References

This book will be written primarily for graduate students, advanced undergraduates, and professionals in the fields of school psychology, special education, and other areas of education, as well as the health professions. We see the book as being a viable textbook for courses in research design, applied statistics, applied behavioral analysis, and practicum, among others. We would not assume of the readers any prior knowledge about single subjects designs, nor any prior statistical experience. We will provide an introductory chapter devoted to basic statistical concepts, including measures of central tendency (e.g., mean, median, mode), measures of variation (e.g., variance, standard deviation, range, inter-quartile range), correlation, frequency distributions, and effect sizes. In addition, given that the book will rely heavily on R software, the introductory chapter will also devote attention to the basics of using the software for organizing data, conducting basic statistical analyses, and for graphics. The R commands used to carry out these analyses will be largely automated so that users will only need to define the range for their data, and then enter it into the R spreadsheet. We envision these tools being available on the book website, with instructions for using them available in the book itself.We envision the book as being useful either as a primary text for a course in educational research designs, school psychology practicum, applied behavioral analysis, special education, or applied statistics. We also anticipate that individuals working in schools, school districts, mental health facilities, hospitals, applied behavioral analysis clinics, and evaluation organizations, as well as faculty members needing a practical resource for single subject design research, will all serve as a market for the book. In short, the readership would include graduate students, faculty members, teachers, psychologists, social workers, counselors, medical professionals, applied behavioral analysis professionals, program evaluators, and others whose work focuses on monitoring changes in individuals, particularly as the result of specific treatment conditions.We believe that this book could be marketed through professional organizations such as the American Educational Research Association (AERA), the National Association of School Psychologists, the National Association of Special Education Teachers, the Association for Professional Behavior Analysis, the American Psychological Association (APA), the Association for Psychological Science, and the American Evaluation Association. Within AERA, the following special interest groups would have particular interest in this book: Action Research, Classroom Observation, Disability Studies in Education, Mixed Methods Research, Qualitative Research, and Special Education Research. The book could also be marketed to state departments of education and their special education and school psychology divisions. Currently, many state departments of education require documentation for Response to Intervention (RtI) and Multi-Tiered Systems of Support (MTSS) procedures for individual students. The method taught in this proposed book would allow educators and student support personnel to document the effectiveness of interventions systematically and accurately.

ABSTRACTThe National Association of School Psychologists' Model for Comprehensive and Integrated School Psychological Services (2010a), often referred to as the National Association of School Psychologists' Practice Model, describes the comprehensive range of professional skills and competencies available from school psychologists across 10 domains. The Self-Assessment Tool for School Psychologists is a two-scale, 48-item self-report measure that is based on the Practice Model and designed to have practitioners assess the degree to which they engage in various professional activities (A scale), and the perceived level of importance of those activities to effective service delivery (B scale). The present study aimed to examine the factor structure and psychometric properties of the Self-Assessment Tool for School Psychologists and to evaluate the proposed interpretation regarding school psychologists' professional practices. Participants included a sample of 1,293 practicing school psychologists. Results of EFA and CFA, as well as reliability analyses, supported a seven- and five-factor model for the A and B scales, respectively. Collectively, this study suggests a varying factor structure between the Self-Assessment Tool for School Psychologists and the 10 domains of the Practice Model. Implications for conceptualization of school psychological practice in relation to the National Association of School Psychologists' Practice Model and future development of the Self-Assessment Tool for School Psychologists are discussed.

Researchers, practitioners and theorists have raised concerns about the special education delivery and classification processes in the United States. The President’s Commission on Excellence in Special Education report (PCESE: 2002) examined these concerns and existing special education research, reports and opinions to develop recommendations for the reauthorization of the Individuals with Disability Act. National Association of School Psychologists Position Statements and other publications support the basic findings of the PCESE report. If enacted as recommended, the proposals will fundamentally change special education classification and service delivery. The changes have the potential to alter in fundamental ways the prevailing school psychology practices in the US. This article: (a) outlines some of the concerns and research that lead to calls for radical special education reform; (b) identifies National Association of School Psychologists (NASP) Position Statements and PCESE findings that respond to identified special education issues and (c) presents information about school-based practices that will likely change if reform actually occurs.

