Intervention training in school psychology doctoral programs : a millennium mandate

The Individuals With Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) (P.L. 94-142) mandates that all children have a right to a free and appropriate public education (FAPE) in the least restrictive environment (LRE). Although implementation of the LRE has been successful, expectations for student performance within regular classrooms have remained low and proven methods of teaching and learning have been insufficiently used (IDEA Section 601(c)(4)). In an effort to encourage accountability and to improve teaching and learning, IDEA was reauthorized in 1997, thus introducing some of the most sweeping changes in the federal law since the enactment of P.L. 94-142 in 1975 (Telzrow, 1999, p. 7). Two overarching themes evident in the IDEA amendments are increasing accountability and increasing intervention-based services (Barnett et al., 1999, p. 358). This increased emphasis on the use of interventions for students with disabilities will require school psychologists to broaden their role in order to effectively practice within the guidelines of the law. Due to the IDEA \u2797 amendments, there is a need for school psychology graduate training programs to incorporate intervention-related course work into their programs of study. To date, there is no known investigation of the degree of intervention-related training in doctoral programs in school psychology. Thus, the purpose of this study was to determine the extent and nature of intervention-related course work versus assessment- related course work in accredited doctoral programs in school psychology. The study was limited to the evaluation of doctoral programs approved by the American Psychological Association (APA) and/or the National Association of School Psychologists (NASP). A list of approved programs was obtained from the most recent edition of the Directory of School Psychology Training Programs in the United States (Thomas, 1998)Upon identification of approved programs, a listing of each program\u27s required course work and the descriptions of those courses were collected primarily via the Internet. Based on those course descriptions, I categorized only those courses that were primarily assessment- or intervention-related to determine the extent of training required by each university in these two domains. To aid in the classification process and to increase the reliability of the study, I developed definitions of the various assessment and intervention categories. A second rater and I independently categorized the data from the university programs based on those definitions. I categorized all the data and the additional rater categorized the data from a random selection of 25% of the programs, yielding an inter-rater agreement of 93%. Furthermore, all data were collected within a one-month period (July 2000) to ensure that the time frame for curricular evaluation was equivalent for all programs. The results of this study indicate that, on average, APA- and/or NASP-accredited school psychology doctoral programs require significantly more (p \u3c .05) course work in intervention than in assessment. On average, 59% of the required course work in intervention is in consultation, counseling/psychotherapy, and behavioral intervention techniques. Within the broad category of assessment, the majority of the required course work (77%) relates to indirect methods of assessment, such as IQ testing and other norm- referenced instruments, as opposed to direct assessment methods, such as curriculum- based assessment (CBA) and functional behavior assessment (FBA). Overall, no significant differences emerged between accreditation type (i.e., APA, NASP, APA/NASP) with respect to required course work in assessment and/or interventionHowever, differences emerged between type of doctoral degree offered and some subcategories of intervention and assessment. Programs awarding the Ed.D. degree required significantly more course work in neuropsychological assessment than did programs offering the Ph.D. degree although not more than programs offering the Psy.D. degree. Programs awarding the Ed.D. degree also required significantly more course work in family intervention then either the Ph.D. or Psy.D. degrees. Programs awarding the Psy.D. degree required significantly more course work in psychodynamic/psychoanalytic intervention than did either the Ph.D. or Ed.D. degrees. This study is significant in its potential to inform the field of the degree to which school psychology programs are providing training in the design and implementation of interventions as mandated in IDEA \u2797. Moreover, school psychology trainers can gain a better understanding of the degree of intervention and assessment training being required in APA- and NASP-accredited school psychology doctoral programs and, in turn, evaluate their program in comparison to other programs. This comparison may serve as a catalyst for modifying curricular requirements where needed to provide graduate students with the skills necessary to practice productively in the field