 2010). Leadership and implementation fidelity are critical components of successfully implementing tiered prevention and intervention models, and school psychologists have a unique skill set which allows them to fulfill critical roles on school and district teams. Our knowledge of assessment, data-based problem solving, and evidence-based intervention make us key individuals in implementation and systems change. At all levels (classroom, school, and systems) we serve as leaders in implementation, provide consultation, and have access to research and resources that inform MTSS practices.
MTSS is defined as a framework for integrating assessment and intervention to maximize student achievement, reduce behavior problems, and increase long-term success (NCRI, 2010). Many are familiar with the concept of Response to Intervention (RTI), but for many the relationship between RTI and MTSS is unclear. While RTI has been an effective model that has been used broadly, in the last several years many have inaccurately interpreted RTI as a special education focused model. This is likely due to the use of RTI language in the Reauthorization of IDEA (2004). MTSS includes the practices and principles of RTI but emphasizes the role of general educators, general education students, and the idea that intervention takes place in the general education setting. MTSS also includes positive behavior interventions and supports creating a comprehensive model for supporting students in academic and behavioral success.
Utah Multi-Tiered System of Supports (UMTSS) is a state-level project that provides varying levels of support to local school districts and educators across Utah. Universal supports include an annual conference held in June, online courses, and a website that includes information, tools, and resources. This website can be found at: www.schools.utah.gov/umtss. Targeted supports include professional development and consultation with LEAs. Intensive supports include funding support and intensive coaching provided to LEAs.
In February 2014, UMTSS, funded by the State Personnel Development Grant (SPDG), began the shift to the Utah State Office of Education (USOE). The vision for incorporating UMTSS formally into the state office was intended to increase collaboration, visibility, and alignment of initiatives. UMTSS staff are located in Teaching and Learning, Federal Programs, and Special Education departments and work collaboratively within and across departments to influence others in their understanding and use of MTSS principles as well as to learn from them how to improve our own knowledge and information. The UMTSS efforts are guided by a State Leadership Team that includes representation from Teaching and Learning, Federal Programs, Special Education, Assessment, Charter Schools, Career and Technical Education, and Counseling.
(see USOE on page 4)
October 2014 Page 3
THE OBSERVER Official Newsletter of the Utah Association of School Psychologists
The opinions and products, including advertising, class/workshop notices, and job announcements, appearing in this newsletter do not necessarily indicate official sanctioning, promotion, or endorsement on the part the newsletter or the Utah Association of School Psychologists. Articles, announcements, and letters should be submitted to Ellie Young, Editor at [email protected].
Check out the new UASP website: http://uasp.squarespace.com/
Many thanks to Kim Lowe and Sean Cunningham for their work on this major project!
(USOE, continued from page 3)
A notable shift that has taken place as UMTSS has become part of USOE. MTSS principles are increasingly being infused into the efforts across state departments. USOE leadership and staff are convening and collaborating to use MTSS as a framework for various types of supports for all students in the state. Aligning initiatives at the state level is not a small task. Breaking down the proverbial “silos” in education is often discussed, but the action required to make this happens lies in the nebulous realm of systems reform. The climate for Utah educators is currently one of change. The adoption of Utah Core State Standards, SAGE, WIDA standards, and requirements for special education are just a few of the shifts in practice that educators are trying to navigate. While UMTSS could be seen as “one more initiative,” the principle of alignment emphasizes combining and collaborating across initiatives to increase efficiency and impact.
The NASP practice model provides a useful working definition for “alignment” by emphasizing the importance of using existing resources widely and effectively. Conceptualizing education practices within a multi-tier framework refines good practice, systematizes decision making, and more effectively meets the needs of all students. In addition, the NASP practice model aligns with the critical components of UMTSS, demonstrating the value of school psychologists as leaders in MTSS implementation.
This alignment between the practice model and MTSS underscores the way in which school psychologists serve a vital role in these practices. School psychologists can support teams in meaningful problem solving utilizing data at the pre-referral level in addition to being critical team members of a special education team. We can consult with general educators to help them in their implementation of evidence-based instruction and intervention practices for behavior and academics and monitor the fidelity and outcomes of those practices. We can also be influential in systems change by participating in leadership teams at the school, district, and state level.
The USOE will continue to provide support to LEAs and educators in their efforts of supporting all students using an MTSS model. The promising advances in collaboration and alignment that have taken place at USOE and we look forward to the positive impact this will have for educators and students. School psychologists will continue to lead out in implementation efforts across the state because they are equipped with the expertise and skills to create meaningful systems change.
October 2014 Page 4
SPECIFIC LEARNING DISABILITIES: IDENTIFICATION METHODS AMONG UTAH SCHOOL PSYCHOLOGISTS
By Joseph M. Cottrell & Courtenay A. Barrett, Utah State University
The authors would like to thank the Utah Multi-Tiered System of Supports for funding this study through the UMTSS Research and IHE Collaboration Grant.
Students with Specific Learning Disabilities (SLDs) comprise the largest segment of students receiving special education services. In the U.S., over 6.5 million students (ages 3-21) receive special education services with roughly 2.5 million of these students (about 40% of all students in special education) being identified as having a SLD (Data Accountability Center, 2012). The state of Utah has a slightly higher percentage of students receiving services under the category of SLD (42.4%; n = 31,970) than the national average (Utah State Office of Education, 2013). Background IDEA (2004) is the evaluation system that governs how states (i.e., state education agencies, SEAs) and public agencies (e.g., schools or local education agencies, LEAs) provide early intervention, special education, and related services to children, adolescents, and adults (ages 3-21) who are part of America’s school system (Küpper & Rebhorn, 2007). Currently, SEAs may implement any of the following methods to identify SLDs: the IQ-Achievement discrepancy method (Ab-Ach), response to intervention method (RtI), or alternative research based procedures (e.g., the evaluation of a student’s pattern of strengths and weaknesses; PSW). IDEA (2004) does not outline a definitive measure or tool that is to be used for SLD identification. In fact, SEAs may choose which method(s) LEAs may implement as long as the measures are deemed appropriate by IDEA guidelines. Subsequently, there is inconsistent measurement of SLDs across the U.S. (Zirkel & Thomas, 2010), where students may be identified as having a SLD in one state but not another. Even within states, districts or LEAs may adapt varying methods for SLD identification based on research and local norms happening within the district (Haight, Patriarca, & Burns, 2002). Utah currently allows districts/schools to use Ab-Ach, RtI, or a combination of the two methods to evaluate students for special education services under the category of SLD (Utah State Office of Education, 2014). In the school context, the school psychologist is one of the main participants in a multidisciplinary school-based team that identifies students as having disabilities (including SLDs) and is legally “qualified to conduct
individual diagnostic examinations of children” (Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1221e-3; 1414(b)(6); IDEIA, 2004). In fact, school psychologists are estimated to spend more than half their time in special education decision making; therefore, identification plays a large and important part of the school psychologist’s role (Castillo, Curtis, & Gelley, 2012). The current study has three objectives: (1) to determine Utah school psychologists’ preferences for SLD identification; (2) to understand how Utah school psychologists identify SLDs in practice; and (3) to document school guidelines for SLD identification reported by Utah school psychologists.
