NYASP Template

Transcription

NYASP Template

New York
2013: Volume XXXI, Number 1
school psYchologist
A publication of the New York Association of School Psychologists
Serving children, their families, and the school community
An affiliate of NASP
Coverage of the
2012 Conference
in Niagara Falls
Inside
this
Issue
Summaries of conference workshops
NYASP position statements
NY school psychologists and education reform
From
the
edItor
The New York School Psychologist Staff:
Another conference has come and gone, and it was surely a success! The
2012 NYASP Conference was held in beautiful Niagara Falls, NY, October
25th-27th. Attendees had the opportunity to choose from over 60 workshops,
plus keynote speakers, a panel on bullying issues, and poster presentations.
Many of those workshops are summarized in this issue. NYASP and The
New York School Psychologist would like to extend a sincere “thank-you” to
the members who provided these reviews. And please save the date for our
next conference, October 24-26, 2013 in White Plains, NY.
Also in this issue are three special NYASP publications , available as center
pull-outs. First, there is NYASP’s Position Statement on Mandate Relief.
Second is Putting Students First: The Role of School Psychologists in New
York’s Education Reform. Finally, we have included a letter in support of
licensure for school psychologists, signed by NYASP, the New York State
Association of School Business Officials, the Council of School
Superintendents, the New York State School Boards Association, the
Council of New York Special Education Administrators, and the New York
Alliance for Children with Special Needs.
We trust that this issue will help keep you well-informed of current topics in
school psychology and the latest issues that NYASP is addressing. Happy
2013, and enjoy the remainder of this school year!
Sincerely,
Lynette
NYASP members are encouraged to
submit articles for consideration in
The New York School Psychologist!
Deadlines for Submission:
i
Issue
Deadline
Fall (No. 1)
Winter (No. 2)
Spring (No. 3)
August 15th
November 15th
February 15th
Editor:
Publications Chair:
Staff: John Kelly
Kim D’Imperio
Arielle D’Aprile
Lynette Maheu
Ruth Steegmann
Tom Kulaga
Sara Douglas
Mary Kay Hafer
The New York School Psychologist is the official
publication of the New York Association of
School Psychologists and is distributed to
NYASP members as a member benefit. The
contents of this publication do not necessarily
represent the views or policies of NYASP,
NASP, or their elected or appointed officials.
Submission Guidelines: NYASP members are
strongly encouraged to submit articles for consideration in this publication. Preferred document size is 750 words (review) or 1500 words
(article). Submissions are accepted in .doc or
.docx format, via email attachment or on CD,
with revisions and corrections already made.
Please include a short bio about the author.
Photos, cartoons, and drawings should be submitted as a .pdf, .bmp, or .tiff file. We will make
every attempt to return hard copy submissions
of art and photography.
Editorial policy: All articles and reports of factual information may be edited to conform to
space and format specifications and to improve
clarity, without permission of writers, so long as
no changes are made to the writer’s overall
objective. NYASP and the Editor reserve the
right to edit or reject submissions based on
legal, social, professional, and ethical considerations. We will assume consent to publish correspondence addressed to the Editor unless specifically noted by the sender. Letters and e-mail
addressed to NYASP Executive Board members, along with the response, may be published
with the consent of both parties. Expressions of
opinion in editorials and letters to the Editor
may be edited only with the writer’s consent.
Reprint Authorization: Editors of state school
psychology association newsletters, NASP publications, and other psychology organization
newsletters are authorized to reproduce only
uncopyrighted articles in the NYASP newsletter
provided the author and newsletter are credited.
State editors please note: if you modify or condense a reprinted article, please report that to
your readers. Permission to reprint copyrighted
articles must be obtained directly from the
copyright holder.
Advertisements: Rates for advertising are $500
for a quarter page, $750 for a half-page, and
$1000 for a full page. Special discounts are provided for multi-issue commitments and other
unique needs. Ads that are run in The New York
School Psychologist do not necessarily indicate
official sanction, promotion, or endorsement by
NYASP. However, ads will be accepted based
on legal, social, professional, and ethical considerations.
NY School Psychologist Volume XXXI, Number 1
Feature Articles
tAble
oF
CoNteNtS
Keynote Address by Dr. Susan Sheridan: Success Through School-Family Partnerships
By Amanda Nickerson..................................................................................................................................................................3
Concussion Goes to School: School Psychologist Roles and Skills
By Nicole Huber............................................................................................................................................................................4
Beyond the Transition Plan:
What School Psychologists Can Do to Help Students with Disabilities Transition to College
By Jennifer Baker..........................................................................................................................................................................5
Creating Suicide Safety in Schools
By Kim D’Imperio........................................................................................................................................................................6
The Predictive Validity of the Utility of the Developmental Reading Assessment, Second Edition
By Kim D’Imperio........................................................................................................................................................................7
Assessment of Executive Functioning in Children: New Ideas, New Data, and the CEFI
By Lynette Maheu.........................................................................................................................................................................8
School Law for School Psychologists
By Lynette Maheu........................................................................................................................................................................10
Girls Growing Through Yoga and Wellness: Preventing Anxiety and Eating Disorders in the Schools
By Sara Haugli............................................................................................................................................................................12
Providing Safe and Supporting Environments for LGBTQ Youth
By Kim D’Imperio.......................................................................................................................................................................13
Behavioral Interventions for At-Risk Students
By Alitsa Panteloukas.................................................................................................................................................................14
Bullying Prevention: Issues, Challenges, and Opportunities
By Emily Owens..........................................................................................................................................................................15
An Introduction to the Wechsler Primary and Preschool Scales of Intelligence – 4th Edition
By Lynn M. O'Connell.................................................................................................................................................................16
Panel Response to Bullying Issues
By Ruth Steegmann.....................................................................................................................................................................18
Early Childhood Assessment: Considerations for Diverse and Underserved Populations
By Lynn M. O’Connell................................................................................................................................................................19
Best Practice: Intervention for ADHD in Schools
By Carrie Baeza..........................................................................................................................................................................21
The Leader in Me: How the 7 Habits of Highly Effective People Impact School Culture
Working with Families Affected by Cancer
By Kim D’Imperio.......................................................................................................................................................................23
I’m Ready for College, But I Can’t Find My Backpack:
Executive Strategies for Young Adults with Asperger’s Syndrome and Learning Differences
Graphing RTI Data Using Microsoft Excel
By Patrick S. O’Donnell..............................................................................................................................................................26
In Every Issue
From the Editor............................................i
President’s Message......................................2
Book Review...................................................28
Research Grant Application.......................40
NASP Notes....................................................41
News from NYASP.....................................42
History of NYASP.......................................47
Student Forum................................................51
Tom’s Tech Talk..............................................52
The Ethics Corner..........................................53
Chapter Representatives...............................54
Executive Board Directory............................56
Membership Application...............................57
PreSIdeNt’S meSSAge
Happy 2013! The end of 2012
was a busy - and often exceptional - time for NYASP. As you will
read in this issue, we hosted a
great conference in beautiful
Niagara Falls. If you were able to
attend the conference, then you
experienced the majesty of the
falls, paired with phenomenal
speakers from across the state and
country. If you were unable to
attend the conference, this issue
of The New York School
Psychologist will give you a comprehensive overview of many of
the workshops and professional
development opportunities available
at the conference. I encourage everyone to attend NYASP conference 2013 in White Plains so that you may experience everything
the yearly NYASP conferences have to offer.
On the heels of NYASP conference 2012, Hurricane Sandy blew
in. The devastation wrought is still in evidence in countless locations in the tri-state area, as many communities struggle to recover and return to normalcy. During this time, NYASP provided support via our website and facebook page, providing information
and materials to help school psychologists support students and
families in the aftermath of the hurricane.
And then came Newtown. The horror of this event will never fade,
and even though we reeled from the news, we also stepped up to
provide support. Not only did we reach out to members via our
website, facebook page, and listserves, we also offered support to
the Connecticut Association of School Psychologists, making our
resources available when needed. NYASP members also volunteered via the United Way, to provide crisis response support during the Sandy Hook Elementary School crisis.
Amidst these exceptional events, NYASP has also continued to
advocate for the field of school psychology. We have submitted
comments on EI services and ABA insurance regulations, and prepared a white paper outlining the role of school psychologists in
New York's education reform. NYASP also signed on to the
December 2012 Connecticut School Shooting Position Statement
prepared by an interdisciplinary group on preventing school and
community violence We also continue to advocate for licensure of
school psychologists at the masters level, and continue to strongly campaign for more and better mental health services for our
students.
We have now rung in the New Year, and with that renewed our
resolution to continue to work for our members and the field of
school psychology, doing our utmost to advocate for appropriate
and available mental health services for students, and licensure for
masters level school psychologists. As NYASP president, I hope
to make 2013 an exceptional year by meeting these goals. Y
Sincerely,
Kelly Caci
NYASP mISSIoN StAtemeNt
The New York Association of School Psychologists (NYASP) is the
statewide organization that represents the profession of school psychology.
NYASP serves children, their families, and the school community
by promoting psychological well being, excellence in education,
and sensitivity to diversity through best practices in school psychology.
2
Keynote Address by Dr. Susan Sheridan:
Success Through Family-School Partnerships
Reviewed by Amanda B. Nickerson, Ph.D.
The 2012 Annual Conference of the New York Association of
School Psychologists opened with Dr. Susan Sheridan’s keynote
presentation entitled “Family-School Partnerships: Creating
Meaningful Connections for Student Success.” This address,
which integrated decades of empirical findings with real-life
video clips, set the perfect tone for the conference theme of families and schools working together.
Dr. Sheridan is a George Holmes University Professor and Willa
Cather Emeritus Professor of Educational (School) Psychology at
the University of Nebraska-Lincoln. She is the Director of the
Nebraska Center for Research on Children, Youth, Families and
Schools and Director of the National Center for Research on Rural
Education. Dr. Sheridan has had several federally funded grants
geared toward the establishment of home-school partnerships. Her
primary work is in conjoint behavioral consultation (CBC), a
model of service delivery focused on bringing parents, teachers,
and other care providers together to develop constructive relationships and address shared concerns for children.
In her keynote, Dr. Sheridan reflected on her realization that the
best way to “do right for kids” is to work with families. She
expanded by saying that engaged parents provide positive, nurturing adult-child interactions, and warmth. They also create opportunities for curiosity, autonomy, and learning, and set high and
realistic expectations for student performance. In turn, engaged
schools provide high and realistic expectations for students and
families. They also understand the importance of relationships as
essential to student success, and perceive families as partners in
achieving the goals of schooling. She emphasized that parent
involvement, parent engagement, and family-school partnership
are not the same, either conceptually or in terms of definition.
Parent involvement is a one-way process where schools try to get
parents to do something different. In contrast, parent engagement
recognizes what the parent and child do together to promote learning and healthy development in different contexts.
Family-school partnerships involve active, meaningful, two-way
communication between families and schools. There is a shared
responsibility for learning, where parents are perceived as partners, not merely as recipients of services. These partnerships provide meaningful learning experiences across environments. Dr.
Sheridan cited the ample research support indicating that schools
with high quality family engagement programs have greater levels of student performance and achievement; fewer disciplinary
problems, detentions, in-school suspensions, absenteeism and truancy; and higher levels of parent volunteering and participation on
school decision-making committees.
In terms of how to develop pathways to these partnerships, Dr.
Sheridan reviewed the “5 As” (identified in collaboration with Dr.
Sandra Christenson): Approach, Attitude, Atmosphere, Actions,
and Achievement. Approach refers to the framework for estabNY School Psychologist Volume XXXI, Number 1
lishing families and schools as partners with a shared responsibility for educating and socializing children. Attitudes are the underlying beliefs about families and parents as important, co-equals
can help their children succeed. Atmosphere is the tone or climate
of the community, which includes both the physical setting and
the affective climate of trust, respect, and openness to differences.
Approach, attitude, and atmosphere are prerequisite conditions to
actions, which includes family engagement, home-school communication, establishing continuity, joint decision-making, and
problem-solving, which then lead to achievement.
CBC is a vehicle for creating constructive, goal directed, solutionoriented services for children. It is considered a Tier 3 intervention in which teachers and parents collaborate to: develop goals to
promote academic, behavioral, and social skills in students;
design and implement plans for use at home and school; monitor
students’ progress using data; and evaluate achievement of student
goals. Research conducted by Dr. Sheridan and colleagues, as
well as other research centers around the country, has revealed
that students receiving CBC have shown significant gains in:
teacher-rated academic productivity and academic skills, parentrated homework performance, and math performance and accuracy. In addition, it impacts behavioral and social-emotional skills,
evidenced by increased teacher ratings of on-task and compliant
behavior for students with emotional and behavioral difficulties.
CBC has also been found to be effective with students in Head
Start, children with pediatric/medical needs, students from diverse
cultural background, and youth with developmental disabilities.
In addition to positive outcomes for students, CBC leads teachers
to have more positive beliefs about parent involvement, and
improves the parent-child relationship. There is new evidence to
suggest that CBC impacts the parent-teacher relationship, which
then influences children’s social skills and adaptive behaviors.
Dr. Sheridan made the analogy that real estate focuses on
Location, Location, Location, whereas School Psychology’s
emphasis is Relationships, Relationships, Relationships. Indeed,
family-school partnership was one of the primary themes in the
recent Future of School Psychology Task Force. Dr. Sheridan provided the weblink to http://fsp.unl.edu/ for user-friendly modules
that can be used by trainers, practitioners, graduate students, and
researchers interested in evidence-based family-school partnership programs. There is a wealth of information (e.g., Power
Points, video clips, case studies, integrity checklists) presented in
six modules: (1) Overview of Family-School Partnerships; (2)
Family-School Interventions: Preschool; (3) Parent Consultation;
(4) Parent Education, Training, Interventions; (5) Family-School
Collaboration; and (6) Parent Involvement. NYASP is certainly
grateful to Dr. Sheridan for sharing her expertise, passion, and
resources for helping schools and families work together to do
great things for children! Y
3
Concussion Goes to School:
School Psychologist Roles and Skills
Reviewed by Nicole Huber
Julie Alexander, Ph.D., NCSP is a Clinical Assessment Consultant
at PAR, Inc., who regularly provides proprietary product workshops at the district, state, and national level. Julie began her
informational talk discussing the Return to Play laws, which have
been passed by at least 37 states in the U.S. Return to Play laws
state that a student experiencing symptoms of concussion have to
be removed from play immediately, have to be symptom free for
24 hours before being allowed back into play, and must have written authorization from a doctor that they can return to play. She
also discussed the importance of having a concussion management team within the school to monitor the student’s symptoms as
well as make any necessary arrangements for the student to participate in school. A few examples of arrangements may include
frequent breaks, a shorter school day, a decrease in homework, or
provision of an aide or use of an elevator. A concussion management team within the school should include the school nurse to
track symptoms and effects of exertion, the school psychologist to
determine appropriate accommodations that may be needed, the
Athletic director or teacher, the principal, and any other school
personnel that may be necessary.
Dr. Alexander also spoke about common misconceptions regarding concussions, such as “it’s not really a concussion because you
never blacked out.” She also discussed the medical definition of a
concussion, which is technically called a mild traumatic brain
injury (mTBI), as well as different types of concussions, with
emphasis on the most common type of concussion obtained within school and recreational sports, which is defined by the lateral
movement of the brain (the forward and backward movement of
the brain against the skull). Some very interesting information
provided was that only 10-20 percent of individuals who sustain a
concussion experience a loss of consciousness, and typically they
will yield a “normal” looking brain scan (e.g., CAT scan, MRI)
because injury affects the “software” of the brain (e.g., neurometabolic/ neurochemical processes and physiological processes) not the “hardware” of the brain (actual skull or brain bleed).
Because of the neurometabolic changes experienced, there is a
variability of symptoms experienced as well as duration (several
minutes to days, months, or longer) and intensity of symptoms.
Therefore, the use of the concussion management team at school
can help to ease a student’s transition back to school by tailoring
accommodations.
More specifically, Dr. Alexander provided specific information
from the CDC website, which has specific information available
4
for schools to use to educate staff, students, and families. The
CDC also provides resources for schools to use in concussion
management, such as a Concussion ABC’s chart: Assess the situation; Be alert for signs and symptoms; Contact a health care professional. Additionally the website has checklists available for
school professionals to use to track common signs and symptoms,
as well as exertion effects. It is important to remember as part of
the concussion management team that learning requires a lot of
cognitive exertion because it is new material, therefore as a result
of a concussion, cognitive exertion happens quicker, resulting in
incomplete learning and understanding of new material, and a
lesser ability to remember the material. Lastly, the school psychologist must also track and help the student address and manage
the emotional effects that a concussion can cause, such as anxiety,
depression and withdrawal, cognitive symptoms affecting his/her
ability to learn, and increased symptom sensitivity.
Dr. Alexander also discussed other concussion management systems that can be used in schools, specifically the Acute
Concussion Evaluation (ACE) developed by PAR, Inc., which is
research based and has an application that can be downloaded on
computers and/or smart phones so that all information can be
readily accessed by school personnel. ACE also helps to determine what areas may need accommodations, such as attention/
concentration, working memory, memory consolidation/ retrieval,
processing speed, fatigue, headaches, etc. and help to develop a
plan to treat that student.
Dr. Alexander demonstrated great knowledge regarding concussions and provided extremely important information regarding the
various areas of difficulties that students can experience due to
concussions. She helped to highlight the importance of the role of
the school psychologist in developing a care plan for a student
with a concussion and provided many useful resources that can
help in the process. I thoroughly enjoyed her talk and look forward to hearing more from her in the future. Y
Nicole M. Huber is in her third year of the School Psychology M.A./A.C.
program at the University at Buffalo. She is also completing her internship with the North Tonawanda City School District. She currently
holds a M.A. in Clinical Psychology from Cleveland State Universit
and a B.A. in Psychology/Sociology from Niagara University.
She has been involved in a variety of research laboratories
investigating areas of bullying, adolescent substance use,
college retention rates, and peer relationships.
Beyond the Transition Plan:
What School Psychologists Can Do to Help
Students with Disabilities Transition to College
Reviewed by Jennifer Baker
Dr. Andrea Burch, Director of the Special Academic Services
Center at Alfred University and adjunct instructor for the Division
of Counseling and School Psychology, along with employed graduate assistants who currently work at the Center; Amanda Smith,
Megan Morrision, Kelly Sission, Leah Houk and Katie Schumehl
presented “Beyond the Transition Plan: What School
Psychologists Can Do to Help Students with Disabilities
Transition to College.
Dr. Burch began by describing the academic consulting model
specific to the academic services provided at Alfred University.
Faculty and staff at the Services Center provide systems-level
interventions for students through the utilization of post-secondary school psychology support. In addition, graduate assistants
benefit from the training opportunities they receive. Student need
for emotional and academic supports places strong emphasis on
the need for such a program. Further, the number of students with
disabilities enrolling in post-secondary education is on the rise,
along with an increase in college students with “severe” psychological problems in addition to ADHD and learning disabilities.
Dr. Burch provided information on the variation in law when students move from a secondary to a post-secondary education setting detailing that they are no longer protected under IDEA and
instead are covered under ADA Law 504. Often times students are
ill-prepared for the self- advocacy they must incorporate into their
learning in order to be successful at the post- secondary level.
Students must learn how to self-disclose their disability, in addition to how to access services at their respective schools. They
also need to know how to appropriately interact with instructions
and professors in higher education who may not be familiar with
instructing students with disabilities.
Third year doctoral student Kelly Sission, M.A., described steps
towards building student selfawareness and advocacy. These
steps include intensifying appropriate knowledge of their disability, including what it means to them and how to work within the
disability, and stay cognizant of their rights and responsibilities
and how to identify and request accommodations. High school
educators can help by having prior discussion with students about
their disability and engage in role playing activities involving selfdisclosure. Involving students in IEP meetings and encouraging
students to seek services during their first year may also prove
helpful.
Amanda Smith, M.A., School Psychology Intern presented on the
usefulness of assistive technology in fostering student independence. She emphasized how assistive technology can decrease time
spent on task, as well as the level of frustration and reliance on
others which in turn increases self-esteem and independence.
Leah Houk, M.A., School Psychology Intern cited primary difficulties for students with ADHD which include; temporal myopia,
low persistence, high frustration and the inability to begin tasks.
In order to help these students, school psychologists can use long
and short-term reward systems, create external representation of
tasks, directly teach time management and planning, and teach
self- advocacy skills.
Lastly, Katie Schubmehl, M.A., Doctoral Candidate and Megan