In a recent themed issue of Journal of Teacher Education (JTE 63.4) about of disability, diversity, and teacher education, guest editors Marleen Pugach, Linda Blanton, and Lani Florian (2012) invite readers to participate in honest, difficult, and much needed dialogue across the many diversity constituencies in teacher (p. 235). In this commentary, I extend the dialogue begun in this special themed issue by considering the affordances of a Disability Studies in Education (DSE) perspective for understanding the intersectional nature of diversity, disability, and the social, cultural, and political production of educational inequities. guest editors of JTE 63.4 are to be commended for gathering and presenting a collection of voices that seek to position identifications of alongside other markers of diversity in a conversation about preparing teachers to foster educational equity. Collectively, the articles represent an important first step toward disrupting the process of ability profiling (Collins, 2003, 2013), that is, the process of educationally marginalizing or segregating based on perceived differences in race, ethnicity, linguistic repertoire, social class, gender, and dis/ability. However, the articles in this issue also illustrate that the disciplinary discourses we bring to bear in identifying, locating, and responding to perceived differences and dis/abilities shape the voices that are heard and, subsequently, the understandings that are created. In this commentary, I draw on research in DSE to clarify some of what is obscured by the disciplinary lenses represented in JTE 63.4. I begin with a brief overview of the articles in JTE 63.4 and the foundations of DSE. I then move to more deeply explicate a DSE perspective on two important concepts, disability labels as a social and political response to difference and personal narrative as decolonizing methodology. After introducing a DSE perspective on each of these points, I contrast it with those represented in JTE 63.4. I conclude with a discussion of the perspectives that a DSE lens affords relative to teacher education and educational equity that are not otherwise addressed in the special issue. A Brief Overview of the Articles in JTE 63.4 authors of the five centerpiece articles in JTE 63.4 each foreground different aspects of the complex relationship between diversity and disability in teacher education. issue begins with Marilyn Cochran-Smith and Curt Dudley-Marling (2012) presenting an overview of the issues that divide general and special teacher educators, including the disciplinary roots of general and special education, deficit perspectives on difference (which they locate within special education), and access to the general curriculum for all students. authors also discuss those areas where connection seems possible, including teacher inquiry within preparation programs. Two of the remaining four centerpiece articles explicate specifically situated perspectives on diversity and disability in teacher education. In The 21st Century Teacher: A Cultural Perspective, Robert Rueda and Jamy Stillman (2012) foreground of cultural (in)congruence between teachers and and argue that teachers must become informed observers of all students (p. 250). In Complex Relationships Between Multicultural Education and Special Education: An African American Perspective, Jacqueline Jordan Irvine (2012) calls attention to the disproportionate representation of of color in general and of African American boys in particular in special education. She argues for an approach that would prepare all teachers to enact culturally relevant pedagogy as means of disrupting the deficit thinking that shapes overrepresentation. other two centerpiece articles, Preparing Teachers to Work in Inclusive Classrooms: Key Lessons for the Professional Development of Teacher Educators from Scotland's Inclusive Practice Project by Lani Florian (2012) and Enacting Diversity in Dual Certification Programs by Marleen C. …