Method Participants Survey methodology was used to fulfill the research objectives. In order to participate, respondents must have met the following criteria: (1) currently practicing as a school psychologist at the time of the survey (e.g., not retired or in graduate school practicum), (2) worked full-time in the school setting (public or private, including parochial and charter schools), (3) had at least a Master’s degree (as this is commonly the entry-level degree for school psychology), and (4) formally trained as a school psychologist (e.g., not as a special educator or behavior analyst). Respondents who did not meet the criteria were thanked for their time and exited from the survey. Procedure The current study was approved by the Utah State University Institutional Review Board in fall 2013. A school district representative that was likely to oversee school psychologists (e.g., school psychologist supervisor or special education director) from each Utah school district, charter school, and parochial school was contacted via email and invited to allow their school psychologists to participate in a survey regarding the SLD construct. Five randomly chosen participants received a $100 visa gift card as an incentive, provided
(see SLD on page 6)
October 2014 Page 5
(SLD, continued from page 5) by the Utah Multi-Tiered System of Supports Research and IHE Collaboration Grant. Instrumentation The survey included informed consent and questions regarding inclusionary criteria and demographics of the respondent. The remainder of the survey included 30 items assessing (a) preferred SLD identification practices, (b) school guidelines, and (c) current practices. For items assessing school guidelines, respondents were given the option to choose Unclear as to what my school guidelines require.
Findings A total of 79 individuals accessed the questionnaire, with 69 Utah school psychologists meeting inclusionary criteria. The majority of participants were female (n= 39; 56.5%), White (n= 62; 89.9%), and held master’s or specialist degrees (n= 58; 84%).
Ab-Ach Methods About 60% of respondents (n = 38) reported a preference for Ab-Ach most of the time or always for SLD identification (see Table 1). There was great variability among participants regarding their preference for operationalizing the discrepancy between cognitive and achievement scores in the Ab-Ach method (see Table 2). A greater number of respondents (n = 56) reported actually using Ab-Ach most of the time or always (see Table 1). Again, there was great variability among participants regarding their operationalization of the Ab-Ach method (see Table 2). Fifty-nine respondents reported their schools required or allowed (with support) Ab-Ach (see Table 1). There was great variability among participants regarding their schools’ operationalization of the Ab-Ach method; with 19 (33.9%) participants indicating they were unclear about their schools guidelines in this area (see Table 2).
(see SLD on page 7) Table 1. Ab-Ach methods: Preferred practices, actual practices,
and reported school guidelines % (n) Preferred
(N = 63) Actual
(N = 61) School Guidelines
(N = 63)
Never use/School does not require 12.7 (8) 3.3 (2) 4.8 (3)
Rarely use/School allows but does not support 27 (17) 4.9 (3) 0 (0)
Use most of the time/School allows and does support
49.2 (31) 29.5 (18) 27 (17)
Always use/School requires 11.1 (7) 62.3 (38) 66.7 (42)
Unclear as to what my guidelines require N/A N/A 1.6 (1)
Missing Data 6 8 6 Note. Percentages represent valid percentages and may not add up to 100% due to rounding. For items about preferred and actual SLD identification methods, respondents answered on a Likert scale from “never use” to “always use.” For items about school guidelines, respondents answered on a likert scale from “school does not require” to “school requires.”
Table 2. Operationalization of Ab-Ach methods: Preferred practices, actual practices, and reported school guidelines % (n)
Preferred (N = 54)
Actual (N = 52)
School Guidelines (N = 56)
1 SD or 15 points 37 (20) 23.1 (12) 16.1 (9)
1.33 SDs or 20 points 33.3 (18) 30.8 (16) 12.5 (7)
≥ 1.5 SDs or 22.5 points 29.6 (16) 46.2 (24) 37.5 (21)
Unclear as to what my guidelines require N/A N/A 33.9 (19)
Missing Data 15 17 13 Note. Percentages represent valid percentages and may not add up to 100% due to rounding. SD = standard deviation.
October 2014 Page 6
(SLD, continued from page 6) Response to Intervention Methods About 90% of respondents (n = 59) preferred to use RtI for SLD identification most of the time or always (see Table 3). When asked to operationalize the RtI method for SLD identification, the greatest number of Utah school psychologists (n = 34) reported they would prefer to deliver three different interventions before classifying the student as non-responsive. The greatest number of Utah school psychologists (n = 32) indicated they would prefer to allow a student 4-5 weeks to respond to one intervention before classifying the student as non-responsive to that intervention. Please see Table 4 for other results regarding how Utah school psychologists’
prefer to operationalize RtI practices for SLD identification. Fewer respondents (n = 29) reported actually using RtI most of the time or always (see Table 3). The greatest number of Utah school psychologists (n = 31) reported they actually deliver two different interventions before classifying the student as non-responsive. The greatest number of Utah school psychologists (n = 27) indicated they actually allow a student 2-3 weeks to respond to one intervention before classifying the student as non-responsive to that intervention. Please see Table 4 for other results regarding Utah school psychologists actual RtI practices. (see SLD on page 8)
Table 3. RtI methods: Preferred practices, actual practices, and reported school guidelines % (n)
Preferred (N = 65)
Actual (N = 63)
School Guidelines (N = 63)
Never use/School does not require 9.2 (6) 19 (12) 19 (12)
Rarely use/School allows but does not support 0 (0) 34.9 (22) 11.1 (7)
Use most of the time/School allows and does support 69.2 (45) 36.5 (23) 46 (29)
Always use/School requires 21.5 (14) 9.5 (6) 17.5 (11)
Unclear as to what my guidelines require N/A N/A 6.3 (4)
Missing Data 4 6 6 Note. Percentages represent valid percentages and may not add up to 100% due to rounding. For items about preferred and actual SLD identification methods, respondents answered on a Likert scale from “never use” to “always use.” For items about school guidelines, respondents answered on a likert scale from “school does not require” to “school requires.”
Table 4. Operationalization of RtI: Preferred practices, actual practices,
and reported school guidelines % (n) Match intervention to students
presenting problem Collect fidelity data to ensure intervention
was implemented with integrity
Preferred (N = 65)
Actual
(N = 51)
School Guidelines (N = 47)
Preferred (N = 65)
Actual
(N = 51)
School Guidelines (N = 47)
Never use/School does not require
0 (0) 2 (1) 2.1 (1) 0 (0) 17.6 (9) 21.3 (10)
Rarely use/School allows but does not support
0 (0) 21.6 (11) 10.6 (5) 0 (0) 41.2 (21) 19.1 (9)
Use most of the time/School allows and does support
30.8 (20) 37.3 (19) 27.7 (13) 27.7 (18) 31.4 (16) 34 (16)
Always use/School requires 69.2 (45) 39.2 (20) 53.2 (25) 72.3 (47) 9.8 (5) 17 (8)
Unclear as to what my guidelines require
N/A N/A 6.4 (3) N/A N/A 8.5 (4)
Missing Data 4 18 22 4 18 22 Note. Percentages represent valid percentages and may not add up to 100% due to rounding. For items about preferred and actual SLD identification methods, respondents answered on a Likert scale from “never use” to “always use.” For items about school guidelines, respondents answered on a likert scale from “school does not require” to “school requires.”
October 2014 Page 7
(SLD, continued from page 7) Forty respondents reported their schools require or allow (with support) RtI (see Table 3). The greatest number of Utah school psychologists (n = 29) reported their school requires them to deliver two different interventions before classifying the student as non-responsive. The greatest number of Utah school psychologists (n = 24) indicated their school requires 2-3 weeks to respond to one intervention before classifying the student as non-responsive to that intervention. Please see Table 4 for other results regarding Utah school RtI practice guidelines.
