Full Version Portfolio

Helbing Portfolio Page 1
Pre-Internship Portfolio
Krista Helbing

5/1/2014


Table of Contents

Curriculum Vitae....4
Letters of Recommendation..8
Philosophy of Practice..13
Professional Goals.....16
Artifact 1: Screener ..18
Artifact 2: Consultation ...24
Artifact 3: Assessment ..31
Artifact 4: Direct Intervention ................40
References.55


Curriculum Vitae

Krista Helbing
6300 E Hampden Ave Apt 2401 Denver, CO 80222
Phone (262) 751-5001 Email krista.helbing@ucdenver.edu

EDUCATION
Doctorate of Psychology (PsyD), School Psychology
University of Colorado at Denver, Denver, Colorado
May 2016 (anticipated graduation)

Bachelor of Science, Psychology
Secondary Major: Communications
Minor: Hispanic Health and Human Services
Carroll University, Waukesha, Wisconsin
May 2012

FIELD EXPERIENCES IN SCHOOL PSYCHOLOGY
School Psychology Practicum Student, Englewood Public Schools, 2013-2014
September 2013-June 2014
Peggy Alway, Supervision School Psychologist at Charles Hay World School
Completed 500+ hours of practicum, providing a range of psychological services to children grades K-6.
Screened for early warning signs of risk and generate appropriate prevention and intervention
strategies
Conducted and reported results of comprehensive evaluations of cognitive abilities and
social/emotional functioning at IEP meetings, for both initial referrals and re-evaluations
Assisted in developing 504 Accommodations for qualifying students
Consulted with teachers and parents regarding students personal, social, academic, and
emotional needs
Took part in monthly interagency meetings
Guided individual and group counseling sessions

ASSESSMENT
I have knowledge of and have administered the following assessments:

WISC-IV
WAIS-IV
KABC
DAS
BASC
BRIEF
Conners
ABAS
SSIS
BDI
Beery VMI
Bender-Gestalt
Beck You Inventories
CDI
KTEA
RADS
RCMAS
Vineland
WJIII


PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT
PREPARE Training, Workshop 2, May 2013
o This workshop trained me in the hierarchical and sequential set of activities that prevent
and prepare for psychological trauma, help reaffirm the physical health of members of the
school community and students perceptions that they are safe and secure, evaluate the
degree of psychological trauma, respond to the psychological needs of members of the
school community, and examine the effectiveness of school crisis intervention and
recovery efforts.
Introduction to Incident Command System, May 2013
o I successfully completed the Federal Emergency Management Association (FEMA)
course on the Incident Command System (ICS). This course introduced the ICS and
provided a foundation for higher level ICS training. It described the history, features and
principles, and organizational structure of the ICS, and also explained the relationship
between ICS and the National Incident Management System (NIMS).
Neuropsychology of Reading Webinar, May 2013
o This webinar provided an overarching framework for effectively diagnosing and treating
reading comprehension disorders in children. There was a review of brain-based
educational perspective, and a review of neural underpinnings of literacy in children.
The webinar introduced multiple evidence based interventions and specific reading
comprehension programs, as well as classroom strategies and accommodations. Case
studies were also included to help demonstrate how various tests of memory, language,
intellectual functioning and executive functioning can be integrated to pinpoint common
reading pitfalls that hinder literacy outcomes.
The Role of Executive Functions in Learning to Read and Reading Webinar, May 2013
o This webinar provided an explanation of how to determine interventions that will be the
most effective in helping a struggling learning. It explained how to find out the specific
cause of a students learning problems and then how to choose an intervention that would
most meet those needs.
Q-Interactive Training Workshop, July 2013
o At this training, I was introduced to the new Q-Interactive technology developed by
Pearson. We learned about development of the new software, as well as how to
administer the various Pearson assessments using the new software and iPads in
comparison to older paper and pencil methods.

LEADERSHIP ROLES
Student Representative Board Member, May 2013
Colorado Society of School Psychologists (CSSP)
Act as a liaison between University of Colorado Denver school psychology students and CSSP
Plan and organize a student activity during the summer incorporating students from all three
school psychology training programs in Colorado
Plan and organize the student activity at CSSP conference
Gather donations for the silent auction at CSSP conference, support staff at silent auction

PROFESSIONAL MEMBERSHIPS
National Association of School Psychologists
Student member since September 2012
Colorado Society of School Psychologists
Student representative board member since May 2013

Student member since September 2012
American Psychological Association-Division 16
Student affiliate since April 2014

CONFERENCES ATTENDED
Colorado Society of School Psychologists Fall Conference
Attended conferences in 2012 and 2013

VOLUNTEER EXPERIENCES
Compact Service Corps AmeriCorps Program, September 2013- April 2014
Completed a total of 600 service hours (120 indirect hours, 480 direct hours) through practicum
and coursework


Letters of Recommendation





Philosophy of Practice

In thinking about my personal philosophy of practice in school psychology, there are
multiple components to what I believe. I think that within the large variety of roles and
responsibilities of being a school psychologist, each practitioner will have a set of beliefs and ways
they approach the job. I also think that this is my personal philosophy of practice for right now, and
that my philosophy will grow and change with the experiences I gain in the profession.

First, I believe that School Psychologists are advocates. It is our job to advocate for
services and interventions for students, and advocate on behalf of students and families. I believe
that through being strong child advocates, the school psychologist is able to establish and maintain
positive, safe, and restorative learning environments for students. Restorative means changing your
own attitude, and it also means believing in students even when- and especially when- they seem to
be behaving badly (Costello, 2009, p 14). I believe attitude is necessary to be an effective advocate,
and to create restoration in relationships and situations. This belief will affect my practice by guiding
me to make all decisions in the best interest of the child or family I am working with.

Second, I believe that school psychologists should be culturally responsive. Since
school psychologists work with a variety of individuals from different backgrounds and cultures,
cultural sensitivity should be at the forefront of all that we do. Cultural empathy or cultural
competence is the ability to understand the unique perspective of people from other cultures,
assimilate cultural knowledge about an individual or group, and develop specific policies or practices
to increase the quality of the interaction provided (Brown, 2011, p. 8). I believe that this quote
describes how and why school psychologists should be culturally responsive. The job of a school
psychologist is to meet the needs of diverse individuals and systems, which cant be done without
any sensitivity to diversity. This will affect my practice because each school system and set of
students will have their own diverse backgrounds and needs and it will be my job to respond to
those cultures and backgrounds appropriately.

I believe that school psychologists should be collaborators and consultants. Part of
the role of a school psychologist is to collaborate with teachers, parents and students, and consult
with parents and teachers. Working effectively within multiple systems requires collaborating,
partnering, and coordinating across those systems (eg- schools, families, and communities) (Plotts
& Lasser, 2013, p 19). This belief will affect my practice by guiding how I assert myself in a school
building. I will make sure I am available and open to collaborating and consulting with teachers and
parents about a variety of issues within the school. I hope to be a valued opinion and resource for
collaborative problem solving in my school environment.

I believe that school psychologists are experts in data. We have a background rich in
statistics, assessment and the ability to integrate data from a variety of sources; this background
provides for a skillset unique to school psychologists. School psychologists must strike a balance
between having information that is sufficiently detailed to be useful and including only information
that is relevant (Plotts & Lasser, 2013, p 15). I believe training in school psychology enables us to

gather and use information effectively. Competent and responsible intervention is characterized by
carefully selected and developed plans and activities that are evidence based and collaborative,
connected to the home and in alignment with the childs or adolescents needs (Plotts & Lasser,
2013, p 14). I believe that through the role as a collaborator and consultant, school psychologists
should use data based decision making to incorporate information from a variety of sources. I will
use this belief in practice by not only including assessment data, but information from informal
sources like interviews and observations to guide my decision making.

