Jane Close Conoley, Ph.D. University of California, Santa Barbara

Loading...

Flash Player 9 (or above) is needed to view presentations.
We have detected that you do not have it on your computer. To install it, go here.

0 comments

Post a comment

    Post a comment
    Embed Video
    Edit your comment Cancel

    Notes on slide 1

    I treasure the chance to talk with school psychology colleagues today and am particularly pleased to be on the same program with Frank, Mike, and Sue. All of whom have significant expertise to share with you and whose presentations promise to bring you up to the minute is what we know about serving educators, children, youth, and families. My talk today is heavily in debt to Dr. Terry Gutkin from San Francisco State University. He shared his forthcoming chapter in the Handbook of School Psychology with me along with various bibliographic and slide resources. As some of you may know, before most of you were born I finished my doctoral degree at the University of Texas and left there not knowing nearly enough, but completely convinced that only systemic change held a chance of preventing and alleviating childhood dysfunctions. In fact my favorite image from that period of time was from public health – draining the swamps (Slide 2) to eliminate mosquito borne disease (Slide 3) not by closing windows or putting on bug repellant but by eliminating the breeding grounds of the disease (slide 4) Many other public health metaphors followed but the belief that we should always strive to change the system that supported pathology into one that supported well being has remained with me. Like Seymour Sarason before me, I’ve felt that as a profession – despite spectacular examples to the contrary – we have remained mired in the swamps or direct service, especially assessment, based on a medical model understanding of people and their strengths and difficulties. (Slide 5)

    1 Favorite

    Jane Close Conoley, Ph.D. University of California, Santa Barbara - Presentation Transcript