Conclusion School guidelines and actual practices within Utah appear to emphasize Ab-Ach for SLD decision making, despite trends in the field towards RtI (Reschly, 2008). Results indicated that although Utah school psychologists’ may have a greater preference for RtI methods for SLD identification they are required and are currently using Ab-Ach to a greater extent. Within RtI methods, results show that Utah school psychologists would prefer to collect fidelity data to ensure that their interventions are conducted with integrity but school guidelines and actual practices may not match this preference. Also, Utah school psychologists report they would prefer to provide more interventions (i.e., 3 interventions) and allow a longer period of time (i.e., 4-5 weeks) before classifying a student as non-responsive. However, Utah school psychologists reported they are required and actually provide fewer interventions (i.e., 2 interventions) and allow a shorter period of time (i.e., 2-3 weeks) before classifying a student as non-responsive. Many participants reported being unclear about how their schools operationalize the discrepancy between cognitive and achievement scores. In general, there was great variability in regards to how participants prefer to define a discrepancy between cognitive and achievement scores (i.e., 1 SD, 1.33 SDs, or ≥ 1.5 SDs), how school districts operationalize the discrepancy between cognitive and achievement scores, and how school psychologists actually define a discrepancy between cognitive and achievement scores. It is variability and inconsistencies like these that may contribute to inconsistencies in classification of SLDs between districts and states (Haight, Patriarca, & Burns, 2002; Zirkel & Thomas, 2010) In conclusion, this study was one of the first to document the current status of Utah SLD identification
practices. Results indicated discrepancies between Utah school psychologists’ preferences for SLD identification (i.e., RtI) and actual practices for SLD identification (i.e., Ab-Ach). This discrepancy may be due, in part, to school guidelines requiring Ab-Ach methods more than RtI methods. Utah school psychologists’ preferences mirror trends toward using RtI for SLD identification (Reschly, 2008) despite school guidelines. References Castillo, J. M., Curtis, M. J., & Gelley, C. (2012). School psychology 2010 part 2: School psychologists’ professional practices and implications for the field. Communique, 40, 4-6. Retrieved from http://www.apa.org/pi/oema/resources/communique/ Data Accountability Center, Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) Data. (2012). Data Table for OSEP State Reported
Data. Retrieved from https://www.ideadata.org/ arc_toc13.asp#partbCC Fuchs, S. L. & Fuchs, D. (1998). Treatment validity: A unifying concept for reconceptualizing the identification of learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 13, 204-219. Retrieved from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/ journal/10.1111/(ISSN)1540-5826 Fuchs, D., Mock, D., Morgan, P., & Young, C. (2003). Responsiveness to intervention: Definitions, evidence, and implications for the learning disabilities construct. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 18, 157-171. Retrieved from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/(ISSN)1540-5826 Haight, S. L., Patriarca, L. A., & Burns, M. K. (2002). A statewide analysis of eligibility criteria and procedures for determining learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 11, 39-46. Retrieved from http://www.ldanatl.org/ journal.asp Individuals With Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004, 20 U.S.C. § 1400 (2004). Retrieved from http://idea.ed.gov/ download/statute.html Küpper, L., & Rebhorn, T. (2007). Module 2: Key changes in IDEA. Retrieved from http://nichcy.org/laws/idea/legacy/module2 Reschly, D. J. (2008). School psychology paradigm shift and beyond. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology V (pp. 3-16). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists. Utah State Office of Education. (2013). Special education. Retrieved from http://schools.utah.gov/sars/Data-Management/Federal-Reports-and-Data-Management/School-Year-Reports.aspx Utah State Office of Education. (2014). Special education laws, state, rules, and policies. Retrieved from http://www.schools.utah.gov/sars/Laws,-State-Rules-and-Policies/Rules-and-Regulations.aspx Zirkel, P.A. & Thomas, L.B. (2010). State laws and guidelines for implementing RTI. Teaching Exceptional Children, 43, 60-73. Retrieved from http://journals.cec.sped.org/tec/
October 2014 Page 8
SCHOOL PSYCHOLOGY AWARENESS WEEK By Sara Susov
School Psychology Awareness Week, November 10-14, 2014, is rapidly approaching. The theme for 2014 School Psychology Awareness Week is Strive. Grow. THRIVE! The NASP goal for this year is “… to engage students at all levels of learning and development to promote personal achievement, growth, and resilience, as well as a sense of connectedness and wellbeing.” School psychologists are in a unique role to help students with all aspects of their education and School Psychology Awareness Week (SPAW) is a great time to advocate for what you do in the schools. SPAW is also a good opportunity to recognize your hard work and dedication to students.
NASP has multiple resources available for SPAW, including a PDF of suggested activities, themed printable notecards, newsletters for parents to encourage involvement, and 2014 SPAW bookmarks to distribute. There is also a district letter that your lead psychologist or district representative can send to district administrators or school board members that reviews the work that school psychologists do. Meeting as a psychology team to plan activities for SPAW would be a great opportunity to determine and highlight what you are doing in your district. If you are a member of NASP, please consider looking at the resources they have available on: http://www.nasponline.org/communications/spaw/2014/ general-resources.aspx. Here are some suggested activities and principles from the 2014 School Psychology Awareness Week NASP Poster.
1. Foster resilience.
Building resilience (i.e., the ability to adapt well to adversity, trauma, tragedy, threats, or even significant sources of stress) helps our students manage stress and feelings of anxiety and uncertainty. Activities that may help foster resilience in youth include providing a caring and safe learning environment and offering frequent after-school programs (i.e., based on subject areas, interests), which help increase home–school collaboration. In addition, incorporating projects into the curriculum that focuses on the unique strengths of each student can also help build resiliency on a daily basis in the classroom.
2. Teach coping skills.
Equipping students with appropriate coping skills sets them up to be successful when confronted with stressful or challenging situations. Use small groups to teach skills such as problem solving or conflict resolution. Also, teaching skills such as deep breathing and relaxation will be beneficial for students both academically and socially.
3. Express yourself.
Resilient people appropriately express all emotions, even negative ones. Work to help students become more aware of emotions, label emotions appropriately, and deal with upsetting events. Small group sessions using “emotional charades,” in which students have to act out different emotions while other students try to guess the emotion is a fun way to work on these skills.
4. Set goals.
Work with students to develop personal goals for both in and outside of schools that they would like to accomplish over the course of the school year (or another specific time frame). Identify potential barriers to achieving these goals, and brainstorm ways to overcome them. Build in reinforcements for achieving short-term goals or steps along the way to accomplishing the larger, long-term goal.
5. Teach students (and staff) how to express gratitude.
Expressing gratitude can increase children’s resilience, optimism, and academic success. Teach students about gratitude journaling, in which they write down two or three things (e.g., people, events, or activities) that they are grateful for and why. Having students identify individuals in the school that they are grateful for (peers or staff) and helping them to write a gratitude letter in which they express reasons that they are grateful for that individual is another way to express gratitude. Finally, school administrators, teachers, and other school professionals can promote gratitude in students by modeling it. For example, schools could have periodic gratitude days, during which staff members announce what they are grateful for and ask students to do the same. In particular, it is beneficial for staff members to focus their thoughts and feelings of gratitude to specific people or students in the school and to directly express their gratitude in person. Get additional ideas and
(see SP Awareness on page 10)
October 2014 Page 9
(SP Awareness, continued from page 9) resources through NASP’s Gratitude Works program at http://www.nasponline.org/communications/spaw/ gratitude-works.aspx.
6. Catch them being good.
Though often overlooked, praise or positive attention can go a long way in boosting students’ self-esteem. Positive emotions buffer kids against depression and other negative reactions to adversity. Work with students and staff to identify and reinforce positive behaviors when they are exhibited throughout the school. This can be part of a larger school-wide positive behavior interventions and supports program or specific to individual classrooms.
