Methods of identification of students with learning disabilities in reading: Perceptions of administrators in Illinois and implications for school psychologists.

摘要

School psychologists' training provides a variety of skills from which its practitioners may draw, including consultation, intervention, counseling, staff development, and assessment. Despite these broad skills, school psychologists' primary roles involve assessment and assessment-related tasks, generally as related to eligibility determination for a Specific Learning Disability (SLD). This narrow focus over time provided a limited view of school psychologists' roles in the eyes of school administrators. With the introduction of Response to Intervention (RtI) as related to eligibility for SLD, districts now must focus on interventions, which may be implemented by any staff member; the traditional identification method of ability discrepancies and IQ tests (which only school psychologists could administer) is no longer required. Given that building administrators tended to determine staff usage patterns within their buildings, this research used a survey to explore Illinois principals' preferences between the traditional discrepancy model for SLD versus the now-required RtI approach, their perceptions of school psychologists' skill sets, and future retention rates for school psychologists within the school setting. Results suggested that principals, regardless of model preference, supported RtI components. However, only those principals in favor of the discrepancy model supported its related constructs. Regardless of model preference, principals desired school psychologists to participate in RtI-related tasks; however, they did not support their own psychologists actually participating across all aspects of RtI. Further study is needed to discern why there was a discrepancy between principals'desire and actual practice. Regardless of model preference, principals predicted neither significant increases nor decreases in psychologists' positions over the next five years. All principals felt that RtI would change the way that school psychologists determined learning disabilities. Model preference was also not linked to concern about resources to implement RtI. Future study recommendations included using a matched subjects design to allow comparison between principals' and school psychologists' perceptions. More detailed information regarding degree of RtI adoption would also offer a clearer understanding of the setting about which the principal was commenting. Comparison with other states not in the same financial straits as Illinois may also be advised.