Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation
ISSN: 1047-4412 (Print) 1532-768X (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/hepc20
Competencies for Systems-Level Consultants Within Diverse Schools Colette Ingraham To cite this article: Colette Ingraham (2015) Competencies for Systems-Level Consultants Within Diverse Schools, Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 25:2-3, 148-159, DOI: 10.1080/10474412.2014.963227 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10474412.2014.963227
Published online: 20 Jan 2015.
Submit your article to this journal
Article views: 94
View related articles
View Crossmark data
Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=hepc20 Download by: [Ms Colette L Ingraham]
Date: 13 April 2016, At: 13:13
Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 25:148–159, 2015 Copyright © Taylor & Francis Group, LLC ISSN: 1047-4412 print/1532-768X online DOI: 10.1080/10474412.2014.963227
COMMENTARY
Downloaded by [Ms Colette L Ingraham] at 13:13 13 April 2016
Competencies for Systems-Level Consultants Within Diverse Schools COLETTE INGRAHAM San Diego State University
The authors in this special issue on systems-level consultation provide an excellent range of models for how school psychologists can work as system-level consultants within the various communities they serve. This article (a) provides commentary on the four articles in this special issue focused on systems-level consultation to serve diverse populations in schools, (b) outlines 10 competencies for systems consultants in diverse schools, and (c) suggests directions for future research, theory, and practice in this area. By intersecting the 2010 National Association of School Psychologists (NASP) Practice Model, Blueprint III, and the illustrations in these four articles, 10 competencies for systems-level consultants are articulated. These involve collaborative, recursive, interpersonal processes whereby the systems-level consultant facilitates communication and understanding across different stakeholders, assisting in the joint gathering and interpretation of data. In systems-level consultation, the system is the client and consultants work to build capacity within the system and its stakeholders to address problems and needs.
We are in an era when school psychologists are asked to be systems-level consultants in diverse schools, yet the number of examples for how to fulfill this role is quite limited. The papers in this special issue on systems-level Correspondence should be sent to Colette Ingraham, Department of Counseling and School Psychology, MC1179, College of Education, San Diego State University, San Diego, CA 92182-1179. E-mail:
[email protected] 148
Downloaded by [Ms Colette L Ingraham] at 13:13 13 April 2016
Competencies for Systems-Level Consultants
149
consultation provide a range of models for how school psychologists can work as system-level consultants within the various communities they serve. The purpose of this paper is to (a) provide commentary on the four papers in this special issue focused on systems-level consultation to serve diverse populations in schools, (b) outline competencies for systems consultants in diverse schools, and (c) suggest directions for future research, training, and practice in this area. Within the past decade, there has been increased attention for systemslevel roles for school psychologists, as seen in Blueprint III (Ysseldyke, Burns, Dawson, Kelley et al., 2006) and National Association of School Psychologists (NASP) Practice Model and Standards (2010). Compared with Blueprint II (Ysseldyke, Dawson, Lehr, Reschly et al., 1997), Blueprint III increased emphasis on systems-level thinking and professional practices, whereby school psychologists integrate ‘‘data for intervening and monitoring outcomes at individual and systems levels’’ (p. 21). It called on school psychologists to be ‘‘systems-level consultants,’’ helping the systems in which children live to build and maintain their capacities to improve competencies for all children and youth. The authors noted that graduate programs were generally effective in preparing school psychologists for data collection and decision making at individual student levels of assessment and intervention, but that today’s schools would also necessitate greater attention to preparing school psychologists for systems-level roles and conceptualizations: It is not enough for school psychologists to be proficient at helping students develop competencies. They must also be proficient at helping systems build capacity to foster and teach these competencies. This requires that school psychologists understand how systems work and what factors contribute to the implementation and success of educational innovations. While schools and educational systems are the most logical targets, school psychologists also need to understand how to impact family and community systems and influence public policy. (Ysseldyke et al., 2006, p. 13)
Similarly, the 2010 NASP Practice Model and the concurrent NASP Standards for Graduate Preparation of School Psychologists include greater focus on systems-level roles for school psychologists, and they delineate both student-level and systems-level services. In fact, three of the 10 domains of practice are specifically articulated as part of systems-level services: (a) school-wide practices to promote learning, (b) preventive and responsive services, and (c) family-school collaboration services. The model calls upon school psychologists to provide direct educational and mental health services and also to ‘‘work with parents, educators, and other professionals to create supportive learning and social environments for all students’’ (NASP, 2010, p. 1).
