Teach ching Consultation Skills Using In Inter erdep epartmen mental Co Collaboration and Su Super ervisi sion with a Mixed ed-Re Reality Simulator S. Kathleen Krach, Ph.D., NCSP Mary Frances Hanline, Ph.D.
Consultant [School Psychologist] Consultee [Teacher] Client [Child] Basic c Consultation Pairings
Consultant School Psychology Student: Educational Psychology & Learning Systems Department Consultee Special Education Student School of Teacher Education Client Virtual Child in simulator TeachLive Train ainin ing g Co Consult ltatio tion Pair airin ings gs
Mi Mixed-Re Reality Simulator
What is TeachLive? [hyperlink]
Cl Clients Ch Chos osen for or Con Consultation on Kevin Sean Kevin is a 6 th grade male (age Sean is a 6 th grade male (age 13-2). He was retained in 12-4). He has never been held Kindergarten for being socially back. He gets along well with other children, but he has delayed. He does not have some issues with authority. many friends. His previous teacher described His previous teacher described problems with speaking out in problems with disrespectful behavior. He can also be class. She said that he tries to disinterested in his work “control the classroom” and leading to off-task behavior. “take up all of my instruction time.” He can sometimes be antisocial with the other children although he is always friendly with the teacher.
In Inter erdep epar artmen ental al Collab llaboratio ion
Consultant Graduate-level School Psychology Student School Psychology School Psychology Dyad 1 Dyad 2 Client Client Virtual Child Virtual Child Kevin Sean Consultee Consultee Undergraduate-level Undergraduate-level Teacher Education Student Teacher Education Student Special Education Special Education
Interdepartmental Individuals Involved School of Teacher Education Educational Psychology & Learning Systems Special Education Program School Psychology Program • Faculty: Mary Frances Hanline • Faculty: S. Kathleen Krach • Class: MTSS Curriculum • Class: School-Based Consultation • Student: Graduate student • Student: Graduate students interested in working as P-12 interested in working as P-12 teacher. school psychologist • Student (Other): Graduate • Student (Other): Graduate students in interested in doctorate students interested in doctorate in in teacher education. school psychology OR school-based social workers.
Consultant Consultee Review Case File Review Case File Formal Formal Introduction Introduction Structured TeachLive #1 Provide Observation TeachLive #1 Instruction Conduct Answer Interview Interview (PII) (PII) After TeachLive Research Consider #1 Intervention After TeachLive Intervention from #1 Consultant Present Intervention to Evaluate Consultee Intervention (IRP) Structured TeachLive #2 Observation Provide TeachLive #2 Instruction Evaluate Consultee (CEF) Evaluate After TeachLive Consulant (CEF) #2 After TeachLive Evaluate #2 TeachLive (TCR) Evaluate TeachLive (TCR)
Teach ching Consultation
Ro Rosenfield’s (2 (2002) ) Model Mo del f for C Cons nsul ultan ant D Devel elopm pmen ent Developmental Stage Training Stage Instructional Activities Novice-acclimation Awareness and understanding Lecture, discussion, reading, observation Skill acquisition Classroom simulations and role plays, videotaped simulation Application of skills Consultation cases, taped and supervised Competence Proficiency-expertise Advanced skill development Additional practice of consultation; continued professional development; research; supervision of others; teaching. Rosenfield, S. (2002). Developing instructional consultants: From novice to competent to expert. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 13 , 97 – 111.
