World*Go*Round, Vol. 29, No. 5, December, 2002
Letter from the President
In
the United States, about every 25-30 years, the profession of school psychology
convenes a conference to assess the current status of the field and to chart
a course for the future. This began with the Thayer Conference in 1954, followed
by the Olympia conference in the mid-70’s, with Spring Hill following shortly
thereafter. In part because it seemed like "it was time"and in part
because the U.S. is facing a significant shortage in the profession as the baby
boom generation approaches retirement, all the major school psychology associations
in the United States made the decision two years ago to organize the first Futures
Conference of the 21st century. ISPA was invited to be a part of this conference
in an effort to lend an international perspective to the discussions. After
2 years of planning, the conference finally took place on November 14-16 at
Indiana University in Indianapolis, Indiana.
ISPA had two official representatives at this conference, myself and Sissy Hatzichristou
of Greece. I was one of six conference planners and Sissy was asked to participate
in a panel discussion during the conference when select participants were asked
to relate the conference discussions to their own work in the field. In addition
to the official representatives, however, a number of other participants in
the conference were ISPA members, and, in that sense, ISPA was more broadly
represented. These members included: Michael Curtis and Deborah Crockett (who
delivered two of the four keynote addresses), Beth Doll and Bonnie Nastasi (who
served as two of six group facilitators), Brett Nelson, an ISPA member from
Colorado, and Chieh Li, a Chinese-American now living in Massachusetts. Thus,
over 10 percent of the 69 on-site participants were ISPA members.
What made this conference so innovative, however, is that in addition to participants
on-site in Indianapolis, numerous remote sites around the country, including
sites in Alaska and Hawaii, were able to participate via the Internet. At least
one of those sites, University of California at Santa Barbara, also included
ISPA participants (Shane Jimerson, in the case of U.C.-Santa Barbara). An effort
was made to identify sites in other countries. I am very sorry that these efforts
did not produce results since the impact of remote site participation was, for
me, one of the highlights of the conference. Many of these remote sites were
university based, which enabled students of school psychology from around the
country to chance to both view the proceedings and participate in the decision-making.
What better way to help shape the future of the profession than by bringing
students in on the ground floor?
The broad goal of the conference was to develop goals and action plans to help
the profession move forward in light of shortages in school psychology that
are problematic now and for the foreseeable future. In order to identify goals
and action plans, we employed a problem-solving model: 1) identify desired outcomes;
2) list threats and opportunities associated with the outcomes; 3) brainstorm
strategies to use to reach the desired outcomes; 4) select the most promising
strategies; 5) develop action plans; and 6) implement action plans. In order
to make the best use of conference time, we actually conducted the first two
steps before the conference began. On-site participants were divided into 6
groups and a facilitator was assigned to each group. Background readings were
posted on the conference website (including an article by Sissy that described
the development of school psychology in Greece), and participants were encouraged
to read the background material and nominate critical issues/outcomes in three
domains: children’s issues, family issues, and school issues. Through a process
of consensus building first within the small groups and then in the group as
a whole (with input from remote sites), we were able to identify 6 critical
outcomes. These outcomes established the work of the conference itself.
The critical issues identified were:
Outcomes for Children:
1. Improved academic competence and school success for all children.
2. Improved social-emotional functioning for all children.
Outcomes for Families:
1. Improved parenting skills and increased ability of families to support
students.
2. Enhanced family-school partnerships and parental involvement in schools.
Outcomes for Schools
1. More effective education and instruction for all learners.
2. Increased child and family services in schools that promote health and mental
health and are integrated with community services.
The conference itself began on the afternoon of Thursday, November 14, with
an opening keynote address by Michael Curtis. He laid out the data documenting
the shortage of school psychologists in the United States. This shortage, by
the way, is not restricted to practitioners. Mike told the audience that one-third
of university training positions went unfilled last year, a statistic that does
not bode well for the future if we believe we can attract more people to the
profession.
From Mike’s kick-off keynote, which was webcast around the country and followed
by a question-and-answer period during which both onsite and remote site participants
submitted questions, the conference proceeded for the next two days, alternating
between keynote speeches and panel discussions that were picked up by remote
sites via webcast and small group work sessions, with work products submitted
to the website via an E-forum. By Saturday afternoon, groups reconfigured themselves,
with participants being encouraged to join the group addressing the outcome
goal of greatest interest to them. At that point, one of the critical issues
was dropped for lack of interest (the first outcome area for families described
above). By Saturday afternoon, when the conference ended, the remaining five
outcome areas had detailed but realistic action plans developed. These plans,
along with all the other material generated by the conference, on the Futures
Conference website. If you have access to Real Player, you can also view all
the keynote and panel presentations. This will give you a great snapshot of
critical issues facing school psychology in the United States.
I
believe that if you view all the presentations, you will find more commonalities
than unique features when comparing school psychology in the United States to
that in your country. A link to the website address can be found below.
Those of you who attended the ISPA colloquium in New Hampshire may remember
me saying at the end of that conference that planning a colloquium was both
the hardest and the most rewarding thing I had ever done. While this conference
may not compare in terms of scope and complexity, I have to admit that being
able to participate in a conference designed to both capture the state of the
profession and set out a bold agenda for the future of school psychology was
as gratifying an experience as any I have
ever had in my 20 years of involvement with state, national, and international
school psychology associations. The standing ovation that participants gave
the conference planners at the end of the very last session was, more than anything
else, an endorsement both of the importance of the conference and the value
of its outcomes.
This is just the beginning. In my next president’s letter, I will discuss the
implications for ISPA of its participation in this important event. In the meantime,
please check out the website! It’s the richest source of information about school
psychology and its place in the broader world of education and mental health
that I know of.