150
C. Ingraham
Downloaded by [Ms Colette L Ingraham] at 13:13 13 April 2016
Clearly, attention to the systems-level roles for school psychologists is increasing in national documents about school psychological service delivery, yet the literature provides few examples of school psychologists serving in this capacity. Research and models for systems-level professional practice are needed to help school psychologists conceptualize, envision, and know how to fulfill systems-level roles. Practicing as systems-level consultants, school psychologists can have maximum impact on the systems that most closely interact with children: schools, families, and communities. Collaboratively, they can partner with other disciplines in developing schools and homes where children thrive. The four articles in this special issue provide models and practices that help address this need.
COMMENTARY ON ARTICLES AND THEIR ILLUSTRATION OF MODELS FOR SYSTEMS-LEVEL CONSULTATION Through commentary on each of the four articles, I will identify strengths of each paper as well as potential considerations for future research. In doing so, I will also highlight some of the needed knowledge and skills that are illustrated in each model, in an effort to identify essential competencies for school psychologists to work effectively as systems-level consultants in diverse schools.
Promoting Psychological Well-Being in an Urban School Using the Participatory Culture-Specific Intervention Model (PCSIM) The article by Bell, Summerville, Nastasi, Patterson, and Earnshaw (this issue) is an outstanding example of the use of participatory processes. They sought to develop and implement programs promoting positive well-being in a specific urban school over a 4-year university–school partnership in New Orleans. Through use of the 11 phases of PCSIM (see Nastasi, Moore, & Varjas, 2004; Nastasi, Varjas, Bernstein, & Jayasena, 2000), with its clear focus on designing programs that are well matched with local priorities and cultures, the project demonstrates a process for overcoming some of the shortcomings of previous efforts to implement multitiered systems of support in school settings. This gives readers an understanding for how to adapt interventions to match the specific cultures and norms of a given school community. The guiding questions in Bell and colleagues’ Table 1 may be extremely useful in educating consultants about the use of PCSIM and how to apply it to their own practice. In future publications, it may be useful to include discussion of the ethnicities and races of the interventionists and authors and how these
Downloaded by [Ms Colette L Ingraham] at 13:13 13 April 2016
Competencies for Systems-Level Consultants
151
may have affected the project processes and outcomes. For example, in this study, in a high-poverty school with 99% of the students but only 23% of the teachers being African American, information about the consultants’ races would be useful. How did the consultants and team members position themselves in relation to the home and school cultures? One wonders about the potential culturally similar and cross-cultural approaches that may have contributed to the project’s outcomes, and what methods were employed to bridge across the potential differences. The authors are to be commended for discussing how they overcame challenges, especially the zero-sum mindset where teachers thought giving attention to positive well-being might detract from the academic focus of their school and students’ achievement. Through sharing the data from universal screenings and formative assessments, the authors illustrate valuable methods to reshape the narrative and mindsets of participants and to develop shared visions and goals for the project outcomes. Nurturing stakeholder buy-in is critical to develop intervention acceptance, integrity, and fidelity, and this paper illustrates the value of participatory data-based service delivery, conducted in stages, so as to engender buy-in among stakeholders.
School-Wide Educator Evaluation for Improving School Capacity and Student Achievement in High Poverty Schools: Year 1 of the School System Improvement Project Reddy, Kettler, and Kurz (this issue) describe the planning processes during Year 1 of the proposed 5-year larger project in 22 high-poverty schools located within four districts in New Jersey. The project team used a topdown model of consultation whereby they worked directly with district leaders (e.g., superintendents and assistant superintendants) to get approvals and feedback, prior to working with school-level staff, including principals and teachers. They adapted stages of consultation described in Kurpius, Fuqua, and Rozecki (1993), and focused on the early stages that included pre-entry, entry, contracting, and information gathering as they described the consultation processes during the first year. The authors connect the project activities to three of the 2010 NASP practice domains: data-based decision making, school-wide practices to promote learning, and research and program evaluation. This article differs from the others in this special issue in its use of a top-down approach for consultation and the limited attention to contextual factors, something that the team recognized at the end of the first year. With conflicts arising related to collective bargaining, the authors encourage future consultants to culturally validate reform components and obtain buy-in prior to implementation. Given the nature of the intervention—evaluating teachers to inform professional development and drive teacher incentives—inclusion of teachers as participatory stakeholders in the initial processes of shaping
152
C. Ingraham
the project’s goals and activities seems critical. Finally, it appears that the authors of this article are all academicians on the project, thus the diversity of perspectives is not as apparent in this paper as in the other papers in the special issue. It would be helpful for the authors to articulate more clearly their roles within this project so readers can better understand the contexts from which they are reporting the results.
