Search results

The roles and functions of a school psychologist are multifaceted. School psychologists are traditionally trained in areas of assessment, intervention, consultation, and program evaluation, though they often participate in prevention and crisis intervention efforts and program evaluation (Harvey & Struzziero, 2008). School psychologists work at district, building, and individual student levels to provide comprehensive and effective services to children and families. Despite a wide range of responsibilities, the school psychologist works in conjunction with other school professionals (e.g., general and special education teachers, speech-language pathologists, audiologists, social workers, principals) and parents to foster individual student success. This chapter presents the general roles and responsibilities of the school psychologist, as well as the school psychologist’s role within an interdisciplinary team when making appropriate educational decisions.

School counselors and school psychologists are charged with supporting the holistic development of students with disabilities. They often collaborate with educational enterprise to improve educational outcomes and implementation of special education services to support student success and postsecondary transitions. However, historically underserved students, particularly Black girls with disabilities, have unique challenges that impact their overall success and preparedness for postsecondary educational opportunities. As such, the purpose of this chapter is to examine these challenges and provide strategies for school counselors and school psychologists to promote college and career readiness among Black girls with disabilities.

School Psychologists (SPs) have usually been associated with supporting educators in meeting the needs of students with socio-emotional and learning difficulties and disabilities. This chapter suggests that they can support teacher assistants and other educators within inclusive settings in many other ways too. It highlights that SPs are generally trained in holistic student development and group dynamics, in learning, teaching and assessment processes, and in bringing about individual and social change. The whole chapter is based on the idea that inclusion is a concern for all students and therefore also for all school staff. Teacher assistants in inclusive schools are regarded as part of a commitment of the whole school to adapt its curriculum, the organisation of learning and teaching, and the grouping of students so that each one can be actively engaged in the regular learning and social activities of the school.

Thus SPs can be called to support not only the engagement of an individual student but also to help make the class and school welcoming learning communities for all.

In response to a critical need for uniform school crisis preparedness and response efforts across districts, the National Association of School Psychologists developed PREPaRE, a model and training curriculum aimed to equip school-based professionals to engage in comprehensive school crisis prevention and intervention practices. The PREPaRE acronym stands for: Prevent/Prepare for psychological trauma; Reaffirm physical health, security, and safety; Evaluate psychological trauma; Provide interventions (and) Respond to psychological needs; and Examine the effectiveness of prevention and intervention efforts. The model spans four crisis preparedness phases: Prevention, Mitigation, Response, and Recovery. This chapter provides a detailed overview of the development and structure of the PREPaRE model's core components and the organizational framework of the Incident Command System. It delineates elements of the basic school crisis response plan, assessment of mental health risk following a crisis event, and the provision of crisis interventions within a multitiered system of support framework. Additionally, it summarizes ongoing effectiveness and implementation research used to evaluate and improve the model based on immediate training outcomes assessed through pre and postmeasures and training transfer to applied school contexts. Implications for research and public policy regarding school safety and crisis prevention and intervention, as well as the future of PREPaRE curriculum development, are discussed.

Assessment and identification of children with emotional and behavioral disorders (EBD) is complex and involves multiple techniques, levels, and participants. While federal law sets the general parameters for identification in school settings, these criteria are vague and may lead to inconsistencies in selection and interpretation of assessment measures. Assessment practice across school settings is greatly influenced by clinical guidelines such as the DSM-IV, which more specifically defines emotional and behavioral disorders and highlights the issue of co-morbidity. Before a student is assessed for special education eligibility under the IDEIA category of emotional disturbance, screening techniques and pre-referral interventions are needed. Positive Behavioral Supports and Response to Intervention models provide empirically supported frameworks for establishing the need for formal psychological assessment. Collaboration among members of the multidisciplinary team, including parents, helps to ensure that identification and intervention efforts have ecological validity. Tests and techniques vary considerably, but developmental histories, interviews, observations across settings, and behavioral checklists and rating scales are recommended, along with cognitive and achievement testing. While problems exist in the reliability and validity of projective techniques, they continue to be used in school-based assessment for EBD. Multitrait, multisetting, and multimethod approaches are essential for culturally fair assessment and reduction of bias in identification and placement.

Increasing numbers of support staff are employed in schools to provide services for students identified as requiring extra support. The roles of these staff have changed as a result of a variety of factors, foremost the increased inclusion of students with disabilities in mainstream settings. Compounding this increase is a re-evaluation of roles of staff in schools, shortages of qualified special education teachers, an increasing requirement of teachers to complete large quantities of administrative tasks, including paperwork (Lee, 2003), and the use of support staff, particularly teacher assistants (TAs) to relieve some of the work of teachers (Webster et al., 2010). This chapter will examine these factors and explore the resulting changes in roles and considerations for teachers when working with support staff.

Behavioral threat assessment and intervention is a violence prevention strategy that has become widely used in US schools. Instead of relying on a zero tolerance disciplinary approach that often leads to school exclusion of students with disabilities, schools can use a multidisciplinary threat assessment team to assess the seriousness and context of a student's behavior and identify appropriate interventions and supports. This process is especially valuable for students with disabilities who are identified as threatening violence. This chapter describes an evidence-based model of threat assessment, the Comprehensive School Threat Assessment Guidelines (CSTAG), ¹ reviews some common misunderstandings of threat assessment, and presents a case example illustrating the value of threat assessment in preventing school exclusion, and provides services for a student with a disability.

While often considered a low incidence disability, traumatic brain injuries (TBIs) among students are anything but low incidence occurrences. Furthermore, educators are often at times not made aware that a student is injured; when informed, the information provided is generally limited or incomplete at best leaving educators unsure regarding what is needed for the student. In this chapter, information on TBI and its effects on students is provided. We also explore the history of inclusion, mechanisms for service delivery, accommodations and modifications for injured students, and transitioning and reintegrating students post-injury. Lastly, we provide a review of common barriers to service delivery and offer both proactive and reactive strategies to overcome those barriers.

Special education issues and considerations often perplex and confuse many educational institutions, regardless if they are traditional or autonomous organizations such as charters. However, research indicates these issues tend to be more complicated with charters because the realm of special education is highly regulated and in many cases, in direct conflict with charter core tenets of autonomy, innovation, curriculum, and accountability. Since the emergence of charter schools in 1991, researchers have investigated the relationship between charter law and the highly regulated domain of special education. The literature has evolved as charters have become more prevalent and established. But one thing remains the same, charter law and federal regulations are often in conflict with one another and cause great tension for autonomous leaders who strive to improve educational practices and learning for all the students they serve. Thus, this chapter focuses on important leadership considerations when building, improving, and maintaining an effective charter organization with regards to working with students with special needs. Essentially, the tension between autonomous leadership and federal regulations can be eased by planning for students with special needs. The key to successful planning and implementation is through alignment that goes beyond the Interstate School Leaders Licensure Consortium (ISLLC) Standard.