7. Give compliments
Getting a complement makes us feel good! Giving one to another person can result in the same feeling. A fun game to teach this skill to children is compliment tag, which can be done in small counseling groups or in the classroom. Students sit in a circle and decide on one person to be “it” first. This student has to tag another person in the group. However, unlike a typical game of tag where you run and use your hands, this game requires you to tag a person with your words. The student who is “it” will say another student’s name in the group, give him/her a compliment, and then say, “Tag you’re it.” The person who gets tagged responds by saying, “Thank you,” and the person who gave the compliment responds with, “You’re welcome.” The person tagged then picks someone else and so on until everyone has had a chance to give and receive a compliment.
8. Check in/check out
Identify at-risk students and assign a staff member or older student (mentor) to check in with them at the beginning of each school day and again before school ends. This system will be beneficial for not only the student who is being checked on, but the older student as well.
9. Get fit
Good physical health prepares the body to grow and thrive. Healthy eating habits, regular exercise, and adequate sleep protect kids against the stress of tough situations. Regular exercise also decreases negative emotions such as anxiety, anger, and depression.
Partner with cafeteria personnel to increase access to healthy fruits and vegetables for breakfast, lunch, and snacks. Also, collaborate with classroom teachers to incorporate movement activities into their school day.
10. Foster competency
Making sure that children and adolescents achieve academically is great protection against adversity. Children who achieve academic success and who develop individual talents, such as playing sports, drawing, making things, playing musical instruments, or playing games are much more likely to feel competent and be able to deal with stress positively. Social competency is also important. Having friends and staying connected to friends and loved ones can increase resiliency. Work with students to identify areas of interest or strength. School staff may consider collaborating with the school’s music or art teacher to develop fun and engaging activities or projects.
11. Show and tell
Learning to foster strengths is an important part of students’ growth and can increase resiliency and well-being. In small groups or in the larger classroom, have students identify an area of strength that they would like to show to the class. This can be a skill or talent, and after presenting their special strength, that student can be in charge of teaching that skill or talent to the rest of the class.
12. Perseverance and determination.
Perseverance means having the self-discipline to continue a task in spite of being confronted with difficulties. It is important that we teach students how to persist through challenges and obstacles without giving up. These are important skills to have both inside and outside of school. Lead a discussion about what perseverance means and does not mean. For example, it means to keep working until the assignment is complete, instead of trying only a few times and quitting. With students' help, list the steps needed to learn a new skill such as riding a bicycle, learning to swim, or memorizing the multiplication table. Have students write or draw a picture illustrating a time when they persevered and succeeded even though they felt like giving up. Then, discuss the feelings associated with their achievement such as pride, happiness, self-confidence, and self-esteem.
(see SP Awareness on page 11)
October 2014 Page 10
(SP Awareness, continued from page 10)
13. Listen up
Check into the music kids are listening to lately and find examples of optimistic and hopeful lyrics and those without them. Bring the music in and play it for the class. Have the student listen to and discuss the lyrics. Determine whether or not they offer a message of hope. Discuss how words in the music can influence our thoughts and actions. This activity can also be done with popular television shows or movies.
14. Build friendships
Increasing students’ connectedness at school can lead to increased well-being. Encourage students to identify their interests, and form activities or clubs comprised of students with similar interests. Clubs can meet before school, during lunch or recess, or after school.
15. Collaborate with parents
Work with parents to implement activities or strategies within their home or community that reinforce skills
being taught at school. For example, parents can model problem-solving skills when confronted with day-to-day problems. Similarly, parents can model emotional competence for their children by using words or appropriate behaviors to express different feelings. This can also be as simple as encouraging parents to take as little as 10 minutes out of every day to engage in an interactive activity with their child (e.g., reading, playing a game, going to the park).
16. Student Power Award.
Consider nominating students for the NASP Student Power Award, which was created to honor students who support others and recognize students for progress toward personal goals, optimism, problem solving, eagerness, and dedication. Information on the award can be found at http://www.nasponline.org/ communications/spaw/student-power.aspx.
Compiled by: Jennifer Cunningham and Christina Burton, Baltimore City Public Schools
If you are recognizing and promoting SPAW, and you would like to be highlighted in a future edition of the Observer, email [email protected]. If you’re promoting SPAW and want to be entered into a drawing to win one of three Starbucks giftcards, please email me details about what you are doing. Additionally, the UASP Public Relations will be working to have SPAW recognized by Governor Herbert. Look forward to hearing about this from him!
INTRODUCING AARON FISCHER, PHD UNIVERSITY OF UTAH—NEW SCHOOL PSYCHOLOGY FACULTY MEMBER
I’ve been working with individuals with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and their families, in schools, outpatient behavioral health clinics, and community settings, for over 10 years. I graduated from the University of Miami, where I earned a bachelors degree in psychology and worked as a research coordinator at the Center for Autism and Related Disabilities. After leaving Miami, I completed my masters and doctoral degree in school psychology at Louisiana State University. Before arriving at the University of Utah in August of 2014, I completed my predoctoral internship in clinical psychology at the May Institute in Boston, Massachusetts. My
internship and graduate work focused on providing evidence-based practices in schools, hospitals, and mental health clinics for children with disabilities and their families. Specifically, my clinical interests concentrate on the assessment and treatment of children and adolescents with ASD, as well as providing support and training to their families. As such, my scholarship is considerably influenced by my applied work in those areas. Additionally, I am a Board Certified Behavior Analyst. As a behavior analyst, I have experience in the assessment and
(see Fischer on page 12)
October 2014 Page 11
(Fischer, cont. from page 11) treatment of behavior problems, as well as the acquisition of adaptive skills, in individuals with ASD and developmental disabilities.
As a new faculty member at the University of Utah, I am eager to advance the field of school psychology. My interest in technology and school psychology aims to increase the efficiency of the day-to-day practice of school psychologists, while promoting evidence-based practices. Regarding my contribution to the field of school psychology, I hope to connect practitioners, teachers, and students in rural areas with critical services through videoconferencing. Considering the shortage of school psychologists nationally, and especially in Utah, I foresee videoconferencing as a viable modality to provide psychological services. My research interests follow two distinct lines of inquiry that are directly applicable to the field of school psychology. First, I am interested in creating and evaluating effective strategies for psychologists engaging in consultation, while incorporating cutting-edge technology. Currently, I am evaluating videoconferencing as a strategy to conserve school resources and remotely consult with teachers. Recently, I was awarded a Faculty Research & Creative Grant by the University of Utah, which will evaluate school-based consultation, behavioral parent training, and systematic direct observations through videoconferencing. My research will continue to evaluate the use of videoconferencing across multiple areas of consultation and school psychology.
My second line of research lies in evaluating and advancing evidence-based interventions for children and adolescents with ASD and their families (i.e., parent training).
Currently, I am evaluating a parent education and training program, which aims to reduce parental stress and provide information about therapeutic services, for families of children with ASD. My other research in this area includes developing and evaluating programs to enhance behavioral and social-emotional skills of elementary and middle school students with ASD.
Finally, I am involved in other research studies including one that is evaluating feeding observations through videoconferencing and I am conducting a variety of single case meta-analyses and systematic reviews on topics including mindfulness-based interventions in youth, yoga-based interventions, and videoconferencing in school consultation. I am currently collaborating with psychology researchers across the country and within the University of Utah, and look forward to executing my research agenda in Utah for years to come.