Downloaded by [Ms Colette L Ingraham] at 13:13 13 April 2016
Interdisciplinary Collaboration Supporting Social-Emotional Learning Programming in Rural School Systems Meyers, Tobin, Huber, Conway, and Shelvin (this issue) use a five-stage organizational model (Meyers, Meyers, Graybill, Proctor, & Huddleston, 2012; Meyers, Meyers, Proctor, & Graybill, 2009) and offer an excellent description of the use of interdisciplinary collaboration to promote social-emotional learning programming across several districts in a rural county of Illinois over a 3-year period. As the authors note, large-scale changes require coordination and cooperation among diverse professionals, agencies, and organizations. Through use of an ecological model of organizational consultation, this project highlights the importance of attending to contextual factors and understanding who is best to carry the message to which stakeholders. They used consultative strategies to assure buy-in at multiple levels of the systems, such as with the superintendents, principals, teachers, and parents. By using consultants proximal to the targeted units, they were able to engage consultants who were knowledgeable about the politics and values of the school-level cultures in ways that a consultant to the whole collaborative may not have been able to access. The explanation of how they used the fivestage model gives readers valuable tools for understanding and being able to implement the process in their own settings. Like the Bell et al. article, this article offers readers exceptional illustrations of practices that lead to effective systems-level consultation, including participatory processes, inclusion of those with differing levels of power within the system; attentiveness to contextual factors, values, and practices that impact the processes used in the intervention efforts; and sustained interdisciplinary collaboration over multiple years. They demonstrate use of similar system-level consultation practices within a very different geographic and cultural context.
Addressing Education Inequity Through Systemic Change: Contributions of Ecologically Based Organizational Consultation Sullivan, Artiles, and Hernandez-Saca (this issue) emphasize an ecologically oriented organizational consultation approach to foster equity in special
Downloaded by [Ms Colette L Ingraham] at 13:13 13 April 2016
Competencies for Systems-Level Consultants
153
education identification and placement and throughout schools. Their article provides a conceptual discussion of some of the systemic issues associated with disproportionality of students from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds in programs for students with disabilities. The authors propose that systemic change throughout every aspect of education, involving new structures, policies, and practices, is needed within the educational system to foster educational equity for all students. University programs, they note, should prepare practitioners to consult about individual students and at the programmatic level. Like other articles in this special issue, Sullivan et al. advocate for using a recursive approach that empowers multiple stakeholders and recognizes that the cultures of individual schools can differ, thus flexibility is needed for organizations to adapt models to their local cultural contexts. It appears that the next step is to adopt this ecological organizational consultation model and follow the path of Meyers et al. and Bell et al., that is, study the model’s use in a specific school or district setting. In this way, research on the implementation of this model would be possible and could serve to more directly inform both research and practice.