Lastly, I believe that the role of a school psychologist is continuously changing.
Historically the role of a school psychologist has changed significantly since the early 1900s and it is
continuing to change. I believe the role of a school psychologist should change based on the needs
of the students and staff in a particular school system, and even within that system the role will
change school year to school year. I believe that as school psychologists, it is our job to recognize
change and acknowledge it, and use it as a driving factor in all that we do. This includes being
knowledgeable and continuously developing ourselves as professionals. This will affect my practice
because I will need to be constantly changing the way I approach situations, and will need to
continually using best practices.


Professional Goals

Short Term Goals

1. Gain experience and expertise working with early childhood populations. I plan to
achieve this goal through gaining a placement at an externship site that focuses primarily on
preschool populations. I feel that this relates to my personal philosophy of practice by
increasing my abilities as an advocate for younger populations.
2. Gain experience in more diverse and multicultural settings. I plan to achieve this goal
through my placement for internship in a diverse and multicultural school district. This ties
into my personal philosophy that school psychologists should be culturally responsive, and I
feel that in order to be culturally responsive, I need more experience working with diverse
populations.
3. Increase confidence as a professional. I believe this is an ongoing goal, and my
confidence level will grow as I gain experience and in the field. I have seen great
improvements over the course of my practicum experience, and expect the same through
externship and internship. This relates to all of my personal philosophies of practice in that I
need to gain confidence in all areas of my practice.

Long Term Goals

1. Continue ongoing training and be a well-informed and up-to-date practitioner. I plan
to achieve this goal by being actively involved in professional organizations like APA and
NASP, and being knowledgeable about current and best practices coming out of research.
This relates to my personal philosophy of practice by improving my abilities in all areas of
my philosophy by having up to date knowledge to be an advocate, collaborator, expert in
data, and culturally responsive.
2. Have some sort of teaching capacity whether that is teaching a class as an adjunct at a
university, or having a role at my job where I am in charge of educating my peers about
various topics in the field of school psychology. This relates to my personal philosophy of
practice by putting me in the role of a consultant and collaborator and using my knowledge
to help others.


Artifact 1
Screening

Behavior Referral Screening
As a part of the Positive Behavior and Interventions Support (PBIS) team at Hay, there is
ongoing monitoring of behavior referral data through the behavior referral data management system
called School Wide Information System (SWIS). The team reviews SWIS data monthly in addition
to other data, to have an idea of how behavior is being managed school wide, and what they can do
to keep students from getting behavior referrals. By looking at this information regularily, the team
can identify needs and risks as they arise, rather than waiting until they have become too large to
handle. This information also drives decision making for the PBIS team, so that they can make
informed decisions based on the current needs of the students. Because Hay is an International
Baccalaureat school, and because Hay also is a PBIS school, there very clear and explicit
expectations for behavior from all students. This is why partly why behavior information is
reviewed monthly at PBIS meetings. In order to to screen for social and emotional risks, student
behavior referral data is particularily useful.
Identifying Risk
In looking at the most recent behavior referral data,for the spring semester to date, it was
noticed that the largest number of major referrals were for phsyical aggression and minor referrals
for phsyical contact or fighting. Between these two behaviors, they made up more than 55% of the
referrals. Behavior referrals were also looked at by grade level to see if there was a pattern occuring.
Another aspect of the PBIS team meeting includes looking at individual student behavior referral
data for students who have received 3 or more referrals. The number of referrals being 3 or more
was chosen as the minimum because the team felt that almost all students will likely get one or two
behavior referrals during the school year, and that students who have gotten three or more referrals
are at a significantly higher risk than those who can manager their behavior to have fewer than three.
The purpose of looking at these students individually is to compare data with the Response to
Intervention team to see if there are similarities between the students who are struggling
academically and those who are struggling behaviorally. Graphs and charts showing the data can be
found in the appendix.
Targeting Intervention
Because these are behaviors of physical aggression and phsyical contact/fighting are highly
preventable behaviors, the team decided that some sort of intervention should be implemented to
reduce the number of behavior referrals. There were multiple option discussed including having all
classroom teachers reiterate school rules, and teach a mini-lesson on what is acceptable and expected
of students. Additionally, some teachers agreed to have a quick conversation with their classrooms
during morning meetings. It was decided that as a universal intervention to follow this data, all
teachers would be having convresations with their students regarding behavior expectations-
especially in regards to physical aggression, physical conact and fighting. It was felt that all students
universally could benefit from a reminder of behavior expectations, especially after a long winter
break.

For a more targeted intervention, students who had received 3 or more behavior referrals
would be monitored. The students in this group would also be screened to see if they would benefit
from a small group direct intervention teaching self-regulation skills. Because the school has access
to the BrainWise curriculum, and it is currently implemented in some classrooms, but not all, the
students selected for this small group intervention would benefit from accessing a currriculum that
directly explains and teaches self-reglation skills so that they could self-regulate in instances where
they would have previously been phsyically aggressive. Additionally, looking at the students in each
grade level who are receiving the most behavior referrals would be useful information for creating
and recruiting members for small group interventions.
While a lot of options were discussed during the PBIS meeting, they were not all
implemented. All teachers did have conversations with their students as a reminder of school
behavior and expectations. The targeted inverntions discussed at the team meeting were not carried
out as they had been originally discussed. Some of this information was used to carry out
interventions for self-regulation, although it was not all entirely data driven. Some of the students
identified through the number of behavior referrals by grade level were included into a third grade
boys group intervention for teamwork and social skills. Also, some of the students identified by the
number of referrals they had received were referred to the Response to Intervention team to look at
possible individualized interventions like counseling and social emotional supports. Regardless of
these interventions being carried out as planned, it is still very positive and encouraging that these
conversations are happening between school staff members, and students are being identified for
both academic and social emotional risks.
Reflection
In reflecting on the screening for behavior referrals, it seemed as though the process was
done backwards. In my opinion the PBIS team should be discussing this topic at the beginning of
the year and implementing universal interventions for all students, like SecondStep, so that the
behavior referrals are reducded from the beginning of the school year, rather than waiting until they
happen to address them. This idea was discussed at a later PBIS meeting, and it was noted that this
was the first school year in the recent past where SecondStep was not implememnted school wide,
and the PBIS team members felt it would be a good idea to address over the summer and early fall
that they go back to using SecondStep across all grade levels. They felt that this might explain the
unusually high number of behavior referrals this school year, or at least address some of the
behavior referrals that could have been minor referrals that escalted into major referrals.
Nonetheless, I felt that using SWIS is a great tool for school teams to get an overal idea of their
school community, and having up to date access to progress monitoring information.


Appendix




Artifact 2
Consultation and Collaboration

Reason for the Consultation
The reason for this particular consultation resulted from multiple conversations with a
classroom teacher and the school principal. Starting at the beginning of the school year, the teacher
noticed that this particular student, R, was having trouble in her classroom, as well as in other areas
of school like the lunchroom and specials classes. The main problem behaviors included physical
aggression and inability to focus on school work. The physical aggression behaviors began resulting
in numerous behavior referrals for this particular student, and that is when it became of concern to
the principal that something needed to be done. The teacher also agreed, and felt that she needed
help through consultation, collaboration, and guidance in order to figure out how to solve the
problems she was having with this student in the classroom.

