Today was a fantastic practicum day. For a couple of reasons, but one reason in particular. Towards the end of the day there was a meeting with the ED program team. We talked between the teachers and an administrator about how the program teachers address language/topic concerns. Primarily, how the team handles threatening concepts or inappropriate language. There were a number of different ways that the teachers handled the situations, but there was no universal format for doing so.
The administrator then went on to explain how in the real world there is zero tolerance for that kind of thing and so it should also reflect in the classes. I could not agree with this idea more. However, when dealing with a population known for their atypical behavior, it gets more tricky to address this concern. Teachers expressed this idea in various ways, but the bottom line was that zero tolerance needed to be enforced regardless. The enforcement plan was to give students a warning and then send them to the dean. The teachers didn't appear too thrilled about that because introducing a zero tolerance policy out of no where would probably not solve the core problem.
This is where my brain started ticking and desiring to blurt out. I didn't find the right moment, unfortunately, but I did bring up my thoughts to my supervisor after the meeting. I said that there appeared to be a missing gap in the thinking at the meeting and that was how to implement the desired policy. Students need to be aware of the new expectations and the expectations themselves need to be clearly defined. Role-playing, debates, and overall sensitivity training are options for making students aware of what is expected of them. A warning does very little for this group of students. These students need to be taught how to demonstrate those skills and have an atmosphere that supports the goals. Clear expectations being posted around the room go a long way.
After a half hour or so discussing this topic with my supervisor, she was in agreement. We talked about her role as a mediator and facilitator to helping everyone achieve this goal. I look forward to hearing the results of this process because I truly believe that students cannot be held accountable for things they have not be taught or had consistent reinforcement on. I sincerely appreciated my advice being seriously considered and really feel like that is what being a school psychologist is all about.
Wednesday, October 24, 2007
Tuesday, October 23, 2007
Seminar - Better Week
This week was probably one of the best weeks I've had at my practicum site since I arrived 5 or so weeks ago. It was a Friday instead of a Wednesday, which may have contributed in the types of things I was doing. There was more free time available which led to less staff meetings and more time to explore other parts of the school. Particularly, I was able to look at the instructional ED program that my research project will be centered on.
It was not a typical day for the program. It was not an instructional day, rather it was a positive reinforcement day. Every third Friday the class gets to participate in playing video games, watching movies, talking, playing computer games, or just about anything they would like to do -- if they completed all of their assignments for their classes. Students who did not complete their assignments had to spend their day working on those assignments in a separate classroom with a teacher who monitored them.
I spent a few hours observing this class day at different times and it was very interesting. I got to see how the students interacted with one another and the type of social skills they had. Most of the students got along very well with each other and had positive relationships with the teachers. When I was watching the class, I noticed the variety of reasons students were placed there. Some were likely the type who constantly created problems and others were more likely to create rare problems.
I also was given the opportunity to learn more about the program by looking at their handbook and talking to the teachers (there were about 5). The program uses great practices that have been around for a long period of time. It appears to be an eclectically based program from prior knowledge of "what works." This program looks like a great idea and I think it has a lot of room for growth. It has the potential to become research-based, organized, and able to pick up for anyone. After observing some of the class, I am optimistic that I will be able to help. This appears to be the only form of social skills training at the school and I can see a lot of other good things growing out of this starting point.
There is also a situation I have been thinking about which has been bothering me. Whenever there is a situation when a student on an IEP exhibits dangerous behavior, a manifestation meeting is required. At this meeting, people discuss whether the behavior was a result of the student's disability or not. The second half of the meeting is about whether the problem is a result of the district's failure to implement the student's IEP. I've noticed there is a tendency to ignore the second part. How can a student be responsible for their behavior if they have not been taught how to behave? How can a student be responsible for their behavior if their needs on an IEP have not been met? It gets sticky at the high school because people are of the belief that "students should know how to behave by now." I don't think that is true -- and there are some situations where students have not belonged to their school districts. Rather than passing the problem along, ignoring it, or not knowing how to deal with it, we need to investigate this type of thing and take responsibility so that students can be in the Least Restrictive Environment (as the law deems).
It was not a typical day for the program. It was not an instructional day, rather it was a positive reinforcement day. Every third Friday the class gets to participate in playing video games, watching movies, talking, playing computer games, or just about anything they would like to do -- if they completed all of their assignments for their classes. Students who did not complete their assignments had to spend their day working on those assignments in a separate classroom with a teacher who monitored them.
I spent a few hours observing this class day at different times and it was very interesting. I got to see how the students interacted with one another and the type of social skills they had. Most of the students got along very well with each other and had positive relationships with the teachers. When I was watching the class, I noticed the variety of reasons students were placed there. Some were likely the type who constantly created problems and others were more likely to create rare problems.