Morrison, M.A., School Psychology Intern stated that the number
of students with Asperger Disorder and Autism is steadily growing across the United States which will require additional attention from educators. College students with these disorders may
exhibit strengths in intellectual areas while experiencing greater
difficulties in areas of communication, engaging in appropriate
social interaction as well as show signs of anxiety and sensory difficulties in the classroom. Strategies which prove helpful in high
school may be incorporated such as; teacher/ student hand signals,
breaks, use of sensory objects, behavioral contracts, and prescripted questions for later sharing.
Overall, the information provided was both helpful and applicable
for helping students with disabilities make a smooth transition to
post- secondary educational opportunities. Y
Jennifer Baker received a B.A. in Psychology from University at Buffalo
and is currently a first year school psychology student at Roberts
Wesleyan College. Her interests include working with students on the
autism spectrum, assessment, and applied behavioral analysis.
5
Creating Suicide Safety in Schools
Reviewed by Kim D’Imperio
On average, there were 62 suicides per year between 2008-2010
for individuals aged 10-19. The three previous years, there were
49 suicides. Already, there seems to be a rise in suicide rates 20112012.
Presenters Pat Breux and Jacquelyn O’connor answered the question: so how can school psychologists help? The role of the
School Psychologist in school-based suicide prevention includes
being knowledgeable about risk facts and warning signs, legal
issues, best practices, and evidence based practices, the advantages of safety plans versus no-harm contracts, crisis assessment
and intervention, and issues related to suicide contagion and clusters. School Psychologists are often in a position to develop their
school’s comprehensive suicide safety plan.
School psychologists should be able to formulate and conduct risk
assessments, differentiate between suicidal behavior and non-suicidal self-injury, conduct crisis assessments and interventions,
involve parents/guardians of potentially suicidal youth in the
intervention process, safely integrate a student into the classroom
following a suicide attempt, and effectively implement postvention procedures. However, schools are often unprepared to handle
issues relating to suicide.
There are seven characteristics of effective school-based prevention programs: (1) specific school needs should be considered, (2)
theory-driven approaches used, (3) comprehensive approach used,
(4) varied interactive teaching methods used, (5) strong and positive relationships promoted, (6) well-trained staff charged with
implementation responsibilities and (7) continually monitored and
assessed.
There are many challenges that arise in the schools, including lack
of leadership support, lack of time, cost of programs, implementation fidelity, perceived prevalence of the problem, acceptability
among stakeholders, prior implementation of prevention programming, awareness of the link between social-emotional functioning and academic progress, and awareness and access to
free/low cost resources.
Keeping all of these things in mind, the New York State Office of
Mental Health Suicide Prevention Initiative began the SPEAK
Campaign in 2005, which provided general awareness of suicide.
In 2007, they developed a strategic plan, including working with
entities across the state, funding for local projects, ASIST (community based, 2-day training), and SafeTALK training. In 2009,
they opened the Suicide Prevention Center of New York. In 2010,
the Youth Specialist position was created to engage schools and
create a toolkit for schools.
6
Creating Suicide Safety in Schools (CSSS) is a free one-day
workshop on youth suicide prevention, intervention, and postvention planning. The workshop uses a problem-solving approach to
build teams’ confidence and facilitate improved readiness.
Schools are encouraged to send an interdisciplinary team to the
training with at least one school-based mental health professional,
such as the school psychologist. The goal for the workshop is simple: to provide the schools with a process/template. Schools need
the tools and competency to figure out what is best for them.
Between September 2011 and July 2012, the CSSS Workshop has
been presented across New York State. Workshop evaluations
were collected from 133 participants to determine the effectiveness of the workshop. The overall rating of the workshop was
98.5% positive, was 98.5% relevant to the job of the raters, and
97.8% of the raters said they were likely to apply information
learned to their job.
Tips for those who work in the schools in addition to school psychologists include being smart and careful about how you address
suicide. It is important to refrain from discussing the risk of suicide because it may actually increase the temptation for those
individuals who are thrill-seeking. Something interesting and surprising to learn is that testimonials do not help as much as we
think they do. Why? Because students do not need to hear about
the depression, they instead need to hear about hope because if
there is no hope, the individual has no reason to hang on. There
appears to be a “normalizing” of suicidality with adults in the
room and it is important to address suicidality immediately. The
workshop was put together to help schools standardize their
approach to dealing with these issues by developing a common
way of documenting and talking about suicide safely. The school
cannot do this in isolation and they need help from family and
community.
Future directions include a partnership with NYASP, evaluation
including follow up surveys of participating schools, incorporation of checklist in pre, post, and follow up surveys to track
progress, pursuit of AFSP/SPRC Best Practice status, and
Training for Trainers development. To learn more about the workshop, contact Pat Breux, Youth Prevention Specialists, Suicide
Prevention Center of New York, 150 Broadway Suite 301,
Menands, NY 12204.
[email protected], PreventSuicideNY.org.Y
Kim D’Imperio is a third year School Psychology graduate student at the
State University of New York at Oswego. She is currently completing her
internship in the Central Square Central School District.
She is a NYASP Student Representative and has served as
a committee member for the 2011 and 2012 NYASP Conferences.
The Predictive Validity of the Utility of the
Developmental Reading Assessment, Second Edition
The Developmental Reading Assessment, Second Edition (DRA2) was developed in 2006 by Joetta Beaver and Mark Carter and
is used as a comprehensive reading assessment to screen, predict,
and progress monitor students. Administration takes up to 45 minutes and is administered by teachers to assess reading engagement, oral reading fluency, reading comprehension, present reading and instructional levels, student progress, and student
strengths and weaknesses.
It is important to note there is a lack of empirical research on the
DRA-2 as there have been no actual studies but only peer
reviewed articles of the technical manual. There were some studies focusing on the DRA in relation to state exams; however, it
was the first edition. Scoring on the DRA-2 is subjective and
based on the teacher. Inter-rater reliability is the extent to which
two or more individuals agree and it provides a measure of consistency. The inter-rater reliability on the DRA-2 is 0.57-0.65,
which is moderate. Good inter-rater reliability is 0.8 or higher.
The presenters of the current study were Dr. James McDougal, Dr.
Michael LeBlanc, Kristina Lavery, Brittany Riesbeck, and KeenaMarie Herne. For the purposes of this study, the DRA-2 was compared to the Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills
(DIBELS) and how well both predict performance on the English
Language Arts assessment (ELA). DIBELS is a brief screening
assessment that looks at early literacy skills. Oral Reading
Fluency (ORF) tests speed and accuracy in one-minute probes and
allows for grade-wide comparisons. The ELA assessment is a
standard proficiency assessment following No Child Left Behind
mandates. It assesses reading, writing, listening, and speaking.
Scores range from 475-780. It is important to note 684 is 3rd
grade proficiency. There has been more research on DIBELS
ORF, which has been found to be a statistically significant predictor of performance on later standardized test scores.
The researchers posed the following questions: (1) Does the
DRA-2 predict future performance on the NYS ELA exam? (2)
How does its ability to predict performance compare to the
DIBELS ORF? (3) If the DRA-2 is a better predictor of student
ELA performance, is it of any practical significance?
In a small, rural school district in Central New York, 546 students
in grade 3 were administered DIBELS ORF and DRA-2. There
were 1,534 students in grades 4-6 who were administered the
Scholastic Reading Inventory (SRI), DIBELS ORF, and DRA-2.
The assessments were administered by teachers and school psychologists.
The researchers looked at the correlation between the DRA-2
(Fall & Winter) and ELA scores and ORF (Fall & Winter) and
ELA scores, with the correlation at 0.59. The correlation between
ORF and ELA is 0.56, on average.
The researchers also looked at the regression of the DRA-2 (Fall)
and ELA scores and ORF (Fall) and ELA scores. The regression
indicates ORF predicts ELA, with r2 = 0.32 and a Standard Error
of Estimate (SEE) of 20.86. The regression indicates DRA-2 predicts ELA, with r2 = 0.35 and SEE of 20.59. The DRA-2 is a statistically significant better predictor of ELA performance.
In addition, the researchers also looked at the hierarchical regression of ORF (Fall) + DRA-2 (Full) and ELA. This indicates that
r2 = 0.32, with an increase to 0.37 by adding the DRA-2 with SEE
of 20.11. This means that 35% of the variance is accounted for by
the DRA-2. There is a 68% chance scores will fall within 20.59
points of the students’ actual score. By adding the DRA-2, there is
a 5% increase in explanation of variation. While it is statistically
significant, it only improves accuracy by less than a point. Thus,
there is no practical significance by adding the DRA-2. In addition, it takes time, money, and personnel.
The researchers were now prepared to answer their original
research questions: (1) Does the DRA-2 predict future performance on the NYS ELA exam? Yes. (2) How does its ability to predict performance compare to the DIBELS ORF? DRA-2 is a statistically significant better predictor of student performance on
the ELA. (3) If the DRA-2 is a better predictor of student ELA performance, is it of any practical significance? Because the ORF
only predicts within 5% of what the DRA-2 can predict, the practical significance is lacking.
The researchers concluded that the DRA-2 is meant to drive
instruction at the Tier 2 level and is not meant to be used as a
screener because it will not tell you anything not already known.
The DRA-2 and DIBELS ORF are both statistically significant
predictors of NYS ELA scores; however, in the researchers’ ability to predict how the students will perform, the difference is not
of any practical significance. Y
7
Assessment of Executive Functioning in Children:
New Ideas, New Data, and the Comprehensive
Executive Functioning Inventory (CEFI)
Reviewed by Lynette Maheu
2012 NYASP Conference attendees
were given the opportunity to attend
a discussion of Executive Functions,
presentation by Jack Naglieri, Ph.D.
Dr. Naglieri is well known in the
field of school psychology, as an
author of over 20 books, 35 tests and
rating scales, and 250 research articles on cognitive assessment, cognitive interventions, specific learning
disability eligibility determination, and measuring psychopathology and resilience. This current workshop explored Executive
Functions, outlined the research behind a new rating scale, and
tied it together with research-based interventions.
Dr. Naglieri began his talk by sharing his background as a musician. When he was teaching music, discovered that students
learned differently, which got him interested in trying to understand how people learn. Dr. Naglieri went on to discuss the familiar story of Phineas Gage, who survived an accident where a railroad spike impaled his frontal lobe. Based on Phineas Gage’s significant changes in behavior, scientists started the discovery that
the prefrontal cortex of the brain is involved with different dimensions of cognition and behavior, playing a key role in impulse
control, maintenance of set, and monitoring ongoing behavior and
socially appropriate behaviors. This initial discovery lead to further research, and ultimately to Alexander Luria coining the term
“Executive Function” (EF).
When Dr. Naglieri and colleagues recently researched the way EF
is currently defined, they found over 30 different definitions,
including mentions of self-directed sets actions; organizing one’s
behavior over time; enabling purposeful, goal-directed behavior,
etc. Basically, what many of those definitions boil down to is that
EF is “how you do what you do”. One of the questions explored
through this presentation was, is EF a unitary construct (Executive
Function) or is it multidimensional with independent abilities
(Executive Functions)? This was researched through extensive
factor analysis with parent, teacher, and self-ratings. Using different methods, one factor was consistently found. Therefore, Dr.
Naglieri ultimately concluded that “Executive Function, not
Functions, is the best term to use”.
A recent review found that 168 measures exist to evaluate EF.
During this presentation, some commonly known measures were
reviewed for their standardization methods and psychometric
properties. Dr. Naglieri emphasized that school psychologists
need to be sure to closely read the manuals of the tools we use,
because the psychometric properties can be misleading (i.e. due to
low reliability, small or unrepresentative sample size, etc). Since
the data we gather on children on a daily basis is used for very
important decisions, we have an ethical responsibility to know the
properties of the measures we are using.
A new measure of EF has recently been published by Dr. Naglieri
and Dr. Sam Goldstein: the Comprehensive Executive Function
Inventory (CEFI). The CEFI is a rating scale designed to measure
behaviors that are associated with EF for youth ages 5-18 years.
Parent, teacher, and self-ratings are available, and there are both
paper versions (with hand scoring or software scoring) and online
forms. The CEFI is available in English and Spanish. In relation
to the problems identified earlier with other published measures,
the CEFI was developed to demonstrate the highest psychometric
properties.
Each form of the CEFI yields a Full Scale score (mean of 100,
standard deviation of 15, with lower scores meaning more difficulties) and nine separate content scale scores:
Attention - how well a youth can avoid distractions, concentrate
on tasks, and sustain attention
Emotion Regulation – a youth’s control and management of
emotions
Flexibility – how well a youth can adapt to circumstances, including problem solving ability
Inhibitory Control – reflects a youth’s control over behavior or
impulses
Initiation – a youth’s ability to begin tasks or projects without
being prompted
Organization – how well a youth manages personal effects,
work, or multiple tasks
Planning – how well a youth develops and implements strategies
to accomplish tasks
Self-Monitoring – a youth’s self-evaluation of his/her performance or behaviors
Working Memory – how a youth keeps important information in
mind in order that he/she know what to do and how to do it,
including remembering important things, instructions, and steps
(Continued on page 10)
8
UnMASC the Many Faces of Anxiety
The
The Multidimensional
Multidimensional Anxiety
Anxiety Scale
Scale ffor
or Children
Children
2
nd E
dition™ (MASC
(MASC 2
™) assesses
assesses tthe
he presence
presence
2nd
Edition™
2™)
of symptoms
sympttoms related
related tto
o aanxiety
nxiety disorders
disorders iin
n youth
youth
of
aged 8 to
to 19
19 years.
years.
aged
The CEFI is a comprehensive evaluation of
executive function strengths and weaknesses
in youth aged 5 to 18 years.
Provides scores on:
ěũũAttentionũũěũũEmotion
ũũ
ũũ ũũ
Regulation ě Flexibilityũũũũ
ěũũInhibitory
ũũ
ControlũũěũũInitiation
ũũ ũũ
ě Organization
ěũũPlanningũũěũũSelf-Monitoring
ũũ
ũũ ũũ
ě Working Memoryũũũũ
ěũ("2ũ(-ũ3'#ũ#1+8ũ("#-3(ă!3(.-Ĕũ"(%-.2(2Ĕũũũ
ũ
ũ ũ ũ
ũ
ũ
ũũũ
ũũũ
ũũũ31#3,#-3ũ/+--(-%ũ-"ũ,.-(3.1(-%ũ.$ũũ
ũ
ũ
ũ
ũ ũũ
ũũũ
ũũũ-7(#38ı/1.-#ũ8.43'ũ
ũ
ũ
ũ
ěũ22#22#2ũũ
ũ
ũ ũ 1."ũ1-%#ũ.$ũ#,.3(.-+Ĕũũ
ũ
ũ ũ
ũũ
ũũ/'82(!+Ĕũ!.%-(3(5#Ĕũ-"ũ
ũũ
ũ
ũ
ũ #'5(.1+ũ28,/3.,2
ũ
ũ
ũũ
ěũ#-#1+(9#"ũ-7(#38ũ(2.1"#1ũĸĹũ
ũ
ũ
ũ
ũ
ũũ
ũũ-"#7ũ"($$#1#-3(3#2ũ!'(+"1#-ũ6(3'ũ3'#ũũũ
ũũ
ũ
ũ
ũ
ũ ũũũ
ũũ"(2.1"#1ũ$1.,ũ3'#ũ%#-#1+ũ/./4+3(.ũũ
ũ
ũ ũ
ũ
ũ
Normed on a sample
p of 3,500
,
yyouth who represent
p
the U.S. p
population:
p
ě Race/Ethnicity
ě Gender
ě Geographic Region
ě Parental Education
ě Age
www.mhs.com/CEFI
*FREE
Book Offer!
P
Pre-order
re-order a
any
ny C
CEFI
EFI K
Kit
it a
and
nd rreceive
eceive
aF
FREE
REE b
book,
ook, v
value
alue o
off $
$40.
40.
Offer
Offer valid
valid u
until
ntil December
December 31,
31, 2
2012.
012.
www.mhs.com/MASC2
B
Byy Jack
J a c k A.
A. N
Naglieri,
aglie ri , P
Ph.D.,
h . D. , &
E
Eric
ric B.
B. Pi
Pickering,
c ke ring , Ph.D.,
Ph . D. ,
with
with Spanish
Spanis h Handouts
Han dou t s by
by
T
Tulio
u lio Otero,
O te r o, P
Ph.D.,
h . D. , & Mary
Mar y
M
Moreno,
o re no, Ph.D.
Ph . D .
Offers
O ff e r s a fre
fresh
sh practical
prac tical ap
approach
proach to
to tteaching
eaching
K-12
grades.
Applying
sstruggling
trug gling sstudents
tude nts iin
n tthe
he K
-12 g
ra d e s . A
p plying
their
expert
off h
how
the
th
eir e
xpe r t knowledge
kn ow l e d g e o
ow cchildren
hildre n llearn,
earn , th
e
authors
shortt qu
questionnaire
au
thor s have
have incorporated
incorporate d a shor
estionnaire
psychologists
and
75
ffor
or sschool
chool p
s yc h o l o g i s t s a
nd 7
5 iintervention
nte r ve ntion
handouts
h
andouts tto
o assist
assist teachers.ũũ
teache r s .ũũ
(Continued from page 8)
The questions in the CEFI are phrased in both positive and negative directions (i.e. “how often does the child think before acting”
and “how often does the child find it hard to control his/her
actions”). There are validity scales of Consistency, Negative
Impressions, and Positive Impressions. There are also methods to
determine significant differences between content scales to identify personal strengths and weaknesses, and a way to determine
significant differences between raters. This is not to say that one
rater is right when the other is wrong; it is important to consider,
for example, that lower scores from one teacher may mean that
he/she manages the environment in a way which is more conducive to that particular student. The CEFI was also researched
with different populations, and is determined to appropriately distinguish differences between control groups and students with
ADHD, Autism Spectrum Disorders, Learning Disabilities, and
Mood Disorders.
about giving the students strategies, but facilitating discussions to
help students become more self-reflective about the use of strategies. For example, one study was discussed where teachers asked
such questions of their students as, “What was your goal? What
strategies did you use? What will you do next time?”. In that
study, significant differences were found pre- and post- intervention, and even one year later in a follow-up, the comparison group
of students maintained their growth over the control group. This
leads us to conclude that if we can teach students to be more
strategic and think about their thinking, it can lead to long-term
effects. In the CEFI manual, there are many recommendations to
address the different areas of EF.
Finally, strategies were discussed that can provide remedial and
compensatory support for children with EF deficits. After an EF
evaluation, the first critical step is to talk to the child about what
was found. EF instruction can also be defined as using cognitive
strategies, or in other words teaching a child to think about how
they do what they do. Dr. Naglieri emphasized that it is crucial to
teach youth “how to think”, not “how to do”, and that being smart
is about thinking, not about remembering. In addition, it is not just
http://nichcy.org/research/ee/learning-strategies
The CEFI is available through MHS (www.mhs.com/cefi). For
further information on EF and strategy instruction, Dr. Naglieri
recommends the following resources:
http://www.ncld.org/students-disabilities/ld-educationteachers/strategic-instruction-model-how-teach-how-learn Y
Lynette Maheu is a school psychologist at Monroe 2-Orleans BOCES.
She is the current Editor of The New York School Psychologist and
previously served on the NYASP Board as a Student Representative.
School Law for School Psychologists
Reviewed by Lynette Maheu
On Saturday, October 27, 2012, a full audience attended Dr.
Shirley Woika’s workshop on school law for school psychologists,
which also provided attendees with NASP CPD credits. Dr. Woika
is the Director of Clinical & Field Training in Penn State’s School
Psychology program, and has spent over 19 years working as a
teacher, school psychologist, special education supervisor, and
central office administrator.
School psychologists are often familiar with special education
laws, such as IDEA, but may not have as much knowledge about
laws that apply to all students. Therefore, this presentation
focused on the legal rights that all students have. Dr. Woika immediately started the presentation in a very interactive manner, asking participants to answer true false questions about school law.
Such statements were:
- Students who refuse to salute the flag may be required
to stand in respectful silence.
- School officials must permit students to distribute controversial
religious materials on campus if it does not cause a disruption.
- Teachers cannot be held liable for student injuries that occur in
breaking up a fight.
- Teachers can be held liable for any injury that occurs if they
leave their classroom unattended.
It was fairly evident that many participants were unsure of the
truth to these statements. Do you know which are true or false?
(The answers at the end of this article.)
In order to increase participants’ knowledge, the following areas
were explored: criminal law, juvenile law, civil law, educator liability, tort action, freedom of expression, search of students, and
educational malpractice.
Criminal Law cases are tried by a prosecutor who has the burden
of proving beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant committed the crime for which he or she is accused. Often times, though,
the defendant accepts a plea after the lawyer and prosecutor plea
bargain. School psychologists are typically not concerned with
criminal law because they do not encounter criminal liability in
(Continued on next page)
10
their work. However, it is illegal to contribute to the delinquency
of a minor.
Juvenile Law is similar to criminal law, except that juveniles who
commit criminal acts are not guilty of a crime; they commit an
“act of juvenile delinquency”. It is neither a felony nor a misdemeanor. Also, juveniles do not receive a sentence, but a judge
enters a disposition that focuses on “the needs of the child”.
Civil Law is when a person who believes he/she has been
wronged (plaintiff) sues another (defendant). This area of law is
most likely to impact school psychologists, due to duty to warn
and confidentiality. The standard of proof is lower here; instead of
“beyond a reasonable doubt”, there needs to be a
“preponderance of evidence”. Two areas of
civil law were explored: educator liability and
tort action.
Educator Liability indicates that educators
must provide adequate supervision and exercise
reasonable care to protect students from hazards. Schools and individuals can be held liable
if harm occurs when supervision is absent or
negligently performed. For example, many
cases have been tried over the injury of a student while the teacher was not in the room. The
most critical question to answer in these cases is:
would the injury have happened if the teacher was present? The
right and obligation to control behavior of students in school is
known as in loco parentis, meaning “in place of the parent”,
which is bound by reasonableness and good faith without malice.
Tort action involves injury or wrongful action for which the legal
system may provide a remedy (which is often financial). In other
words, it is when one party sues another. Oftentimes, judicial
precedent (what courts have decided in the past) is viewed more
closely than the actual statute (law). Educators may be sued for
willful or negligent actions. There are three classes of torts: strict
liability, intentional interference, and negligence. Negligence is
conduct that falls below an established standard of care and result
in an injury. Four elements must be considered: Did the defendant
owe the plaintiff a duty of care? Did the defendant breach that
duty? Did the negligence cause the injury? What was the injury or
actual loss? Schools can reduce the risk of negligence by developing policies and procedures for volunteers, maintaining liability insurance, providing orientation and training, and
screening/supervising all employees.
Student Freedom of Expression: Before the 1960s, the First
Amendment (freedom of speech) did not apply to public schools.
However, there has since been four landmark supreme court cases
which challenged this. In Tinker v. DesMoines (1969), several
students had planned to wear black armbands to protest the
Vietnam War. School officials quickly adopted a no-armband rule,
and after the students came to school with the armbands they were
suspended. The students claimed this was a violation of their First
Amendment rights, and ultimately the Supreme Court ruled in
their favor, stating that “It can hardly be argued that either students or teachers shed their constitutional rights to freedom of
speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate." (Justice Abe
Fortas). However, in Bethel v. Fraser (1986) the Court ruled that
vulgar and offensive speech is not protected. In Hazelwood v.
Kuhlmeier (1988) the Court ruled that expression in school-sponsored activities (i.e. newspapers) can be limited, and in Morse v.
Frederick (2007) the Court ruled that schools can prohibit student
expression of messages promoting illegal drug use at school
events. Further issues were discussed in this workshop, including
disruptive expressions, dress (uniforms, gang activity), and hair
(length, color).
Search of Students: School officials have an
obligation to respond when students bring
drugs or guns to school; however, procedures
must be established for confiscating and
returning most other items. Without such rules,
educators can be accused of “trespass of private personal property”. Schools need to exercise good judgment in personal searches, using
reasonable cause (different than probable
cause, which is what police searches are governed by). Locker/desk searches, strip searches, dog sniff searches, privacy issues, and
metal detectors were all discussed.
Educational Malpractice: Several cases were discussed in which
a student or their family sued their school claiming malpractice.
However, most courts have rejected claims of educational malpractice because it is hard to determine the causal relationship
between the school’s actions and poor outcomes for the student,
and many courts are reluctant to get involved in the public policy
issue of the quality of education. However, Dr. Woika noted that
if a strong case appears in the future, it could bring a flurry of educational malpractice cases.
In sum, this was a lively presentation that was speckled with personal stories and real life cases. These examples truly illustrated