Consultation Model
The model chosen for this consultation was the teacher consultation model because the
teacher would be the one making the changes, and simply collaborating with the consultant. The
teacher consultation model is described as a problem solving process where the educational
consultant and consultee share responsibility for an intervention outcome (Brown, 2011, p 182).
This model was chosen because it fit the needs of the consultee and was feasible for the consultant
to implement. The teacher consultation model also fits in the guidelines of Response to
Intervention (RtI) and would be required before considering the student for a special education
evaluation for a behavioral or social emotional disability. The interdisciplinary team can facilitate
the process through skill development of the consultee and serve as a support system wherein a
team member (case manager consultant) consults with a particular teacher, thereby developing the
team members skills as independent instructional consultant (Brown, 2011, p 184). The teacher
consultation model is also focused on brief interactions, where sessions occur in roughly 15 minutes,
which is typically all a teacher has for a consultation. For this reason, the model was chosen to fit
the needs of the consultee, Ms. Fall.

Teacher and Parent Concerns
Informal information was gathered prior to the consultation process, so that all parties including
the teacher, principal, and school psychologist would be aware of what the consultation process
would look like and what was being done to alleviate the problem. This informal information
provided by the principal and classroom teacher was the reason for referral to bring this situation
into a formal consultation process.
One of the main concerns of the classroom teacher was one of safety. She was mainly
concerned that the student would end up being retaliated against and getting seriously hurt because
of his actions or interactions with other students. Her other concerns were that R was not able to
participate in class activities for fear of physical aggression toward other students, and his
interference with other students learning. In addition, he was missing a large amount of instruction
due to time being spent in the office when he was asked to leave the classroom, of when he
spending time in the office due to behavior referrals.

One of the main concerns of Rs mother was that this student would continuously get in trouble
and begin to not like school because he was always getting in trouble. She was also concerned for
his physical safety, in that he was being physically aggressive with students and she felt that they
might retaliate and do the same to him. While Rs mother was concerned about the situation, she
was not initially concerned as the school team. The team decided to keep Rs mother informed on
the situation and let her know all decision the team was making in regards to Rs behavior.

Important Background and Baseline Information
Baseline data was collected through the number of behavior referrals the student received
weekly, in addition to qualitative information from the classroom teacher. Information regarding
behavior referrals can be seen in the appendix. Student R has the most number of referrals for the
entire school; 17 major referrals and 8 minor referrals for the 2013-2014 school year. Nineteen of
these referrals came from the classroom, while the rest occurred in other settings. The majority of
these referrals came from what the person writing the referral perceived as Rs attempt to obtain
attention.
Through the process of the classroom teacher chatting with this students mother, she learned
that the student had been physically abused by his father prior to entering kindergarten. After this
discussion, the teacher asked me for resources regarding getting R into some counseling or therapy
to deal with this anger and frustration at his father. The consultant called to discuss with Rs mother
the current situation at school including the number of behavior referrals R was receiving, the teams
concerns and what the school team was doing to address the problem. At this time, counseling and
therapy for R were discussed, although Rs mother was hesitant and said she would consider
pursuing something if the supports at school were not helpful.

The Consultation Process: Teacher Consultation
a. Session 1
The first session of the consultation process was simply to gather information about the
situation and get a scope of what the teacher hoped to accomplish through the consultation process.
During the session, the problem was identified and outlined in detail. During this meeting,
information was shared regarding Rs history of physical abuse and his current behaviors in the
classroom. In addition, the consultant and consultee looked at SWIS data to review the number of
behavior referrals, reasons for referral and perceived motivation for those referrals. Due to time, this
meeting did not look into solving the problem or making a change, and another meeting was
scheduled.
b. Session 2
During the second session of the consultation process, multiple options were discussed
regarding the problem and what the teacher could try in the classroom to reduce physically
aggressive behaviors and the number of referrals R was receiving. This was a main concern of the
teacher because not only was R being affected by the number of referrals; he was missing significant

amounts of class time by being in the office. The consultant offered the idea of a response-cost
system where R would start the day with a certain number of tokens, and for each physical contact
with another student he would lose a token. At the end of the day if he had any tokens left, he
would earn a prize. To insure success from the start, R was started off with 10 tokens to begin each
day, and over time the number of tokens would be reduced. It was decided that in order to give this
plan a fair try, we would need multiple weeks of data. The team decided on 4 weeks of data, and
then we would reconvene after 4 weeks took at the data and make adjustments.
c. Session 3
After collected 4 weeks of data from the response-cost plan, we met as a team again. At the
meeting we looked at the data tracking how many tokens R was left with at the end of each day and
determined that R was not responsive to earning prizes or keeping his tokens. The teacher provided
more qualitative and informal feedback that R was having trouble interacting with peers during
transitions and sitting cooperatively at a table. She suggested that R be moved to a seat away from
his peers in the classroom to alleviate the problem of him working at a table with peers. The teacher
decided she would try this out to see if it reduced the amount of time and access R had to interact
with peers, in hopes that it would reduce his physical contact and number of behavior referrals.
d. Session 4
Session 4 was called by the classroom teacher because she was getting very frustrated with
the situation. The school principal also became involved at this point, because he felt the number of
behavior referrals R was getting was unacceptable and that something needed to change. At this
meeting, the special education teacher from the self-contained classroom was invited to help
brainstorm ideas. She suggested that since moving R away from his classmates wasnt working, the
classroom teacher Ms. Fall should try and put Rs desk up against his table so that he could be near
his classmates, but still have his own personal space. In addition, Ms. Fall used blue tape on the floor
to show R his physical boundary of where he needed to be when he sits at his desk. The team
decided to give this plan another 3 weeks to see if the number of physical contact time between R
and other students decreased, and if the number of behavior referrals R was receiving would
decrease.
e. Session5
At session 5, the team met to look at the successes that R has been having in the classroom. His
most recent behavior referral was 4/22/14, which is a success considering he was previously getting
more than 1 a week or at least removed from the classroom to settle down more than 1 a week. The
classroom teacher felt that everything was under control in her classroom with R having his desk
placed against his teams table. She no longer needed to send R to the office to calm down, and he
was spending all of his time in the classroom participating with other students. She felt that his
behaviors and physical contact with other students had decreased and she was no longer concerned
about safety of other students in the classroom.

At this meeting Ms. Fall did express her concerns about Rs mental health and meeting his needs
outside of the classroom due to his history. The team decided to contact Rs mother to report the
good news that Rs behaviors had improved in the classroom, but discuss outside supports for R.
The team offered the idea of having Rs family attend the school district interagency meeting where
community supports can brainstorm a situation and help families get connected to resources.
Paperwork was sent home with R for Rs mother to look over, and she returned it a few weeks later.
Throughout the process of these sessions and consultation, there were also informal sessions
and conversations that were had between Ms. Fall and the consultant and Rs mother and the
consultant. These conversations revolved around informal check-ups to see how the process was
going for Ms. Fall, and to follow up with Rs mother regarding any questions she might have or
connecting her to resources. That information is integrated into this report where it is appropriate.

Evaluation/Outcomes
One of the biggest outcomes of this situation was that Rs classroom teacher is feeling less
frustrated dealing with his behavior. In addition, the number of behavior referrals and time spent in
the office has decreased significantly. R has been successfully integrated back into his seat alongside
his peers and no longer needs to be separated from the class for activities.
After involving Rs mother in this consultation process, we were able to help her understand the
significance of Rs behaviors and the teams concerns. Rs mother agreed to attend a district
interagency meeting where she can get support from community agencies for R to receive
counseling or therapy in addition to the supports he is receiving at school. This meeting will occur
5/21/14 thus the outcomes of that meeting are unknown at this time.