COMPETENCIES FOR SYSTEMS-LEVEL CONSULTATION In reading these articles and reviewing the roles outlined in the NASP Practice Model and Blueprint III, the competencies needed to achieve these practices become clearer. While systems-level consultation shares many similarities with consultation at individual, triad, and conjoint levels, there are clearly some distinctions that are important to note. Table 1 summarizes 10 competencies for systems-level consultation. While referring to different models of organizational or systems consultation in schools, Harris (2007), Meyers et al. (2009), and Nastasi et al. (2004), all identify collaborative, recursive, interpersonal processes whereby the systems-level consultant facilitates TABLE 1 Competencies for Systems-Level Consultation 1. Context matters: Attend to the specific cultural values and practices of the local community and context 2. Use prolonged engagement: Systemic change is a multiyear process 3. Invite participation from stakeholders at multiple levels of the system 4. Implement recursive, participatory processes throughout the consultation 5. Build on primary theories: Ecological, systems theory, organizational development 6. Cultivate interdisciplinary collaboration and focus on relationships 7. Attend to multiple considerations: Multimethod, multisource, multitiered, multimeasures, multisystems, multiconstituencies, and multistakeholders 8. Employ shared decision making and empowerment paradigms: Give voice to parents, teachers, and other stakeholders 9. Develop local partners who are internal to the system 10. Provide author transparency: Identify author roles, perspectives, and relationships
154
C. Ingraham
Downloaded by [Ms Colette L Ingraham] at 13:13 13 April 2016
communication and understanding across different stakeholders, assisting in the joint gathering and interpretation of data. Unique knowledge and skills are needed for systems-level consultants to work successfully with (a) the number of participants in the consultation process, (b) the complexity of the dynamics that arise between various members of the consultation constellation, and (c) the issues of rapport, communication, and credibility with multiple stakeholders. Whereas in individual consultation, the client is typically a child or group, in systems-level consultation, the system is the client and consultants work to build capacity within the system and its stakeholders to address problems and needs. Below are 10 considerations that are salient in the methods and approaches for effective systems-level consultation.
Context Matters: Attend to the Specific Cultural Values and Practices of the Local Community and Context The context where the intervention is to be implemented has a major impact on the approaches used and their potential match with a given setting for the intervention. Ingraham and Oka (2006) outlined numerous issues and practices to consider when transporting an evidence-based intervention from one context to another. The papers in this special issue demonstrate methods for bringing evidence-based interventions to a variety of settings, including those with high levels of poverty, within rural and urban communities, composed of populations 99% African American (Bell et al.) vs. 93% White (Meyers et al.), and to scales ranging from an individual elementary school to multiple districts within a county. Also, the focus of the interventions varied and included psychological well-being, educator evaluation, social emotional programming, and special education and disproportionality. Most teams used approaches to match the interventions with local contexts, thereby increasing intervention acceptability, adherence, and fidelity.
Use Prolonged Engagement: Systemic Change is a Multiyear Process Regardless of whether the consultant is internal or external to the organization, the consultant must make a multiyear commitment to the systems change process to guide it through all the stages. All four of the articles recognize this and refer to 3–5-year sustained efforts to reach project goals.
Invite Participation From Stakeholders at Multiple Levels of the System The leadership team and systems-level consultants need to engage multiple stakeholders in the process of identifying needs and problems, reviewing
Competencies for Systems-Level Consultants
155
data, reconceptualizing policies and practices, and developing and implementing interventions. Bell et al. and Meyers et al. present a variety of useful strategies for working with multiple stakeholders at different levels of the system (e.g., administration, teachers, staff, parents, community members, students). Decision making is shared among multiple stakeholders, engendering greater buy-in, intervention acceptability, and adaptations of evidence-based interventions to local cultures and contexts.
Downloaded by [Ms Colette L Ingraham] at 13:13 13 April 2016
Implement Recursive, Participatory Processes Throughout the Consultation Systems-level consultation is not a linear process, and while it may involve stages, the recursive nature of the process is paramount for problem identification, analysis, intervention development, and evaluation. Recursive participatory processes provide opportunities to make modifications and adaptations at multiple stages, as additional data is examined, and to match local cultural norms and contexts. Involving active participation of stakeholders at multiple levels of the systems is critical, as emphasized in Bell et al., Meyers et al., and Sullivan et al.; Reddy et al. have plans to build in more participatory processes with teachers following their Year 1 experiences. Recursive participatory processes facilitate the development of stakeholder buyin, contribute to developing shared visions for outcomes, and help to build and maintain capacity of the system to improve competencies for all students.