the basic components of school law that school psychologists
should be familiar with. It was obvious that the workshop attendees left entertained and full of new knowledge. Dr. Woika recommended an excellent resource that, although geared towards
principals, is very applicable for school psychologists. The book
is Principals teaching the law: 10 legal lessons your teachers
must know, by Schimmel and Eckes (2010).
And in case you’re wondering, the above statements are false,
true, true (Teacher Liability Protection Act), and false (but true in
cases where they are proved negligent). Y
Lynette Maheu is a school psychologist at Monroe 2-Orleans BOCES.
She is the current Editor of The New York School Psychologist and
previously served on the NYASP Board as a Student Representative.
11
Girls Growing Through Yoga and Wellness:
Preventing Anxiety and Eating Disorders in the Schools
Reviewed by Sara Haugli
“Girls Growing Through Yoga and Wellness: Preventing Anxiety
and Eating Disorders in the Schools” was presented at NYASP
2012 in Buffalo, to a room full of graduate students and professionals. The presenters, Dr. Cook-Cottone and Linda Kane, were
full of energy and passion as they spoke to the crowd.
Linda Kane pulled us in as she spoke about how her 5th graders are
already talking about dieting. This presentation focused on the
unfortunate prevalence of eating disorders and anxiety in young
women and how school professionals can work at preventing
these diseases. According to the presentation, current estimates
suggest that some form of eating disordered behavior occurs in
30% of girls. Likewise, anxiety disorders occur in 12% of children
and adolescents. It is important to note that without treatment,
20% of people with serious eating disorders die. Eating disorders
are the most deadly of all mental illnesses and among the most
difficult to treat. Unfortunately, intervention is not always successful with eating disorders, which makes prevention programs
that much more important.
Girls Growing in Wellness and Balance (GGWB) is a girls group
that is implemented at the 5th grade level. GGWB is evidence
based and aims to prevent anxiety and eating disorders while
teaching girls to empower themselves and view one another as
unique, strong women. GGWB opens the eyes of these fragile
girls and allows them to see that media can make them feel bad
about themselves and that magazines distort their images. This
Tier I/II level program is modeled on a positive psychology
framework. Interestingly, throughout this eating disorder/anxiety
prevention program, group leaders never once mention eating disorders. Instead, group leaders work to build a strong resilience and
mature personal characteristics that will make them less likely to
develop an eating disorder.
The program is structured to have a body, mind, and mind and
body component. Each session starts with yoga, an action, is then
followed by a thinking based activity and journaling, and ends
with an integration of the mind and body or visualization/relaxation exercise. Ideally, the group is run as an after school program.
Starting the group with yoga allows the girls to decompress from
school and get out some energy. The girls are able to focus much
better on the content lessons of GGWB after yoga. Yoga provides
physical self-esteem, mind body awareness, and body and spirit
wellness. The 12 session sequence focuses on internal awareness,
emotional integration, feelings, coping, changing automatic negative thoughts, setting boundaries, strong women, and sociocultural pressures. During the group’s final sessions, the girls make
their own magazine and depict what a strong woman means to
them.
12
Dr. Cook-Cottone and Linda Kane are passionate about their
work. This group has been run in multiple schools for over 10
years. They have found significant decrease in body dissatisfaction attributed to group participation, significant decrease in
future intentions to engage in eating disorder behavior, improvement in media literacy knowledge, and significant effects found
on the social self-concept scale.
Through many revisions and hard work, Dr. Cook-Cottone and
Linda Kane were able to announce the release of the GGWB manual. This will be the first yoga based girls group manual published
that focuses on the prevention of eating disorders and anxiety.
They gave the audience a preview of what type of useful lessons
to expect in the manual:
“Another way to think about how our brain works is by using the
Hot Soup model. Imagine a freshly poured, steaming hot bowl of
soup- your favorite kind. The soup spoon is right next to it, waiting to be lifted. You might sprinkle some crackers or cheese into
the soup, or eat it just how it is. It smells delicious, and you can
feel your mouth start to water at this delicious meal in front of
you. The soup, however, cannot be eaten just yet; It is piping hot.
When we are upset or are facing a problem to solve, our brain is
just like hot soup: It is too hot, and needs to be cooled before we
can eat it. Nothing is wrong with the soup; it is still going to be
delicious and good for us, it just needs to cool down. Like the
soup, when our brain is “too hot,” or we are having strong feelings, it needs to be “cooled down” before acting or making decisions. Our moms often tell us, “wait a few minutes and it will cool
off” or they say, “blow on it and it will cool off.” The soup needs
TIME and AIR. This is exactly what the brain needs when it is
wound up and ready to react: TIME and AIR. So, we wait and we
breathe. The results, the thinking and the feeling parts of our
brain can work effectively together to help us make a good
choice.”
There are many more kid friendly examples and lessons in their
newly published book, “Girls Growing in Wellness and Balance:
Yoga and Life Sills to Empower.” The manual can be found at
www.psychprocesses.com/store/. Y
Sara Haugli is a fourth year school psychology doctoral candidate at the
University at Buffalo. Her practicum placements this year include Jacobs
Neurological Institute and West Seneca Central School District.
Providing Safe and Supporting Environments for
LGBTQ Youth
The presentation, delivered by Emily Owens and Dr. Amanda
Nickerson, began with a definition of terms for those who may not
be aware. The first thing to address is the difference between gender identify and biological sex. Gender identity is a person’s
innate sense of (or lack thereof) maleness, femaleness, both genders, or somewhere in between. Biological sex refers to a person’s
genitalia medically assessed and is established in utero or at birth.
An individual is gender-variant when their innate gender identity
does not align with their biological sex. The term transgender
encompasses people whose anatomies and/or appearances do not
conform to predominant gender roles. They have physical and/or
behavioral characteristics that readily identify them as having
non-conforming gender identity. This includes transsexual, cross
dressers, performers, intersex and gender benders/androgynies.
The DSM-IV-TR diagnostic criteria for gender identity disorder
includes four main criteria: (A) a strong persistent cross-gender
identification (not merely a desire for any perceived cultural
advantages of being the other sex), (B) persistent discomfort with
his or her sex or sense of inappropriateness in the gender role of
that sex, (C) not concurrent with physical intersex condition, and
(D) causes clinically significant distress or impairment in social,
occupational, or other important areas of functioning.
It is then important to define bullying and harassment. Bullying is
the intentional, repeated acts of verbal, physical, or written
aggression by a peer (or group) operating from a position of
strength or power, with the goal of hurting the victim physically
or damaging status and/or social reputation. Harassment is generally defined as conduct which annoys, threatens, intimidates,
alarms, or puts a person in fear of safety. Unwanted, unwelcome,
and uninvited behavior that demeans, threatens or offends the victim and results in a hostile environment based on race, color,
national origin, sex, disability, or other “legally protected status.”
Types of bullying and harassment includes physical bullying
(punching, shoving), verbal bullying (name calling, offensive
remarks), indirect bullying (rumors), and cyber bullying (email,
text messaging, chat rooms).
Individuals are expected to assume the gender of their biological
sex as well as the gender roles associated with It, causing societal
challenges. Actually, biological sex, gender identity, gender
expression and sexual orientation run on a continuum and do not
have to be in congruence with one another. It is difficult to develop a positive LGBTQ identity and succeed within hostile environments. There can be a lack of safety, including verbal and
physical harassment, and intimidation by peers. There can also be
feelings of isolation, vulnerability and invisibility, which contribute to poor academic performance and social isolation. Some
risks for LGBTQ youth includes an increased risk for depression,
anxiety, drug and alcohol abuse, eating disorders, harassment,
homelessness, dropping out of school, self-harm, etc. There are
often limited resources to address the mental health concerns of
LGBTQ youth and a lack of continuity of care given to LGBTQ
youth by their schools, communities, and their families. Many
mental-health professionals have little or no education in counseling LGBTQ persons. This is especially true for transgender youth.
In the schools, it is important to recognize who in the student’s life
is supportive of the coming out process for them. Identify who in
the family knows and know their level of support (or lack thereof). It is important to discuss the pros and cons of coming out with
the student and have resources on hand. It is important to not
assume sexual orientation as gender identity does not need to
align with sexual orientation. Recognize that LGBTQ is a sociocultural issue and is not a pathology.
Common topics in therapy include body image, grief and loss,
sexual concerns, social isolation, religious concerns, substance
abuse, violence/abuse. With the youth’s consent, contact the parents to offer family support because family members may need
just as much support as the youth. The family may suffer rejection
from friends, other family members, or coworkers. It is challenging to find qualified mental and physical health providers. It is
important to recognize your own limitations regarding these
issues and if necessary, seek consultation, supervision, and local
support groups.
School personnel can reduce LGBTQ bullying and harassment by
responding directly to concerns. It is important to know (and
develop, if necessary) anti-bullying harassment policies that
specifically deal with sexual orientation and/or gender identity.
School Psychologists may need to train teachers on effective
intervention strategies, including intervention, when harassment
takes place.
School personnel can help make a difference by becoming a visible ally. There is a program developed by GLSEN that highlights
what was discussed during the workshop. The materials are free
to print. Again, address name-calling, bullying, and/or harassment
immediately. Take the opportunity to use as a teachable moment,
indicate the behavior is unacceptable, hold the offender accountable, and support the targeted student.
The workshop ended on this final note: no one can change a
child’s gender identity or sexual orientation but we, as school psychologists, can directly impact how a child feels about their identity. When supported by their families and schools, LGBTQ youth
have the opportunity to thrive and develop strong self-esteem. Y
13
Reviewed by Alitsa Panteloukas
Dr. Randy Sprick, an adjunct faculty member at the University of
Oregon, presented “Behavioral Interventions for At-Risk
Students” at the 2012 NYASP conference in Niagara Falls, New
York. Dr. Sprick is an educational consultant and trainer in
Eugene, Oregon. His concentrations include
helping teachers, principals, and other staff
develop schools and classrooms that encourage
student responsibility and motivation, while
assisting with issues regarding discipline and
classroom management. He is the director of
Teaching Strategies, Inc. and the lead consultant for Safe & Civil Schools.
Third, set formalized goals with the student without the need of
contracts or rewards.
Dr. Sprick enthusiastically opened the presentation with a message: Don’t forget the small
stuff. When it comes to classroom management
and behavioral intervention strategies, general
education teachers are in a powerful position to
eliminate misbehaviors by focusing on simple
Tier I interventions as their primary defense.
Fifth, increase positive interactions between
student and teacher. Students should not be
given attention only when they are misbehaving. Continuous positive reinforcement is critical when trying to change a negative behavior
for a positive one. If the above mentioned
strategies prove to be ineffective, look to discover what the function of the misbehavior is.
Misbehavior can serve several functions: a means
to escape, power-seeking, attention-seeking, offending behavior,
and habitual behavior; all of which can be redirected with appropriate interventions.
It seems that with the integration of RTI and evidence-based interventions within the school systems, teachers are
welcoming the assistance they can receive through FBA’s and
other support services without putting sufficient effort into basic
behavioral management strategies. Granted, intervening with
troublesome students can be exceptionally trying; however, it is
best practice to conduct an intervention with fidelity before
exhausting it. All behavioral management plans “should begin
with a standard protocol of data-driven, early staged interventions
that both general and special education teachers are trained in…
to rule out potentially simple and easy to implement interventions.”
Dr. Sprick listed several basic behavioral interventions proven to
be successful with defiant students; all of which allow for data
collection to show the progression of the student’s behavior.
The first one involves arranging for a planned discussion to take
place between student and teacher at a neutral time during the day
to talk about the problem. Why this simple act fails to work is
because the teacher chooses the time of the infraction to scold the
student about their behavior which may result in embarrassment,
anger, defensiveness, negative attention, and classroom disruptions. Instead, calmly speak to the student at an appointed time
about the behavior and document the discussion and date.
Second, provide academic assistance to rule out that the issue is
not due to a “cannot” problem. Use district based norms to compare the students’ current achievement to their grade level and
determine specifically where they are struggling.
14
Fourth, utilize data decision making and debriefing by previously
formulating a plan to collect data and make the
student aware that the teacher is “keeping tabs”
on his or her behavior. Just the act of objectively collecting data increases the likelihood of the
behavior getting better on its own 33% of the
time. In addition, provide excessive positive
reinforcement when appropriate behavior is displayed.
As a preventative method to identify students who are at-risk for
trouble behaviors, Dr. Sprick shared several “red flags” that each
school district should have as standard precautionary measures.
Chronic absenteeism, failing grades in two or more classes, and
retentions are key indicators of students who need to be monitored
for academic and or behavior difficulties.
Dr. Sprick also provided several forms (which are accessible
through the NYASP website) that provide organized ways to keep
track of interviews, data, and the design and implementation of
interventions. This way, teachers can track these simple interventions through systematic data collection before ruling out their
ineffectiveness. This type of tracking is also purposeful as preliminary documentation if additional support services or more intensive interventions are required.
Alitsa Panteloukas is a second-year school psychology graduate
student at Marist College and is currently completing her practicum work
in the Newburgh Enlarged City School District. Alitsa is a NASP
Student Leader and a NYASP Student Liaison for 2012-2013.
Bullying Prevention:
Issues, Challenges, and Opportunities
Reviewed by Emily Owens
Amanda Nickerson, Ph.D. and Michelle Serwacki, B.A. presented “Bullying Prevention: Issues, Challenges, and Opportunities”
at the 2012 NYASP Conference on October 26, 2012 in Niagara
Falls. Dr. Nickerson is an Associate Professor and Director of the
Alberti Center for Bullying Abuse Prevention at the university at
Buffalo, SUNY. Serwacki is a third year graduate student in the
Combined Counseling and School Psychology doctoral program
at the University at Buffalo, SUNY and works with Dr. Nickerson
in the Alberti Center.
Dr. Nickerson began this presentation by defining bullying as
intentional, and usually repeated acts of verbal, physical, written,
or electronic aggression by a peer (or group of peers) operating
from a position of strength or power with the goal of hurting the
victim physically or damaging the victim’s status and/or social
reputation. Within this broad definition, she differentiated by specific subtypes, such as physical, verbal, indirect, and cyber bullying. Dr. Nickerson maintained within this definition that,
“Although not all aggression is bullying, all bullying is aggression.”
Detailing the complex nature of bullying, Dr. Nickerson stated
that the factors of influence are imbedded within the bully and target themselves, as well as their interactions with family members,
staff, peers, community, and social culture at large. Research
reviewed within this presentation indicated that bullying tends to
peak in grades 4 through 7 and is more likely to occur in less
supervised areas such as bathrooms, hallways, playgrounds,
buses, etc. Although estimates vary widely, approximately one in
three adolescents are involved in bullying as a bully, a target, or as
both.
Dr. Nickerson argued the importance of bullying prevention within this presentation, stating that students who bully are more likely to experience legal or criminal troubles as adults and are less
likely to develop and maintain positive relationships later in life.
In addition, students who are targets of bullying experience higher rates of loneliness, peer rejection, school avoidance, anxiety,
depression, and suicidal ideation.
The essential elements of a comprehensive school wide bullying
prevention program include data collection, whole-school antibullying policy, skill development, awareness and supervision, a
continuum of response to bullying, and parental inclusion.
Serwacki continued the discussion of school-wide anti-bullying
programs by discussing both effective and ineffective intervention
components.
Factors that have demonstrated little efficacy include one-time
assemblies, zero-tolerance policies, and peer-led conflict resolution. Although brief assembles help to raise awareness and obtain
student buy-in, no lasting impact from these one-time events has
been observed. Zero-tolerance policies are discouraged as they
may result in under-reporting bullying and there is limited evidence that they serve to curb bullying behavior. Finally, policies
focused on peer mediation actually saw an increase in victimization and research suggests that the grouping of bullies together
may actually reinforce this behavior.
Serwacki highlighted successful factors of school-wide anti-bullying programs, indicating that such programs are often intensive
and long lasting, carefully monitored, evidence-based, and
include parent training. The conduction of a needs assessment
prior to the selection of a bullying prevention program is necessary in order to include representative stakeholders, identify gaps
in the school’s current practices, evaluate the level of administrative support, and determine teacher and administrative acceptability.
One challenge in determining the efficacy of school-wide bullying prevention programs is the issue of implementation fidelity, or
how close the actual implementation of a program compares to its
original design. This serves to be a problematic component as
research trials are often highly monitored and less attention is paid
to program implementation in practice. Therefore, those programs
that are implemented with integrity and systematically evaluated
report the most positive outcomes.
In conclusion, Nickerson and Serwacki introduced the SchoolWide Bullying Prevention Guide as a resource for educators on
choosing from the many bullying prevention programs available.
These guidelines encourage the selection of programs that are
geared toward PreK-12 students, include content focused on bullying prevention alone or in combination with skills needed for
social-emotional success, are based on solid research and theory,
include universal (school-wide) interventions, and are evaluated
within the United States.
For more information and resources on topics addressed within
this presentation, including data collection procedures, Dignity
for All Students Act, skill development, and program selection,
visit the Alberti Center for Bullying Abuse Prevention Website at
http://gse.buffalo.edu/alberticenter/. Y
Emily Owens is a fourth year PsyD student at SUNY Albany. Her interests are in crisis prevention, intervention, and postvention.
15
An Introduction to the Wechsler Primary
and
th
Preschool Scales of Intelligence – 4 Edition
Reviewed by Lynn M. O'Connell, Psy.D.
The Wechsler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence
(Wechsler, 1967) recently underwent its fourth revision and is
now available for purchase (WPPSI-IV; Pearson, 2012). At the
2012 NYASP Conference, Michael Grau, Psy.D.,
([email protected]),Pearson representative, provided
an overview of the newest Wechsler measure including revision
goals; theoretical foundations of test structure; subtest changes;
changes to administration, scoring, and interpretation; and information about the enhanced normative sample and psychometric
properties. Over four years of collaborative work with an expert
advisory panel and feedback from practicing psychologists resulted in extensive changes to this battery which will likely produce
greater utility of this popular tool for assessing the cognitive abilities of young children.
Revision Goals. The WPPSI-IV is an innovative measure of cognitive development for preschoolers and young children aged two
years six months to seven years seven months, extending the age
range upward from 7:3. The revision goals of the WPPSI-IV were
created based on contemporary models of intelligence with a
strong emphasis on child-friendly, developmentally appropriate
features. Goals included (1) updated theoretical foundations; (2)
increased developmental appropriateness; (3) increased userfriendliness; (4) improved psychometric properties; and (5)
enhanced clinical utility. Changes within the WPPSI-IV include
five new subtests, six retained subtests with changes to administration and/or scoring procedures, as well as new items on all subtests.
Theoretical Foundations of Test Structure. Contemporary
structural intelligence models, which assert that intelligence is
conceptualized as a hierarchical model with global intelligence at
the top and various related and distinguishable broad abilities at
the level beneath, provides an expanded factor structure of the
WPSSI-IV. In contrast to WPPSI-III, which only included verbal,
performance, and processing speed composites, the new WPPSIIV includes extensive content changes to provide broader coverage of the intelligence construct. Major changes include (1) the
separation of visual-spatial and fluid reasoning composites; (2)
addition of a working memory composite; (3) revisions to the processing speed subtests; and (4) addition of Ancillary Index composites. Additionally, composite terminology replaced Quotients
scores with Index scores.
Due to the substantial developmental changes in cognitive ability
of young children, the WPPSI-IV is divided into two age-band
batteries: Level 1 for ages 2:6-3:11, and Level 2 for ages 4:0-7:7.
Each battery allows for three levels of interpretation, including the
Full Scale, the Primary Index Scales, and the Ancillary Index
Scales. At Level 1, the entire battery includes seven subtests, with
16
five core subtests making up the Full Scale Index, and six subtests
making up the Primary Index Scales which include Verbal
Comprehension, Visual Spatial, and Working Memory (30 minute
administration). At Level 2, the full battery is comprised of 15
subtests; six subtests make up the Full Scale Index and eight subtests make up the Primary Index Scales, which include Verbal
Comprehension, Visual Spatial, Fluid Reasoning, Working
Memory, and Processing Speed (45 minute administration).
Subtest Changes. Several changes were made to the retained subtests of the WPPSI-IV, with all subtests acquiring new items, simplifications of directions, and revisions to administration and scoring procedures. The Level 1 battery retained five subtests including Information, Receptive Vocabulary, Picture Naming, Block
Design, and Object Assembly. The Level 2 battery retained ten
subtests including Information, Similarities, Vocabulary,
Comprehension, Receptive Vocabulary, Picture Naming, Block
Design, Object Assembly, Matrix Reasoning, and Picture
Concepts. Four subtests were deleted and five subtests were added
to the WPPSI-IV. The Word Reasoning subtest was removed due
to its construct overlap with Vocabulary, its lack of strong validity evidence as a fluid reasoning measure, and its high correlation
with the Information subtest. The Picture Completion subtest was
dropped to decrease the emphasis on speed and to allow the inclusion of other working memory measures. Symbol Search and
Coding subtests were replaced with new processing measures that
are more developmentally appropriate and have fewer fine motor
skill demands (i.e., Bug Search and Animal Coding). Additionally,
Cancellation was added as an additional measure of processing
speed. Picture Memory and Zoo Locations were added as measures of working memory. Both working memory subtests utilize
proactive interference rather than sequencing to create necessary
cognitive processing demands. Finally, new picture items were
added to the verbal subtests (i.e., Similarities and Comprehension)
to expand the floor to make it easier for young children to be successful.
Processing Speed Subtests. Three new game-like subtests were
added as measures of processing speed. Bug Search is a timed test
in which the child marks the bug in the search group that matches the target bug. The stimuli are large, simple iconic images that
are meaningful and engaging to young children. This task is conceptually similar to Symbol Search as it measures perceptual
speed, short-term visual memory, visual-motor coordination, cognitive flexibility, visual discrimination, and concentration. Animal
Coding which is a speeded paired-association task, conceptually
similar to Coding, uses a large ink dauber rather than a pencil to
reduce the fine motor demands. Cancellation was modified to provide a more child-friendly task in which the child stamps articles
of clothing from a random and structured layout.
Working Memory Subtests. New to the WPPSI-IV are working
memory subtests. These were added to the battery as the most
highly rated customer request and practical need for measures of
working memory in preschoolers. The new working memory subtests include Picture Memory and Zoo Locations. The Picture
Memory subtest is a visual recognition task in which the child
views the stimulus pictures and then selects stimulus pictures
from a larger group. The Zoo Locations subtest is a visual-spatial
recall task in which the child views a matrix with zoo animals and