    1. School Psychology Misdirected U C Berkeley School Psychology Conference May 9, 2008 Jane Close Conoley, Ph.D. University of California Santa Barbara
    2. Special Thanks to Gutkin, T.B. Ecological school psychology: A personal opinion and a plea for change To appear in: T. B. Gutkin & C. R. Reynolds (Eds.), The handbook of school psychology (4 th ed.) . New York: Wiley.
    3.  
    4.  
    5.  
    6.  
    7. National Comorbidity Replication Survey (Kessler & Associates, 2005)
      • Every year, 25% of Americans are diagnosable with a DSM mental disorder (approximately 60% either moderate or serious)
      • Nearly 60% will receive no treatment in any given year
      • Median delay between onset and treatment - 6 to 23 years for those with lifetime disabilities
      • Half of all lifetime diagnosable mental disorders begin by age 14
      • “ Most people with mental disorders in the United States remain either untreated or poorly treated.”
    8. WHO World Mental Health Survey Consortium (2004) “Approximately 85% of Americans will not receive health care treatment for their diagnosable mental or substance-abuse disorder within a year. More than 70% of them will never receive specialized mental health care.” (Norcross, 2006, p. 683)
    9. Milken Institute An Unhealthy America: The Economic Burden of Chronic Disease. National annual cost of mental disorders = $217 billion (treatment, lost economic output) - third only to cancer and coronary disease (DeVol & Bedroussian, 2007)
    10. 250 Million prescriptions in 2006
      • anti-depressant, anti-psychotic and anti-anxiety medications (Munsey, 2008; Burt, McCaig & Rechtsteiner, 2007)
    11. Thomas Insel - Director of the National Institute of Mental Health   Data such as these are indicative of “a systemic and unacceptable failure in the provision of [mental health] care” in the United States (Insel & Fenton, 2005, p. 590).
    12. U. S. Surgeon General “The nation is facing a public crisis in mental healthcare for infants, children and adolescents.” (U.S. Public Health Service, 2000)   The “foremost finding is that most children in need of mental health services do not get them.” (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 1999, p. 180)   THE SYSTEM IS BROKEN
    13.  
    14.  
    15. POPULATION-BASED SERVICES PREVENTION EARLY INTERVENTION Effective Remediation Services Ideal Distribution of Services
    16. OUR HIGHEST PRIORITY GOALS – MOST IMPORTANT JOB ROLES   1. Engage and motivate primary caregivers (e.g., teachers, parents) in the lives of children so they take action in behalf of children   2. Give psychology away (Miller, 1969) to primary caregivers (e.g., teachers, parents) in the lives of children so they take effective action in behalf of children
    17.  
    18. Medical Model Human Behavior = Individual, environment  
    19.  
    20.  
    21. Ecological Model   Behavior = Individual Environment
    22.  
    23. Traditional Clinical Psychology Service Delivery – Direct, Medical Model
      • Daily Interaction Student
      • Teacher (The Problem = Pathology)
      • Referral
      • Assessment &
      • TREATMENT
      • Brief Feedback
      Psychologist
    24. School Psychology Consultation Service Delivery – Indirect, Ecological Model
      • Daily Interaction (The Problem = I-E “Match”)
      • Teacher ……………………………………………… Student( s )
      • Treatment
      • Assessment & Referral Assessment Assessment
      • CONSULTATION
      • Psychologist
    25.  
    26. Comprehensive programs consist of school readiness, parent involvement that empowers parents to take a role in education across grades K-12, and school-linked services designed to improve achievement by ensuring that the health and social needs of children are met .
    27. Policymakers and educators have mostly ignored the nature of interactions between families and schools…this relationship may be “the missing link in school-linked social service programs” Smrekar (1994)
    28. Constructive Connection: The 6 “C”s
      • Context
      • Centrality
      • Complexity
      • Consistency
      • Communication
      • Collaboration
    29. C ontext
      • Site specific
      • There is no one prescription
    30. Family-School Teams Ask
      • What forms of parent participation are desirable and feasible? and
      • What strategies can be employed to achieve them?
    31. This team, amongst other things, is a vehicle for establishing a common language, mapping existing school- and community-based resources, and identifying student, family, and staff needs.
    32. C omplex Relationships
      • The child/family system is in transaction with the school/schooling system
      • Home and school inputs and resources
      • Match between home and school
    33. Home Inputs
      • Include messages about
        • Effort
        • Attitudes about the value of learning
        • Sense of self as a learner
    34. School Inputs
      • New experiences
      • Demands
      • Opportunities
      • Rewards
    35. C entral to Child Development
      • “ If educators view children simply as students, they are likely to see the family as separate from school. That is, the family is expected to do its job and leave the education of children to the schools. If educators view children as children, they are likely to see both the family and community as partners with the school in children's education and development”
      Epstein (1995 )
    36. Activities
      • Parenting
      • Communicating
      • Home learning
      • Volunteering
      • Shared decision making and governance
      • Community support
    37. Family-School Relationships Are Essential
      • ADHD (August, Anderson, & Bloomquist, 1992)
      • Conduct disorders (Reid & Patterson, 1992 ; Webster-Stratton 1993)
      • Social skills deficits (Sheridan, Kratochwill, & Elliott, 1990)
      • Homework completion difficulties (Jayanthi, sawyer, nelson, Bursuck, & Epstein, 1995)
      • Significant improvement in academic achievement (Hansen, 1986; Heller & Fantuzzo, 1993).
    38. C onsistency Across Systems
      • Set realistic expectations
      • Provide a structure and routine for learning
      • Enhance students’ learning opportunities
      • Support students’ learning
      • Establish positive relationships
      • Model learning
    39. Home Values X Achievement
      • Strong, consistent values about the importance of education.
      • Willingness to help children and to intervene at schools.
      • Ability to become involved.
    40. C ommunication : Foundational Element
      • Two-way communication is necessary to co-construct the “bigger” picture about the child’s life
      • Families and school personnel see the child in their respective environments and jump to conclusions about the child’s behavior in the other environment
    41. C ollaboration
      • Equal status between participants (e.g., parents, teachers, students, psychologists, principals)
      • A common goal
      • Adequate leadership and support (e.g., school district, state, federal levels)
    42. Sample Programs
    43. Check and Connect
      • Model designed to promote student engagement with school for youth at high risk for dropping out
      • (Sinclair, Christenson, Evelo, & Hurley, 1997)
    44. Conjoint Behavioral Consultation (CBC)
      • Process entails four separate stages for professionals and families to work together on identifying and solving academic, social-emotional, or behavioral concerns for students:
        • Problem identification
        • Problem analysis
        • Implementation, and
        • Evaluation
      • (Sheridan, Kratochwill, & Bergan, 1996)
    45. Connecting With Families
      • Family school meetings (Weiss & Edwards, 1992),
      • Family-school consultation (Carlson, Hickman, & Horton, 1992), and
      • Parent-educator problem solving (Christenson, 1995).
    46. Comer’s School Development Program
      • Illustrates the power of relationships at a systems level
      • (Comer et al., 1996).
    47. Comer’s School Development Program
      • 3 teams
        • Parent, school planning and management, and student and staff support
      • 3 operations
        • Comprehensive school plan, staff development, and periodic assessment and modification
      • 3 guiding principles to create a positive school climate for learning
        • Consensus - decisions made by consensus
        • Collaboration - viewpoints of team members are heard and respected
        • No-fault - time is not wasted on unproductive blaming
    48. Key Elements of Successful Programs
      • Parents are children’s first teachers and have a lifelong influence on their values, attitudes, and aspirations
      • Children’s educational success requires congruence between what is taught at school and values matched at home
    49. Key Elements of Successful Programs
      • Most parents care deeply about their children’s education and can provide substantial support if given specific opportunities and knowledge
      • Schools must take the lead in eliminating or at least reducing traditional barriers to parent involvement
    50.  

    + schoolpsychologyschoolpsychology, 2 years ago

    custom

    2106 views, 1 favs, 0 embeds more stats

    Jane Close Conoley, Ph.D. University of California more

    More info about this document

    © All Rights Reserved

    Go to text version

    • Total Views 2106
      • 2106 on SlideShare
      • 0 from embeds
    • Comments 0
    • Favorites 1
    • Downloads 21
    Most viewed embeds

    more

    All embeds

    less

    Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
    Flag as inappropriate

    Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate. If needed, use the feedback form to let us know more details.

    Cancel
    File a copyright complaint
    Having problems? Go to our helpdesk?

    Categories