Build on Primary Theories: Ecological, Systems Theory, Organizational Development Ecological, systems and organizational development theories, and mental health and educational services are important to systems-level consultation. This is in addition to understanding learning and development, as is needed for triadic, conjoint, and individual consultation. Both Bell and colleagues and Sullivan and colleagues referred to Bronfenbrenner’s ecological work, and all four papers identified organizational and systems theory as a foundation for systems-level consultants. There are multiple moving parts and components in systems-level consultation, thus theories of change and reform need to attend to the interconnectedness of the multiple parts and systems involved. Systems-level consultants seek and understand how distal and proximal influences intersect and affect processes.
Cultivate Interdisciplinary Collaboration and Focus on Relationships Rapport-building and the development of trust are important to all types of consultation, and in systems-level consultation, the additional ability to
156
C. Ingraham
collaborate with persons and groups from differing disciplines and perspectives is essential. Systems consultants interact with individuals from several different professions and walks of life, and the extent to which they are able to develop and maintain collaborative, positive relationships can dramatically affect their success. The articles by Meyers et al. and Bell et al. offer readers excellent examples of consultants engaged in interdisciplinary collaboration and relationship building.
Downloaded by [Ms Colette L Ingraham] at 13:13 13 April 2016
Attend to Multiple Considerations: Multimethod, Multisource, Multitiered, Multimeasures, Multisystems, Multiconstituencies, and Multistakeholders Systems are complex, and systems-level consultants have many methods, models, and groups to attend to during the consultation process. They need skills in working with complex systems using data collection and analysis procedures that cross a variety of methodologies, participants, and priorities. Each of the papers highlights how consultants can incorporate multiple methods, sources, and processes of data collection and analysis; ongoing communication with multiple entities; and different methods to access perspectives, concerns, and patterns of behavior. These multiple considerations are much more relevant and salient than those needed for individual, small group, or conjoint levels of consultation.
Employ Shared Decision Making and Empowerment Paradigms: Give Voice to Parents, Teachers, and Other Stakeholders Bell et al., Meyers et al., and Sullivan et al. all emphasized empowerment of those who traditionally do not have voice or power within the system. They advocated for efforts to engage parents, teachers, and others through focus groups, advisory groups, surveys, and group or community meetings so that the team could learn their perspectives and help give them more prominence in intervention design, development, and evaluation. This process often involves paying special attention to procedures and approaches that build trust over time and using practices that distribute and share decision making across multiple stakeholders. Practices such as member checking and recursive reporting of data throughout the process can serve to engage and empower participants, engender greater buy-in, and improve the accuracy and quality of findings.
Develop Local Partners Who are Internal to the System Bell et al. and Meyers et al. used a local ‘‘champion,’’ a person within the system such as a teacher or parent leader who can advocate within peers
Competencies for Systems-Level Consultants
157
and local contexts-for example, a teacher who can be a point person at a school, communicate with other teachers at the site, and distribute program information. Like cultural brokers, these individuals can also help project leaders understand the local cultures and perspectives and can serve as bridges across system levels, units, and cultures.
Downloaded by [Ms Colette L Ingraham] at 13:13 13 April 2016
Provide Author Transparency: Identify Author Roles, Perspectives, and Relationships This allows readers to better understand the potential lenses through which authors are reporting the events and models the attention to multiple perspectives, as is important for projects with diverse participants with different levels of social location and power within the systems. For example, in Bell et al., the five authors represent different professional perspectives and roles, helping readers to see how differing professional paradigms can both intersect and differ. In their discussion of their differing, and in some cases changing, roles over the 4 years, they make transparent to readers the potential lenses from which they may be operating, and how that might affect their reporting of results in the paper. They are to be commended for clearly identifying which authors played which roles over the course of the project, something that more school psychology authors should do to inform readers about their potential orientations, roles, and perspectives. They also offer a good example for how relationships matter in developing collaborative partnerships and, in this case, how the relationships among some of the authors assisted in the processes and time needed to develop rapport and trust.