Appendix



Artifact 3
Assessment


CONFIDENTIAL PSYCHOLOGICAL REPORT

STUDENT: Angel DOB: 08/22/2004
School: Vaughn Elementary Grade: 4
School Psychologist: Krista Helbing Report Date: 4/30/14

REASON FOR REFERRAL
Angel recently transferred to Vaughn Elementary from Denver Public Schools where he was
placed in a self-contained classroom for affective needs. The reason for referral in Aurora Public
Schools is an annual review and re-evaluation to determine the best placement for Angel in
Aurora Public Schools based on his prior history in special education programs. The referral
included requests for bilingual assessment of receptive language, expressive language, language
dominance, adaptive and social emotional skills, as well as cognitive functioning.

ASSESSMENT PROCEDURES
Parent Interview
Teacher Interview
Student Interview
Observations
Record Review
Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children (KABC-2)
Emotional Disturbance Decision Tree (EDDT)
Behavior Assessment Scale for Children (BASC-2)
Woodcock Munoz Language Survey (WMLS-Revised)

BACKGROUND INFORMATION
According to Angels mother, and previous educational files, Angel was born healthy, and is a
healthy child. He met developmental milestones at age appropriate times, and does not have any
diagnoses or take any medications. Angel passed both his vision and hearing screenings at
school, and dos not require vision or hearing aids. He receives regular medical care at Westside
Clinic. Angel has had a tough childhood, and has been specifically affected by his father leaving,
and the death of his brothers father. Angel and his brother received grief counseling at Judys
house following the death of his step father. According to a previous parent interview and
educational records, Angel has also been witness to domestic abuse in the household, although
the extent is unknown. Angels mother reports that his behavioral difficulties began in
preschool/daycare, and have continued since.

EDUCATIONAL HISTORY
According to Angels cumulative records from Denver Public Schools, he has been in special
education since starting kindergarten in 2009. His initial IEP came from Denver Public Schools,
where they determined Angel was identified as having a serious emotional disorder (SED). The
initial IEP from 2009 reports that Angel was receiving grief counseling from Judys house due to
the death of a step-father. The IEP from 2009 also included a Functional Behavior Assessment
(FBA) that Angel was disruptive in the classroom on a consistent basis, in addition being to
defiant and disrespectful. An IEP from 2011 stated that Angel was in an Affective Needs
starting in the middle of his kindergarten year and he was referred to the special education team

after being in the kindergarten class for 8 days. Angel has a long educational history that
includes transfers between at least 3 schools that are known of. In Angels previous settings, he
was placed in small group settings for instruction, which is where he seemed to be the most
successful. An IEP from 2012 shows that Angel was given the WISC-IV and his overall abilities
fell within the average range, with solid average abilities in processing speed and working
memory.

A Functional Behavior Assessment (FBA) was completed by Denver Public Schools in 2009,
and they concluded that Angels two main disruptive behaviors were being out of his seat and
rummaging through materials, and defiance to following rules and expectations. They found that
triggers to these behaviors include transitioning back to routines and change of rules. The
Behavior Intervention Plan (BIP) suggests that Angel responds to immediate reinforcers
throughout the school day and environment. Strategies that were implemented to reduce
problem behaviors included providing choices, setting boundaries, point sheets and paraeducator
support.

When transferring to Vaughn Elementary, Angel came from Denver Public Schools with a
special education identification of SED, along with a Behavior Intervention Plan. According to
referral data from the speech language pathologist at Vaughn Elementary, Angel has had 4 years
of education in the US, and his achievement compared to English Language learner peers, is
behind. At Vaughn Elementary, Angels current placement is in general education classroom.

INTERVIEWS
Angels mother was interviewed through the bilingual psychologist as an interpreter. Much of
the information Angels mother provided during the interview was similar to the information
gathered from Angels previous IEPs. She described his involvement in special education from
the beginning of kindergarten, and the family history regarding the death of a family member and
the familys involvement at Judys House. During this interview time, Angels mother was
asked clarifying questions about previous records and information. Because Angel already has
an IEP and the reason for referral was a re-evaluation and determination of placement, the focus
of the interview was more about gathering the most current information rather than a full
background and clinical history. Angels mother was also interviewed using a direct translation
of the EDDT from English to Spanish.

Angels teachers were briefly interviewed, as well. Because Angel is a new student at Vaughn
Elementary, they were not able to provide very much detail about Angels achievements or
performance in the classroom. The main concern for both of his teachers seems to be Angels
behavior. One of Angels teachers described posturing behavior where Angel seems to be
setting up to physically engage another student. The teacher found this behavior concerning, and
Angel has received a few behavior referrals for similar incidents. Additionally, they both
described Angel as very fidgety and distracted in the classroom.

Angel was also interviewed as part of the evaluation. Angel was given the opportunity to
conduct the interview in Spanish or in English and Angel expressed that he prefers to speak in
English, thus the interview was conducted in English. The bilingual school psychologist was
also present in case there was a need for Spanish interpretation. Angel expressed his interests in

sports like soccer, and skateboarding. He showed the interviewer some of his quarters he was
saving up to buy a new skateboard with blue wheels. Angel was cooperative during the
interview, although it appears that he is not concerned with his social emotional behavior at the
present time.

OBSERVATIONS
Angel was observed in Ms. Rethingers 4
th
grade classroom, on April 4, prior to any formal
assessment. During this observation, Angel was observed in a whole group setting, and during
independent work time. During whole group instruction, students were sitting on the floor
listening to directions from the teacher who was standing at the front of the room. Angel
appeared to be very fidgety and distracted. He was looking around the room, and looking to
peers to get their attention. During the transition from whole group instruction to independent
work time at the students desk, Angel transitioned much slower than his peers. It took him
longer to move from the carpet to his seat, and longer for him to get out his supplies and begin
working. During independent work time, the students were asked to complete a math fractions
assessment. Angel took considerably more time to get started than his peers, and was prompted
by the teacher multiple times. The teacher had to prompt Angel by saying start here and you
know what you have to do multiple times.

Angel was also observed during administration of formal assessments. He was observed during
the Woodcock Munoz Language Survey, as well as during cognitive testing. During the
Woodcock Munoz Language Survey administration, Angel also seemed very fidgety. He was
cooperative with the examiner, and responded when appropriate. These same behaviors were
observed during the cognitive assessment. Angel asked multiple times how many more or are
we done yet? He seemed like he was not very interested in completing the tasks required of
him.

LANGUAGE
According to the home language survey, and previous educational history the language spoken in
Angels home is primarily Spanish. Angel speaks Spanish at home with his mother, although at
school he speaks primarily English. When given opportunities during testing, Angel responded
in both English and Spanish. Anecdotal information from his previous IEP indicated that when
spoken to in Spanish, Angel will often respond in English.

Angel was given the WIDA-ACCESS Placement Test (W-APT) to assess his language
proficiency in English. The W-APT is an English language proficiency screener test given to
incoming students who are designated as English Language Learners. Angel was given this test
on 2/21/14. W-APT scores are given on a scale of 1 to 6, where 1 is entering and 6 is reaching
English proficiency. Angels scores are below:

Speaking: 4
Writing: 2
Listening: 2
Reading: 1
Overall: 2.1

Angel has a nice strength in speaking English, although it appears that his proficiency in writing,
listening and reading English is behind his grade level peers. The W-APT is a placement test, to
get a beginning understanding of Angels English Proficiency and as he receives English
language education and support, this assessment will be followed with the WIDA ACCESS test
as a progress monitoring tool.