Camera, 208 Capitalism, scepticism of policies on education in future based on society with influx of, 42 Carnegie Learning, 251-252 Central government, 92 Challenges to inclusion, 84-85 Change of practice concept, 253 Character qualities of sets in twenty-first century, 25-33 communicative competencies, 28-31 digital competencies, 31-33 'grit' for inclusive and special education teachers, 27-28 high self-efficacy, 25-27 Children, rights and characteristics of, 4-5 Children with disabilities in rural areas in Telangana state, providing services to, 174-177 259 Children with special needs in VUCA world, preparation for education administrators to manage education for, 241-244 Chlorpyrifos, 64-65 City local government, 93-99 Civil rights, 39-40 Classic economic liberal theory, 41-42 Classrooms with assistive technology, improving efficiency of, 250-252 Climate change, 64-65 Collaboration, 180 Collaborative learning, 23-24 Communication, 180 channels, 29-30 disabilities, 211 Communicative competencies, 28-31 Community resource persons (CRPs), 175 Competency-based education, 23-24 Complexity, 80-81 Comprehensive teaching strategies, 236 Computer-assisted tools, 128 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia (1945), 89-90 Constructive Alignment model, 21 Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD), 159 Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), 158-159 Conversations, feedback and recognition (CFR), 225 Core educational subjects, 179 COVID-19, 18-19, 118-119, 123-124 crisis, 7-8 inclusive learning for students with special needs during, 108-110 learning experiences during, 114-116 learning experiences of KU

This interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA) study explored the experiences of eight urban school psychologists in the northeastern United States, identifying barriers or facilitators to the adoption in professional practice of the 2010 National Association of School Psychologists Practice Model for Comprehensive and Integrated School Psychological Services. The question guiding this study was: How do urban school psychologists make sense of their experiences while adopting the Practice Model? The literature review revealed three themes: the need for increased behavioral health services in schools, the role of school psychologists, and current implementation of the Practice Model, creating a conceptual framework for the study and illustrated the current practice of school psychology; and adopted Rogers' Diffusion of Innovation theory as a lens to analyze the data. The findings reveal that: (a) a clear role definition is needed for role expansion in practice, and that awareness of school psychologists' potential to be mental health providers needs to increase among stakeholders; (b) district barriers to adoption of the Practice Model exist due to insufficient staffing, high caseloads, and lack of district strategic planning for student services; (c) school psychologists require specialized supervision; (d) specialized professional development is needed to expand practice, increase awareness and training in the Practice Model, and in leadership development; and (e) increased knowledge of the Practice Model as a result of participation in professional organizations. The study concludes with recommendations for district change, increased outreach by the National Association of School Psychologists, and advocacy and coalition-building on the part of school psychologists.--Author's abstract

Examining school psychology trainees' perceptions regarding school psychologists' key role and function is important because inaccurate perceptions may lead to unmet professional expectations, reduced job satisfaction, and burnout. One hundred and eighty two first‐year school psychology graduate students enrolled in National Association of School Psychologists (NASP) approved and/or American Psychological Association accredited school psychology specialist and/or doctoral training programs were surveyed regarding their perceptions of how school psychologists spend their time. Responses were compared to results from the 2010 NASP survey of school psychologists, in which NASP members reported the percentage of time engaged in various school psychology functions. Respondents in the current sample underestimated time spent conducting special education evaluations t(399.54) = 12.2, p < 0.000, d = 0.76 and overestimated time spent providing individual student counseling, t(465.27) = 2.94, p < 0.001, d = 0.17 and student groups t(444.74) = 5.42, p < 0.001, d = 0.409, η2 = 0.04. A positive correlation between prior professional public school experience and time estimates for special education evaluations was found, r(175) = 0.14, p = 0.03. Implications for the field of school psychology are discussed, including the provision of updated information on key role and function to applicants along with screening to assess knowledge of the field.