I also was given the opportunity to learn more about the program by looking at their handbook and talking to the teachers (there were about 5). The program uses great practices that have been around for a long period of time. It appears to be an eclectically based program from prior knowledge of "what works." This program looks like a great idea and I think it has a lot of room for growth. It has the potential to become research-based, organized, and able to pick up for anyone. After observing some of the class, I am optimistic that I will be able to help. This appears to be the only form of social skills training at the school and I can see a lot of other good things growing out of this starting point.
There is also a situation I have been thinking about which has been bothering me. Whenever there is a situation when a student on an IEP exhibits dangerous behavior, a manifestation meeting is required. At this meeting, people discuss whether the behavior was a result of the student's disability or not. The second half of the meeting is about whether the problem is a result of the district's failure to implement the student's IEP. I've noticed there is a tendency to ignore the second part. How can a student be responsible for their behavior if they have not been taught how to behave? How can a student be responsible for their behavior if their needs on an IEP have not been met? It gets sticky at the high school because people are of the belief that "students should know how to behave by now." I don't think that is true -- and there are some situations where students have not belonged to their school districts. Rather than passing the problem along, ignoring it, or not knowing how to deal with it, we need to investigate this type of thing and take responsibility so that students can be in the Least Restrictive Environment (as the law deems).
Sunday, October 21, 2007
Mental Health - Presentation
This week I did not have as much of a chance to use more Reality Therapy. But it was on my mind for much of the week and I tried to apply it to my own life. When I was considering how to face a problem regarding another person, I would think about how I can only control my own behavior and not the behavior of others. When I lost the mentality of thinking I could control someone else's behavior I regained control over the situation for myself. Instead of thinking of an impossible goal, I thought about small changes I could make that were in my capacity range.
The video about the married couple that we watched in class was very insightful. It had a couple who had been married for a long time and they were arguing about how the other person doesn't do certain things. They both agreed that there was a time in the past where they were happy. In addition, they discussed things they could each do to make the situation better. While the idea of making compromises in a relationship was not new to me, thinking about it from a one-step-at-a-time approach seemed to make sense. Instead of wishing that things were how they used to be, people in relationships should focus on what they can do in the here and now to change. That being said, each person in the relationship can start small taking responsibility and build on that.
Another interesting idea presented itself in the video. It is the idea that if the same problems have existed for a long period of time, and no one is willing to change to make things better -- then it's time to quit. While quitting is not the ideal situation, it makes sense and at the very least is a good perspective to have, since people seeking help generally want things to change. I wish that I had the opportunity to present this idea to a couple I am friends with, but the chance unfortunately did not come up this week.
This last week we had a presenter in class, Larry Letwick, who talked about reality therapy. He was very interesting to listen to and had the reality therapy attitude built into him. I think having that attitude is important as a therapist practicing it. The attitude is the same as the title of the therapy -- it's very "realistic." It isn't about focusing on things in the past. It's about life as it is in the real moment and about real things that people can do about it. I appreciate that it is a "doing" model and not a "reflecting" model.
School psychologists generally do not have time for long therapy sessions. Reality therapy is a form of brief therapy that is practical to use for a school psychologist. Brief therapy is all there is time for and it seems like it can lead to positive results in a short amount of time.
The video about the married couple that we watched in class was very insightful. It had a couple who had been married for a long time and they were arguing about how the other person doesn't do certain things. They both agreed that there was a time in the past where they were happy. In addition, they discussed things they could each do to make the situation better. While the idea of making compromises in a relationship was not new to me, thinking about it from a one-step-at-a-time approach seemed to make sense. Instead of wishing that things were how they used to be, people in relationships should focus on what they can do in the here and now to change. That being said, each person in the relationship can start small taking responsibility and build on that.
Another interesting idea presented itself in the video. It is the idea that if the same problems have existed for a long period of time, and no one is willing to change to make things better -- then it's time to quit. While quitting is not the ideal situation, it makes sense and at the very least is a good perspective to have, since people seeking help generally want things to change. I wish that I had the opportunity to present this idea to a couple I am friends with, but the chance unfortunately did not come up this week.
This last week we had a presenter in class, Larry Letwick, who talked about reality therapy. He was very interesting to listen to and had the reality therapy attitude built into him. I think having that attitude is important as a therapist practicing it. The attitude is the same as the title of the therapy -- it's very "realistic." It isn't about focusing on things in the past. It's about life as it is in the real moment and about real things that people can do about it. I appreciate that it is a "doing" model and not a "reflecting" model.
School psychologists generally do not have time for long therapy sessions. Reality therapy is a form of brief therapy that is practical to use for a school psychologist. Brief therapy is all there is time for and it seems like it can lead to positive results in a short amount of time.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