As a part of the evaluation, the bilingual school psychologist administered the Woodcock Munoz
Language Survey-Revised (WMLS-Revised) to get a better understanding of Angels language
proficiency in both English and Spanish. Scores are presented as a Cognitive Academic
Language Proficiency (CALP) score on a scale of 1 to 6 where 1 is negligible and 6 is very
advanced. The Oral Language portion of the assessment measures listening and speaking in
English including language development and verbal reasoning. Angel demonstrated limited
English oral language ability (Level 3). When compared to English speaking individuals at his
age level, Angels Oral Language skills are limited. The Lenguaje Oral portion of the
assessment measures listening and speaking in Spanish including language development and
verbal reasoning. Angel demonstrated very limited Spanish oral language ability (Level 2).
According to the bilingual school psychologists assessment, she determined that Angel is not
fluent in English or Spanish, which will make academic proficiency difficult. She also
determined that because Angel is not exhibiting a strong dominance in either language, further
testing should be completed bilingually when possible to give Angel every opportunity to
succeed.

COGNITIVE
The Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children, Second Edition, (KABC-II) was administered to
assess Angels intellectual functioning. Subtest scores on the KABC-II are standardized to have a
mean of 10 and a standard deviation of 3. This means that 2 out of 3 people will obtain subtest
scores between 7 and 13. The global and index scores have a mean of 100 and a standard
deviation of 15; thus, 2 out of 3 people will obtain global and index scores between 85 and 115.
In order to assess Angels cognitive functioning; the KABC was administered using the MPI
model, which is more appropriate for Angels cultural and linguistic differences. Scores on the
KABC-II are grouped into four indices which combine into a global score: the MPI. The MPI
model uses the same subtests as the typical model, although it takes out the knowledge
component because these questions are culturally and linguistically loaded and favor native
English speakers. Testing was conducted in English with consideration regarding exposure and
experience to Spanish as a second language an Angel was allowed to respond in Spanish if he
was able to or could not answer in English. Angels scores are presented below:

Subtest Scores
Number Recall: 9
Word Order: 6

Story Completion: 15
Pattern Reasoning: 10

Rover: 9
Triangles: 13
Scale Scores
Sequential: 85

Simultaneous: 106

Planning: 114

On the Sequential/Gsm scale, a measure of Angels ability to hold information in immediate
awareness/short term memory and then use that information in a few seconds before it is
forgotten, Angel scored in the average range (85). This suggests that Angels abilities in this area
are similar to those of his same-age peers. On the Simultaneous/Gv: scale, Angel earned a score
of 106. This scale measures the ability to perceive, manipulate, and think with visual patterns and
stimuli, and to mentally rotate objects in space. Angel scored average on this scale as well. On
the Planning /Gf scale, Angel earned a score of 114. This scale measures Angels ability to draw
inferences, understands implications, and applies indicative or deductive reasoning when solving
novel problems. Angels performance on the Planning/Gf subtests indicates that this is an area of
strength for him.

Due to interruptions, during administration of the Learning scale subtests; scores from these
subtests cannot be reported. During one subtest, Angel was picked up by his mom from school,
so administration was stopped, and during another subtest Angel had to repeatedly use the
bathroom and take breaks, making the scores invalid. Similarly, these subtests could not be
repeated at a later time due to the nature of the subtest relying on memory. Because these scores
were not included, a full scale index number cannot be reported. Since the nature of the concern
or reason for referral did not include concern for Angels cognitive abilities, and previous
cognitive data from a prior evaluation showed Angel solidly in the average range, it was decided
that the information from these scales and subtests is sufficient in describing Angels cognitive
abilities as average. Should there be any question at a later time; a culturally responsive full
cognitive battery is recommended.

ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT
Because Angel is new to Vaughn Elementary, there is little academic information in his
cumulative file to review. Based on academic information collected over the first month of
Angel being at Vaughn, his teacher has noticed he is behind in almost all academic areas. The
teacher is collecting informal data so that there is a strong body of evidence for Angel to be
placed in the response to intervention process or recommended to the IST meeting for a review. .
According to Angels teachers, academics and achievement seem to be a secondary concern at
this time. The primary concern is finding the best placement for Angel, where he can manage
his social and emotional behaviors in order to access the instruction and content.

SOCIAL EMOTIONAL FUNCTIONING
The Emotional Disturbance Decision Tree (EDDT) is a standardized, norm-referenced scale
designed to assist in the identification of children who qualify for the federal Special Education
category of Emotional Disturbance (ED). The scores are presented on the following page:

Teacher
Mrs.
Rethinger

Teacher
Ms.
Miller

Scales T-Score Percentile
Qualitative
Label
T-Score Percentile
Qualitative
Label
REL 90 > 99
Very High
Clinical
> 100 > 99
Very High
Clinical
IBF 69 94
Moderate
Clinical
> 100 > 99
Very High
Clinical
PM/DEP 77 > 99 High Clinical 68 95
Moderate
Clinical
FEARS 83 > 99
Very High
Clinical
78 > 99 High Clinical
TOTAL 85 > 99
Very High
Clinical
97 > 99
Very High
Clinical

The EDDT Teacher Rating Scale was also completed by Mrs. Rethinger, Angels 4
th
grade
teacher. She reported Very High Clinical scores in the areas of inability to build or maintain
relationships, physical symptoms or fears and EDDT total score. She reported that Angel is
likely to have marked trouble starting or keeping successful relationships with same-age peers
and/or to have problems in his interactions with teachers and adults. He may also be isolated,
overly aggressive or both. Furthermore, Angel might be spiteful, disrespectful or lack social
problem-solving skills. She also reported that Angel is often anxious, avoidant, traumatized,
worrisome, physically restless and/or dependent. Mrs. Rethinger also reported a High Clinical
concern in the area of pervasive mood/depression. She reported that Angel is appears depressed
and hopeless with little animation or enthusiasm or to be irritable and angry much of the
time. Angel might also express self-dislike, be unable to enjoy things and lack energy or
enthusiasm. Based on Mrs. Rethingers Very High Clinical and High Clinical scores, the extent
of follow-up and monitoring will be determined by the IEP team.

The EDDT Teacher Rating Scale was completed by Ms. Miller, Angels 4
th
grade special
education and COMPASS teacher. She reported Very High Clinical scores in the areas of
inability to build or maintain relationships, inappropriate behaviors or feelings and EDDT total
score. She reported that Angel is likely to have marked trouble starting or keeping successful
relationships with same-age peers and/or to have problems in his interactions with teachers and
adults. He may also be isolated, overly aggressive or both. Furthermore, Angel might be
spiteful, disrespectful or lack social problem-solving skills. She also reported that Angel is
poorly regulated, inappropriate, overly aroused and displays behavioral extremes of one or more
types. He is likely to tease others, seeks attention, have tantrums and/or cope poorly with
problems or discipline. It is also likely that Angel may display unusual behavior, strange
perceptions of feelings, or emotion that is inappropriate to the given situation. Ms. Miller also
reported a High Clinical concern in the area of pervasive mood/depression. She reported that
Angel is appears depressed and hopeless with little animation or enthusiasm or to be irritable and
angry much of the time. Angel might also express self-dislike, be unable to enjoy things and

lack energy or enthusiasm. Based on Ms. Millers Very High Clinical and High Clinical scores,
the extent of follow-up and monitoring will be determined by the IEP team.

The EDDT Parent Rating Scale was also completed by Angels mother. Because the rating scale
was directly translated from English to Spanish and given in an interview format, the scores
should not be reported. This interview still provides useful and meaningful information, because
on many of the questions Angels mother agreed with the two teacher reports. If the overall
qualitative labels were to be reported from the parent rating scale, Angels mother rated him in
the very high clinical ranges for IB, PM/DEP, and in the overall category. She rated Angel in the
high clinical range for fears, and in the moderate clinical range for REL. While these scores are
much less significant because of the way they were translated and administered, they provide
useful information in that Angels mother shares many of the same concerns and sees the same
behaviors, as well as rates Angel in the clinical ranges on the same scales as his classroom
teachers.