This study investigates Historically Black Colleges and University (HBCU) students' and faculties' knowledge related to school psychology. A total of 165 students and 14 faculty members completed inventories that assessed the understanding and views of various psychological disciplines. Results indicated that HBCU students rated their perceived knowledge of school psychology significantly lower than all psychological disciplines. In addition, these students have significantly fewer sources of information for school psychology than comparable disciplines. Although more than 90% of students stated that they would attend graduate school, the majority was only somewhat interested in school psychology as a career choice. Furthermore, HBCU psychology faculty members stated that the American Psychological Association and the National Association of School Psychologists do not actively recruit or provide information to their students. Results are discussed in terms of increasing the number of African American school psychologists. © 2009 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Despite attention in other social sciences and within other areas of psychology (e.g., community psychology; Nelson & Prilleltensky, 2005), social justice has received minimal attention in school psychology literature. The two studies by Shriberg et al. (2008) and McCabe and Rubinson (2008) represent significant developments in exploring school psychology's commitment to social justice. The studies address important questions regarding individual and collective professional development for promoting social justice in schools. Shriberg et al. examined perspectives of multicultural/diversity in school psychology regarding social justice in general. McCabe and Rubinson examined the attitudes, perceived norms, and behavioral intentions regarding social justice for the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgendered (LGBT) school-age population among graduate students in childhood and early childhood education, school counseling, and school psychology. Both populations were expected to have had unique opportunities to develop awareness, attitudes, and skills related to social justice. In the former case, the were viewed as well positioned to promote social justice given their experiences working with diverse populations; in the latter, graduate students were studying in a program with a mission of social justice. Together, these studies are important initial steps in exploring the status quo of school psychology and providing directions for future research and action. The purpose of this commentary is to discuss the findings of these two studies in the context of school psychology's future role in social justice. The discussion is organized around three questions (themes); What is social justice (definition)? Where do we currently stand in school psychology (status quo)? How do we move forward as a profession (future directions)? Guiding interpretation and inference is a participatory, interdisciplinary, and action-oriented framework, consistent with the social justice work of Prilleltensky and Nelson (2002; Nelson & Prilleltensky, 2005) in community psychology, the international development work of Eade (1997), and health promotion work of Nastasi (2000) and Nastasi, Moore, and Varjas (2004) in school psychol- ogy. The models guiding these efforts share several key values related to (a) promoting the well-being of ail people by transforming existing power structures, (b) critically examining the status quo of society and the profession, (c) involving stakeholders in guiding and enacting social change, and (d) personal responsibility and accountability of professionals for promoting social justice. Certainly these values are within the realm of current thinking in school psychology. As reflected in the findings from Shriberg et al. (2008) and McCabe and Rubinson (2008), however, school psychology is not yet prepared to fully participate in social justice work. The key question we return to at the conclusion of this commentary is what steps we need to take individually and collectively to fully participate in promoting socially just institutions and societies. Defining Social Justice The research by Shriberg et al. (2008) specifically addressed the question of definition by asking a group of cultural diversity experts (based on their record of publications and presentations related to diversity) to define social justice in the context of school psychology. The resulting definitions included equity (equal rights and protection for all), an ecological or systemic perspective, advocacy, and personal responsibility, with equity being the primary concept. As Shriberg and his colleagues pointed out, this primary focus on equal protection is consistent with accepted definitions of social justice, with professional standards of practice (e.g., American Psychology Association [APA] and National Association of School Psychologists[NASP]), and with the major premise of special education legislation that has played a central role in school psychology since the 1970s (PL 94-142). …

