Search

An exploratory study of resiliency profiles of male and female juvenile offenders committed to a juvenile correctional facility was conducted. The goal of the present study was to examine juvenile offenders' positive characteristics (e.g., adaptability, optimism, self-efficacy, tolerance of differences). To assess positive characteristics and vulnerabilities, 215 male and female juvenile offenders completed "The Resiliency Scales for Children and Adolescents." K-means cluster analysis identified four resiliency profiles among the sample of juvenile offenders. The clusters were analyzed using ANOVA to determine how they differed on the Resiliency Scales for Children and Adolescents, as well as demographic factors (e.g., age, age when incarcerated, number of months incarcerated prior to survey completion, number of educational credits obtained) and behavioral indicators (number of major infractions and visits to segregation 30 days before survey completion). Differences in the four resiliency profiles are discussed in respect to these factors. Discussion of the four resiliency profiles illuminates the importance of identifying areas of strength to help mitigate against risk factors for juvenile offending and to prevent recidivism. (Contains 4 tables and 2 figures.)

Recommendations of the Thayer, Spring Hill, and Olympia conferences are examined as they relate to ways we can support and make positive contributions to students, families, and schools. In the current issue of the Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, Hatzichristou and Lampropoulou (this issue), Meyers, Meyers, and Grogg (this issue), Nastasi (this issue), and Wizda (this issue) share important insights that can guide efforts to implement ideas discussed at the recent 2002 Futures Conference. Their ideas, along with literature on the public health model, are discussed. Points are made about the move to evidence-based interventions, as well as the use of Internet technology to facilitate collaboration and follow-up to the 2002 conference.

Eleven broad themes emerged from the 2002 multisite conference on the Future of School Psychology. After the conference, strategies developed by the participants were clustered into the following domains: (a) advocacy and public policy; (b) research and knowledge base; (c) collaboration and communication; (d) practice; (e) preservice training; and (f) in-service training. The eight sponsoring associations subsequently formed the School Psychology Leadership Roundtable in an effort to increase collaboration and to advance the agenda of school psychology to meet better the needs of children, families, and schools. Caveats and cautions are offered relative to strategic planning. The article concludes with a question of whether school psychology is at a tipping point.

In April 2001, the presidents and presidents-elect of the eight major national and international school psychology organizations gathered at the convention of the National Association of School Psychologists (NASP) in Washington, DC. The purpose of the meeting was to discuss the merits of having a major conference to discuss the current and future directions of school psychology. Among the professional organizations represented were the American Academy of School Psychology, American Board of School Psychology, Division 16 of the American Psychological Association, Council of Directors of School Psychology Programs (CDSPP), International School Psychology Association (ISPA), National Association of School Psychologists (NASP), Society for the Study of School Psychology (SSSP), and Trainers of School Psychologists (TSP).The purpose of the present article is to describe the procedures and activities before and during the conference. The problem solving model that provided the vehicle for processing ideas about the collective futures of these organizations is described initially. Then each phase of the conference is explained.

Eleven broad themes emerged from the 2002 multisite conference on the Future of School Psychology. After the conference, strategies developed by the participants were clustered into the following domains: (a) advocacy and public policy; (b) research and knowledge base; (c) collaboration and communication; (d) practice; (e) preservice training; and (f) in-service training. The eight sponsoring associations subsequently formed the School Psychology Leadership Roundtable in an effort to increase collaboration and to advance the agenda of school psychology to meet better the needs of children, families, and schools. Caveats and cautions are offered relative to strategic planning. The article concludes with a question of whether school psychology is at a tipping point.

The preparations for and the implementation of the 2002 Multisite Conference on the Future of School Psychology are described. The conference goals were to (a) achieve consensus on current and future demands for school psychologists and our profession's ability to meet those demands; (b) conceptualize the practice of school psychology in the face of diminishing numbers and increasing demand for services; and (c) develop an agenda to use the resources we have to maximize the benefits to the children and schools that we serve. A problem-solving model served as the conceptual foundation of the conference. School psychologists at the host site in Indianapolis and 30 remote sites collaborated to identify threats, opportunities, strategies, and action plans to respond better to the needs of children, families and schools. The conference not only generated excitement and hope for our future, but also provided a framework to propel the current and future practice of school psychology.

Examines Web-based syllabi of current college courses offered in schools of education through an examination of syllabi on the Web site of the World Lecture Hall. Discusses forms of communication and interactivity; the influence of instructors; the influence of students; and the influence of practitioners and experts. (Author/LRW)

Twelve learner-centered recommendations for Web-based instruction are discussed, relating to safe learning communities; student engagement; students' choice; facilitating learning; public and private feedback; apprenticing student learning; recursive assignments; electronic writing and reflection activities; student Web link suggestions; clear expectations and prompt task structuring; student evaluation; and personalizing learning as technology advances. (AEF)

Appropriate preservice education is needed to prepare school psychologists for working in rural communities. The scientist-practitioner model is a means to develop the psychologist as a generalist; it integrates research and theory with clinical training and field experience. Indirect services, burnout, and school psychology subspecialties are also discussed. (GDC)

One hundred eighty-nine Illinois school psychologists participated in a diagnostic simulation investigating the effects of a student's race and assessment data on psychoeducational expectations and diagnostic and placement decisions. Psychologists sampled were not influenced by a student's racial status, but were influenced by individual psychoeducational test results. (Author/LMO)

Psychologists (N=56) participated in an adapted version of Algozzine and Ysseldyke's (1981) diagnostic simulation to investigate the effects of sociocultural background (rural vs. suburban) and assessment data (normal vs. learning disabled) on educational decisions. Findings suggest school psychologists utilize multiple sources of information but rely primarily upon objective sources for decision making. (Author/BL)

The study investigated the basic concept attainment of 45 primary-level educable mentally handicapped (EMH) children who had been exposed to two to three years of classroom instruction. The study documented that primary-level EMH children have significant deficits in their understanding of the Boehm basic concepts. (SB)

The major national and international school psychology organizations hosted the 2012 School Psychology Futures Conference during the fall of 2012. The conference was designed to provide an opportunity for school psychologists to plan their future roles in better supporting children, families, and schools. The 2012 conference, titled "School Psychology: Creating Our Future(s)," encompassed three broad themes: leadership, critical skills, and advocacy by school psychologists. The mission of the 2012 School Psychology Futures Conference was to join school psychologists together to ensure children's future academic success and mental health through the promotion of leadership, critical skills, and advocacy by school psychologists. The 2012 School Psychology Futures Conference has provided an opportunity to examine progress, current impacts, and major needs related to services for children, families, and schools and update school psychology's directions for the future. Services by many school psychologists are being redefined in varying ways and because of different reasons, and the field needs continued and systematic analysis to guide professionals. A very positive aspect of the 2012 Future's Conference is the effective cooperation and collaboration between school psychology organizations to identify a shared vision for the field. The Futures Conference webinars provide a foundation for continued discussion and planning. Action planning, described in this article, will promote updated strategies to develop a working agenda for the future. (Contains 2 tables and 1 figure.)

Presents a response to "The National Association of School Psychologists and the Division of School Psychology--APA: Now and Beyond" (this issue). The author addresses the challenges in facilitating new forms of communication and collaboration between the two entities for the next decade. (GCP)