Besides my research and clinical interests, I plan to contribute to school psychology in other areas as well. Those areas include training and supervising graduate students in school psychology and behavior analysis, and involving myself with state organizations such as the Utah Association of Behavior Analysis (UTABA) and the Utah Association of School Psychologists (UASP). I believe that high quality training and supervision is fundamental for the field of school psychology and behavior analysis; this motivated my pursuit of a career in academia. I was fortunate to have amazing mentors and supervisors across my training, and their contributions to my professional development encouraged me to deliver the same standard of support to my students. Besides my interest in training and supervision, I plan to become an active member of the UTABA and UASP. As an active member of
these organizations, I hope to progress school psychology and behavior analysis in Utah while promoting and expanding evidence-based services.
As a new Utahn I was initially drawn to the state and the University of Utah for many reasons. First, the supportive faculty and work environment at the University of Utah impressed me. The record of achievement and contributions of the stellar faculty to school psychology and behavior analysis was remarkable. Also, the new Sorenson Education and Arts Complex is a beautiful facility with contemporary teaching and meeting spaces that offers comfortable area to learn and engage in critical thinking. Additionally, I was drawn to the prospect of collaboration with faculty across Utah’s high quality universities including Brigham Young University and Utah State University. Next, I was excited about the opportunities to work with children with ASD in Utah, specifically at the largest school for children with ASD in the state—the Carmen B. Pingree Autism Center of Learning—located in Salt Lake City. Finally, my wife and I were thrilled about the unique and picturesque beauty of Utah, as well as all of the outdoor activities that we could participate in. We love hiking and walking with our dog, Shef, and hope to take up winter sports in years to come, after we have our first baby in January.
If I was not a school psychologist, I’d like to be a chef. I love to cook and although it would be incredibly challenging, I’d love to own and operate a breakfast food truck. I take advantage of the opportunity to cook brunch every weekend for my wife and I plan to try out new recipes with the faculty in my department. I love my position at the University of Utah and can’t imagine a better job or a more supportive university.
October 2014 Page 12
SCHOOL PSYCHOLOGY STUDENTS IN UGANDA By Becky Washburn and Rachel Traynor
Second Year School Psychology Students at Brigham Young University This past summer as part of a study abroad program for Brigham Young University, we lived in Uganda, Africa for seven weeks. We spent the first three weeks in a small village called Buhoma, on the northern side of Bwindi Impenetrable Forest. It was beautiful and greener than we had imagined! The last three weeks we were in Mukono, a city about thirty minutes away from the capital city of Kampala. The middle week of our trip was spent in Rwanda and on safari in Queen Elizabeth National Park. We saw so many incredible wild animals including two elephants fighting for a brief moment.
We experienced a variety of foods. We had eggs, toast, and fresh fruit every morning for breakfast. Our sack lunches always had a hard-boiled egg, crackers, and more fruit—a banana or a slice of pineapple. Sometimes we had a sandwich; sandwiches with cheese were our favorites because cheese was very hard to come by. Occasionally we were given a local food called chapati, which is kind of like a thick, fried tortilla. For dinner, we always had plenty of rice, cooked vegetables, and meat, usually pork, chicken, or beef. Soda was always close at hand—for 1500 shillings (about 60 cents).
We went on this study abroad so that we could experience a little bit of Africa, earning college credit
was an extra bonus. It was an amazing experience. We rode in the back of a truck with seven other people, built two houses out of mud, had monkeys steal our food, planted trees, held a baby crocodile, and even ate goat! We climbed up the minaret of the Gaddafi Mosque and saw all of Kampala. Betsy hiked from the north side to the south side of Bwindi Impenetrable Forest. We danced with locals, and made wonderful friends. Rachel even had a baby named after her!
While we were in Mukono, we worked on our research project—teaching the Picture Exchange Communication System (PECS) to children with disabilities. Few of the families we worked with spoke English, which made for some interesting meetings! There were times that we had to get creative in teaching PECS to the children. We worked with families in slums, where children are left home for much of the day while their single mothers work to provide for the family. In order to go to school, parents must pay school fees, which can be very costly. If there is no money for school fees, children simply do not go to school. We became very aware of the great benefits of the public school system in the US. This experience also taught us a lot about persevering through difficult circumstances, and to appreciate our life style.
October 2014 Page 13
Rachel Traynor in Uganda working with local residents
THOUGHTS FROM MY SUMMER BREAK: SEARCHING FOR EDUCATIONAL EXCELLENCE
IN HELSINKI, FINLAND By Rob Richardson
This summer I had the opportunity to visit Finland. My wife has been on a sabbatical leave from the University of Utah to take on a research project at the University of Helsinki; so while she worked I had a chance to explore and to goof off. While most of my time was spent with my boys biking, boating, and bathing in the Baltic, I did have some time to speak with Finns (and Finn-o-philes from other countries), and read about the Finnish education system. This article is about what I learned about the Finnish education system. If you would prefer to learn about pick-up soccer games, bike paths, eating smoked fish, or sauna conventions in Finland, you can contact me directly. However, if you want to learn about what I learned about the Finnish education system, read on.
School Psychology in Finland
In Finland, anyone with psychologist credentials can work in a school, as a school psychologist (Finish Psychology Association website, 2014). Psychologists in the schools are certified as psychologists from psychology departments without a specialty in working in schools. Becoming a certified psychologist requires a masters degree, which takes 5 to 6 years of classwork, plus 5 month practicum. There are 5700 psychologists in Finland. The average salary for working as a psychologist in the public service (like schools) is similar to
that in the U.S.: €3800 per month, or about $50,000 per year. The role of a school psychologist in Finland currently is narrower and focuses more on counseling and student mental health rather than academic achievement. School psychology leaders are in the process of building a model for school psychology services in Finland, but there currently are no practice standards. I was in Helsinki during the summer, and unfortunately, I was unable to meet and talk to any real school psychologists. They were generally in southern Europe on vacation. However, I was able to find out much about the Finnish education system from reading and speaking with those Finns who remained in Finland during the summer months.
Education in Finland
Finland, a country with a population of about 5 million people, located in the far north of Europe, above the 60th parallel, has what many have argued is one of the best education system in the world. Finland has gotten much press over the past 15 years by knocking test scores out of the park in reading, mathematics and science on internationally benchmarked exams such as the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA), Trends in International Mathematics in Science Study (TIMSS), and Progress in International Reading Study (PIRLS). “In Finland every one does well and social background has little impact”
(Scheicher, as quoted in Ripley 2013).
Finnish students perform very well on international tests in language arts, mathematics, science, and civics. Below is graph of testing trends from a variety of nations whose students take the PISA test (Figure 1).
Finland has not always received such impressive results. The rise in academic excellence has happened over the past 30 years. Very few got any formal education at all in 1960, and they did not perform particularly well compared to other first-world countries. Twenty years later (by 1980), Finland was performing in the average range for European Union. Now, they are near top in all areas by international standards including PISA (see Figure 1).
Furthermore, drop out rates are among the lowest in the world. Only 0.2% of students drop out of compulsory education, which ends at 16 years of age, and the graduation rate from their equivalent of high school (upper secondary), is 93%, despite being non-compulsory. (High school dropout rates in Utah are currently around 82%.)
It is not clear precisely what elements resulted in Finland’s impressive educational statistics, as there are lots of interacting factors that likely jointly and severally impact student outcomes; however there are
(see Finland on page 15)
October 2014 Page 14
Figure I from Ripley (2013). “Dance of the Nations: Over a half century,different countries gave eighteen different tests to their children. Economists Ludger Woessmann and Eric Hanushek projected kids’ performance onto a common measuring stick.
The results suggest that education levels can—and do—change dramatically over time, for better and worse.”