Social/Emotional/Adaptive/Behavioral functioning was also assessed through teacher completion
of rating scales. On the Behavior Assessment System for Children-Second Edition (BASC-2),
scale scores in the Clinically Significant Range suggest a high level of maladjustment. Scores in
the At-Risk Range may identify a significant problem that may not be severe enough to require
formal treatment or may identify the potential of developing a problem that needs careful
monitoring.

The BASC-2 Teacher Rating Scale was completed by Mrs. Rethinger, Angels 4
th
grade
teacher. She reported Clinically Significant concerns in the areas of hyperactivity, aggression,
depression, attention problems, learning problems, atypicality, withdrawal, social skills, study
skills and functional communication. She reported that Angel is often restless and overactive
and may have difficulty controlling his impulses. She reported that Angel displays a high
number of aggressive behaviors and may be reported as being argumentative, defiant and/or
threatening to others. She reported that Angel is withdrawn, pessimistic and/or sad. She
reported that Angel has difficulty maintaining necessary levels of attention at school. She
reported that Angel has significant difficulty comprehending and completing schoolwork in a
variety of academic areas. Mrs. Rethinger also reported that Angel frequently engages in
behaviors that are considered strange or odd and generally seems disconnected from his
surroundings. She reported that Angel is generally alone, has difficulty making friends and/or is
unwilling to join group activities. His teacher also reported that Angel has difficulty
complimenting others, encouraging others, offering assistance and saying please and/or thank
you. She reported that Angel demonstrates weak study skills, is poorly organized and has
difficulty turning in assignments on time. Furthermore, Mrs. Rethinger reported that Angel
demonstrates poor expressive and receptive communication skills, and that he has difficulty
seeking out and finding information independently. Mrs. Rethinger also reported moderate
concerns or scales falling in the At-Risk Range in the areas of conduct problems, somatization,
adaptability and leadership. Based on Mrs. Rethingers Clinically Significant and At-Risk
scores, follow-up and monitoring will be determined by the IEP team.

It should be noted that information and scores obtained from the EDDT and BASC-2 teacher
reports should be used cautiously, as these teachers have only known Angel as a student for a

brief time. Similarly, the norms for the EDDT and the BASC-2 are not normed for students who
are English Language Learners, so the actual scores mean less than they qualitative information
provided by descriptions of Angels behaviors. The information from these rating scales was
collected with the intention of beginning a body of evidence for Angel in Aurora Public Schools,
as well as information for his annual review of his IEP. The decision making process for placing
a student into a self-contained classroom or the special education identification as SED is not
based solely on these scores.

STATEMENT OF VALIDITY OF RESULTS
This evaluation was conducted using procedures that reduce potential bias and discrimination in
regard to culture or language. Whenever possible, less culturally and linguistically biased
assessment methods were used. Results were interpreted within the context of Angels unique
cultural and linguistic background. All conclusions were made based on multiple sources of
information and not any single score or procedure.

SUMMARY
Angel is a 4
th
grade student who recently transferred to Vaughn Elementary. He came to Vaughn
with a special education identification of SED and an educational placement in a self-contained
affective needs classroom. The purpose of this evaluation is to conduct an annual review, and
determine a best placement for Angel in Aurora Public Schools at this time. According to
previous and current data, SED is still an appropriate special education label for Angel for an
annual review of his IEP. Additionally, Angel would benefit most from a classroom setting with
small group instruction and social emotional support, such as an affective needs program in
Aurora Public Schools, rather than the general education classroom.

RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Provide Angel with native language activities at school and in the home to promote
Spanish language development.
2. Provide Angel with English-Language supports in school in order to increase proficiency.
3. Transition Angel from the general education to a different classroom environment, such
as a self-contained classroom for students with social or emotional disabilities.
4. Provide Angel with small group and one-on-one instruction in as many academic areas as
possible.
5. Provide Angel routine and structure in classroom to ease transitions.
6. Provide immediate reinforces for behavior, as define in the Behavior Intervention Plan.
7. Progress monitor Angels English language proficiency.
8. Progress monitor Angels abilities in all academic areas in addition to social emotional
development.

_____________________________
Krista Helbing
Student School Psychologist

Artifact 4
Direct Group Intervention

Needs Assessment
In looking at the need for conducting a group intervention at my practicum site, the
requirements of the project were discussed and my supervisor made recommendations of types
of groups or students that would benefit from a group. She thought of a few different problems
that could benefit from a group intervention, and a few different students that could benefit from
some extra support in certain areas. After listening to her informal suggestions, I took the
information she gave me and looked into it more formally through looking at IEP goals of the
students she mentioned and student behavior referral data, along with teacher consultation and
interview information.
The need for the particular group that I co-lead came from students in special education
with similar IEP goals, and students in general education who were struggling with similar issues
as their peers on IEPs. This situation was convenient because there were multiple students
needing to learn similar skills, who could all benefit from learning these skills in a group setting.
It was also more time efficient for my supervisor because she was able to fulfill her IEP minutes
for two students at the same time, in addition to helping students from the general education
population. Secondary prevention strategies target students who are at-risk for or who are
already experiencing some difficulties in learning-related social skills whereas tertiary strategies
are for children who currently demonstrate chronic or intense problems (Pelco & Victor, 2007).
The members of this group represent a mix of students who need secondary prevention strategies
because their teachers are beginning to notice them struggling, and those who have already been
identified and are currently demonstrating problems with self-regulation.
One of the main reasons that this group was needed was because the students were
receiving behavior referrals for physical aggression and physical contact, in addition to teacher

reports of physical behaviors in the classroom. It is a priority for students to be safe at school,
and it was best to intervene now rather than wait for these students to continue to get behavior
referrals for unsafe behaviors. Two of the students selected for the group have IEP goals around
self-regulation and using calming strategies to inhibit their physical response when they become
upset, angry or frustrated. The other students that were recommended by their teachers could
benefit from learning and practicing the same strategies as their peers. The other students that
were recommended for the group had received some office referrals, but the amount of time they
were spending outside of the classroom to calm down and diffuse their anger was interrupting
their ability to access the academics being taught in the classroom. Thus, it seemed beneficial to
include these students in the group so that they could learn skills in group to help them calm
down quicker and be able to spend more time in the classroom in the long term.
It was decided that a small group intervention would be useful for this population because
these particular students benefit from instruction a small group setting and need extra attention
and support to help them focus and stay on task. It was also beneficial to teach these skills and
work through some of the self-regulation training in a group setting where students could role
play with their peers. It was decided that this type of group would be useful for the problem of
self-regulation in behavior because the students in the group were struggling with inhibiting their
impulses and self-regulating. In looking at the research in support of teaching self-regulation of
impulses, Bath (2008) writes Young people also need to be actively taught ways to exert
rational control over their emotions and impulses (Bath, 2008). Based on the information we
have gathered and some of the research, it is apparent that these students needed explicit training
in self-regulation and learning how to control their impulses rather than assuming they would be
able to learn these skills on their own like their peers have or are in the process of.

