DOMAIN 2: CONSULTATION AND COLLABORATION

Steven MalmLauren Moss

March 12, 2012

Overview Definition of Consultation and Collaboration

Domain Understanding Consultation and Collaboration Topic 1: Consultation-Based Academic

Interventions Activity 1 : Math Interventions at Grissom Topic 2: Collaboration to Implement School-

Wide Progress Monitoring Activity 2: Creating MAZE passages at Sutton Reflection

Definition “School psychologists have knowledge of varied

models and strategies of consultation, collaboration, and communication applicable to individuals, families, groups, and systems and methods to promote effective implementation of services. As part of a systematic and comprehensive process of effective decision making and problem solving that permeates all aspects of service delivery, school psychologists demonstrate skills to consult, collaborate, and communicate with others during design, implementation, and evaluation of services and programs.” (National Association of School Psychologists [NASP], 2010)

Collaboration in Consultation: Multiple Definitions (Schulte & Osborne, 2003)

Equal but Different Two experts with different roles

Peer Facilitator Consultee has more power

Unique Service-Delivery Model Joint responsibility

Consultant-Structured Consultee-Participation Consultant seeks input; consultee implements intervention

Shared Assent to Variable Roles Consultant and consultee define leadership and roles

throughout the process; not a predefined process Equal Value/Equal Power

All parties have equal expertise and decision-making power

Topic 1: Consultation-Based Academic Interventions

Studied the effects of consultation-based academic interventions on children with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD; Jitendra et al, 2007) Two groups: traditional and intensive data-based academic

interventions Interventions implemented over a 15-month period Measured effectiveness based on CBM assessments, grades, and

individual goal attainment Results found that there wasn’t a difference between either

consultation group A one-year follow up study found that the achievement gains

of the two groups in the initial study were not significantly different (Volpe, DuPaul, Jitendra, & Tresco, 2009) This study found that the interventions did not have long-term

effects

Activity 1: Math Interventions at Grissom

Working on multiplication and division with pairs of fourth and fifth graders

Utilized a “pre-test” Combine flash cards and math games to

help students learn skills Record progress and amount of time

spent working on skills on documentation sheets

Documentation used to monitor and evaluate student progress; also helps guide the direction of future interventions

Documentation Sheet 1

Documentation Sheet 2

Topic 2: Collaboration to Implement School-Wide Progress Monitoring

IDEA and NCLB put pressure on schools to implement school-wide screening and progress monitoring

Curriculum-Based Measures (CBM) has been shown to be reliable and valid methods of progress monitoring (Deno et al., 2009) Oral Reading (CBM-R) – requires student to read a passage aloud

for a minute individually with instructor. Most widely used

MAZE Reading - students read silently and must choose the correct word within a passage at a series of decision points Can be administered simultaneously to whole class.

Creating and implementing school-wide progress monitoring is time consuming and requires the efforts of many individuals (Deno et al., 2009; Brown-Chidsey & Steege, 2010)

Activity 2: Creating MAZE Passages at Sutton

The 3-5th grade interventionist at Sutton Elementary discussed the need for progress-monitoring for those grades with the principal.

Sutton had used some MAZE passages created by practicum students the year before. MAZE passages had teacher buy-in

Easy to administer to whole class, easy to score, not time consuming

They needed a larger variety of MAZE passages to use. The teachers at Sutton could not make the MAZE

passages due to time constraints. The Ball State students were asked to assist.

Activity 2: Passage Sources

2nd years had to figure out where to get the MAZE materials Children’s literature from the school library? Reading textbooks from each grade level?

Brown-Chidsey et al., 2005 Investigated MAZE passage sources: literature popularly

taught at grade-level vs. material found in specific grade-level curriculum

Scores between conditions were highly correlated. Grade-level sources yielded higher scores than literature-

based sources 2nd years decided to take passages from the students’

reading textbooks 15 passages for EACH grade: 3rd – 5th

Activity 2: My Role 2nd years set-up what needed to be done. 1st years were tasked with making the passages A single set of instructions was generated and

distributed First sentence should be kept completely intact Every 7th word was to be removed and replaced with 3 choices

Correct word Near distracter (same part of speech) Far distracter (different part of speech)

Needed to be between 150 and 400 words Create a cover sheet with practice sentences and an answer

key Each of the 1st years would have to make 3 passages

for each grade.

Reflection Selecting a method of

consultation/collaboration Understanding the interconnectedness of

the NASP domains My role in the MAZE passage creation

Include pre-practicum students in collaboration next year

The research and planning involved with creating progress-monitoring measures Use and refer to MAZE passages in the future

References Brown-Chidsey, R., Johnson Jr., P., & Fernstrom, R. (2005). Comparison of grade-level controlled and

literature-based maze CBM reading passages. School Psychology Review, 34(3), 387-394. Brown-Chidsey, R. & Steege, M.W. (2010). Response to Intervention, 2nd Edition. The Guilford Press: New

York, NY. Deno, S.L,. Reschly, A.L., Lembke, E.S., Magnusson, D., Callender, S.A., Windram, H., & Stachel, N.

(2009). Developing a school-wide progress-monitoring system. Psychology in the Schools, 46(1), 44-55. Espin, C., Wallace, T., Lembke, E., Campbell, H., & Long, J.D. (2010). Creating a progress-monitoring

system in reading for middle-school students: Tracking progress toward meeting high-stakes standards. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 25(2), 60-75. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-5826.2010.00304.

Jitendra, A.K., DuPaul, G.J., Volpe, R.J., Tresco, K.E., Vile Junod. R.E., Lutz, J.G., Cleary K.S., Flammer-Rivera, L.M., & Mannella, M.C. (2007). Consultation-based academic intervention for children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder: School functioning outcomes. School Psychology Review, 36(2), 217-236.

National Association of School Psychologists (2010). Standards for graduate preparation of school psychologists. 1-16.

Schulte, A.C. & Osborne, S.S. (2003). When assumptive worlds collide: A review of definitions of collaboration in consultation. Journal of Educational & Psychological Consultation, 14(2), 109-138.

Volpe, R.J., DuPaul, G.J., Jitendra, A.K., & Tresco, K.E. (2009). Consultation-based academic intervention for children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder: Effects on reading and mathematics outcomes at 1-year follow-up.