(Finland, cont. from page 14)
many factors that make Finland stand out and hence invite educated speculation regarding why Finland has such exemplary educational outcomes. Some of the main factors include:
1. Teacher variables
a. Selection and training
b. Support network and collaboration
2. Social variables
a. Strong social support network
b. Culture that values learning
c. Wealth to stand behind values
3. Systemic variables
a. Focus on equity b. High standards and
opportunity for all
Teacher Variables
Teaching is a highly respected profession in Finland. In order to be admitted into a school of education, requires being in the top quartile of your class. Becoming a teacher is as competitive as becoming a doctor. Approximately 10% of applicants to schools of education are admitted. Consequently, the profession attracts bright, highly motivated individuals and teachers have significant status in Finnish society.
(see Finland on page 16)
October 2014 Page 15
(Finland, continued from page 15)
Pre-service teacher training includes subject content knowledge, pedagogy, and training in educational research (qualitative and quantitative). Entry-level teaching positions require a Masters degree. Post- service teachers have more collaboration time than in most countries, including the U.S., and are expected to engage in regular self-guided professional development and to collaborate with other teachers around formative student data through professional learning communities. Regular formative assessment (rather than high stakes summative testing) is emphasized to understand and promote student learning. Assessment is encouraged as a daily part of schoolwork.
Social Variables
Finland is proud to be a social welfare state. Collective well-being is emphasized over individual well-being. Finns take great pride in creating equal opportunities for all by providing free healthcare, daycare, and adult vocational training. Many of the stresses that the economically disadvantaged face in the U.S. are not present in Finland, such as hunger, medical bills, shelter concerns, and opportunities to get job training to retain employability. It is illegal to charge for education, so even private schools are free of charge. And private schools cannot exclude any applicants, so there is less temptation to strive for elitism. Since there is not profit motive and no
status motive, private schools in Finland are largely religious and the vast majority of students attend public schools. Schools provide free food, and health care (mental and physical) to all students. These social safety nets likely reduce stress and may put children in a better place for learning.
Finland is a relatively homogeneous population. Most people are ethically Finnish, Swedish, or Russian. Current culture values learning and education. These values are likely to be internalized by students and reinforced by parents and communities.
The Finish economy has been very successful, especially in high tech areas, with several economic powerhouses such as Nokia. This money fuels their education system, which in turn fuels an educated workforce for their high tech industries. Due to this wealth, with an emphasis on communal rather than individual well being, and low levels of corruption,
Finland is able to maintain a relatively high standard of living for all its citizens, including opportunities for quality education for all.
Systems Variables
The over arching goal according to the Finnish Education Ministry is to provide an equitable, quality education for all. Unlike many European systems, Finnish schools do not track students early on in their school careers. All students are expected to meet the same high academic expectations and national standards until they are about 16 years of age. At this point, upper secondary school, students begin to specialize, by deciding to take either an academic or a vocational route.
The Finnish National Board of Education determines the Finnish national core curriculum, which consists of objectives and core content standards of an array of subjects. Content standards from this national core curriculum are reviewed every 10 years, in order to adjust to demands of the global economy.
Finnish students receive a good deal of career counseling: two hours per week in middle school. Career counseling is continued through the end of upper secondary school. Guidance counseling seen as the role not only of school counselors, but it is also a role of all education personnel including teachers (Finnish Education Department, 2014).
(see Finland on page 17)
October 2014 Page 16
“The over arching goal according to the Finnish
Education Ministry is to provide an equitable,
quality education for all.”
(Finland, cont. from page 16)
The Finnish education system takes pride in being proactive at addressing difficulties as soon as a student falls behind. Any student who is experiences academic difficulty is entitled to what is called “special education services” and receives an Individual Learning Plan (ILP). Special education services are fluid and designed to boost youth to meet standards. For example, if a student is behind in learning a foreign language, such as English, she can get additional support in the form of special education to help her meet language proficiency standards. Once students reach proficiency standards, supports are removed. Except in the cases where individuals have severe disabilities, special education services are provided in conjunction with mainstream education. Students are not removed from core areas in which they are having difficulty. By the time students are finished with comprehensive school (at about 16 years of age) 50% have received some form of special education. Since it is so common, receiving special education services caries very little stigma. And since services are targeted at specific academic needs, services are generally short lived. The preventative and proactive nature of services in Finland are much like Multi-tiered Services and Supports in the U.S.
The central problem-solving team at most Finnish schools is called a Student Welfare Team. This team is composed of the classroom teacher, the building administrator, a special education teacher, a school nurse, and a psychologist. This team is charged with trouble shooting problems, and finding effective solutions.
School Accountability
Finnish schools do not have high stakes testing for every student, every year, as is found in many first world countries, including the U.S. Instead they focus on self-evaluation of schools for formative improvement, and national evaluations of student outcomes for summative policy evaluation. For these national evaluations, the Finnish Education Ministry engages in statistical sampling (rather than census testing of every student). This process is similar to what is done in the U.S. with the National Assessment of Educational Proficiency (NAEP) to monitor educational outcomes nationally.
High stakes testing is reserved for the end of Upper Secondary School. Upper Secondary school has two routes: academic and vocational. Upon completion of the academic route of Upper Secondary School, students take a high-stakes Matriculation Exam. 83% of students in the academic upper secondary schools take this exam (42% of all students). This exam determines which colleges and universities a student can get into. (And whether or not they can become a teacher.)
Those in the vocational strand of upper secondary are not exempt from matriculation testing of their own. Their exams consist in demonstrating industry standards of proficiency within their chosen career area. For those in the vocational studies route, representatives from trades and businesses are involved with proficiency evaluation. Trainers and representatives from trades and businesses certify competency.
Concluding Thoughts
Educational excellence requires some basic well-known wholesome ingredients that have been illuminated through educational research. These include such things as high expectations, curriculum with strong scope and sequence, quality instructional delivery, adequate practice, and frequent quality feedback. That said, educational excellence is not cooked up with a simple, easy recipe. Teacher, social, and systems elements all interact to produce student outcomes. However it is achieved, educational excellence appears to require significant deliberate and coordinated efforts so that academic, social, emotional, and physical needs are met as soon as they can be made evident. What stands out to me about Finland is that when educating ALL Students is a national priority, for teachers, students, parents, politicians, business leaders, and citizenry at large, impressive results are clearly possible. Finland provides one example of how a nation (or state, district, or school) can educate ALL students to a respectably high level. Summer break is long gone. It’s time to roll up our sleeves, grab our quality research-based ingredients, and start cooking.
References Finnish National Board of Education
(2014). Retrieved from http://www.oph.fi/english
Ripley, A. (2013). The Smartest Kids in the World: and How They Got That Way. Simon and Schuster, NY.
Sahlberg, P. (2011). Finnish Lessons: What can the World Learn from Educational Change in Finland. Teachers College, Collumbia University.
October 2014 Page 17
ISPA CONFERENCE 2014 By Kim Lowe, School Psychology Intern
This year, the International School Psychology Association (ISPA) hosted its annual conference in Kaunas, Lithuania. School psychologists from around the world gathered to discuss current research and best practices in the field. Individuals from countries such as Lithuania, Canada, Portugal, New Zealand, Turkey, Japan, Latvia, Australia, Sweden, Cyprus, Greece, Peru, UK and USA came together to share their unique experiences. The theme of the conference was “Children’s Rights and Needs: Challenges to School, Family, and Society.”