The literature about self-regulation and teaching self-regulation skills is very supportive
of explicitly teaching self-regulation skills and strategies to students so that they are better able
to function at school. In looking at the needs of the students selected for the group, my
supervisor said she felt most comfortable using the BrainWise curriculum along with another
curriculum called Helping Young People Learn Self-Regulation to base our group sessions.
BrainWise is a curriculum that is 10 weeks long, that teaches students wise ways to handle
situations. The publishers of the curriculum write Learning how to control impulsive behavior,
accurately identify choices, assess the consequences of actions, and make responsible decisions
is what BrainWise is all about (BrainWise). This statement accurately describes the problem
that the identified students were having with self-regulation, thus theoretically it is a good fit.
The publishers of the other curriculum used write based on our interpretation of the literature
and our experience in the field, we have come to understand that self-regulation is a universal
skill that is directly related to success in every major area of functioning (Chapin, 2013).
Because these two curricula directly targeted the skills the students were lacking or having
difficulty with, we thought it was most beneficial to utilize aspects of both programs together
rather than relying solely on one.
In other research areas, the benefits of teaching self-regulation to students can be seen in
school performance and achievement. Self-regulation or meta-cognitive control of cognition
and behaviour is considered an important aspect of student learning and school performance
(Ommundsen, Haugen, Lund, 2005). In the case of the students in this particular group, their
abilities to self-regulate are interfering with their ability to perform in school, thus teaching these
skills will hopefully increase their school performance and learning.

In looking at relevant data from school personnel and behavior referral data, combined
with the research and evidence base supporting self-regulation skill training, it is apparent that
there is a need for some sort of intervention for these particular students. There is enough
evidence to support the type and intensity of intervention, along with data to show that certain
students need more support in the area of self-regulation.

Recruitment Procedures and Selection Criteria

In looking at conducting a group intervention at my practicum site, the requirements of the
project were discussed and my supervisor made recommendations of types of groups or students
that would benefit from a group. After listening to her informal suggestions, I took the
information she gave me and looked into it more formally through looking at IEP goals and
student behavior referral data, along with teacher consultation and interview information.
In order to keep students identities confidential, they have each been assigned a number
for description purposes. Student 1 had received 7 major referrals and 4 minor referrals prior to
the group intervention, of which 6 were for physical aggression and 3 were for physical contact.
Student 2 did not have any behavior referrals, but his teacher reported he was struggling with
self-regulation and inhibiting his impulses in the classroom. Student 2 also is on an IEP for a
learning disability but also has goals for learning and implementing self-regulation skills.
Student 2 struggles with self-regulation of anger and frustration when he gets frustrated with
academic tasks. Student 3 prior to the group had 2 major referrals and 0 minor referrals. These
referrals were for disruption of class and inappropriate language. Student 3 is also on an IEP for
an emotional disorder and has goals about self-regulation and controlling his emotions when he
becomes angry, upset, or frustrated. Student 4 had 2 major behavior referrals and 3 minor

behavior referrals prior to the group intervention. His teacher also reported that he is struggling
in the classroom with regulating his mood, and inhibiting his impulses. Student 4 during the
group intervention also received an outside diagnosis of ADHD, which was very similar to what
his teacher reported. After these 4 students had been identified, it was decided that it was best to
keep the group small, so that their behaviors could be managed in a group setting, and so that
they could all benefit from small group instruction of these skills.
Permission was obtained by calling parents and explaining what type of group we were
offering, and asking if they would be interested in having their student participate. After getting
an informal, verbal permission, a consent form with more detail was sent home for the parent to
look over and send back. Of the consent forms sent home, all were returned and these students
were a part of the group.

Co-Leadership
My supervisor decided that it would be best if we co-led the group due to the nature of some
of the behaviors of the students; we decided it was best to be proactive in managing behaviors
with two adults rather than being reactive with one adult. I felt that for the purpose of the
assignment, it may have been better that I lead the group by myself, but I also didnt feel quite in
the position to tell my supervisor that. I didnt have super strong feelings either way, so I went
with co-leading as the way the group would be conducted. I agreed with my supervisor thought
the idea of co-leading seemed beneficial for this type of group, although as the group got started
I got frustrated with co-leading. My supervisor and I have very different styles for planning
sessions- she plans things 5 minutes before they happen, and I prefer to have them planned in
advance. This led to some frustration because I often went into the group sessions with a very

general or vague idea of what we were doing, whereas I would have preferred a detailed outline
of what we were going to do step by step.
For the first few sessions, it was very much co-led and the responsibilities were shared
between me and my supervisor, but as the group progressed, I led the last few sessions entirely
on my own. The first few sessions the responsibility of teaching the lesson and behavior
management of the students was shared equally. As we moved into sessions 3 and on, I did the
majority of the teaching, while my supervisor aimed to manage the behavior of the students. I
was happy when I was able to lead the group sessions on my own, because I was able to plan
activities in advance, and be prepared for what I anticipated would happen during the session.
The benefit of having a co-leader was that when I was teaching the lesson, I could be focused
entirely on the lesson and not have to worry about managing student behavior because the co-
leader was there to do that. It was definitely easier having two adults to manage the students in
the group as they misbehaved or were off task, but I think this could have been improved with
better communication or agreeing to a more definitive plan ahead of time. If it had been agreed
upon from the beginning that one leader was in charge of lesson planning and the other leader
was in charge of student behavior, things would have gone much more smoothly.

Group Sessions
Because our students were very young, and generally not the type to remember a homework
assignment, we decided that we would not assign homework for our group, but rather have them
focus on completing their academic homework. While we didnt assign actual homework, the
goal or hope was that some of the skills learned in the group would transfer into the classroom
and other settings. We also thought it was most beneficial for them to work on their skills in

group, and hopefully transfer them to outside of group. The overarching theme and goals of the
group were to reduce some of the physical responses students were having, and target self-
regulation skills. A copy of the goal, theme and topic for each of the sessions can be found in the
appendix.
The original intention of the group was to use the BrainWise curriculum for the entirety of
the group. We had planned our first session to be an introduction, and then sessions two through
ten would be from the BrainWise curriculum. During session two, we quickly realized that the
BrainWise curriculum was way too difficult for the students in our group. During this first
session, after 30 min of working on the lesson, we had barely made any progress. We also
realized that the reading level and vocabulary included in the worksheets was at an academic
level much higher than the students in our group. After realizing this, we decided to change our
plans for the activities during group sessions, and instead of using a manualized curriculum,
create our own plans. We decided that in planning for future lessons, we would either have to
continuously modify the activities from the BrainWise curriculum to the extent that it would no
longer be manulaized to meet the BrainWise method, or create our own lesson plans. We
decided that if we were going to spend that amount of time changing and planning for modifying
the BrainWise curriculum, it would be more beneficial to create our own lessons to meet the
exact needs of the students at their academic levels.

Evaluation of Effectiveness
`In evaluating effectiveness of this group, it depends on multiple factors. It was hard to
determine group member satisfaction because of the students age and abilities. They reported
they were satisfied with the group, and they found the activities fun. Beyond that, its unclear if

they were able to take much away from the group when they had little understanding of why
there were in the group to begin with. When quizzing the students on some of the strategies and
concepts we learned during group, they were able to repeat them, although it was unclear if they
could just repeat them or if they were actually able to use them.
Feedback from the students consisted on their verbal thoughts because they were not able
to read or write them down. The general consensus from the four students in the group was that
they enjoyed the activities and time out of class, rather than the lessons or skills taught during the
lesson. The students were able to repeat some of the topics and vocabulary they had learned
during the group, although it was clear that while they remembered the concepts, they didnt
always understand fully what they meant. In addition, it was clear through behavioral referral
data that they were not using those strategies to avoid getting behavior referrals.
Feedback from the teachers of the students in the group was mixed. The teacher of
students 1 and 2 thought the group was beneficial for student 1, but not student 2. She felt that as
the school year was progressing, student 2s behaviors were stemming from the fact that he is so
far behind academically and gets frustrated, and not necessarily an issue of self-regulation. She
was very supportive of having the students in the group, and began discussing other students who
may benefit from various types of groups for the end of this school year or the beginning of next
school year. The teacher for student 3 had mixed reviews. Working with this teacher was very
difficult because there was at least one occasion where she did not want the student pulled out of
class during group time. She was very protective over this student, although it was counter-
productive because he then didnt get to learn the skills he needs and could use in the classroom.
Her feedback was that the student didnt learn anything during the group, and that she had not
seen an improvement in the classroom.