This volume of The California School Psychologist includes several articles regarding "autism spectrum disorder" as well as other informative articles on topics ranging from California's First 5 Initiative, to school crisis teams, classroom sociograms, and projective assessments. These articles provide valuable information for school psychologists and other professionals working in the schools, and also contribute to the literature and scholarship that aims to promote the educational success of all students. Previous articles published in The California School Psychologist, including the recent volumes addressing (a) school engagement, (b) strength-based assessment, and (c) response to intervention (RTI), are available on-line at www.education.ucsb.edu/school-psychology. The first article (Akshoomoff, Corsello, & Schmidt, 2006) reports the results of a national survey examining autism diagnosis practices among school and clinical psychologists. The role of the Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule (ADOS) was a particular focus of this study. The results of this study revealed that both school psychologists and clinical psychologists were similar in following best practice guidelines for screening, diagnosis, and assessment. Both school psychologists and clinical psychologists were found to typically include a parent interview and a developmental history in their assessment. It was also found that school psychologists were more likely to include a home observation or teacher report, relative to clinical psychologists. Perceived merits of the ADOS included the standardized structure for observation and capturing behaviors specific to autism spectrum disorder. The authors emphasize that more research is needed on how practitioners interpret the various diagnostic criteria and the impact of different practices and level of expertise on classification and service utilization. The second article (Carlson, Brinkman, & Majawicz-Hefley, 2006) provides valuable information regarding the use of biomedical treatments with school-aged children diagnosed with autism. Noting the increasing prevalence of autism and the increased frequency of pharmacological interventions, this article provides a synthesis of research informing the outcomes and risks associated with psychotropic medications. No medications are currently PDA-approved for treating autism; however, such interventions are often implemented as an adjunct to behavioral, social, and educational interventions. The authors identify specific domains where pharmacological treatments demonstrate promise in treating specific symptoms commonly associated with autism, including aggression, anxiety, agitation, cognitive inflexibility, overactivity, self-injury, and stereotypic behaviors. School psychologists are in a critical position to monitor the effects of various interventions, including medications. Moreover, it is important that school psychologists be knowledgeable of the effects of pharmacological interventions. The third article (Brock, 2006) examines the changing rates of autism in special education using data from the U.S. Department of Education. The U.S. Department of Education included "Autism" as a specific special education eligibility category beginning in 1991, whereas previously students with ASD who required special education assistance were identified as eligible by meeting other eligibility category criteria (e.g., mental retardation, speech/language impairment). This article explores whether classification substitution may be an explanation for increases in the number of students found eligible for special education using the autism criteria. The trends illustrate that as the rates of autism classification have gone up, the classification rates of mental retardation (MR), emotional disturbance (ED), and specific learning disability (SLD) have gone down. The author concludes that it is possible that the increased numbers of students found eligible for special education using autism criteria are at least in part a function of IEP teams being increasingly more willing and able to use autism criteria instead of MR, ED, and SLD criteria. …

With the advent of a multi-tiered system of supports (MTSS) in schools, counselor preparation programs are once again challenged to further extend the education and training of pre-service and in-service school counselors. To introduce and contextualize this special issue, an MTSS's intent and foci, as well as its theoretical and research underpinnings, are elucidated. Next, this article aligns MTSS with current professional school counselor standards of the American School Counselor Association's (ASCA) School Counselor Competencies, the 2016 Council for Accreditation of Counseling and Related Educational Programs (CACREP) Standards for School Counselors and the ASCA National Model. Using Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS) and Response to Intervention (RTI) models as exemplars, recommendations for integrating MTSS into school counselor preparation curriculum and pedagogy are discussed.

The term evidence-based practice remains an important concept within special education research, policy, and practice. Evidence-based practice requires that interventions, strategies, and policies undergo a systematic process of experimentation and replication to demonstrate their effectiveness. The use of experimental or quasi-experimental designs allows researchers to infer causal relationships between a practice and a set of outcomes. While special education researchers and research consumers value experimental and quasi-experimental methods via evidence-based practice, we often overlook the assumptions associated with these designs. The purpose of this chapter is to provide a primer on experimental and quasi-experimental research methods with a specific focus on their use within special education. In the following chapter, we describe (a) the logic of causal inference, (b) experimental and quasi-experimental design options that researchers may deploy, and (c) the strengths and limitations of this class of studies. We draw on examples from the special education literature and highlight key terms throughout the chapter.

Research examining student outcomes (e.g., achievement, adjustment) after grade retention reveals that it does not result in long‐term improvements for students; however, grade retention continues to be used as an intervention. The purpose of this study was to examine retention decision‐making practices, as well as school psychologists' knowledge, beliefs, and opinions regarding retention. Actual and ideal roles of school psychologists in grade retention decisions were also examined. Participants included 250 school psychologists randomly selected from the membership of the National Association of School Psychologists. Results revealed that the decision to retain is a subjective one, typically made by a team. Responding school psychologists did not support retention and found the research moderately applicable to practice. However, most school psychologists indicated that they were not centrally involved in decision making. Findings also revealed a desire among school psychologists for increased involvement in developing and/or implementing programs aimed at improving performance and consulting on the effects of retention. © 2009 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Editorial: Introduction to Special Section on Evidence-Based Practices for Persons With Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities

Audiologists Join SLPs at Schools Conference