I attended the conference along with BYU student Michelle Norton and BYU Counseling Psychology and Special Education professor Ellie Young. Having attended both state and national conferences in the past, I found it was a unique opportunity to engage in this international experience. While attendees were all there to discuss issues related to the field of school psychology, our diverse backgrounds made our experiences uniquely different. For example, in some countries, secondary schools are structured so that students all remain in the same classroom throughout the day. Thus, concerns about behaviors during classroom transitions are not an issue. However, in other countries, such as the United States, passing time can be a critical period in the day for problematic behaviors. In addition, a session about LGBT students highlighted differences across countries in the way these students are perceived and treated. Some countries actively support the rights of these students while representatives of other countries related that it was not a hotly debated topic in their countries. Others shared that there was not much in the way of support for these students. These unique perspectives helped to shed light on the issue and, if nothing else, helped to remind me that the way we serve students in the United States is not the only approach one might take.
The set-up of the conference was similar to conferences I have attended in the past with keynote speakers followed by small breakout sessions each day. The breakout sessions tended to be fairly small which allowed for participants to share their unique experiences. I appreciated this format and the ability to collaborate with a variety of individuals.
Kaunas is the second largest city in Lithuania; however, its population is still only just under 350,000. We had the opportunity to explore the city in the evenings once sessions were over, seeing churches and museums, and tasting the local cuisine. In 2015, ISPA is hosting its international conference in Sao Paulo, Brazil. Given the positive experiences I had at the 2014 conference, I hope to be able to attend again next year and would recommend the experience to fellow students and school psychologists.
October 2014 Page 18
Kim Lowe (left) and Ellie Young in Kaunas, Lithuania at the International School Psychology Conference. Kim Lowe presented a poster about gender and social-emotional-behavioral screening.
NASP’S WESTERN REGIONAL MEETING
By Rob Richardson Late this September Julia Hood (current president) and Fulvia Franco (NASP Delegate), and Rob Richardson (president elect) went to NASP’s Western Regional Meeting in San Diego. The purpose of this meeting was for NASP leadership and leadership from the western state school psychology organizations to learn from each other, get updates from the NASP mothership, and plan how best to serve the profession and members.
Representatives from 13 states identified these top 5 critical issues that are impacting school psychologists: 1. Recruitment and retention of school psychologists. In the western region there is a shortage of school psychologists. Demand is outstripping supply. There is some concern that this could result in roles being filled by less well-trained personnel. 2. Budget and school funding issues related to school psychologists. School budgets are typically tight and often school districts do not have the money or priority to hire more school psychologists. 3. Adoption of NASP Standards/Practice Model. Many administrators and policy makers are unaware of the value that school psychologists can add to supporting students in the schools. School districts are looking for personnel who have the skills required to support schools with data-based decision making around social-emotional, and academic issues; and don’t recognize that school psychologists are personnel who have had training in these highly sought after domains. Too often school psychologists are viewed as purveyors of test-and-place regimen that appears to be heading for extinction. The practice model provides a very different story of what school psychologists can provide.
4. Multi-tiered Systems of Support (MTSS). MTSS is a way in which school psychologists bring the Practice Model to life and increase their impact system-wide, rather than just student-by-student. Being part of such a system has potential to greatly expand efficiency and impact across individuals. 5. Licensing, credentialing, NCSP Parity. Many prioritize increasing pay and recognition for NASP credentials. Having such credentials should be seen as a signal that a school psychologist has the skill set described in the NASP Practice model. At the Western Regional Meeting, state organizations shared recent initiatives and future plans. Major themes in these plans included the following: • Promotion of mental health in the schools through MTSS, legislative efforts, and grassroots advocacy • Promotion of the NASP Practice Model in order to improve student academic and mental health outcomes through
o Improved school psychologist to student ratio by plugging into current school needs o More school psychologists helping more students through an expanded systems-driven role o Improved accountability through tying school psychologist evaluations to the Practice Model
(see NASP on page 20)
October 2014 Page 19
(NASP, continued from page 19) Commitment expressed from across the western state organizations included efforts to promote the following: • Encourage Local Educational Associations (LEAs) to structure job descriptions around the Practice Model • Increase awareness of school and district administrators about the diverse and valued skill set of school psychologists that feed directly into the landscape of current educational initiatives
• Create professional development opportunities around the Practice Model. As a result of the conference discussions, many state leaders made plans to for their state organizations to officially adopt the Practice Standards as their way of doing business, providing professional development, and advocating for the field. Julia, Fulvia, and Rob had lots of opportunities to network with other states and to make discuss ways in which we can best serve membership in Utah. We look forward to serving the UASP membership in upcoming months and years.
October 2014 Page 20
UASP elections are held each May. Below are a few interesting facts about the current UASP Board.
Julia Hood—President Julia is the director of the Carmen B. Pingree Autism Center of Learning, and she has worked as a school psychologist for five years. She is passionate about the work we do for kids and families. Being involved in the state organization and helping to represent the interests of school psychologists throughout the state motivates Julia to be involved in UASP. Fun Fact: She got married on a rainy beach in Puerto Rico in April under a beautiful rainbow. Devin Healey—Past President Devin has been a school psychologist for 9 years and currently works as an Education Specialist in Teaching and Learning at the USOE serving as the Director of the Utah Multi-Tiered System of Support Project. He enjoys this field because of the problem solving he gets to do as well as his ability to help facilitate individual and systems change. Devin is part of the board because of his desire to impact school psychology practices at a systems level as well as to expand his personal network and work with other LEA’s across the state. His goal while serving on the board is to contribute to the awareness of a school psychologist’s role, better disperse information to association members, and learn from the perspectives and expertise of the other board members. Fun Fact: Devin has also acted in movie scenes opposite big names like David Hasselhoff, Beau Bridges, and Randy Quaide. Robert Richardson— President Elect Robert has been a school psychologist for 16 years and currently works in Canyons School
District in the Evidence Based Learning Department. In this capacity he facilitates the use of academic behavior and implementation fidelity data to inform decisions about professional development, pedagogy, curriculum, and resource allocation. His favorite thing about being a school psychologist is the immense satisfaction that comes from impacting the lives of children as you removed obstacles to learning and facilitate opportunities for growth. While on the board he aims to create opportunities to network and share ideas, receive professional development, monitor, respond to, and promote legislation in the best interest of students, and to establish and enforce healthy standards of professional practice as well as enhancing quality, evidence based practices in the field. Fun Fact: Before becoming a school psychologist Robert was a musician and played at a wide variety of venues. His favorite of these was at the zoo with the Milwaukee symphony, the seals joined in with the brass section, which added a nice touch to the performance. J. Lane Valum—Treasurer Lane currently works as the Coordinator of School Psychologists in the Canyons School District. He has an impressive 25 years of experience in the field of school psychology. He enjoys the diversity, and the challenges around clinical problem solving keep the job fresh and compelling. He is involved with the UASP board because he enjoys the comprehensive view of the practice and challenges of the field across both state and national levels. His goal while on the board is to make meaningful contributions to UASP members through decisions affecting professional development,
standards of practice, legislation, and supports to allied agencies who serve youth and their families. Sara Susov— Recording Secretary Sara is in her fourth year as a school psychologist and currently works at the Utah School for the Deaf and Blind. Her favorite thing about being a school psychologist is being with students. She loves doing groups and individual counseling. She has become involved with the UASP board to learn more about how the association benefits members and to learn what it can do to reach more people. While on the board she hopes to help recruit more school psychologists to join UASO and spread the word about conferences and activities. Fun Fact: She can get a plastic spoon wedged between her top teeth and hold it there without it touching any other part of her mouth.