then places animal cards in correct position on layout.
Administration, Scoring and Interpretation Changes.
Improvements were made to the developmental appropriateness
of the materials, instructions, and scoring options. The WPPSI-IV
subtest manipulatives include blocks, colorful puzzles, memory
card games, and ink dauber. All pictures include updated graphics
and adaptive test manipulatives including ink dauber to ease fine
motor demands. Directions are simplified to reduce verbosity and
vocabulary level. For each subtest, instructions are provided to
demonstrate, practice and teach the task. Discontinue rules were
decreased from five consecutive scores of zero to two or three
failures, depending on the subtest. Allowable subtest substitutions
and out-of-level testing options were retained. Scoring can be
completed by hand or with the Q-global web-based scoring and
reporting platform. Q-global offers 24/7 secure, web-based
access, portability use on mobile devices, on-demand scoring and
reporting, as well as online ordering. Interpretative analysis provides ability-achievement discrepancies as well as patterns of
strengths and weaknesses. Statistical linkages to the WIAT-III will
soon allow combination reports using both measures.
Normative Sample. The WPPSI-IV normative sample was collected December 2010 through May 2012 and is stratified for age,
sex, gender, race/ethnicity, parent education levels, and geographic region using the 2010 Census. The normative sample totals
1,700 children, divided into nine, five-month age groups; 200
children were included in each of the age groups, with the exception of the oldest age group (7:0-7:7) which included 100 children.
Psychometric Properties. Internal consistency reliability coefficients were obtained using split-half method for all subtests, with
the exception of the processing speed subtests which used the testretest stability coefficients. Average reliabilities for the FSIQ,
across age groups, were excellent, at .95 or higher. Index reliability coefficients were also excellent (.86 to .94 range) with the
majority above .90, except for the Processing Speed Index which
had good split-half reliabilities. The ancillary index scores were
excellent (.91 to .96 range), while the reliability coefficients of
subtest scores for special groups were good to excellent (.81 to .98
range), providing support for the instrument’s generalizability.
Several clinical validity students were completed providing preliminary evidence of the instrument’s utility based on enhanced
test content, added construct coverage, and acceptable correlation
with other intelligence measures.
Purchasing and Training. The purchase price for the WPPSI-IV
complete kit of materials is $1,120; however, one can also purchase the kit of materials and case, with 25 Q-global score reports
for additional fees. Current purchasers receive 10 complimentary
score reports for free. To assist with learning the WPPSI-IV, several training tools are available from Pearson including webinars,
on-demand videos, and free training on the administration and
scoring of each of the subtests with the purchase of each kit. Y
Lynn M. O'Connell, Psy.D. is an Associate Professor in the Division of
Counseling and School Psychology at Alfred University. She is a NYS
licensed psychologist who conducts preschool evaluations.
17
Panel Response to Bullying Issues
Reviewed by Ruth Steegmann
Experts on the various aspects of bullying convened a panel,
reviewing the current status of our knowledge and progress in
addressing this pressing issue on Friday, October 26th. Members of
the panel were Amanda Nickerson, Associate Professor and
Director of the Alberti Center for Bullying Abuse Prevention at
the University at Buffalo; Susan Swearer, Professor of School
Psychology at the University of Nebraska – Lincoln, and CoDirector of the Bullying Research Network; Randy Sprick, educational consultant and trainer in Eugene, Oregon, and primary
author of the Safe and Civil Schools series, and Stewart Pisecco,
CEO of Psychological Software Solutions and former Director of
the Counseling Psychology at the University of Houston. All
panel members had given presentations earlier in the conference.
John Kelly, co-chair of NYASP’s Legislative Committee and former President of NYASP, moderated the discussion.
Dr. Nickerson described the mission and work of the Alberti
Center, which was established just a little over a year ago. A major
challenge was to strike a balance between getting research grants
and publishing, versus offering practical help to practitioners.
During her first year she did 60 media interviews, held a regional
conference in September, 2012 and established a symposium
series focused on bringing research into practice. Cyberbullying
was added to the list of the different ways that bullying takes
place.
Dr. Swearer reported on the second annual think tank for bullying
research which she hosted in Virginia last summer. Emphasis was
on considering bullying from a social-ecological perspective by
understanding individual characteristics, familial influences and
environmental factors when implementing programs for prevention and intervention.
Dr. Sprick described the approaches for helping schools develop
positive climate: teacher coaching, behavior management and
professional development services. He noted that one problem is
that schools want quick fixes, which is not realistic.
Dr. Pisecco spoke about the challenge of implementing interventions consistently in the current atmosphere of distrust around the
country. A primary emphasis is on helping districts manage discipline problems, as disruptive kids tend to be the ones who most
often engage in bullying behaviors.
Highlights of the panel discussion centered around what schools
need to be aware of in planning and implementing prevention and
intervention programs. Bullying issues tend to lower academic
performance. Both peer group norms and structure along with
family functioning and values are key components. It is important
to assess what function bullying behaviors serve and whether families are reinforcing victimization. Are families and schools implementing meaningful consequences? We need to look at adult
behavior in engagement with handicapped kids. Children with
internalizing issues tend to be victimized more often.
18
The importance was stressed of giving students a role in the
school. This can range from the traditional classroom housekeeping and messenger roles to ones that are uniquely creative. A project was cited in which Microsoft technicians taught computer
repair to students, enhancing both their self esteem and their
social status in the school. The biggest variability factor is the
involvement of the building administrator.
Potential liability issues with any school initiative accentuates the
importance of getting the district’s attorney involved. Outside
influences on districts were also cited; notably, media involvement and legislation. Strong emphasis was placed on the need be
committed and not just compliant. The website of the Centers for
Disease Control was referenced as a resource for information on
what records that districts should maintain, along with some
assessment tools.
Importance was placed on looking at the discrepancy between
staff responses and student responses. Staff need to treat students
respectfully. Humor versus sarcasm was discussed, as a component of the bullying by teachers of students.
Strategies for raising awareness need to start with the staff:
- What kind of talk goes on in the teachers’ lounge?
- Put anti-bullying within an RTI framework, including universal
screening.
- Implement appropriate supports including one-on-one counseling in lieu of supervision.
- Involve school nurses along with other support personnel.
- Children need adult supervision to model how civil society
works.
- Recognize the strength and persuasiveness of peers in empowering students.
Concluding the presentation, the panelists gave three top tips to
bring back our schools:
1. Bullying happens because of intolerance of differences.
Celebrate differences with initiatives such as “Lunch Bunch”
groups combining special ed and general ed students to increase
awareness and acceptance.
2. Climate, Climate, Climate.
3. Recognize and celebrate what you are already doing, while
resolving to be a better school next year. Y
Ruth Steegmann is a twice retired school psychologist; in 2001 from the
West Seneca Central school district and just recently, from the faculty of
the school psychology training program at University at Buffalo. Along
with Judy Harwood, she is working on a “History of NYASP”.
Early Childhood Assessment:
Considerations for Diverse and Underserved Populations
Reviewed by Lynn M. O'Connell, Psy.D.
The assessment of young children can be a challenging, complex
process given their tender age, developmental level, situation-specific behavior, language limitations, and cultural experiences.
However, more school psychologists are being called upon to conduct preschool assessments than ever before. Yet, training programs often do not provide sufficient instruction and practice in
the specialized approaches needed to effectively assess young
children’s cognitive, language, adaptive, and social-emotional
functioning. To address this need, Vincent Alfonso, Ph.D. professor of School Psychology at Fordham University, provided a
review of best practices in the assessment of young children at the
2012 NYASP Conference. He addressed how to conduct a comprehensive, multisource, multi-method, and multi-setting assessment of young children, especially those from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds, and those living in poverty.
Those of us who have worked with very young children appreciate their unique characteristics that often challenge even the most
seasoned psychologists. Young children are self-focused which
results in virtually no concern for the assessment process or evaluation outcomes. They often have a limited desire to please the
examiner, and would prefer to engage in free play than examinerdirected sequenced activities. Additionally, young children’s
developmental level is often manifested by limited attention span
and expressive language skills, coupled with high energy and
activity levels. Therefore, to be an effective evaluator of young
children, one must be part entertainer, part interpreter, part speedy
multi-tasker, and part detective in order to document and incorpo-
rate all the child’s behaviors into assessment findings. Special
considerations when working with young children include beginning with a play-based warm-up period, using the child’s own
toys as part of the assessment process, allowing parents to encourage the child’s participation and effort, working quickly when
managing manipulatives and paperwork, and paying close attention to everything the child does as evidence of ability or skill.
Assessment for Young Children. The evidence of the importance
of early assessment and intervention for the prevention of learning and behavioral problems in young children is well understood
and accepted. The assessment domains of early childhood development must include intrauterine (i.e, prenatal and perinatal),
temperament, language, cognitive, self-regulatory behaviors,
social-emotional, adaptive behavior, motor (i.e., fine and gross),
social skills, play, physical, as well as parenting behaviors and
parenting stress. It is necessary to use a variety of assessment
methods that include the typical norm-referenced approaches, as
well as observations in a variety of settings, interviews with a
variety of care-givers, play-based assessments, curriculum-based
measures, and dynamic, ecologically-based procedures.
Information from parents and extended family members, teachers
and paraprofessionals, other professionals (i.e, pediatrician,
speech pathologist, OT, PT), and community-based providers
(i.e., daycare, church, neighbors) will provide comprehensive
insight into the situation-specific behaviors that are typical of
young children.
(Continued on next page)
2012 NYASP Conference
Bullying Prevention Panel
Pictured are (L-R), Susan
Swearer, Stewart Pisecco,
Amanda Nickerson, Randy
Sprick, and moderatorJohn Kelly
19
A variety of criteria must be considered when evaluating the adequacy of the technical characteristics of preschool norm-referenced assessment tools. Optimal criteria of the standardization
sample include (1) data collection since 1999 or later; (2) 2000
overall sample with 200 children included in each one-year interval; (3) five or more demographic variables matched to census;
and (4) two-month age bands (four-month age bands are acceptable). Subtest and composite internal consistency and test-retest
reliability coefficients are adequate at .80 to .89; but good at .90
or above. The test-retest sample should contain at least 100 subjects who span no more than one-year interval, and the length of
test-retest interval should be three-months or less. Test authors
should provide at least four strands of validity evidence.
Additionally, subtests with a raw score of one should be associated with a standard score greater than two standard deviations
below the normative mean. It is recommended that test directions
are brief with limited vocabulary demands, each subtest provides
opportunities to teach the task prior to asking the child to perform
the task, expressive language response requirements are minimal,
and alternative stopping points are in place so as to not overburden a child who has not yet developed the skill.
Special Considerations for Diverse Children. When considering the assessment of children who are culturally and linguistically diverse, Dr. Alfonso discussed common observed themes
including, language dysfluencies, slow rates of learning, socialemotional problems, and difficulties with attention and impulsivity. Often children who are in the process of learning English as a
second language are characterized as manifesting language and
behavioral problems that are interpreted as learning difficulties or
disabilities, rather than acculturation to mainstream American
society. He argued that evaluators must be keenly aware of the
cultural and linguistic factors that may negatively influence test
performance, be familiar with the assets and limitations of each
assessment tool used with diverse populations, be able to adapt
their interactive style to the demands of the child, and assess children’s language development in the primary language as well as
in English. It is critical to consider the magnitude of the child’s
language and behavioral differences as evidence of a cultural or
linguistic diversity in contrast to a disability/disorder. Dr. Alfonso
provided a graphic representation of two variables that impact
performance on cognitive measures: (1) degree of linguistic
demand; and (2) degree of cultural loading. Instruments with the
least linguistic demand and cultural loading allow for performance with minimal impact from diverse upbringing, while tools
20
with greater receptive and expressive English language demands
combined with a high degree of cultural experiential loading will
result in performance that is most affected by those from diverse
backgrounds.
Special Considerations for Children in Poverty. Several talking
points regarding research about children living in poverty were
also provided. Dr. Alfonso noted that persistent poverty has more
detrimental effects on IQ, school achievement, and social-emotional functioning, and leads to greater risk exposure than transitory poverty. Children living in poverty are often exposed to significant family turmoil and separation, instability and violence, as
well as environmental risks such as air and water pollution,
crowded and noisy housing, and dangerous neighborhoods.
Additionally, parents often take an authoritarian parenting
approach which results in limited responsiveness and support to
the child. Therefore, early childhood evaluation procedures
should include temperament and emotional reactivity, self-regulation, as well as parent involvement and parenting stress in order to
develop intervention procedures aimed at reducing stress and fostering emotional competence needed for cognitive and academic
development. Research on resilient children indicates several key
characteristics including: good cognitive development; appealing,
sociable disposition; self-efficacy; high self-esteem; talents; faith;
close relationships with parent figure; authoritative parenting
practices; supportive extended familial network as well as other
pro-social adults, and attending effective schools, in addition to
SES advantages.
In summary, early childhood assessment is not for everyone as it
involves a complex process, expertise in conducting interactive
assessments, and heightened knowledge of the cultural and linguistic implications for children from diverse backgrounds,
including those living in poverty in order to sort out unique individual differences from educational disabilities. Effective preschool evaluators must be able to be interactive and entertaining
while conducting an ecologically valid assessment of young children from diverse upbringings.Y
Lynn M. O'Connell, Psy.D. is an Associate Professor in the Division of
Counseling and School Psychology at Alfred University. She is a NYS
licensed psychologist who conducts preschool evaluations.
Best Practice: Intervention for ADHD in Schools
Reviewed by Carrie Baeza
Gregory A. Fabiano, associate professor of psychology at the
University of Buffalo, discussed the issues surrounding children
with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD). Dr.
Fabiano received a Ph.D. in Clinical Psychology in 2005 from the
University of Buffalo, where he now serves as associate professor
of counseling, school and educational psychology. His research
primarily entails assessment and treatment of ADHD, as well as
other disruptive behavior disorders. He has dedicated a substantial
amount of time to ADHD research with the resulting dissemination of numerous articles on the subject.
Dr. Fabiano began his presentation by defining ADHD as being
developmentally inappropriate levels of inattention, hyperactivity
and impulsivity. He stated, “ADHD behaviors are developmentally inappropriate, pervasive, enduring and cause problems in daily
functioning.” Those with ADHD experience difficulties both academically and socially. These functioning problems, he asserted
are not deliberate and those who experience them feel they have
no control over their behavior. Dr. Fabiano then described a situation where a student continuously disregarded their teacher’s
rules in class. When his instructor asked why he continued to disobey the rules the student replied: I don’t know why, I know how
to behave but it is like my brain is telling me not to.
Dr. Fabiano described how different parenting is for a child with
ADHD. “While the average parent has to give maybe four or five
commands to their six year old during their morning routine, the
parent who has a child with ADHD may have to give 30 or 40
commands.” The smallest tasks become daunting and difficult
with a seemingly never ending cycle for parents and teachers to
try and manage. Simultaneously, children feel badly about the
repercussions of their behavior. In the classroom, a child with
ADHD is likely to be excluded from their peers due to punishment
for “misbehaving” or avoidance by other children because they
view the child with ADHD as having poor behavior. This exclusion combined with academic difficulties, contributes to the manifestation of low self-esteem in children with ADHD. Low selfesteem can lead to anxiety, depression, academic difficulties and
a multitude of other problems.
Dr. Fabiano stressed that the prognosis for a child with ADHD, is
highly dependent on the implementation of an appropriate and
effective program. It is important to understand that ADHD is a
chronic disorder that extends into adolescence and adulthood. He
stated, “these children need consistent support to be successful,
even as they reach the higher grades in school.”
most in the form of parent and teacher rating scales. A separate
scale is used to measure the degree of impairment a child is experiencing. Dr. Fabiano stated that once a diagnosis is made, the
practitioners focus must then go to a detailed assessment of multiple areas of functioning, treatment and progress monitoring.
Dr. Fabiano concluded his seminar by discussing effective techniques for helping children with ADHD. He described both
behavior modification and stimulant medication as effective treatments and when combined, they provide a child with the greatest
benefits and best chance at a positive life-long outcome. Behavior
modification consists of classroom contingency management,
behavioral parent training and peer interventions in recreational
settings. Antecedents and consequences are essential to the
process of behavior modification. Dr. Fabiano described behavior
modification antecedents as “establishing rules, issuing clear
commands, clarifying expectations and contingencies and structuring situations.” Consequences include praising and attending,
planned ignoring, rewards and punishments.
Some empirically valid class-wide behavior modification interventions, discussed by Dr. Fabiano, include a classroom point system or classroom lottery. With a point system, students start with
100 points and lose 10 for each violation, while rewards are given
for positive behaviors. In a lottery system, Dr. Fabiano explained
that teachers would tell students they were assigning classroom
jobs. Those who won a drawing at the end of the day would get to
choose their job. The teachers would then award tickets to students displaying good behavior and those students would be able
to enter the contest. An effective, evidence-based tier 2 intervention and progress monitoring technique, described by Dr. Fabiano,
is the Daily Report Card (DRC). The DRC provides immediate
feedback from teachers to student’s, is time and cost effective and
helps students identify problems to facilitate progress towards
goals. Dr. Fabiano advocated for the DRC’s empirical effectiveness as well as practicality. For a more in-depth understanding of
the effectiveness of the DRC, Dr. Fabiano recommends his book,
Daily Behavior Report Cards: An Evidence-Based System of
Assessment and Intervention (Guilford Practical Intervention in
the Schools). Y
Carrie Baeza is a first-year graduate student in the school psychology
program at The College of Saint Rose. Her interests include early
intervention for children with behavioral/social emotional issues
and mental health counseling.
According to Dr. Fabiano, to accurately and adequately diagnose
ADHD, it is necessary to use an evidence-based assessment. He
explained that there are many different reliable assessment tools,
21
The Leader in Me: How the 7 Habits of Highly
Effective People Impact School Culture
The Leader in Me is a school-wide process that grew out of
Stephen Covey’s widely acclaimed The 7 Habits of Highly
Effective People. Its implementation in The Winchester
Elementary School in West Seneca, just adjacent to Buffalo, was
presented by Kathy Brachmann, principal; and Jim Sipior, school
psychologist on Saturday, October 27th.
Kathy described how, when she came to Winchester as principal
some six years ago, there were major concerns in the domains of
student achievement, attendance, discipline, parent engagement,
teacher/administrator job satisfaction and general school climate.
This school has the lowest SES in the district, with approximately 50% of the pupils on free or reduced lunch. She described how,
one day early in her career a Winchester, she was browsing in a
bookstore and Covey’s book caught her eye. She bought it, read
through it with record speed and resolved to implement it in her
school.
The 7 Habits are cited as follows:
Habit 1: Be Proactive (You’re in Charge)
Habit 2: Begin With the End in Mind (Have a Plan)
Habit 3: Put First Things First (Work First, Then Play)
Habit 4: Think Win-Win (Everyone Can Win)
Habit 5: Seek First to Understand, Then to be Understood (Listen
Before You Talk)
Habit 6: Synergize (Together is Better)
Habit 7: Sharpen the Saw (Balance Feels Best)
Audience participation was invited at the outset of the presentation, with Kathy and Jim challenging everyone to brainstorm
ideas as to what their ideal school would look like. Responses
were recorded on a flip chart and included concepts of academic
achievement, positive school climate, cooperative behaviors, lack
of serious discipline issues, respect, no bullying, good attendance
and parent engagement, among others. The presenters stressed
that in order to create this kind of school, everyone has to be on
board. The school community must include everybody, from
administrators, teachers and support personnel, to clerical, custodial and transportation staff, as well as parents and family, and the
community at large.
The Leader in Me is not a program, but rather a process which permeates all aspects of the school experience. Everyone working in
the Winchester school participated in orientation to the philosophy, structure and procedures. Weekly meetings are held for the
faculty and staff to review and evaluate progress, there are pushin activities by the psychologist and social worker, the Mission
Statement was redesigned, a “Lighthouse Team” was developed to
help guide the process, the “Peaceful School Bus” program was
adopted, with regular meetings taking place; “Read and Lead”
assemblies are held and a Leadership Day was scheduled.
22
The school day begins at Winchester with the arrival of the school
buses at about 8:30. As the students stream into the building they
are greeted by multiple adults who shake hands with them,
address them by first name, and wish them a good day. Greeters
typically are the principal, support personnel and often visitors,
who are asked to arrive at that time so that they can also participate. Their classroom teachers are awaiting the arrival of the children in their rooms. Most of the students go through this daily routine with considerable animation, some initiating conversation
with the adult they know best.
Review and discussion of The 7 Habits is subsumed in class activities, with leadership development seamlessly integrated into the
daily curriculum, routines and systems. Each student has a specific responsibility within the classroom, with assignments rotating
daily. There is a class greeter who welcomes visitors, a child who
waters the plants, one who passes out papers, one who delivers
messages to the office, etc. A culture has been created where every
student is encouraged to set and achieve meaningful goals, be a
positive influence on others and use his or her individual gifts to
better their world.
A visitor to Winchester immediately experiences the positive culture of the school. With virtually all schools now requiring
entrance permission procedures and many of these procedures
feeling more like barriers to admittance, at Winchester it is a real
welcoming practice. Guests in the classrooms will typically have
children spontaneously approach them, wanting to share what
they are working on and often referencing one or more of The 7
Habits as a component of their work. One is immediately struck
by how confident these children are in speaking with adults, how
they maintain good eye contact and communicate enthusiasm.
An open house was held last Spring, to which basically all of
Western New York was invited. In an assembly program the children interpreted the Leadership in Me process and a number spoke
about their own experiences and what was their favorite Habit.
Visitors then spent time in the classrooms, during which students
were able to give them more in-depth descriptions and examples
of how this all was working.
Results from the five years the program has been in operation
were reported:
- Significantly enhanced student self-confidence
- Improved student achievement