FUTURE DIRECTIONS FOR RESEARCH, TRAINING, AND PRACTICE There is much to be done to advance the research, training, and practice of systems-level consultation. The four articles in this special issue provide valuable examples of the complexities and possibilities for using systemslevel consultation in diverse school settings. They offer exemplars for systemic roles for consultants to fulfill the goals of the NASP Practice Model and Blueprint III. Future research is needed to investigate further the use of systems-level consultation in diverse school contexts, with attention to the competencies, models, processes, and outcomes that are unique to this type of consultation. Research studying the characteristics of systems-level consultation that lead to success, as well as those that have not resulted in desirable outcomes, is needed to investigate the mechanisms of systems change in schools and the factors that contribute to success. Such research is complex, involving
Downloaded by [Ms Colette L Ingraham] at 13:13 13 April 2016
158
C. Ingraham
multiple stakeholders, mindsets, and intersecting influences, and it must persist over several years, thus it is not quick or easy research to conduct. Training and guided practice are needed at multiple levels of the profession, beginning with graduate programs and continuing through early, middle, and late career phases. With the many factors to include, developing the knowledge and skills necessary for effective systems-level consultation must extend over multiple months and years so that learners have opportunities to practice with varying stages of systems change. Creative training approaches are needed to prepare professionals for practices that are not easily studied within a single graduate term or course, or within a single inservice training. Finally, training should be provided within multidisciplinary contexts to encompass the varying perspectives, mindsets, and stakeholders encountered in systems consultation. The four articles in this issue and the 10 competencies outlined in this paper provide a foundation from which to expand into the future. As more systems-level consultation research is published and innovative training methods are implemented, school psychologists will become better prepared to take on the complexities of systems-level consultation and to advocate for and contribute to contexts where all children can thrive.
REFERENCES Harris, A. (2007). Systemic consultation in a multilingual setting. In G. B. Esquivel, E. C. Lopez, & S. Nahari, Handbook of multicultural school psychology: An interdisciplinary perspective (pp. 137–155). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Ingraham, C. L., & Oka, E. R. (2006). Multicultural issues in evidence-based intervention. Journal of Applied School Psychology, 22, 127–149. Kurpius, D. J., Fuqua D. R., & Rozecki, T. (1993). The consulting process: A multidimensional approach. Journal of Counseling & Development, 71, 601–606. Meyers, A. B., Meyers, J., Graybill, E. C., Proctor, S. L., & Huddleston, L. (2012). Ecological approaches to organizational consultation and systems change in educational settings. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 22, 106–124. Meyers, J., Meyers, A. B., Proctor, S. L., & Graybill, E. C. (2009). Organizational consultation and systems intervention. In T. B. Gutkin & C. R. Reynolds (Eds.), Handbook of school psychology (4th ed., pp. 921–940). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. Nastasi, B. K., Moore, R. B., & Varjas, K. M. (2004). School-based mental health services: Creating comprehensive and culturally specific programs. Washington DC: American Psychological Association. Nastasi, B. K., Vargas, K., Berstein, R., & Jayasena, A. (2000). Conducting participatory culture-specific consultation: A global perspective on multicultural consultation. School Psychology Review, 29, 401–413. National Association of School Psychologists. (2010). Model for comprehensive and integrated school psychological services. Bethesda, MD: Author. Retrieved from http://www.nasponline.org/standards/2010standards/2_PracticeModel.pdf
Competencies for Systems-Level Consultants
159
Downloaded by [Ms Colette L Ingraham] at 13:13 13 April 2016
Ysseldyke, J., Burns, M., Dawson, P., Kelley, B., Morrison, D., Ortiz, S. et al. (2006). School psychology: A blueprint for training and practice III. Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists. Retrieved from http://www.nasp online.org/resources/blueprint/finalblueprintinteriors.pdf Ysseldyke, J., Dawson, P., Lehr, C., Reschly, D., Reynolds, M., & Telzrow, C. (1997). School psychology: A blueprint for training and practice II. Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists. Retrieved from http://www.nasp online.org/resources/blueprint/blue2.pdf Colette Ingraham, NCSP, PhD (University of California, Berkeley), is a Professor in the School Psychology Program and serves on the Doctoral Program in Education at San Diego State University. She specializes in multicultural and cross-cultural school consultation, systemic and MTSS interventions, and multicultural issues. She has served in leadership positions within APA, NASP, and TSP and currently is the Co-Chair of the NASP Consultee-Centered Consultation Interest Group. Note: The author reports that to the best of their knowledge neither they nor their affiliated institutions have financial or personal relationships or affiliations that could influence or bias the opinions, decisions, or work presented in this article.