The other feedback or evaluation method used consisted of looking at behavior referral
data during and after the group intervention. The students in the group did not have drastic
decreases in behavior referrals during or after the group. Student 1 received 4 behavior referrals
during the duration of group sessions, and 1 after group had ended. Student 2 continued to not
have any behavior referrals, and received the most positive feedback from his teacher. She did
voice her concern about the gap between him and his peers academically as a contributing factor
to behaviors in the classroom. Student 3 did not receive any behavior referrals during the
duration of the group, although he did receive 1 after. Student 4 also received 4 behavior
referrals during the duration of the group. Because Student 2 and Student 3 are in special
education and on IEPs, they will continue to receive psychoeducational services through
individual counseling to help them meet their IEP goals. Overall, it appears that the
effectiveness of the group is debatable. There was some great qualitative feedback, although the
quantitative feedback wasnt as positive. The students who were struggling with behavior
referrals continued to receive behavior referrals during and after the group intervention. Going
forward, it would be best to re-evaluate the needs of the individual students in the group and plan
the group accordingly.

Appendix
2/25- Session 1
Introduction and Group Expectations
Lesson Plan Outline

Goal: introduction to group
1. Introduce Co-leaders
a. Ms. Alway
b. Ms. Helbing
2. Introduce group members
a. Student 1
b. Student 2
c. Student 3
d. Student 4
3. Introduce group topic
a. Self-Regulation
b. BrainWise curriculum
4. Set Group Expectations
a. Behavior during group
b. How to participate appropriately
c. What happens if we dont participate
Post Group Notes
All four students present
Students participated, seemed eager
Trouble controlling behaviors like sitting in a chair, raising hand
Students needed explanation of why they were in group
o Did not recognize their behaviors were a problem or needed help
Co-Leadership Notes
Went well
Easy lesson to co-lead
Planned ahead of time

3/ 4- Session 2
BrainWise lesson 1
Lesson Plan Outline

Goal: Begin working on explaining what self-regulation is, and why its important
1. Refresh group goals
2. Remember group member names
3. Begin BrainWise Lesson
a. Work students through worksheet and lesson 1
Post Group Notes
Lesson was too difficult for students
Barely made it through half of lesson 1 in allotted time
Above their reading/writing level
o Only Student 1 could understand/read worksheet
Too many verbal instructions for their learning style

Co-Leadership Notes
Only 3 students present
Student 3 was absent
Agreed on this lesson ahead of time
Supervisor led majority of lesson- She was more familiar with BrainWise
I helped ask student questions, manage behavior,

3/11- Session 3
School Expectations
Lesson Plan Outline

Goal: Help students understand school expectations and what behaviors are/are not acceptable at
school

Objective: Help students recognize some of their behaviors and reasons for referral. Focus on
positives rather than negative behaviors.
1. Ask students to brain storm what they believe is good behavior at school
2. Write out behaviors and expectations on whiteboard
3. Brainstorm 15 or so
4. Divide behaviors among students
5. Each student draws a picture of their 3 or so assigned behaviors
6. Create book
Post Group Notes
Students were very excited to share this book of expectations with a new student in their
grade-they were proud of their work
Student 3 was very particular about the expectations
Would use this activity in the future
The book was a useful reminder during later sessions of behaviors

Co-Leadership Notes
This lesson was brainstormed with very little time for planning
Supervisor put my entirely in charge of this lesson, and she only attended half of the
session

3/18- Session 4
Self-Regulation worksheet
Lesson Plan Outline

Goal: Talk about self-regulation and skills to help us

Objective: Have students be able to learn/recall one strategy
1. Use worksheet from self-regulation skills book
2. Teach mini-lesson
3. Have students fill out worksheet
4. Go around group and share responses
Post Group Notes
I had used this worksheet in the past during an individual counseling session and thought
it would be a good fit for the students in this group
Students had trouble with worksheet
Ended up discussing more than doing actual work on worksheet
o Valuable discussion
May have been above students academic level
Student 3 chose not to participate and got upset during the group session
Co-Leadership Notes
Not a co-led lesson
Led entirely by me

4/1- Session 5
Teamwork/regulation exercise (balloons)
Lesson Plan Outline

Goal: provide example of physical self-regulation with balloons

Objective: Students recognize what it feels like to control the impulse/urge to swat/pop/drop
balloons
1. Have students stand in circle
2. Hand out a balloon to each student
3. Explain were going to pass them in a circle
4. They must stand on their own spot, feet are glued to the floor
5. Balloons cannot touch the ground
6. Have students begin passing
a. After a few minutes, suggest a strategy like calling out names or passing in a
circle
7. Have students stop
a. Discuss self-regulation to not swat the balloons to the ground
b. Discuss self-regulation to not pop the balloons
c. Discuss self-regulation to hold the balloon still during group lesson
d. Discuss self-regulation to keep feet planted on the floor
Post Group Notes
Only student 1 and 2 were present
Lesson would have worked better with all four students
These two students learned a lot from this lesson, or at least could recite what they
learned
Students enjoyed an active lesson/activity
Co-Leadership Notes
I led this group session on my own, it was not co-led
Very fun activity to lead and observe

4/8- Session 6
Termination
Lesson Plan Outline

Goal: Go over what we learned in group

Objective: Students will recall at least one skill/strategy from group
1. Brainstorm what we learned in group
2. Write a list on the white board
3. Discuss how to use the brain stormed strategies in the future
4. Talk about how for some students group is ending, but some will still need to meet
individually
5. Termination Activity
a. Students get to choose game to play as a celebration/closing activity
Post Group Notes
Students were able to recall strategies from worksheets and activities
Students reported that they would try and use them in the classroom
Student 3 was not present
Co-Leadership Notes
This lesson was not as structured as the previous lessons
o Very relaxed session
I led this group session on my own, it was not co-led

References
Bath, H. I. (2008). Calming together: The pathway to self-control. Reclaiming children &
youth, 16(4), 44-46.
BrainWise Program. http://brainwise-plc.org/method.htm
Brown, D., Pryzwansky, W. B., & Schulte, A. C. (2011). Psychological consultation and
collaboration: introduction to theory and practice (7th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson/Allyn &
Bacon.
Chapin, B., & Penner, M. (2013). Helping Young People Learn Self-Regulation: Lessons,
Activities & Worksheets for Teaching the Essentials of Responsible Decision-Making &
Self-Control. : YouthLight Inc..DeLucia-Waack, J.L. (2006). Leading
psychoeducational groups for children and adolescents. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage
Publications. http://www.selfregulationstation.com/
Costello, B., Wachtel, J., & Wachtel, T. (2009). The Restorative Practices Handbook for
teachers disciplinarians and administrators. Bethlehem, PA : International Institute for
Restorative Practices.
DeLucia-Waack, J.L. (2006). Leading psychoeducational groups for children and adolescents.
Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage Publications.
Ommundsen, Y., Haugen, R., & Lund, T. (2005). Academic selfconcept, implicit theories of
Ability, and selfregulation Strategies. Scandinavian Journal Of Educational
Research, 49(5), 461-474. doi:10.1080/00313830500267838
Pelco, L. E., & Reed-Victor, E. (2007). Self-regulation and learning-related social skills:
Intervention ideas for elementary school students. Preventing School Failure, 51(3), 36-
42.

Plotts, C. & Lasser, J. (2013). School Psychologist as counselor: A practitioners handbook.
Bethesda, MD. National Association of School Psychologists.

Full Version Portfolio

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Full Version Portfolio

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Helbing Portfolio Page 1

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen