By Zaslofsky, Anne F.
National Association of School Psychologists. Communique , Vol. 40, No. 7
The latest issue of School Psychology Review features six articles covering a wide range of topics and addresses important issues facing school-based practitioners, but there are several papers that school-based practitioners may find particularly relevant to their practice. For example, there are two papers that examine intervention for social and emotional learning (SEL) and behavior concerns. In the first article, Reyes, Brackett, Rivers, Elbertson, and Salovey (2012) examine the effects of training, dosage, and implementation quality of SEL programming. Specifically, the authors used the RULER approach, which draws from the central theoretical tenet that recognizing, understanding, labeling, expressing, and regulating emotion (i.e., the RULER skills) is central for positive development. The study findings indicated that teacher training and implementation quality were keys for positive student outcomes. Sheridan, Bovaird, Glover, Garbacz, Witte, and Kwon (2012) examined teachers' roles in improving student behavioral outcomes by implementing a parent-teacher consultation model. Findings suggested that students whose teachers and parents engaged in consultation with a school-based practitioner demonstrated an increase in adaptive and prosocial behavior during the 8-week intervention. Moreover, participating teachers reported improvements in parent-teacher relationships.
An additional two articles address assessment and identification of academic issues, including specific learning disabilities (SLD). McDermott, Rikoon, Waterman, and Fantuzzo (2012) measured the dimensionality and utility of using the Preschool Learning Behaviors Scale and found significant predictive validity and reliability evidence for the measure's use when assessing factors associated with later academic achievement and learning behaviors. Stuebing, Fletcher, Branum-Martin, and Francis (2012) compared three methods for identifying SLD based on cognitive discrepancies and patterns of strengths and weaknesses. The findings of the study indicated that each of the three methods modeled were good at identifying students who did not meet SLD criteria. However, each model demonstrated varying levels of sensitivity for positive identification of SLD.
Finally, the last two articles in the present issue discussed findings from a metaanalysis of bullying prevention programs (Polanin, Espelage, 8c Pigott, 2012) and demonstrated the use of guidelines from a standardized threat assessment (Cornell, Allen, 8c Fan, 2012). …