- Increase in teacher/administrator job satisfaction
- Delighted parents
Working with Families Affected by Cancer
This workshop, presented by Dr. Cate Flanagan-Priore, began
with sobering data. In 2007, approximately 10,400 children under
the age of 15 were diagnosed with cancer. On average, 1-2 children develop the disease every year for every 10,000 children in
the United States. Though it is still extremely rate, cancer remains
the #1 non-accident related cause of death in children. In WNY,
there are 50-60 new pediatric cancer cases diagnosed each year
and this includes children over the age of 14. We are diagnosing
cancer at a much faster rate than previously and the rate has consistently risen. Types of childhood cancer include leukemias (most
common), lymphomas, bone, liver, soft tissue sarcomas, brain,
Wilm’s Tumor, neuroblastoma, and retinoblastoma.
There are numerous short- and long-term effects from cancer
treatment. Short-term effects includes hair loss, mouth/throat
sores, nausea/vomiting, diarrhea/constipation, anemia, fatigue,
and social and emotional issues (anxiety, depression, fear). Late
effects of cancer includes cognitive issues. Some individuals have
problems with organization, reading and/or reading comprehension, processing speed, visual memory, and understanding math
concepts or remembering math facts. Generally, a slow decline
occurs six months after treatment. Physical effects include
seizures, eyesight and/or hearing problems, and physical mobility
issues. Hearing problems can be caused because the drugs are
platinum-based , which affects hearing. Psychological issues
include PTSD/PMTS, anxiety, depression, grieving the loss of the
life they had before, and adjustment issues.
One important thing to consider is that family is also affected by
cancer. Families struggle to keep up with everyday activities and
responsibilities. One suggestion by Dr. Flanagan-Prior is to not
wait for the family to ask for help. The average family with
“good” health insurance will spend close to $20,000/year on
expenses related to cancer treatment. Families affected by cancer
are grieving, going through the stages of shock & confusion,
denial, hope, fear & anxiety, anger, guilt & blame, sadness & loss,
and doubts about religious and spiritual beliefs. Siblings may
experience guilt, anger, sadness, annoyance with extra attention
that cancer patient gets. They may feel lost in the shuffle of treat-
ment exhibit depressive symptoms, headaches, and problems at
school. Siblings need normal routine and discipline, involvement
in activities, opportunities to talk about their feelings, cancer, and
treatment, alone time with mom/dad, support from other caring
adults.
When students return to school either during or after treatment,
there are accommodations to reduce physical and/or cognitive
stressors. Physical accommodations include two sets of books
(one for home, one for school), a water bottle to stay hydrated,
physical education restrictions, allow to wear a hat/scarf, and
snacks as needed. Cognitive accommodations include extra time
to complete assignments, home instruction/tutoring as necessary,
an extended school year, and a lightened workload. As a school
district, it is important to include at least one member of the treatment team to determine the best possible return to school for the
student.
There are certain behaviors to watch for when the student with
cancer does return to school, including being loud and demanding,
quieter/withdrawn, changes in eating habits, generally not doing
well in school, and possible regression. Take note of any changes.
Schools can provide medically necessary accommodations, invite
medical personnel into school before the student returns, maintain
normalcy, reach out to family during treatment, understand and
appreciate the stress associated with cancer treatment diagnosis.
Remember that the child with cancer still wants and needs to go
to school, have friends, and enjoy activities he/she participated in
before diagnosis. The student needs to feel normal and be treated
like everyone else. Keep in mind the student needs opportunities
to maintain contact with friends and classmates. When the student
does return to school, the same rules and levels of discipline must
apply just as they did before diagnosis. Y
23
I’m Ready for College, But I Can’t Find My Backpack:
Executive Strategies for Young Adults with
Asperger’s Syndrome and Learning Differences
Executive functioning, especially with reference to young adults
with Asperger’s Syndrome and learning differences, was discussed by Mary Lawler, Program Director for the College
Internship Program (CIP) on Saturday, October 27. CIP provides
individualized, postsecondary, academic, internship and independent living experiences for this population. The local facility
is located in Amherst, NY. CIP also maintains programs in
Massachusetts, Florida, Indiana and California. Students are
enrolled in college courses and are housed in residential houses
and apartments which include support staff.
Executive function is centered in the prefrontal cortex, which has
been called the CEO of the brain. It has many connections to other
parts of the brain and is responsible for all meta-cognitive functioning and processing. It is the last component to develop and
mature in the individual, with neurotypicals occurring by age 25,
but later with people with learning differences. This provides an
explanation for the unpredictable teen and young adult behavior –
and why insurance rates go down at age 25.
Components of executive functioning include attention, impulse
control, transition from one task or activity to another, and time
management. Executive functions are cognitive activities of logic,
strategy, planning, problem solving, information processing and
behavior control. Executive functions continue to develop and
change throughout adulthood and are affected by physical
changes in the brain, life experiences and direct instruction (with
explicit feedback being essential). Executive functioning helps the
student to:
- Engage in mental planning
- Persist to complete a task or activity
- Organize / keep track of one’s belongings and actions
- Self-regulate and exhibit self-control
- Self-monitor one’s behavior
Difficulties with executive functioning can lead to a wide range of
problems:
- Difficulty predicting what will happen next (creates
anxiety and transition problems)
- Inflexibility / getting stuck / needing to preserve sameness
- Difficulty attending / concentrating
- Impulsivity (blurting out)
- Difficulty with working memory so that it is available
when needed
- Difficulty allocating and managing time (especially
with respect to long-term assignments, homework)
- Difficulty keeping track of belongings / materials, forgetting things
- Difficulty with multi-step or complex tasks
24
- Disorganization
- Difficulty working in groups
- Difficulty with planning
Executive functioning impacts all areas of development and life:
academic, money management, intrapersonal, interpersonal,
health / fitness, and occupational. Four types of attention are needed in most upper level classrooms: focused attention (ability to
respond to sensory stimuli), sustained attention (vigilance and
concentration during a continuous activity); alternating attention
(ability to shift focus between tasks; and divided attention (multitasking).
Many persons with executive functioning problems are visual
thinkers and do not respond well to a traditional lecture format of
instruction. Chances are good that the student is not lazy or dumb,
is not oppositional and is not “doing this on purpose to drive me
crazy”.In addressing the needs of the population at CIP, a focus is
on metacognitive training, which is the knowledge and awareness
of one’s own thinking and the ability to monitor and regulate the
process of that thinking. Structuring, storing, organizing and
retrieving from memory are aspects of metacognition that can be
learned. Memory is an active process: you must manipulate information to get it into your head. Memory requires rehearsal. Some
general strategies / interventions used at CIP include:
- Help the student choose the individual strategies that
work best for him/her
- Teach step by step approaches toward task completion
- Use time organizers, computers, watches with alarms,
smart phones
- Use visual schedules
- Provide written and oral directions and oral instructions
- Plan and structure transition times and shifts in activities
Several examples of individualized weekly student schedules
were shown. One was a calendar page with pictures and logos
pasted onto the blocks for each day, to supplement and reinforce
the written prompts. Techniques for improving memory were outlined: repetition, visualization, association, group / placing like
items together, written recording, use / create acronyms or
mnemonics. Problem solving strategies were described, grouped
into three components: Plan (goals, steps, sequence), Execute
(deciding how and when to start, how to persevere, and being
aware of what could go wrong) and Repair (evaluating whether
the plan is working, how to know when task is completed and
determining what do to the same and what to do differently next
time).
Managing time is a key component for successful achievement.
Strategies employed at CIP include:
- Segment large tasks into chunks
- Use calendars / day planners to keep track of long term
assignments, due dates, deadlines
- Reminders on computers and smart phones
- Reorganize daily, weekly, monthly
- Use checklists, to-do lists
- Time estimation worksheet
To manage space and material, students at CIP are helped to create a dedicated work space and organize it with color coded bins
and sections in their backpacks. They are strongly encouraged to
minimize clutter, and schedule cleaning and organizing at least
once per week. They are helped to keep a notebook or filing system, usually an accordion file or a three ring file with sections.
Specific academic interventions include a master notebook,
accommodations, note taking and tutorial support, mnemonics
and flash cards, tape recorded lectures, livescribe smart pen, audio
books and text to voice software. Residential interventions are
composed of educational function checklists posted on bedroom
doors, photos of what an acceptably clean kitchen or bedroom
looks like posted in the student’s apartment, along with photos of
what a properly groomed student looks like, also posted in the
apartment. A hygiene checklist, similar to the calendar used to
track schedules, was shown.
The importance of interventions in the clinical domain was
emphasized. Key aspects are to reconcile the discrepancy between
giftedness and differences, help students to understand complex
emotions, assist in goal setting and action planning, monitor pharmacological program, teach stress management techniques and
techniques for overcoming anxiety, and establish treatment for comorbid conditions.
CIP’s program is structured around a continuum of growth: Selfawareness leads to self-regulation, then self-advocacy and finally,
self-determination.
Links and resources:
The Source for Executive Function Disorder – Susanne Phillips Keeley
Psychology Today
http://wwwpsychologytoday.com/experts/michael-mcmanmon-edd
Assessment and Intervention for Executive Function Difficulties
(School-Based Practice in Action) – Dr. George McCluskey
Asperger’s for Dummies – Stephen Shore
College Internship Program www.collegeintrnshipprogram.com/links.html Y
Call for Proposals for the 2013 NYASP Conference
Proposals for Conference 2013 will be accepted Feb. 1, 2013 – May 31, 2013
The NYASP Conference 2013 will be held in White Plains, N.Y. October 24-26. The theme of the 2013 NYASP Conference is
Expanding the Role of the School Psychologist, and focuses on the many hats that we wear as school psychologists. We understand that school psychologists are both scholars and practitioners. To that end, the conference committee has endeavored to pair
theory and practice, offering workshops on applied, solution-oriented activities which are based upon sound theory and best practice. Current workshop topics include identification and treatment of learning disabilities, prevention through PBIS, RTI and other
Tier II activities, bullying, spectrum disorders, ADHD/executive function, early childhood, emotional disorders and behavioral
health.
The conference will also feature two panels focusing on school-based programs on PBIS and Autism Spectrum Disorders. If
your school has a particularly effective and innovative program that you are particularly proud of, please consider submitting a
proposal to be included on the panel.
We are soliciting papers from our membership that would reflect the theme and the goals of the conference. Papers should be submitted via www.nyasp.org no later than May 31, 2013.
Instructions for submitting your proposal is detailed at www.nyasp.org.
25
Graphing RTI Data Using Microsoft Excel
By Patrick S. O’Donnell, Psy.D., NCSP
Response to Intervention (RTI) has become a major topic within
schools and has led to a shift in the way interventions are implemented, tracked, and analyzed. With up to 70% of schools indicating the use of some form of RTI (Brown-Chidsey & Steege,
2010), progress monitoring for interventions has become a common concern in school teams across the country. Many dedicated
computer programs now exist for progress monitoring and they
include the ability to collect, plot, and present intervention data.
Unfortunately, many of these programs come with substantial and
ongoing costs that are difficult to absorb given the current fiscal
climate. Plus, some of us have the personal inclination toward
maximizing the resources we already have. I am still proud of (but
reluctant to admit to) the night I was making macaroni and cheese
and I substituted ice cream for milk upon encountering an empty
milk carton. You know you’ve thought about it. For those of us
working without the benefit of RTI-specific progress monitoring
computer programs, there may be a useful alternative right at our
fingertips. And it does not even require going to the freezer.
Microsoft Excel is part of the Microsoft Office (Microsoft, 2010)
software package. As of July 2011, 100 million copies of
Microsoft Office 2010 had been sold (Foley, 2011; Warren, 2011)
and there were 750 million users of Office worldwide (Warren,
2011). With such widespread use of the Microsoft Office suite,
there is a good probability that it and Excel are installed on a computer near you. The Excel interface allows users to enter data, create graphs, and perform statistical calculations. These are just the
right tools that school psychologists need to complete progress
monitoring within the RTI process. If you have Microsoft Excel
on your computer, you are ready to get started.
The best place to start in this process is learning how to enter data
and create graphs. The first step in using Excel to create baseline
and intervention data graphs is understanding how a spreadsheet
uses rows and columns to enter data. The rows are the entry boxes
displayed horizontally across the page and the columns are the
vertical boxes. The data box/cell where row 1 and column A converge would be cell A1. Once your data is entered in the cells,
everything else flows from knowing the correct button or
sequence of buttons to press. So, let’s get started by entering some
data and pressing some buttons! We will use the format of a reading fluency intervention conducted with Jane Student for this
example. Just open Excel and follow the steps below:
26
the intervention data (four school weeks). All of these dates are
listed one after the other in column A. The last date should be in
cell A31.
3. In column B, enter the baseline data collected for each of the
baseline dates in column A. This should result in data in cells B2
to B11.
4. In Column C, enter the peer norm for each of the dates in column A. In this case, we will assume the peer norm has remained
constant and enter the same number (reading fluency rate) in column C for each of the baseline dates.
5. You are now ready to create your baseline graph. Use the mouse
to highlight all of the information that you have entered so far.
This will encompass columns A through C and rows 1 through 11.
With all those cells highlighted, go to the top menu bar and click
“Insert,” then “Line,” then the picture that corresponds to “Line
with Markers.” Your baseline graph will now appear.
6. To add a trendline to your baseline data, use the mouse to rightclick on the baseline data line on the graph. Then, choose “Add
trendline.” You can extend the trendline into the future by going
to the “Forecast” option in the dialog box that appears and entering the number of days you would like to extend the trendline.
Then click close and your trendline will appear on the baseline
graph.
7. To add a title, click anywhere on the graph, go to the top menu
and click “Layout,” then “Chart Title,” then “Above Chart.” You
can now enter the title in the box that appears on the graph.
With your baseline graph complete, you can now move forward
with the analysis and intervention phases of your process. Once
you have collected your intervention data, you can use the same
spreadsheet to create an intervention graph following the steps
below:
1. Using the same spreadsheet from above, enter “Jane’s Goal” in
cell D1 and “Jane’s Intervention Fluency” in cell E1.
2. In Column D, enter the value for Jane’s goal in each of the cells
starting with D12. This will likely be the same value from cells
D12 through D31.
1. Enter the following headings:
a. In cell A1: Date
b. In cell B1: Jane’s Baseline Fluency
c. In cell C1: Peer Norm
3. In Column E, enter the values for each of the daily fluency
measurements during the intervention phase, which should correspond with the 11th date in Column A and begin in cell D12.
2.Starting with cell A2, enter the series of dates during which you
will be collecting data. For this example, list ten dates (two school
weeks) for the baseline data immediately followed by 20 dates for
4. You should now have a spreadsheet that includes both baseline
and intervention data and you are now ready to create your intervention graph. Use the mouse to highlight all of the information
that you have entered so far. This will encompass columns A
through E and rows 1 through 31. With all those cells highlighted,
go to the top menu bar and click “Insert,” then “Line,” then the
picture that corresponds to “Line with Markers.” Your baseline
graph will now appear.
5. To add the baseline trendline and chart title, follow steps 6 and
7 in the baseline graph instructions above.
Congratulations! You now have a graph that includes baseline
data, an extended trendline, peer norm, student goal, and intervention data. As you grow accustomed to the interface, there are
many additional items that you can add and modifications that you
can make to individualize your graph. For instance, you can adjust
the spacing/alignment of dates on the x-axis, modify intervals on
the y-axis, move the chart title and key, add a trendline to intervention data, include changing criterion data for goals, and/or
attach values to each datapoint on the graph. Now that you have
your data and graph, a wide variety of analysis techniques exist
for establishing whether an adequate response to an intervention
has occurred. Evaluation of change for both tier two and three
interventions can be accomplished using visual analysis, percentage of non-overlapping data points, g-index, and d-index (Hunley
& McNamara, 2010). Gresham (2008) also offers the option of
percent of change in median from pre to post-intervention. A more
comprehensive version of the methodology above, including
instructions for a multiple baseline design, can be found in
Zaslofsky and Volpe (2010).Whether you are a new or experienced school psychologist, having a variety of tools to do your job
is a necessity. Sometimes, we even have tools at our disposal that
we did not realize were available. Microsoft Excel is a tool that
most of us have right on our desktop. Following the steps above,
it can be used to create detailed RTI graphs that can be shared with
students, parents, and faculty. So get out that data, open a spreadsheet, and press some buttons!
References
Brown-Chidsey, R., & Steege, M. W. (2010). Response to intervention: Principles
and strategies for effective practice (2nd ed.). New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
Foley, M. J. (2011). Microsoft: 400 million Windows 7 and 100 million Office
2010 licenses sold (and more partner conference stats). Available from
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/microsoft/microsoft-400-million-windows-7-and100-million-office-2010-licenses-sold-and-more-partner-conference-stats/9988
Gresham, F. (2008). Best practices in diagnosis in a multitier problem-solving
approach. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology
V (Vol. 2, pp. 281-294). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School
Psychologists.
Hunley, S., & McNamara, K. (2010). Tier 3 of the RTI model: Problem solving
through a case study approach. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
Microsoft Office. (2010). [Computer Software]. Redmond, WA: Microsoft.
Warren, T. (2011). Microsoft has sold 100 million copies of Office since launch.
Available from http://www.winrumors.com/microsoft-has-sold-100-millioncopies-of-office-2010-since-launch/
Zaslofsky, A. F., & Volpe, R. J. (2010). Graphing single-case data in Microsoft
Excel 2007. School Psychology Forum: Research in Practice, 4, 15-24. Y
SAVE THE DATE: NYASP Conference 2013
October 24-26, 2013 Crowne Plaza Hotel: White Plains, NY
“Expanding the Role of the School Psychologist”
Friday Keynote Speaker:
Former Assistant Deputy Secretary of Education
President/CEO of “Be the Change”
Kevin Jennings
27
book revIew
Culturally Responsive Teaching:
Theory, Research, and Practice
Written by Geneva Gay
Geneva Gay (2010), author of Culturally Responsive Teaching:
Theory, Research, and Practice, promotes and advocates for the
widespread implementation of culturally responsive teaching
through her book. Her argument supporting the implementation of
culturally responsive teaching provides multiple discussions of
research studies and instructional practices that incorporate culturally responsive teaching techniques that are sensitive to different learning styles. Gay explores culturally responsive teaching
through the relationship between education and culture, culture
and communication in the classroom, and cultural diversity in curriculum. An examination of each of these notions follows, along
with a discussion of the relevance culturally responsive teaching
has on the field of school psychology.
An Examination of Culturally Responsive Teaching: Theory,
Research, and Practice
Culturally responsive teaching adheres to the individual cultural
identity of students. Descriptive characteristics of culturally
responsive teaching compiled by Gay (2010) include: validating
and affirming, comprehensive (teaching the whole child), multidimensional, empowering, transformative, and liberating. Ideally,
for these characteristics to be feasible, teachers must learn what
the cultural differences are between themselves and the students
they teach. Curriculum will then need to be adapted to reflect cultural learning styles in order to increase academic achievement.
Materials used within the classroom must also reflect culture for
cultivating intrinsic value for the students (Gay, 2010).
Just as culture and identity are codependent upon one another, culture and communication share the same bond. The cultural influences on communication are listed by Gay (2010) including: sociocultural context and nuances, discourse logic and dynamics,
delivery styles, social functions, role expectations, norms of interaction, and nonverbal features. All of these cultural features within communication are important for teachers to be perceptive of
and have the ability to reciprocate in times of need. Gay provides
research indicating that higher proficiency in a first language correlates with higher academic achievement in English, respect for
the self and others, civic and community participation, moral and
ethical behaviors, and multicultural competence. Due to these
results, Gay (2010) argues that multiple communication systems
should be a central feature in culturally responsive teaching.
Gay (2010) argues that culturally influenced curriculum enhances
levels of learning by empowering the learner to accentuate his/her
abilities, attitudes, and experiences. In other words, cultural diversity in curriculum personalizes learning for the individual. Gay
(2010) explains that both curriculum content and delivery should
reflect culture, making it easier for the learner to comprehend the
material. Curriculum content for culturally responsive teaching
comes from a multitude of sources including, but not limited to,
28
Reviewed by Katherine LeMire
textbooks, standardized testing, literary and trade books, and mass
media. These sources have the power to positively and negatively
influence students’ self-perceptions, attitudes towards others,
what is considered knowledge worth knowing, and how to
respond to classroom instruction (Gay, 2010).
Culturally Responsive Teaching’s Relevance to the Field of
School Psychology
Culturally responsive teaching is relevant to the field of school
psychology in many of the same ways in which it is relevant to
teachers. By incorporating the same notions and techniques teachers use in a culturally responsive classroom into the encounters
between school psychologists and students would greatly impact
communication in a positive way. Building a culturally responsive
relationship with a student could potentially increase the reliability and validity of information gathered about the student, whether
it be test scores or better rapport building within the consultation
process. Finally, cultural responsiveness is also relevant to the
field of school psychology in the practice of curriculum based
assessment. Knowledge of how culture impacts instruction and
learning styles can help the school psychologist negate any possible problems the student is having with the presentation of
instruction or even the curriculum itself.
Conclusion
Geneva Gay’s Culturally Responsive Teaching is an evidencebased argument supporting the implementation of culturally
responsive teaching within the classroom. Gay (2010) found that
significant academic achievement improves when culturally relevant content, teacher attitudes and expectation, and instructional
actions converge. Culturally responsive teaching increases learning among culturally diverse students, and simultaneously does
not impede on the quality of learning for those students of mainstream cultural backgrounds. Even though her arguments for culturally responsive teaching are supported, Gay (2010) states further professional development in culturally responsive teaching
will be required and more evidence is needed on the effects multicultural content on student achievement in all subjects, grade
levels, and ethnic/racial groups. All educators should practice cultural responsiveness within their professional duties in order to
enrich the educational experience for all students.
Reference
Gay, G. (2010). Culturally responsive teaching: Theory, research,
and practice (2nd ed.). New York: Teachers College Press.
Katherine LeMire, M.S.E., Department of Counseling and School
Psychology, University of Wisconsin—River Falls.
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to
Katherine LeMire, 1646 Lakewood Dr., Maplewood, MN 55119.
Email: [email protected]
NYASP Position Statement on Mandate Relief
January 2013
New York Association of School Psychologists
The New York Association of School Psychologists
(NYASP) is an active partner with New York State
in efforts to contain educational costs and provide
flexibility to school districts in budget development.
There are many reasonable mandate relief and