Be Behavior oral Con Consultation on (B (BC; ; Bergan & Kr Kratochwill, , 1990) ) • Formal Entry: Professors introduce the two students • Assessment: • Classroom session • Direct observations “pre” using School Psychology Tools Observation System • Defining the Problem and Setting the Goals • • Case file review • Problem Identification Interview (PII; Crothers, Hughes, & Morine, 2008). Intervention or Strategy Selection • Review of the literature • Present the interventions to the students • Intervention Rating Profile for Consultee and Client (IRP-15; Martens, Witt, Elliott, & Darveaux, 1985), • • Implementation “Classroom” session • Evaluation • Direct observations “post” using School Psychology Tools Observation System • Analyze data and report • Consultant Evaluation Form (CEF) published by Erchul (1987) and adapted version Consultee Evaluation Form •
Supe Supervision
Su Supervis vision ion by Prof ofessor or(s (s) Student Consultant Student Consultee • As-Needed • As-Needed • Before, after, during TeachLive • Before, after, during TeachLive session session • Group Supervision • Group Supervision • In whole class setting. • In whole class setting. • Individual Supervision • Individual Supervision • One-on-one prior to each • One-on-one following each of the consultation sessions TeachLive sessions • Supervision of Work Products • Supervision of Work Products • Intervention materials • Case study documents • Lesson plan
Krach, S. K., & Hanline, M. F. (2017). Teaching Consultation Skills Using Interdepartmental Collaboration and Supervision with a Mixed-Reality Simulator. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation , 34. doi:10.1080/10474412.2017.1301818
Qu Quantitative: : Finding Findings from Fir First t Year ear of Projec ject Completed by Total Completed by Consultant Consultee Possible Points Instruments N M SD - N M SD - - - 90 21 74.05 8.33 Intervention Rating (IRP) - - - 70 22 62.18 8.20 CEF-Rates Consultant* 10 56.10 8.99 70 - - - CEF-Rates Consultee* 9 18.33 0.41 20 14 14.93 0.74 TeachLIve Rating (TCR)* *score differences were statistically significant
Qu Qualitative: : Finding Findings from Fir First t Year ear of Projec ject Positive Trends Negative Trends • Both groups felt constraints on the • Both groups enjoyed the process. assigned tasks • Saw it as a positive learning • Intervention recommendations could not experience. be done in the TeachLive environment. • Felt like a “real world experience.” • Undergraduate students lacked motivation to meet and/or use the • Enjoyed meeting with other school interventions professionals • Both groups noted some technology • Both groups wanted more time problems with the mixed-reality simulator. • TeachLive changed interactors (puppetmasters) between T1 and T2. • Longer sessions • Cannot use any intervention involving • More sessions changing seats or moving around.
Me Meeting NA NASP SP St Standards ( (Knowledge) Standards Subcomponent(s) Not Addressed in TeachLive Methods for effective consultation and collaboration that link home, school, and community settings Not linked Varied methods of consultation in psychology and education (e.g., behavioral, problem solving, Does not apply to families. mental health, organizational, instructional) applicable to individuals, families, groups, and systems Strategies to promote collaborative, effective decision making and implementation of services Does not apply to families among professionals, families, and others Consultation, collaboration, and communication strategies effective across situations, contexts, and Does not apply across contexts diverse characteristics NASP Standards for Graduate Preparation of School Psychologists (NASP, 2010).
Me Meeting NA NASP SP St Standards ( (Sk Skills) Standards Subcomponent(s) Not Addressed in TeachLive Apply consultation methods, collaborate, and communicate effectively with others as part of a All apply comprehensive process that permeates all aspects of service delivery Consult and collaborate in planning, problem solving, and decision-making processes and to Not across contexts design, implement, and evaluate instruction, interventions, and educational and mental health services across particular situations, contexts, and diverse characteristics Consult and collaborate at the individual, family, group, and systems levels Does not apply to families Facilitate collaboration and communication among diverse school personnel, families, Does not apply to families community, professionals, and others. Facilitate collaboration and communication among diverse school personnel, families, Does not apply to families and community professionals, and others community professionals Effectively communicate information for diverse audiences, for example, parents, teachers, other Does not apply to parents, policy- school personnel, policy makers, community leaders, and/or others makers, or community Promote application of psychological and educational principles to enhance collaboration and All apply. achieve effectiveness in provision of services.
Cos Costs ts
Recommend
More recommend