BOARD TRUSTEES THROUGH JUNE 2015 Courtenay Morsi Courtenay is in her third year as an assistant professor at Utah State University in the Psychology Department. She works with the combined clinical/counseling/ school psychology PhD and School Psychology EdS programs there. Courtenay loves everything about being a school psychologist but specifically loved the wide range of skills she can engage in and teach as well as the ability to focus on ecology and systems level issues rather than just focusing on one individual in isolation. She got
(see Board on page 22)
October 2014 Page 21
(Board, cont. from page 21) involved with the UASP board to become familiar with the local practice and culture after moving to Utah. While on the board she hopes to help build awareness for the profession as well as clarify its distinction from other similar fields. She also hopes to support recruitment efforts and help build professional development. Fun Fact: Courtenay loves to travel! Last year she and her husband traveled to Spain and Portugal and went to South Korea the previous year. They plan to visit as many new countries as they can in the coming years. Heidi Block Heidi works part-time in Davis School District and at Wasatch Canyon’s Adolescent Day and Residential Treatment Programs as a licensed psychologist. She also does some private practice work at the Utah Center for Psychological Health. She has been a school psychologist for seven years. She enjoys working with multidisciplinary teams that problem solve to generate effective interventions for youth. Being directly involved with students and seeing their growth is especially rewarding for Heidi. She joined the UASP Board because she was interested in collaborating with peers, advocating for the profession, and becoming more involved in the field of school psychology on a broader level within our community. She would like to help make UASP a resource for all school psychologists and would like to see more people get involved with the board. Fun Fact: I recently got married and enjoy spending time with my husband skiing, backpacking, and river rafting in the Utah wilderness.
Julie Daye Julie is in her third year in the field and currently works as a school psychologist in the Canyons School District. She enjoys her job because of the challenges it presents, the variety of daily tasks and the opportunity to help adolescents in crisis. She is involved with the UASP board because she likes the idea of giving back to the community in any way she can. Her primary goal while on the board is to provide meaningful conferences for school psychologists in Utah. Fun Fact: Julie calls herself a “Utah Yoyo”—she has moved away but ended up coming back four times. Laura Miller Laura has been involved with the field of school psychology for a commendable 26 years. She currently works for the Salt Lake City School District focusing on students in preschool and private charter schools, and as the district 504 Coordinator. She enjoys her work as a school psychologist because she enjoys learning new ways of working with all kinds of families and working in the school setting. She became involved with the board in order to network with peers in other districts and stay informed on best practices. Her goal while on the board is to help those in the organization become advocates for the profession. Fun Fact: Laura’s family fosters cats and kittens for the humane society and her son is currently raising a guide dog. Bethanie Monsen-Ford Bethanie is in her eighth year as a school psychologist and currently works for the Davis School District splitting her time between two elementary schools and a preschool. She enjoys being a school psychologist because the job is
never boring and she loves being an advocate for a child, helping others see the whole child and see the gains and successes a child can have with appropriate supports. She is involved with the board because of her desire to make the role of a school psychologist well known in the community and to increase her own knowledge and professional skills. She also hopes to help her own school district become more involved at the state level. Fun Fact: Bethanie has a crazy fondness for fall and all things pumpkin oriented. She’s even a pretty talented pumpkin carver.
BOARD TRUSTEES THROUGH JUNE 2016 Sean Cunningham Sean has been involved in the field of psychology for 15 years but has been a School Psychologist for the past 6 years. He currently works for the Davis School District as a school psychologist as well as training and supervising the assessment practices of the District Autism Team. He also provides services to the community at a private practice, the Utah Center for Psychological Health. He enjoys diagnostic and an assessment issue, but his favorite things about the profession are the humor and imagination that children bring to it. His participation in UASP has stemmed from a desire to be involved in the profession at a policy level. As a member of the board he aims to contribute meaningfully to the filed in a way that improves professional practice and standards. Fun Fact: Sean moved to Utah to ski and taught himself as an adult with no previous experience.
(see Board on page 23)
October 2014 Page 22
(Board, cont. from page 22) Brittaini Howard Brittaini currently works as a school psychologist in Davis School District. She has been in the doctoral program at the University of Utah for the last four years and successfully defended her dissertation this past May. Her favorite part of being a school psychologist is the integration of evidence based support and collaboration with others to create comprehensive services for students. Brittaini’s involvement with the board stems from a desire to assist in the organization and progression of the field. Her goal for service on the board is to be an influential representation of practitioners by supporting evidence-based strategies and to be an advocate for collaborative services as well as striving to increase membership. Fun Fact: Brittaini is also involved in NASP leadership. She enjoys teaching and aspires to become a professor. Linda Phosaly Linda just started working as a school psychologist Intern for Davis School District and is a doctoral candidate in the School Psychology program at the University of Utah. She enjoys the opportunity to work with students, parents, and other professionals to address academic, behavioral, and socio-emotional concerns of students in order to help them thrive in all settings. Linda ran for a board position to advocate for the profession of school psychology and to address the needs of the profession from the early stages of training to becoming a full professional. She would like UASP to be a source for all school psychologists and would like to increase student involvement within the organization to maintain its
continuity. Fun Fact: I am a New Year's baby born on January 1st, and I was a birthday gift to my mother who also shares the same birthday. Virginia Maria Ramos Matias Virginia is a school psychologist intern in the Canyons School District. She is also a doctoral candidate at the University of Utah School Psychology program. This is her second year as an intern. Shen enjoys being a school psychologist because of her interactions with students and the joy she feels seeing how our work positively impacts their lives. She began her involvement with UASP because of her goal to work in academia and research. She feels that as a future academic, being involved in local and national associations is part of her duty and responsibility. Furthermore, it provides her with the opportunity to connect with and support other colleagues and make an impact on the profession within our state. Her goal while on the board is to gain a more in depth understanding of UASP and provide assistance to different committees. Specifically, she would like to disseminate more of the benefits of the UASP Minority Scholarship to more students of diverse backgrounds. Fun Fact: Virginia moved to Utah from Puerto Rico 4 years ago. Ben Springer Ben is the Director of Special Education in the Wasatch County School district. He has been a school psychologist for seven years, having worked in Jordan School District and Park City. Being with kids and the collaboration makes school psychology and enjoyable profession for Ben. He is involved with UASP to support mental and
SPED services in Utah. He’s eager to help with advocacy, awareness, and the field of school psychology. Fun Fact: He collects comics and fly fishes with equal passion. Ellie Young Ellie has been a school psychology trainer at Brigham Young University since 2001. She researches social-emotional-behavioral screening in secondary settings and also studies other aspects of PBIS. She also has a small private counseling practice in Springville. She enjoys working with youth who have behavioral or social-emotional challenges because she finds these youth to be resilient, and she learns from their efforts to keep trying. Being a part of UASP allows Ellie to learn from practitioners across the state. Fun Fact: I love to run, and when I run I usually listen to disco music. If I weren’t a school psychologist, I would aspire to be a ski bum. Fulvia Franco— NASP Delegate Fulvia works in the Jordan School District as the Program Specialist--Guidance and as the Coordinator of the Jordan Family Education Center. She has been a school psychologist for 30 years. As a school psychologist, she likes being able to help children and families. She teaches some classes at the Jordan Family Education Center and feels she has made a difference in the lives of some students. Being part of UASP in an official capacity has allowed her to have a voice in the profession. Her goals for being on the board are to be involved in the profession and provide assistance in any areas that impact our profession on a state level.
October 2014 Page 23
Utah Association of School Psychologists 358 S. 700 East, B-312 Salt Lake City, UT 84102 ADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTED
October 2014uasp.squarespace.com
Betsy Washburn in Uganda (see page 18)