flexibility provisions that appear to have minimal
impact upon student programs or established
protections afforded to students and/or parents. It is
imperative to eliminate unnecessary mandates
which place a financial burden upon school
districts.
However, it is equally important to
be mindful that some mandates
provide important benefits and offer
protection to children and families.
There are mandates that represent
sound educational practice. One of
the often targeted areas is “Special
Education mandates that exceed
federal requirements.” NYASP
wants to ensure that certain
provisions related to special
education services remain intact in
order to prevent unintended
negative consequences that may
severely impact the education of
New York’s most vulnerable
students. In fact, the removal of
some mandates could increase the
costs of special education in New York.
Significant concerns exist within the proposed
Executive Education Budget, specifically related to
“school district mandate relief”. The proposal by the
Mandate Relief Council which would allow school
districts the ability to petition for “waivers from
certain duties” is cause for grave concern. While the
Individuals with Disabilities in Education Act
(IDEA, 2004) provides the minimum standards for
the provision of special education services, New
York has been a leader in recognizing the value of
requiring provisions that have been proven to
support the education of all children. It is important
for school communities to recognize that some
mandates are just best practice and vital to
providing a free appropriate public education which
ultimately adds value to the education of all
children. Therefore, restraint must be employed in
making over-inclusive demands for “mandate
relief” to ensure that New York State does not
jeopardize
the
educational
advancements of our students.
Districts are encouraged to be
mindful of requesting waivers
that damage services to children
and explore flexibility and relief
that currently exists within
education law.
One illustration of the damaging
effect of waiving certain special
education mandates would be
the removal of the requirement
to have a school psychologist as
a member of the Committee on
!
Special Education. This type of
waiver would provide minimal
fiscal relief for school districts
and has the potential to negatively impact students
and families with special education needs. The
school psychologists are integral members of the
general and special education process in schools. As
mandated members of the CSE, school
psychologists are the only professionals who are
uniquely trained and qualified to provide all of the
following services:
NYASP Position Statement on Mandate Relief
January 2013
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Use assessment data to identify strengths and
needs, develop interventions, and measure
progress and outcomes.
Develop
IEP’s
and
Research
Based
Interventions for students classified under all 13
Special Education classifications.
Develop FBA/BIP’s in conjunction with
families and school staff.
Consult and collaborate with teachers,
administrators and parents to promote positive
outcomes for students.
Develop interventions and supports to promote
the development of academic skills.
Develop and provide mental
health services to promote
mental wellness and social and
life skills.
Provide preventive services on
multiple levels to build resiliency
in youth or respond to crises that
occur in schools.
Work with families to support
their influence on children’s learning and mental
health, as well as develop a collaborative
relationship between home and school.
Understand the impact of factors related to
diversity on learning and development.
Understand ethical and legal practice of school
psychology, as well as multiple models of
service delivery.
Understand and present information pertaining
to both federal and state Special Education laws
to ensure legal compliance and avoid costly due
process proceedings.
With their expertise in these areas, the school
psychologists often design the Response to
Intervention and Positive Behavioral Support
programs in districts. All of these skills serve to
control the classification rates of students with
disabilities, broaden the school-based options and
programs, institute appropriate conduct and
discipline policies and procedures, promote an
individualized approach to student’s needs, and
promote quality programs and instructional
practices based upon research and data. Removal of
the mandate for these professionals as part of the
CSE eliminates the protections and benefits
afforded to school districts, students, and parents.
The vast majority of school psychologists in New
York State are engaged in a variety of activity
beyond membership on the CSE. They bring the
expertise of these varied roles to the CSE and are
able to provide recommendations that will benefit
the student, family, and the school district.
Therefore, the relief of this mandate would not
represent substantial savings to school districts.
Concern seems to have been
raised related to the mandate
for the attendance of these
professionals on the CSE and
potential
delays
in
the
scheduling or conduct of
meetings.
While
noncompliance with timelines
established in the special
education process is an important issue, remedies
for these concerns already exist within the law.
Chapter 311 of 1999 allows for members of the
CSE to serve multiple roles on the CSE and Chapter
378 of 2007 allows members of the CSE to be
excused from attendance with parental consent.
Therefore, any potential delay in scheduling or
conducting CSE meetings due to difficulties in
assembling members can be addressed through
these procedures.
It is of vital importance to ensure that mandate
relief decisions are balanced between the
educational needs of children and fiscal matters.
Decisions CANNOT be made based upon funding
alone. This is the very reason that the protections
were offered by Federal and State mandates.
Authorizing waivers may lead to the unintended
consequence of removing the protections necessary
to provide appropriate educational supports for
children with learning needs.
!
School Psychologists and Education Reform
The Role of the School Psychologist in New York’s Education Reform
0
Putting Students First: The Role of the School Psychologist
In New York’s Education Reform
“Achieving excellence in education for the 21st Century requires that every student is
ready to learn and every teacher is empowered to teach. From pre-kindergarten through
high school graduation, children need to be healthy, supported, and focused when they
come to school. All children possess tremendous potential and deserve access to
comprehensive, rigorous curricula and high quality instruction. Too often, though, they
come to class struggling with life challenges that can create barriers to learning—and
teaching—as well as undermine school climate. Left unaddressed, issues such as learning
difficulties, poor mental and physical health, cultural and linguistic differences, and
socioeconomic or family problems can significantly impede student and school success.
Even the most highly skilled teachers cannot help children achieve their fullest potential
unless such barriers to learning and instruction are remedied. Teachers cannot do this
alone and it is counterproductive to expect them to. The educational environment
presents unique opportunities to address barriers, but only when services are available
that support the whole child. Effective student support services enable teachers,
administrators, and parents to know how best to ensure that students are ready and able
to learn.” (Cowan & Skalski, 2008)
Education reform across our country has
generally focused on two components of the
education system; instructional factors that
impact learning and governance and
operations of schools. There is no doubt that
high quality teachers, improved academic
assessments, improved data collection
systems, and increased accountability will
contribute to improvements in education.
However, without addressing barriers to
learning that interfere with student success,
reform and growth will be limited.
Learning Supports and Education
Reform
The New York Association of School
Psychologists has worked with the Center
for Mental Health in the Schools at UCLA
to promote a “comprehensive system of
learning support” that is integrated with
other areas of education reform. This system
is defined as “resources, strategies, and
practices that provide physical, social,
emotional, and intellectual supports to
enable all students to have an equal
opportunity for success at school by directly
addressing barriers to learning and teaching
and by re-engaging disconnected students.”
“A comprehensive, multifaceted, and
cohesive learning support system provides
essential interventions in classrooms and
school-wide. To ensure effectiveness, it is
fully integrated in school improvement
policies and practices designed to enhance
instruction and school management”
(Skalski & Taylor, 2010). However, these
1
learning supports are often fragmented in
schools and generally viewed as ancillary to
instruction in the classroom. Instead,
addressing barriers to learning must be
viewed as an essential component of
education reform and improvement.
The
learning
supports
component
establishes an umbrella for ending
marginalization by unifying fragmented
efforts and evolving a comprehensive
system. Major content areas for developing
learning supports are:
supports component on par with the
instructional and management components,
the marginalization of associated programs,
services, and policies ceases and a
comprehensive
school
improvement
framework is established (Skalski & Taylor,
2010).
School Psychologists and the Education
Process
The
National
Association of School
Psychologists
(NASP)
published
a
policy
Integration of
document entitled Ready
Building
teacher
to Learn, Empowered to
learning supports
capacity to re-engage
Teach, in which there is
disconnected
students
with reform of
recognition that services
and
maintain
their
which lower barriers to
engagement
instructional and
learning are not ancillary
Providing support for the
management
to education but rather
full range of transitions
central to the supportive
that
students
and
components of the
educational
process
families encounter as
school
system
will
necessary to prepare all of
they negotiate school
America’s children for
and grade changes
provide a
academic success, healthy
Responding
to
and
comprehensive
development,
and
preventing
academic,
responsible
citizenship
behavioral,
social–
framework for school
(Cowan & Skalski, 2008).
emotional problems and
One of the “guiding
improvement.
crises
principles”
of
this
Increasing community
document indicates that
and family involvement and support
schools must provide sufficient student
Facilitating student and family
support services to meet the needs of the
access to effective services and
whole child in order to promote healthy
special assistance as needed
learning and development.
Effective integration of this component is
Relevant research indicates that family risk
dependent upon promoting collaborative
factors are associated with poor performance
models of practice that value and capitalize
in school-aged children and are also linked
on school and community resources and
with lower proficiency in early reading,
expertise. By integrating the learning
2
math skills, and general knowledge (U.S.
as
provide
direct
classroom-wide
Department of Education, National Center
interventions,
targeted
academic
for Education Statistics, 2000). One in five
intervention services (AIS) for smaller
children and adolescents will experience a
groups, and more intensive individualized
significant mental health problem that can
supports based upon the student’s needs.
interfere with their educational achievement
The school psychologist is often providing
during their school years (U.S. Department
social and emotional supports at all three
of Health and Human
levels. Addressing problems
Services,
1999).
Also,
before they escalate or
School psychologists
teachers cite student behavior
become chronic is less costly
ensure
quality,
and attitude, lack of student
over time than intensive
motivation, poor school
remedial services or negative
genuinely accessible
climate, and lack of adequate
outcomes such as dropping
education for all
support among the top
out of school, delinquency,
reasons for leaving the
or incarceration (Aos, Lieb,
students.
profession (Ingersoll, 2001).
Mayfield,
Miller,&
Pennucci,2004;
National
Despite these challenges, we
Research Council and Institute of Medicine,
know that there are proven strategies to
2000). For at-risk children and youth, in
address such barriers in ways that are
particular, services should begin in early
appropriate to and supportive of the mission
childhood and include quality after-school
and purpose of schools. Access to student
activities at all ages to ensure better
supports is cost–effective; directly assists
outcomes. Families are children’s first and
teachers, administrators, and families; and
most important source of guidance and care
improves school outcomes. For example,
and they are essential partners in the
longitudinal studies provide strong empirical
learning process. Providing supports within
evidence that interventions that strengthen
a continuum of care that engages families,
students’ social, emotional, and decisioneducators, and community service providers
making skills also positively impact their
promotes
continuity
and
enhances
academic achievement, in terms of both
effectiveness.
School-employed
higher standardized test scores and better
professionals who are trained specifically
grades (e.g., Fleming, Haggerty, Brown,
for work in educational settings are best
Catalano, et al., 2005). Effective student
equipped to guide school-based services,
supports include mental health services,
even those provided in schools by
emphasize
prevention
and
early
community providers.
intervention, actively engage families, and
incorporate strength-based approaches such
The School Psychologist within the School
as positive behavioral supports, social–
Setting
emotional learning, and response to
A primary role of the School Psychologist is
intervention. School psychologists help
to work with students, educators, and
teachers and administrators develop, as well
3
families
to
support the academic
achievement, positive behavior, and mental
wellness of all students. These professionals
help schools and families address some of
the biggest challenges in education;
improving and individualizing instruction to
close the achievement gap; increasing
graduation rates and preventing dropouts;
creating safe, positive school climates and
preventing violence; providing meaningful
accountability; and strengthening family–
school partnerships (Cowan & Skalski,
2008).
School psychologists have extensive training
in assessment, progress monitoring,
instruction,
child
development
and
psychology, consultation, counseling, crisis
response, program evaluation, and data
collection and analysis. Their training is
specific to applying this expertise to the
school setting, both within general education
and special education, and also includes
extensive knowledge of school systems and
law (NASP 2010a, 2010b).
As critical members of the school team,
school psychologists ensure quality,
genuinely accessible education for all
students. This is one of our state’s most
important responsibilities and wisest
investments. While New York State is
engaged in the process of education reform,
now is the time to correct some of the
deficiencies of previous efforts to
accomplish the same goal. Recognition of
learning supports that enhance classroom
instruction and aide in the management and
operation of schools must be an integral part
of this reform. Utilizing the expertise of
school-based mental health professionals,
like school psychologist, to provide these
learning supports has been demonstrated to
be not only cost effective, but successful in
improving the educational outcomes for
students.
We Are Here to Help
School psychologists are specially trained in
school law, learning, child development, the
operation of school systems, as well as in
family systems, traditions and cultures, and
mental health service delivery. This
expertise is especially important in school
districts serving high need populations if we
are to genuinely raise the bar and close the
gap in achievement for all students. By
nature of their training and expertise, school
psychologists are an integral part of
effective educational practices and have a
strong investment in the school reform
process.
Addressing problems before they escalate or become chronic
is less costly over time than intensive remedial services or
negative outcomes such as dropping out of school,
delinquency, or incarceration
4
References
Aos, S., Lieb, R., Mayfield, J., Miller, M., & Pennucci, A.(2004). Benefits and costs of prevention and
early intervention programs for youth. Olympia, WA: Washington State Institute for Public Policy.
Retrieved July 9, 2008, from http://www.wsipp.wa.gov/rpt3les/04-07-3901.pdf
Cowan, K.C., & Skalski, A.K. (2008). Ready to Learn, Empowered to Teach: Excellence in Education for
the 21st Century. Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists. Available:
http://www.nasponline.org/advocacy/2008educationpolicydocument.pdf
Fleming, C. B., Haggerty, K. P., Brown, E. C., Catalano, R. F., Harachi, T. W., Mazza, J. J., et al. (2005).
Do social and behavioral characteristics targeted by preventive interventions predict standardized test
scores and grades? Journal of School Health, 75, 342–349.
Ingersoll, R.M. (2001). Teacher turnover, teacher shortages, and the organization of schools. Seattle,
WA: Center for the Study of Teaching and Policy, University of Washington. Retrieved July 9, 2008,
from http://depts.washington.edu/ctpmail/PDFs/Turnover-Ing-01-2001.pdf
Jussim, L., Smith, A., Madon, S., & Palumbo, P. (1998). Teacher expectations. In J.E. Brophy (Ed.),
Advances in research on teaching: Expectations in the classroom (pp. 1–48). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
National Association of School Psychologists. (2010a). Model for comprehensive and integrated school
psychological services. Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.
http://www.nasponline.org/advocacy/2008educationpolicydocument.pdf
National Association of School Psychologists. (2010b). Standards for the credentialing of school
psychologists. Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.
http://www.nasponline.org/standards/2010standards/2_Credentialing_Standards.pdf
National Research Council and Institute of Medicine. (2000). From neurons to neighborhoods: The
science of early childhood development. Committee on Integrating the Science of Early Childhood
Development, J. P. Shonkoff & D. A. Phillips (Eds). Board on Children, Youth, and Families, National
Research Council and the Institute of Medicine. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Skalski, A.K., & Taylor, L. (2010). Enhancing the Blueprint for School Improvement in the ESEA
Reauthorization: Moving From a Two- to a Three-Component Approach. Bethesda, MD: National
Association of School Psychologists. Available:
http://www.nasponline.org/advocacy/UCLA_NASP_Brief_FINAL.pdf
U.S. Department of Education: National Center for Education Statistics. (2000). The condition of
education 2000 (NCES 2000-062). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. Retrieved July 9,
2008, from http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2006/2006071.pdf
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (1999).Mental health: A report of the surgeon general.
Executive summary. Rockville, MD: National Institute of Mental Health.
_________________________________________________________________
January 1, 2013
We write to you about a matter of great significance and concern related to educational funding
and budget development within local school districts. In February 2007, the Federal Centers for
Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) clarified provisions of Federal Medicaid laws and
regulations governing the reimbursement procedures for school-based psychological services.
Accordingly, qualified Medicaid providers for these services must be able to provide the same
services within the community. School psychology is one of the professions that provide these
vital services within the schools. Unfortunately, limitations within the current credentialing of
school psychologists restrict their practice to the school setting. Therefore, over 75% of our
current school psychology workforce has been declared ineligible to provide Medicaid services.
This change in Medicaid Provider status has cost our school districts millions of dollars in lost
reimbursement for services that we are mandated to provide. An analysis of Medicaid
reimbursement in New York estimates that school psychological services represent $100 million
dollars in unreimbursed services. During these difficult economic times, when the Legislature
and the Governor are faced with difficult budgetary decisions, it becomes imperative for New
York to advance all opportunities to utilize any available revenue streams to fund educational
mandates.
In addition, provisions within the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 expands
the Medicaid program by increasing the number of children and their families who are eligible
for services and expanding the availability of preventative services. This Act identifies children
as a priority population for the provision of “behavioral health services” and schools as a priority
location for these services. School psychology is defined as a “mental health service profession”
(Section 5002, Definitions, (22)) and school psychologists are defined as “qualified health
providers” for the provision of child and adolescent mental and behavioral health services
(Section 5203, Subpart 3, Sec. 775, (B)). As mentioned earlier, current statutory and regulatory
provisions within New York conflict with these aspects of the Affordable Care Act.
We ask that you support legislation (S2923/A3570) which is the first step to opening the revenue
stream for Medicaid reimbursement of school psychological services. This legislation removes
the restriction of school psychological practice to the walls of the school. We believe that the
"school" in school psychology represents the type of psychology practiced by these
professionals, not the specific location. The legislation is careful to limit practice to activities in
which school psychologists currently engage on a daily basis and for which they are well trained
and highly qualified.
It is vital to advance this legislation as part of the budget process. Without these funds, provision
of school psychological services to Medicaid eligible students becomes another drain on precious
dollars for local school districts.
We look forward to your anticipated support of this legislation and your continued support of
schools and children throughout New York State.
Yvette Gooorevitch
Karen Keemp
Keelly Caaci
Council of NY Special Education Administrators
NY Association of School Psychologists
Pamela Maadeiros, Essq.
Miichael Boorges
NYS Alliance for Children with Special Needs
NYS Association of School
Business Officials
Jay Woorona, Essq.
Roobert Loowry
NYS School Boards Association
NYS Council of School
Superintendents
Conducting Research in the Schools
By John Garruto, D.Ed., NCSP-NYASP Research Chair
Some things never change. Whether you have been in the field ten
months or ten years, you probably have noticed consistent realities. There are those parts of our jobs that are rewarding-such as
the feeling we get when a child leaves our offices saying "Thank
you" for helping them, or when we discover why a child might be
struggling to learn. There are those parts of our jobs that can be
frustrating, such as the amount of administrative paperwork that
we are often asked to complete.
One thing that has also held consistent is the limited amount of
research conducted by actual practitioners. You might remember
having to do a research proposal or learning how to analyze data
via statistical tests. School psychologists might think that the volume of work to conduct this research may mirror what they
remember from graduate school. The irony is-there is no better
person to conduct this research than school psychologists!
Think about it-you're sitting on a pile of data. You have test
scores, evaluations conducted, you might conduct surveys for systems level analysis, etc. You have a real opportunity to turn that
into something real. It's not as hard as you think! The most important thing in any research that you wish to conduct is to have it
approved by an Institutional Review Board (IRB). Often, Boards
of Education can help serve this purpose. If this is troublesome,
you can look to link up to a local college-professors are always
looking to conduct research.
Whether you're looking to compare state test scores to your CBM
data so that you can share this information with your school community or you want to see if your Positive Behavioral
Interventions and Supports (PBIS) initiative has reduced discipline referrals, you can use your skills to answer important questions and inform best practices in your school.
Finally, it's important to remind New York School Psychologists
that there is a research grant that is available to one member every
year. One thousand dollars is awarded to the winner (five hundred
before the research takes place and five hundred when it sees
completion). Perhaps this is the year that you decide to pilot a new
program in your school to see if it truly helps enhance the social
skills of children with autism, or you create a survey for parents
to determine which practices have helped their kids the most.
However you do it is up to you. Research...it's not just for graduate school. Y
The Leader in Me...
(continued from p. 14)
(continued from p.22)
Dr. Sprick ended with a shocking research finding: Out of 200
behavior intervention plans that were designed by school psychologists and assessed, 54% of teachers said they were implementing these plans in their classrooms. In actuality, direct observation showed that only 4% were doing them correctly! If this is
indeed what is occurring in schools, it is imperative teachers act
as problems solvers in the earliest stages to increase the probability that they are creating a general, congruent environment of
support for these students.
- Improved school culture
- Support from business and community leaders
- Reduced discipline referrals
Below are additional resources authored by Dr. Randy Sprick on
discipline and classroom management:
Sprick, R. (2008). Interventions: Evidence-based behavioral strategies for individual students. Eugene, OR: Pacific Northwest Publishing.
Sprick, R., Booher, M., & Garrison, M. (2009). Behavioral response to intervention. Eugene, OR: Pacific Northwest Publishing. Y
Bus misconduct reports declined from over 100 in 2008-2009 to
about ten in 2011-2012.School suspensions were reduced from
55 to 10 during the same period. The RTI caseload dropped from
55 to 10. Reasons given for why this works include the idea that
this is a new paradigm: Every child is a leader. It is based on universal principles and involves teachers, students and parents. It
employs a ubiquitous approach – everywhere, all the time.
The presentation concluded with two quotes, the first from
Thoreau: “Go confidently in the direction of your dream. Live
the life you have imagined”, and from The Leader in Me: “Be
the school you have imagined”. A video, “Creating Greatness”
was then shown. Y
39
Research Grant Application
The NYASP Research Committee
invites you to apply for a research grant.
Applicants must be members in good standing of
NYASP.
Outline of Guidelines for Research Proposal
I. Introduction
A. Briefly summarize your hypothesis
B. Provide a brief review of the literature to
support your hypothesis
Grants will be awarded in amounts up to $1,000.00.
Half the amount of the grant will be given upon
selection. The second half of the grant will be distributed upon presentation of the resulting study at
a future NYASP conference.
The closing date for applications is May 15, 2013
for the initial NYASP research grants. Winners will
be notified by August 1, 2013.
Please submit 1 copy of the application (below) and
2 copies of the proposal (up to 750 words) to:
II. Method
A. Briefly describe the subjects
B. Briefly describe the setting
C. Variables
1. Briefly describe the dependent and
independent variables
2. Briefly describe the methods for
demonstrating the reliability and
validity of the variables
D. Experimental Design - briefly describe
and explain
E. Procedure - concretely summarize
III. Results - describe plan for your analysis of
your data
John Garruto
17 Ellen Street
Fulton, NY 13069
Also, submit your proposal by e-mail to
[email protected]
IV. Discussion - briefly state the potential signifi
cance of the study
APPlICAtIoN Form
Name_______________________________ Current Position__________________________
Email Address________________________________________________________________
Address_____________________________________________________________________
City/Town___________________________ State & Zip Code_________________________
Office Phone_________________________ Home Phone_____________________________
Title of Research Proposal_______________________________________________________
40
Updates from
Your NY NASP Delegate
NASP NoteS
Submitted by Vincent Alfonso
Coming to grips with the tragedy in
Newtown as well as the loss of one of
our own has been challenging. But the
school psychology community came
together to support our schools and
communities, and I personally want to
thank you for counseling, comforting,
and educating your community during
this national tragedy. Below are some
NASP notes that provide information
about what is happening on the national level:
1) NASP released statements relating
to Newtown. Read the statement on the
tragedy at http://www.nasponline.org/
communications/press-release/
Sandy_Hook_Media_Statement.pdf,
the statement 'Stigmatizing Mental Health or Developmental
Disorders is Harmful' at http://www.nasponline.org/communications/press-release/Diagnosable_Disorder_Statement.pdf, and the
call to action for comprehensive school safety policies at
h t t p : / / w w w. n a s p o n l i n e . o r g / c o m m u n i c a t i o n s / p r e s s release/School_Safety_Statement.pdf.
2) In light of the tragedy at Sandy Hook, many districts are reexamining their safety procedures and crisis plans. As you do, take
time to review the NASP school safety and crisis resources at
http://www.nasponline.org/resources/crisis_safety/index.aspx.
NASP offered PREPaRE training at its convention in February.
To learn more about PREPaRE training, visit http://www.nasponline.org/prepare/index.aspx.
3) The winter Emotional and Behavioral Screening issue of
School Psychology Forum is now available at
www.nasponline.org/publications/spf/index.aspx?vol=6&issue=3
Articles include 'Screening for Behavioral and Emotional Risk:
Constructs and Practicalities' and 'Mental Health Screening and
Academic Outcomes in Elementary School.' If you have questions, comments, ideas for future theme issues, or manuscript submissions, e-mail them to [email protected].
4) Save the date for the NASP 2013 Summer Conferences. This
year they will be held July 8-10 in Cincinnati, OH, and July 22-24
in Albany, NY. Get in-depth training during your summer break.
For more information, keep checking back at http://www.nasponline.org/conventions/2013/summer-conferences/index.aspx.
5) Want to affect the future of school psychology? Serve as a mentor at future conventions and share your experiences and provide
guidance to a school psychology graduate student or early career
professional. Through a 1-hour meeting, scheduled at your convenience, you'll give your mentee a chance to ask real-life questions about professional practice. Information is available on the
NASP website preceding the annual convention.
7) Please take a moment to update your member profile to enable
NASP to provide you with greater member value. Visit
www.nasponline.org/membership/memberupdate.aspx to select
your e-mail and print subscription preferences and specify your
professional interests. With this, NASP can provide you with
more targeted information.
41
NewS
From
NYASP
2012 NYASP Award Winners
Honored at the Conference
in Niagara Falls
Frank Plumeau School Practitioner of the Year Award
The recipient of this award is chosen from the regional chapter winners in NYS. Linda Dugan of the Williamsville School District was
honored as this year’s School Practitioner of the Year. Her colleagues entertained the audience at the Awards Luncheon with a creative
presentation honoring Linda.
Gil Trachtman Leadership in School Psychology
The Leadership in School Psychology Award has been renamed the Gil Trachtman Leadership in School Psychology Award.
The recipient of this award for 2012 is James Sipior of the West Seneca Central School District.
42
NewS
From
NYASP
Ted Bernstein Awards
The Ted Bernstein Awards honor outstanding graduate students in the school psychology training programs across the state. Twentythree students were nominated by their programs this year. The Ted Bernstein Award winners are:
Yeshiva University, Lindsay Sherrin; Hofstra University, Leah
Jacobs; St. John’s University Queens Campus, Tara Cuskley;
St. John's University Oakdale Campus, Nicole Hudson;
Fordham University, Wendy Roman; Pace University,
Meredith Mahoney; Roberts Wesleyan College, Edgarda
Zordan; Alfred University, Brad Ervin; College of New
Rochelle, Jennifer Fucci; SUNY at Buffalo, Stuart Linke;
Brooklyn College, Kimberly Black; Syracuse University,
Kaitlin Hendricks; Niagara University, Eileen Rohan; RIT,
Amy Dosaro; Marist College, Amber Saracino; Queens
College, Sean McCabe; Columbia University, Lindsay Cook;
SUNY at Albany, Christine Viall; Mercy College, Kristen
Byrne; LIU – Brooklyn, Samantha Benvenuto; LIU –
Westchester, Ayla Mertturk; SUNY Oswego, Brittany
Riesbeck; College of St. Rose, Leslie Herwig; SUNY
Plattsburgh, Dina Casey.
NYASP Chapter School Psychologist of the Year Awards
Individual chapters are given the opportunity to identify regional
winners as School Psychologist of the Year. This year’s local winners
are: Jennifer Ragan of Chapter A, Madrid-Waddington Central
School, Linda Dugan of Chapter C, Williamsville School District,
Shannon Miller of Chapter K Germantown CSD, and Helen Stevens
of Chapter O, Farmingdale UFSD.
43
NewS
From
NYASP
The Friend of Children Award
Presidential Service Awards
The Institute for Autism Research at Canisus College was the
recipient of the 2012 Friend of Children award. Accepting
were Martin Volker, Marcus Thomeer, Christopher Lopata,
Gloria Lee, Susan Putnam, Jeffrey Fox, and Jennifer Toomey.
The Presidential Service Awards for 2012 are awarded to
Kirsten Eidle-Barkman, Robin Raphael, and Ruth Steegmann,
pictured with President Kelly Caci..
Nominations for the NYASP Psychologist of the Year and
Gil Trachtman Leadership in School Psychology Awards
are Now Being Accepted
Chapter School Practitioner of the Year
These awards recognize excellence in the provision of school psychological services. They are presented by local chapters to individuals who spend the majority of their time (75%) providing direct services to children and their families. Contact your local
chapter representative to nominate a school psychologist in your chapter for this award. Each local winner becomes the chapter
nominee for the NYASP Frank Plumeau School Practitioner of the Year Award.
Chapter representative information available at http://www.nyasp.org/contact_us/
Gil Trachtman Leadership in School Psychology Award
This award recognizes a school psychologist who has made a significant contribution to the field of School Psychology by virtue
of teaching, research or supervision. Nominees may not necessarily spend the majority of their time providing direct services to
children and their families but have made a significant impact to the field of school psychology in other ways.
Nomination forms are available at:
http://www.nyasp.org/awards/leadership_packet.pdf
Deadline is August 15. For information or questions, please contact: [email protected]. Send completed nomination forms
to Dr. Jeanne B. Gold, 21 Shaw Lane, Irvington, NY 10533.
44
NewS
From
NYASP
Chapter A News
Submitted by Mary Kay Hafer
Chapter A of NYASP celebrated Jennifer Ragan’s nomination for
School Practitioner of the Year for the 2011-2012 school year on
Friday September 21, 2012 at Cheel Arena during their fall School
Psychologists Networking Meeting. Jennifer was nominated by a
fellow school psychologist and former Chapter A winner, Robert
Higgins. Jennifer is employed by the Madrid Waddington Central
School District where she functions in all capacities as a school
psychologist. Mr. Higgins, a Behavior Consultant, praised Ms.
Ragan’s ability to work collaboratively with parents and teachers,
offer reasonable and appropriate recommendations, and positioning herself in leadership roles. In particular, Mr. Higgins noted a
special program initiated by Ms. Ragan which involved Social
Skills Training for children on the Autism Spectrum. Ms. Ragan’s
program implemented the use of social thinking® groups for late
elementary and middle school students. In implementing this program, Ms. Ragan also included multidisciplinary members to aid
in fidelity of the program (a speech therapist, teaching assistants,
and behavior consultant). Mr. Higgins noted that he “greatly
appreciated Ms. Ragan’s professionalism, high ethical standards,
and all around competence”. In addition to Mr. Higgins’ letter,
Ms. Ragan received supporting letters from other school personnel who work closely with Ms. Ragan.
As a chapter winner of this award, Ms. Ragan is eligible as a candidate for the state award as “School Practitioner of the Year”. The
New York State winner is then nominated for the National
Association of School Psychologists Award. The National
Association of School Psychologists (NASP) is composed of over
24,000 members across the country. The standard for this award
at the state and national level requires that one is a member of the
association and is practicing full time. In addition to this require-
ment, NYASP and NASP consider the eleven domains of School
Psychology which include; Data Based Decision Making and
Accountability, Consultation and Collaboration, Effective
Instruction and Development of Cognitive/Academic Skills,
Socialization and Development of Life Skills, Student Diversity
in Development and Learning, School and Systems Organization,
Policy Development and Climate, Prevention, Crisis Intervention
and Mental Health, and Home School Community Collaboration.
Other duties and training areas of school psychologists are;
Research and Program Evaluation, School Psychology Practice
and Development, and Information Technology.
Ms. Ragan is a graduate of The University of Rhode Island,
Kingston, Rhode Island where she received a Master of Science
Degree in School Psychology (May, 2009). Her Bachelor of Arts
Degree is from Connecticut College, New London, Connecticut
(May, 2004). She is married to Dan Ragan and the mother of a
three-year-old daughter, Addison. When receiving the award, Ms.
Ragan stated “Undeniably, the teachers, support staff, and families of the students I work with have been instrumental in this
process. Parents and staff have remained alongside me and have
enthusiastically incorporated Social Thinking ® pieces into both
classrooms and homes. Without question, the dedication on the
part of the families and professionals who spend far more time
with these students than I, has been the catalyst to the everyday,
small successes that occur.”
Chapter A also joined with The New York Association of School
Psychologists and the National Association of School
Psychologists to celebrate School Psychology Awareness Week
during the week of November 12-16, 2012.
Chapter J News
Submitted by Eliane Hack
Chapter F partnered with Chapter J to host meet and greet events
during School Psychology Awareness Week in November.
Chapter F's event, which was billed as a "Meet, Eat, and Share",
was hosted at Uno's Chicago Grill in Queensbury, New York.
Local school psychologists gathered to discuss local issues of
interest and shared FBA templates. Another event is planned for
January 17th with a topic of APPR for School Psychologists.
Please check out NYASP Chapter F's facebook page for regular
updates regarding events in our area and beyond.
45
NewS
From
NYASP
Chapter C News
Submitted by Aimee Lepsch
Chapter C Celebrates the Frank Plumeau Practitioner of the Year!
It was with great excitement that Chapter C honored NYASP’s
Frank Plumeau Practitioner of the Year, Linda Dugan! Linda was
proudly nominated by Jennifer Griffin, one of her colleagues in
the Williamsville School District, where she worked prior to her
retirement in June 2012. Linda’s career has been filled with significant accomplishments, continued learning, and an unbounded
and unconditional love for the profession.
During her career in Williamsville, Linda was instrumental in the
implementation of data-based decision making methods and procedures. She was on the forefront of developing a system of
accountability and discussion to institute positive change. She
chaired various committees such as the Child Support Team,
Committee on Special Education, and PBIS Behavioral Data
Team.
The provision of direct and indirect services for children, families,
and schools has been a skill which Linda honed to perfection. She
continually gained further insight into the field of psychology
through attending trainings and workshops. Linda was a member
of a three-year BOCES training in PBIS and was an integral member of a collaborative project with Canisius College and the
University of Buffalo to gather research data for students with
high functioning autism. These successful programs were rolled
out to other elementary and middle schools within Williamsville.
Linda also wrote a proposal for a ‘community learning’ in-service
for the school psychologists in Williamsville. This in-service provided a 17-hour training with Niagara University professors in the
administration, scoring, and interpretation of various neuropsychological, cognitive, and academic tests. Linda’s commitment to
the continuing education of school psychologists has also been
evidenced in the time she has spent planning the 2012 NYASP
Conference in Niagara Falls.
Chapter E News
Submitted by Kara McCarten May
Chapter E has been busy attending and hosting local events in the
Central New York area. In September of 2012, Michelle Storie
and Kara McCarten May represented NYASP at the 2012
Children’s Mental Health Summit, held at the Crowne Plaza in
Syracuse. Information was distributed regarding the role of
school psychologists and free resources were provided regarding
a range of children’s issues including ADHD, bullying, homework
completion, anxiety and depression.
In December of 2012, Chapter E hosted a workshop at East
Syracuse High School with Dr. John Garruto and Dr. Andrew
Shanock entitled “Moving towards best practice in the identification of learning disabilities in New York.” The event was attended by over 100 local school psychologists, graduate students,
Directors and Assistant Directors of Special Education, professors, CSE and CPSE chairs. The event was met with overwhelming attendance and response. Attendants received a great deal of
information reviewing and critiquing the various methods of designating learning disabilities in New York, which included
Response to Intervention, discrepancy, and patterns of strengths
and weaknesses. The workshop was humorous, thorough, entertaining, and informational, and attendants were able to earn CPD
credits. Additionally, information was disseminated at the event
regarding the benefits of NYASP membership and renewal.
46
In February of 2013, Chapter E hosted a two-hour WPPSI-IV
training with Dr. Michael Grau, Assessment Consultant at Pearson
Publishing, at the new and improved Syracuse Teacher Center.
Through this workshop, participants were able to describe the new
domains and factor structure of the WPPSI-IV, increase their
understanding of the cognitive processes assessed by the WPPSIIV subtests and how these processes contribute to school achievement, and understand how the tool can be used to identify developmental strengths and weaknesses and make program eligibility
and intervention decisions.
As of January of 2013, Kara McCarten May proudly stepped into
the role of Chapter E representative. Kara attended the fall and
winter NYASP Board meetings in Albany in preparation for the
new position. Kara is excited to be part of the NYASP Board and
to continue to work with the dedicated and enthusiastic Chapter E
committee in planning future events and meetings. We have
already begun to plan upcoming events, as well as the 2015
Conference to be held at the Turning Stone Resort. We are proud
to welcome back Michelle Storie as a conference co-chair for a
second time and introduce Jennifer Vega Meyers as the new cochair. We welcome any new or seasoned faces who would like to
get involved at the local level. If you have ideas for local events,
please don’t hesitate to contact Kara!
Summary of Efforts to Gain
Licensure, Independent Practice
for Masters Level Certified
School Psychologists
hIStorY oF NYASP
By Ruth Steegmann
A portion of this article appeared in Volume XXX Number 3. The
complete article, including a further section on the issue of the
MLA and the details of NYASP’s response appears below.
BACKGROUND
The issue of licensing for psychology has been formally explored
in New York State since 1937 and possibly even earlier. Prior to
1936 the field of psychology in New York State had had a system
of self certification. In the period between 1946 and 1948 State
Senator Desmond proposed two certification bills to the State
Legislature, both being unsuccessful, having died in committee
because of objections from the State Department of Education.
There were myriad organizations within the State, representing
various divisions of psychology (general psychology, teaching,
research, applied social psychology, personnel psychology, clinical and abnormal psychology). In 1947 they collaborated in writing a licensing bill which they submitted to the Division of
Licensure of the State Department of Education. Their response
was that it was “too soon for the psychologists to seek a licensing
bill” and advised the committee to seek a certification bill instead.
The following year (1948-49) a certification bill was presented to
State Ed.; however, that department had changed its mind and
stated that a certification bill would not adequately protect the
public or make prosecution of questionable practitioners possible.
They directed the psychologists to develop a licensing bill “with
teeth in it”.
A bill presented late in the 1950 legislative session died in committee, largely because of the opposition of a number of psychology groups. The following year another bill was introduced but
was vetoed by Governor Dewey, based on the perceived danger
that the public (and even some of the practitioners) would not
understand the distinction between psychologists and psychiatrists (and the opposition of a large number of physicians and psychiatrists).
In 1953 a bill, backed by the American Medical Association, was
introduced without prior knowledge of psychologists, limiting
psychotherapy to the exclusive domain of medical practice. This
bill also died in committee. It was not until 1956 that a psychology licensing bill was signed into law by Governor Harriman. By
this time, following extensive negotiations, the American
Psychiatric Association supported the bill.
CURRENT STATUS
This bill, known as Article 153 of Education Law, officially established the profession of psychology in New York State, and is still
basically in effect. It addresses the use of the title “psychologist”
and to the practice of psychology. Its basic provisions are:
Use of the title and practice in the field are limited to persons
licensed or otherwise authorized under this article.
Practice was defined as including observation, description, evaluation, interpretation and modification of behavior, for the purpose
of eliminating symptomatic or undesired behavior, enhancing personal adjustment, mental health, etc. Practice includes but is not
limited to psychological testing and counseling, psychoanalysis,
psychotherapy, diagnosis and treatment of mental, cognitive and
behavioral disorders, alcohol and substance abuse, psychological
aspects of learning and the use of accepted classification systems.
“Diagnosis and treatment” were defined as the appropriate psychological diagnosis and the ordering or providing of treatment
according to need, which included (but not limited to) counseling,
psychotherapy, marital or family therapy, psychoanalysis and
other psychological interventions, including verbal, behavioral,
etc.
A state board of psychology was established to assist the board of
regents with licensing and professional conduct issues.
Licensure requirements were established. These include a doctoral degree from a program registered with the NY State Education
Department (or the substantial equivalent) and two years supervised employment in appropriate psychological activities or the
substantial equivalent, in accordance with the commissioner’s
regulations. Additionally, applicants for licensure must pass an
examination satisfactory to the board, must be at least 21 years of
age, be of good moral character, as determined by the department
and pay a fee for admission to the examination and for an initial
license and an additional fee for each triennial registration period.
There are no citizenship requirements.
Limited permits were available to persons licensed in other states
or countries, which were valid for a year, after which the applicant
had to pass the NY state examination. These were also available
to persons who had completed their doctoral degree requirements
and were gaining the experience requirements.
Exemptions to all of the above requirements are outlined and
include persons in the employ of a federal, state, county or municipal agency or other political subdivision, or a chartered elementary or secondary school or degree-granting educational institution, insofar as such activities and services are part of the duties of
his or her salaried position.
47
hIStorY oF NYASP
Basically, non-doctoral level certified school psychologists are
restricted to practice only in their school or other exempt settings,
and are prohibited from engaging in independent contracting,
either with individuals or with schools, hospitals or agencies. This
restriction was not well understood – many school psychologists
were not aware of these provisions of the education law. The same
applied to school districts and agencies. Or they chose to ignore
them. Some districts adopted the practice of contracting with
school psychologists from other districts for help cleaning up
backlogs of triennial re-evaluations, particularly during the summers. A number of school psychologists earned extra income by
contracting with pre-school assessment or other agencies on a part
time basis. A number of attempts to obtain clarification of the precise definition and interpretation of what constitutes “salaried
employment” have failed to result in definitive information
In May, 1992, NYASP published a position paper on independent
practice, prepared by the organization’s government relations
committee and the legal firm of O’Connell and Aronowitz in
Albany. Members of the committee who contributed to this paper
were Debra Handel, Chairperson; Jack Kamins, NYASP president, Dirk Hightower, past president; Kevin Bacher, Kevin Coats,
David Giannascoli, Robert Johnston, Paul Meller, Peggy
Plumeau, Marcia Schaeffer and Cherie Tyler. Counsel members
were Peter Danziger, Esq. (who was also NYASP’s lobbyist) and
Robert E. Biggerstaff, Esq.
Major arguments put forth included:
1. Independent practice would enable school psychologists to provide services under their professional title, to school age children
and families after the school day and the school year, enhancing
the availability of services and the profession of school psychology.
2. Based on their education and training, the current law allows
school psychologists to provide services outside the school system under a different title, such as “therapist”, “counselor”, or
“educational consultant”. This is misleading to the public and a
disservice to the profession.
3. School psychologists have extensive education, training, experience and understanding of the school as a social system, and
family structure which shapes a child’s educational and emotional development. We are uniquely qualified to deal directly and
effectively with school-age children’s learning disabilities, emotional, and developmental difficulties.
4. A child in need of psychological services during the day is most
likely to also have that need after the school day. While the family may hire a teacher to tutor a student after school hours, it cannot seek additional counseling from a school psychologist.
48
5. Unlike the Masters level speech pathologists, social workers,
occupational therapists, etc., school psychologists are the only
professionals to be prohibited from using their earned title privately.
6. School psychologists are under-utilized in New York State and
there is a severe shortage of school psychologists throughout the
state. Independent practice would enhance both the availability of
services and the attractiveness of the profession.
The following month (June, 1992) a bill was introduced in the
state Senate by Senator Stafford, to amend the education law in
regard to school psychologists. Listed as TITLE BILL FOR
SCHOOL PSYCHOLOGISTS (S. 8633, A. 12282) the bill proposed amending section 7605 of the education law by adding a
new subdivision 5 to read as follows: “The activities, services, and
use of the title school psychologist on the part of a person who has
a permanent certificate as a school psychologist issued pursuant to
the regulations of the commissioner.” Section 7605 deals with
exempt persons, beginning with the statement: “Nothing in this
article shall be construed to affect or prevent”, then has eight sections covering different categories of exempt persons. School psychologists as salaried employees of public schools, municipalities,
etc., are cited in subdivision 1 of section 7605. The original subdivision 5 states: “The conduct, activities or services of the clergy
or Christian Science practitioner, in the provision of pastoral
counseling services within the context of his or her ministerial
charge or obligation”. The bill proposes to add the above statement to cover certified school psychologists practicing outside of
our exempt settings.
With passage of the title legislation, permanently certified New
York State school psychologists would be able to use the title and
to practice as school psychologists outside of school hours. This
bill reached the Higher Education Committees of the Senate and
Assembly but remained there at the end of the legislative session,
and was not brought to a vote by the entire bodies. There was a
concerted effort by the APA state affiliate, NYSPA, to block the
bill from being acted upon.
As the 21st century began, APA/NYSPA, which primarily represents licensed psychologists, attempted to impose restrictions
which would narrowly define the practice of psychology to doctoral level persons. A number of other professional groups (social
workers, marriage and family therapists, creative art therapists,
psychoanalysts.) developed their own initiatives to define and
implement scope of practice in their professions. State Ed
responded by stating its unwillingness to work with that number
of disparate groups and instructed them to collaborate on an
omnibus bill which would cover all of them. School psychology
was not represented in the discussions. APA (and its NY affiliate,
NYSPA), have always maintained that the entry level for practice
hIStorY oF NYASP
in any of the sub-disciplines of psychology is the doctorate.
Discussion, commentary and debate ensued for several years, at
length resulting in the passage of the omnibus bill in 2002. It
restricted the practice of psychology, set requirements for Master
Social Worker, Licensed Clinical Social Worker, Marriage and
Family Therapist, Creative Arts Therapist and Licensed
Psychoanalyst, along with establishing the new profession of
Licensed Mental Health Counselor.
NYASP had attempted to gain our own scope of practice regulation along with licensure through a bill introduced into the NY
legislature in May, 1999. This bill was drafted by Peter Mannella
of CARR Public Affairs, NYASP’s legislative consultant and lobbyist, with Lynne Thies and Tom Kulaga providing advisement.
Senator Dale Volker sponsored the bill in the Senate and
Representative Steve Sanders in the Assembly. (S. 8391 / A.5747).
The bill provided a statutory definition of “school psychology”
and “school psychologist” and prescribed the requirements for
individuals to become licensed as school psychologists. These
were: (1) filing an application with the State Education
Department, (2) having a master’s degree and/or a certificate of
advanced studies or the substantial equivalent thereof, (3) two
years supervised employment as a certified school psychologist or
engagement in appropriate school psychology activities satisfactory to the state committee for school psychologists and in accordance with the commissioner’s regulations, (4) pass an examination satisfactory to the state committee (described above) (5) be at
least 21 years of age (6) meet no requirements as to United states
Citizenship, (7) be of good moral character as determined by the
department (8) Pay a fee of $115 to the department for admission
to a department conducted examination, and a fee of $155 for
license renewal after each triennial registration period, (9) continuing professional education: as a condition of renewal of licensure, complete not less than 20 hours of continuing competency
activities annually during each registration period.
Once again, NYASP’s bill was referred to the Higher Education
Committees, but was not acted upon before the end of the legislative session. It was reintroduced in subsequent legislative sessions, again remaining in the Higher Education Committees at the
close of each year’s session. In 2007 George Lattimer came on as
the major sponsor of our bill in the Assembly. In the elections of
2009 Democrats won control of the New York State Senate and
Senator Volker was no longer in a position to be the primary sponsor of our bill. He announced his retirement from public office in
May, 2010. The current sponsor of the bill in the Senate is John
Flanagan (R, Suffolk County), while George Lattimer (D,
Westchester County) was elected to the State Senate and remains
a co-sponsor. The bill was reintroduced in January of 2012, and
again in January of 2013, with Linda Rosenthal (D, NY County)
as the sponsor in the Assembly and Michael Miller (D, Queens) as
co-sponsor.
Requirements for licensure have become more specific than in the
original bill, with the added stipulation that education must
include a minimum of 60 graduate hours. The course of study
must cover the areas of (1) biological, social and cultural bases of
development, (2) psychopathology and exceptionality in learning
and behavior, (3) assessment and appraisal of learners in home
and school contexts, (4) consultation and collaboration in family,
school and community systems, (5) effective instruction and
development of cognitive and academic skills, (6) prevention and
treatment of behavioral and emotional disorders and deficits, (7)
school organization, curriculum, policy and law, (8) research and
program evaluation (9) professional and ethical practice of psychology in schools, (10) completion of a 1200 hour supervised
internship in school psychology, with no less than 600 hours completed within a school setting.
Experience requirements are specified in the current bill as completion of a minimum of 2400 hours of post-master’s supervised
experience relevant to the practice of school psychology satisfactory to the board and in accordance with the commissioner’s regulations, such supervised experience which may include 1200
hours completed as part of a program in school psychology.
Current fees are $240 for the examination and initial license,
along with $85 for each reexamination.
The current bill spells out boundaries of professional competency.
Outside of these boundaries are the provision of services for serious mental illnesses on a continuous basis without a medical evaluation of the illness by, and consultation with a physician.
“Serious mental illness” is defined as schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, bipolar disorder, major depressive disorder, panic
disorder and obsessive-compulsive disorder.
Persons licensed under provisions of this bill are also prohibited
from (a) prescribing or administering drugs, (b) using invasive
procedures, or (c) being granted hospital privileges.
The exemption under which certified, non-licensed school psychologists are permitted to work remains essentially the same as
in the original Article 153 of Education Law, enacted in1956.
Increasing importance and urgency for certified school psychologists to gain licensure was APA’s proposal in 2007 of a Model Act
for State Licensure of Psychologists. This included removal of the
exemption from licensure regulations for school psychologists
(which the APA governance had actually adopted in 1977). Two
periods of public commentary were held during which both
NYASP and NASP were key players. Ultimately, APA dropped the
part of the proposal that would have eliminated the exemption. An
update of the Model Licensure Act was again proposed in 2010,
this time not including the removal of the exemption.
49
hIStorY oF NYASP
An additional rationale for licensure of certified school psychologists involves the changes to regulations for Medicaid reimbursement to schools for services performed by school psychologists.
The Medicaid and Medicare programs came into being in 1965 as
Title XIX of the Social Security Act and have undergone numerous revisions in the ensuing years. In 1988, as part of the
Medicaid provisions, Congress allowed Local Education
Agencies (LEAs) to claim reimbursement for covered related
services authorized in an IEP, which included the assessment and
mental health intervention services performed by school psychologists.
States have discretion in determining which groups their Medicaid
programs will cover and the financial criteria for Medicaid eligibility. In the fall of 2008 NASP conducted an informal survey
regarding the impact of recent changes in Medicaid reimbursement of school psychological services. Several states do not bill
Medicaid for psychological services in the schools. In New York
State, all non-doctoral and non-licensed school psychologists
were no longer eligible for reimbursement of their services to
Medicaid-eligible students, causing local districts to lose one to
one and a half million dollars of potential Medicaid reimbursement. If certified school psychologists are able to gain licensure,
these funds would once again become available to districts.
This was a major component of the rationale for passage of our
current licensure bills which were discussed with key members of
the New York State Senate and Assembly by a delegation of
NYASP Board members on Lobby Day, May 7, 2012 in Albany.
Participants were Kelly Caci, Beth Rizzi, Britton Schnurr, Lisa
Kilinowski-Press, Andrew Shanock, Kyle Sutton, John Kelly and
Pam Madieros (NYASP’s lobbyist). Additional significant talking
points included:
- Without licensure, school psychologists are getting squeezed and
their scope of practice is being limited.
- In some cases, school psychologist positions have been cut
because the districts are unable to obtain the Medicaid reimbursement.
- Many educational professionals, who at the specialist/masters
level, have less training than school psychologists, but can be
licensed (i.e. social workers).
- School psychologists have broad training in both education and
psychology, which is not the case with other service providers in
the schools who are eligible for licensure.
- School Psychologists are leaders in the schools and often the
main go-to persons to deal with school crises and work with
teachers to implement various interventions.
- Outside of NYC, there are few licensed psychologists. (In some
counties there are fewer than five and in some, none at all.)
- Poverty levels, under the ACA, will be lowered, thus, more children will be Medicaid-eligible. It is in the schools where most
children are served.
- It would allow more school psychologists to get out of their
offices and into the classrooms to do more than just what is mandated by law.
Representatives from NYASP met with legislators again on Lobby
Day, May 6 of this year. A summary of these discussions will
appear in the next issue of The New York School Psychologist. Y
50
By Kim D’Imperio, Ayla Mertturk, Elizabeth Tiffany,
and Craig Hanthorn, Graduate Student Representatives
It was wonderful to see a large number of students in attendance
at the Niagara Falls conference. In fact, it was one of the largest
numbers of students to attend in a while! We hope that you found
the sessions informative and helpful. As always, we are here to
facilitate communication between the graduate students of New
York and the NYASP board. We welcome any and all feedback on
the student strand of the conference.
As a reminder, the 2012 conference student strand consisted of the
following workshops:
- Tips and strategies to utilize in forming your resume, interviewing, and searching for jobs
StudeNt Forum
Did you find these workshops helpful? Did you miss one that you
would be interested in attending in the future? Tell us what you
think! Graduate students can contact their NYASP student representatives or their university’s student liaison to express any concerns about past or future NYASP conferences.
Does your university have a student liaison? Do you know who it
is? If the answer is no, please contact us at [email protected]
for more information. Student liaisons are representatives of their
respective School Psychology programs. Information is passed
along to the liaisons to be disseminated to students in their programs. Interested? Contact us!
- Preparing for the PRAXIS II exam in school psychology
- Applying for NCSP when graduating from a non-NASPapproved program
- Finding creative solutions in the job market with a School Psych
skill set
New York State
School Psychology Graduate Training Programs
1. Adelphi University (MA)
2. Alfred University (MA/CAS; Psy.D.)
3. Brooklyn College (MS Ed/CAS)
4. College of New Rochelle (MS)
5. College of Saint Rose (MS Ed/CAS)
6. Columbia University, Teachers College (MS Ed, Ph.D., Ed.D.)
7. CUNY – Graduate Center (Ph.D.)
8. CUNY – Queens College (MS Ed/CAS)
9. Fordham University (Ph.D.; PD; BiPD)
10. Hofstra University (Ph.D.; Psy.D.)
11. Iona College (MA/CAS)
12. Long Island University – Brooklyn (MS Ed)
13. Long Island University – Westchester (MS Ed)
14. Marist College (MA/CAS)
15. Mercy College (MS/CAS)
16. Niagara University (MS/CAS)
17. Pace University (MS Ed; Psy.D.)
18. St. John’s University (MS; Psy.D.)
19. Roberts Wesleyan College (MS/CAS)
20. Rochester Institute of Technology (MS/CAS)
21. SUNY Albany (Psy.D./CAS)
22. SUNY Buffalo (MS/CAS; Ph.D.)
23. SUNY Oswego (MS/CAS)
24. SUNY Plattsburgh (MA/CAS)
25. Syracuse University (Ph.D.)
26. Touro College (MS)
27. Yeshiva University (Psy.D.)
51
tom’S teCh tAlk
Managing Your Digital Footprint:
Think Before You Post
By Tom Kulaga
The New York State Office of Cyber Security recent newsletter on
digital footprint offers good advice for all of us. Digital footprint
refers to the compilation of content on the Internet that can be
associated with you and, thus, potentially available to anyone performing a search on you. The list of possible content visible online
is endless (e.g., your family videos on YouTube, your comments
on a news article or blog, vacation photos on Flickr, your posts on
Facebook and Twitter).
Why should you be concerned about the information available
online about you? While these bits of information may seem
innocuous on an individual basis, when pieced together they create a composite profile that could be used by cyber criminals. The
more information about you on the Internet, the more information
that is accessible for social engineering and identity theft.
Additionally, this content may be accessed at some point by an
outside source doing an assessment of you, whether it be for college admissions or a new job.
Can you do anything to manage your digital footprint? Yes.
By reviewing the tips and recommendations below, you can help
minimize your online exposure and possibly reduce the risk of
identity theft. Keep in mind, once information is posted on the
Internet, it may be impossible to remove it.
Map Your Footprint. Before you can start reducing and cleaning
your digital footprint, you should know what it currently looks
like. Make a list of all social networking sites that you've signed
up for, any websites where you've had an account in the past and
all the user names or aliases you have used on the web.
Using your name, other personal details, and the information from
your list, do a few searches on multiple search engines and you'll
get a good idea of how big or small your digital footprint is.
Take Control of Your Privacy. Once your footprint is mapped,
you can start to clean it up. Perhaps you found a few social networking posts that were available to the public, or maybe a few
photos that you would rather not have everyone see. Most social
networking sites have varying levels of privacy controls, so you
can change a few settings and restrict access.
52
Manage Your Interactions with Others. Be careful about how
you interact with others online. Be selective about which venues
you participate in. If you regularly contribute to blogs or message
boards, consider how your statements might be interpreted by others. Be cautious about referencing your place of employment or
your job function as this might be used for social engineering and
other scams.
Use Caution on Social Media and Networking Websites. Use
the available privacy controls to limit and control access to your
information. Do not post any inappropriate photos, comments,
status updates or other content. Think before you post.
Recommendations
• Clean up your footprint. Remove any photos, content and links
that are inappropriate or reveal too much information.
• Be selective about who you authorize to access your information.
• Monitor comments made by others.
• Consider using the “block comments” feature or setting your
social networking profile to “private” so only designated friends
can view your information.
• Think before you post.
For More Information
OCS Newsletters: http://www.dhses.ny.gov/ocs/awareness-training-events/news/
MaximumPC: How To Erase Your Digital Footprint:
http://www.maximumpc.com/article/features/how_erase_your_di
gital_footprint
Washington Post: Beware of Privacy Policies: Time to Clean Up
Your Digital Footprint: http://www.washingtonpost.com/
lifestyle/style/beware-of-privacy-policies-time-to-hide-your-digital-footprint/2012/01/31/gIQADI7PnQ_story.html
Tom Kulaga is a School Psychologist in the
Marlboro Central School District, a past-president of NYASP,
and the webmaster of www.nyasp.org.
What About Those New Tests?
By Merryl Bushansky, Psy.D.
the ethICS CorNer
By the time you read this, the annual rite of passage for preschoolers, Kindergarten Screening, will probably have come and gone.
Hopefully, it went smoothly but for some of you, it may have been
a difficult or uncomfortable situation.
ing tests and assessments. You may be told that the district can’t
afford it this year. You may need to negotiate or compromise, perhaps offering to share the kits instead of purchasing one for each
elementary school in your district.
A popular assessment tool for this annual activity came out with
its 4th Edition in 2011. You probably used the 3rd Edition when
you held your screening in the spring of 2012 which was ok since
it had been less than a year since the newer version had been
released. This year, however, the new instrument has passed its
first birthday and accepted practice is to no longer use the outdated tests after one year of the publishing of a new assessment.
Your administrators may still deny your request to purchase the
new materials. Long time readers of my columns and Position
Papers may be familiar with what I have advocated in the past, to
use a different assessment measure instead of the outdated test.
That may not be practical when it comes to Kindergarten
Screening. Another option would be to refuse to use the outdated
test but then you run the risk of being perceived as insubordinate.
So what’s a school psychologist who is well versed in best practice and ethical guidelines to do? Hopefully, your district has purchased the new measure. If not, perhaps you can bring the issue to
the attention of those responsible for purchasing assessment materials as it is possible that they may be unaware that the new version has been published. You may need to explain why this is necessary since not all administrators are well versed in psychometrics, norming procedures and the rationale for periodically updat-
So what should you do? I’m sure you are well aware that most
Ethics and Professional Practices issues are not black and white
and there are often no easy answers. I believe it’s important to
raise the issues however, and start the conversation…
Merryl Bushansky, Psy.D, has been the Chairperson for
NYASP’s Ethics and Professional Practice Committe for several years.
She is a school psychologist in New Rochelle, NY.
Do you have an ethical dilemna?
Contact Merryl Bushansky at [email protected]
53
ChAPter rePreSeNtAtIveS
C
hapter representatives are appointed officials
who, along with the executive committee,
comprise the voting members of the
NYASP board. Chapter reps serve for a two-year
term and attend three to four meetings per year.
Alternates for each chapter are selected by the
chapter representative and appointed by the president. They arrange chapter functions and attend
meetings when the elected representative is not
available. Chapter reps are encouraged to hold
regional meetings to forward the practice of school
psychology.
Any member who is interested in service as a chapter representative should contact
Andrew Shanock, President-Elect
[email protected]
7318 Vic Court
Schenectady, NY 12303
518-817-3692
for information and assistance. Y
A
B
Jefferson, Lewis, & St. Lawrence
Mary Kay Hafer
[email protected]
315-265-9033 h / 315-265-4642 w
E
Cynthia Burns-McDonald (co-rep)
[email protected]
315-393-4992 h / 315-393-0900 x248 w
Clinton, Essex, & Franklin
Carole Holmes
[email protected]
518-297-2451 h / 518-298-4031 x5 w
C
Aimee Lepsch
[email protected]
Christine Metzger (co-rep)
[email protected]
D
Monroe, Ontario, Seneca, & Wayne
Victoria Mosetti
[email protected]
(D alternate OPEN)
Lawrence Pelkey
[email protected]
315-668-1796 h / 315-253-0361 w
Kara McCarten-May (co-rep)
[email protected]
315-427-6958
F
(B Alternate OPEN)
Erie, Genesee, Niagara, Orleans, & Wyoming
Cayuga, Cortland, Madison, Oneida,
Onondaga, & Oswego
Fulton, Hamilton, Herkimer, Montgomery,
Saratoga, Warren, & Washington
Eliane Hack
[email protected]
518-879-5494
(F Alternate OPEN)
G
Allegany, Cattaraugus, & Chautauqua
Gregory Leonard
[email protected]
716-499-9661
(G Alternate OPEN)
H
Chemung, Livingston, Schuyler, Steuben, &
Yates
Nancy Foreman
[email protected]
607-324-7834 h / 607-324-3703 w
Rachel Scaccia (co-rep)
[email protected]
585-739-1462 w
54
ChAPter rePreSeNtAtIveS
“Chapter representatives serve to communicate the needs and interests
of their chapter members and to advocate best practice strategies
in their geographical region.”
(NYASP Operations Handbook, 2009)
I
Broome, Chenango, Delaware, Otsego,
Tioga, & Tompkins
(I Representative OPEN)
N
(I Alternate OPEN)
J
Shauna Maynard (co-rep)
[email protected]
518-330-6553
K
Tiffany Sivco (alternate)
[email protected]
845-235-5830
L
(Second alternate OPEN)
O
Dutchess, Greene, Orange, Sullivan, & Ulster
Heather Dahl
[email protected]
845-987-9234
Putnam, Rockland, & Westchester
Robert Meagher
[email protected]
917-561-8098 c
Elzbieta Black (alternate)
[email protected]
718-549-2714 h / 718-696-6010 x2551 w
Albany, Columbia, Schenectady, Schoharie, &
Rensselaer
Katherine Kelly
[email protected]
New York City (Manhattan, Brooklyn, The
Bronx, Queens, and Staten Island)
P
Nassau
Michael Amorgianos
[email protected]
917-549-4999
(O Alternate OPEN)
Suffolk
Kimberly Behanna
[email protected]
631-786-6655
(P Alternate OPEN)
Rayna Shapiro
[email protected]
914-395-3742 h / 914-472-8040 w
Dawn Catucci (alternate)
[email protected]
914-693-6300 x2280 w
StudeNt rePreSeNtAtIveS
Student Representatives provide reciprocal communication between the executive board of NYASP and graduate students in training programs
across the state. They serve a two year term and are elected by the NYASP board. For more information please contact Mark Terjesen, Student
Representative Liaison, at [email protected] or 718-990-5860.
2011-2013 Student Reps
2012-2014 Student Reps
Kim D’Imperio
[email protected]
315-664-0194
Liz Tiffany
[email protected]
315-558-2329
Ayla Mertturk (alternate)
[email protected]
917-574-3124
Craig Hanthorn (alternate)
[email protected]
419-236-4981
55
exeCutIve boArd dIreCtorY
Executive Committee (2012-2014)
President
President-Elect
Andrew Shanock
[email protected]
7318 Vic Court
Schenectady, NY 12303
518-817-3692
Peter Faustino
[email protected]
1 Old Orchard Rd, Rye Brook, NY 10573
914-417-7661 c / 914-241-6119 w
Treasurer
Treasurer-Elect
Lynette Maheu
[email protected]
205 Yorkshire Rd, Rochester, NY 14609
315-569-7813 c
Kelly Caci
[email protected]
25 Shadowood Ln
New Windsor, NY 12553
845-567-4815 h / 845-563-3715 w
Cindy Burns-McDonald
414 Elizabeth St, Ogdensburg, NY 13669
315-393-4992 h / 315-393-0900 x248 w
Secretary
Michelle Storie
[email protected]
8772 Wedgefield Lane, Cicero, NY 13039
315-450-5269
Arielle D’Aprile
[email protected]
216 Main Street # 30, Nyack, NY 10960
Past-President
Newsletter Editor
NASP Delegate
Vinny Alfonso
[email protected]
75 West End Ave R23D, NY, NY 10023
212-957-0146 h / 212-636-6433 w
Committee Chairpersons
Awards
Jeanne Gold ∙ [email protected]
914-591-8634 h
Judy Harwood ∙ [email protected]
716-684-1097 h
Conference Coordinator
Britton Schnurr ∙ [email protected]
518-221-7411 h
Conference 2013
Ernie Collobolletta ∙ [email protected]
914-761-3411
Mitch Samet ∙ [email protected]
914-980-0722
Conference 2014
Flora Covey ∙ [email protected]
518-369-9803
Conference 2015
Michelle Storie
[email protected] ∙ 315-450-5269
Jennifer Meyers
[email protected]
Continuing Professional
Development
Lynne Thies ∙ [email protected]
516-466-5477 h / 516-349-3394 w
Robin Raphael ∙ [email protected]
716-632-1755 h / 716-250-1457 w
Culturally Responsive
Jennifer Arroyo
[email protected]
845-787-4023 h / 347-623-5290 c
Marlene Sotelo-Dynega
[email protected]
347-610-1036 c
Early Childhood
Heather Meddaugh
[email protected]
518-346-5360 w / 518-588-2727 c
Ethics & Professional Practices
Merryl Bushansky ∙ [email protected]
718-548-2386 h / 914-576-4415 w
Job Information Network
Mark Terjesen ∙ [email protected]
718-990-5860
Legislative
John Kelly ∙ [email protected]
631-912-2122
Beth Rizzi ∙ [email protected]
914-475-8155
Membership
Kirsten Eidle-Barkman
[email protected]
518-439-1583 h
Public Relations
Andrew Livanis
[email protected]
718-564-0237 h
Publications
Ruth Steegmann ∙ [email protected]
716-694-0719 h
Research
John Garruto ∙ [email protected]
315-729-7248
Rural Initiatives
Cynthia Burns-McDonald
[email protected]
315-393-4992 h / 315-393-0900 x248 w
Urban Initiatives
open position
Website
Listserves
Tom Kulaga ∙ [email protected]
845-790-4382 h / 845-236-8000 x1913 w
Bullying/School Voilence
Prevention
TSP-NY to NYASP
Kelly Caci ∙ [email protected]
845-567-4815 h / 845-563-3715 w
John Kelly ∙ [email protected]
631-912-2122
Liaisons & Affiliates
Archivist
Lisa Kilanowski
[email protected]
716-553-4977
RTI
Amy Piper ∙ [email protected]
56
Amanda Nickerson ∙ [email protected]
Andrew Shanock ∙ [email protected]
518-817-3692
NYASP to NYSCEA
Student Representatives
Bruce Weiner
[email protected]
413-738-5488 h / 518-658-2515 x222 w
Mark Terjesen ∙ [email protected]
718-990-5860
Membership Application
First Name________________________________________
Last Name _______________________________________
Address ________________________________________
City State Zip _____________________________________
County________________________________________
Email Address _____________________________________
Home Phone _______________________________________
Work Phone ______________________________________
Employer________________________________________
Job Title _________________________________________
___ Part-Time Private Practice
___ Full-Time Private Practice
__ Certified as a school psychologist in New York
__ Provisional Certification
__ Permanent Certification
Certificate # __________________________Date:______________
___ Currently functioning as a school psychologist
___ Primarily engaged in the training of school psychologists at a
college or university
___ Trained as a school psychologist, but currently functioning in
another position
___ Student enrolled in a school psychology training program
__ Nationally certified (hold the NCSP credential)
NCSP # ________________________________________________
__ Licensed as a psychologist in New York
License # _________________________________________
___ Regular
$110
___ Retired
$55
___ Student
$55
___ Common Address
$165
(two members at same address)
Applicant’s Signature____________________________________________________________Date _________________________
Indicates agreement to abide by the ethics and standards of NYASP
Note: please verify your professional status by enclosing a copy of your state certification.
Student membership requires supervisor’s signature and program information below.
Signature of Advisor or Supervisor _________________________________________________Date_________________________
Program / Employer Name and Location _________________________________________________________________________
MAIL TO: NYASP Membership • 911 Central Avenue • Suite 118 • Albany, NY 12206
or join/renew online at www.nyasp.org
57
New York ASSoCIAtIoN oF
SChool PSYChologIStS
Non-Profit
Organization
US Postage
911 Central Avenue Suite 118
Abany, New York 12206
PAID
Newburgh, NY 12550
Permit No 8604
Calendar of Events
July 22-24, 2013
NASP 2013 Summer Conference
Albany, NY
October 24-26, 2013
NYASP 2013 Conference
White Plains, NY
Looking Ahead
February 18-23, 2014
November 5-7, 2014
October 22-24, 2015
NASP 2014 Convention
Washington, DC
Albany, NY
Orlando, FL
Verona, NY
New Orleans, LA
San Antonio, TX
Chicago, IL
Visit our Website: www.nyasp.org
Find us on Facebook!
Follow us on Twitter!
Join the group ‘NYASP’
Like the page ‘NYASP Legislative Forum’
@nyasp

NYASP Template

Transcription

Similar documents

OKOTOKS • HOLY TRINITY ACADEMY

Register by writing to: [email protected]

Baumrind, D. (1966). Effects of Authoritative Parental Control on

NHASP Protocol

Brosura FSPUSH_EN - Universitatea Spiru Haret

Wire Issue 17

faculty of psychology and pedagogy

Frequently Asked Questions - Psychology

here - Headington Institute