INFORMATION TO USERS

This material was produced from a microfilm copy of the original docum ent. While
the m ost advanced technological means to photograph and reproduce this docum ent
have been used, the quality is heavily dependent upon the quality of the original
subm itted.
The following explanation of techniques is provided to help you understand
markings or patterns which may appear on this reproduction.
1. The sign or "ta rg e t" for pages apparently lacking from the docum ent
photographed is "Missing Page(s)". If it was possible to obtain the missing
page(s) or section, they are spliced into the film along w ith adjacent pages.
This may have necessitated cutting thru an image and duplicating adjacent
pages to insure you com plete continuity.
2. When an image on th e film is obliterated with a large round black m ark, it
is an indication th at the photographer suspected th at the copy may have
moved during exposure and thus cause a blurred image. You will find a
good image of th e page in the adjacent frame.
3. When a m ap, drawing or chart, etc., was part of the m aterial being
photographed the photographer followed a definite m ethod in
"sectioning" th e material. It is custom ary to begin photoing at the upper
left hand corner of a large sheet and to continue photoing from left to
right in equal sections w ith a small overlap. If necessary, sectioning is
continued again — beginning below the first row and continuing on until
com plete.
4. The m ajority of users indicate th a t the textual content is of greatest value,
however, a som ew hat higher quality reproduction could be m ade from
"photographs" if essential to the understanding of th e dissertation. Silver
prints of "photographs" may be ordered at additional charge by writing
the Order D epartm ent, giving the catalog num ber, title, author and
specific pages you wish reproduced.
5. PLEASE NOTE: Some pages may have indistinct print. Filmed as
received.

Xerox U niversity M icrofilms
300 North Z eab R oad
Ann Arbor, M ichigan 48106

74-6042
FRID£MA, N ic h o la s Bernard, 1938THE ROLE OF THE SCHOOL PSYCHOLOGIST IN MICHIGAN
AS PERCEIVED BY SCHOOL PSYCHOLOGISTS AND
DIRECTORS OF SPECIAL EDUCATION.
M ichigan S ta te U n iv e r s it y , P h . D . , 1973
E d u ca tio n , s p e c ia l

U n i v e r s i t y Microfilms, A XEROX C o m p a n y , A n n A r b o r , M i c h i g a n

THE ROLE OF THE SCHOOL PSYCHOLOGIST IN MICHIGAN
AS PERCEIVED BY SCHOOL PSYCHOLOGISTS
AND DIRECTORS OF SPECIAL
EDUCATION

By

Nicholas Bernard Fridsma

A DISSERTATION

Submitted to
Michigan S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y
in p a r t i a l f u l f i l l m e n t o f th e r e q u i r e m e n t s
for the degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

D epartm ent o f E l e m e n t a r y and S p e c i a l E d u c a t i o n

1973

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The u n d e r t n k i n g
involves th e

and c o m p l e t i o n o f a d o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n

s u p p o r t a n d c o o p e r a t i o n o f ma n y p e o p l e .

people I would l i k e t o

acknowledge a t t h i s

Some o f t h e s e

tim e,

1 p a r t i c u l a r l y w i s h t o e x p r e s s my s i n c e r e a p p r e c i a t i o n t o
Dr.

Charles Henley, m ajor ad visor*

and encouragement t h r o u g h o u t t h i s
gram.

I would a l s o l i k e

Dr.

co n tin u al guidance,

Edwi n K e l l e r ,

during t h i s

invaluable help

research undertaking.

com m ittee members.

i n d e b t e d t o L i n d a G l e n d e n i n g f o r h e r p a t i e n t a nd

in th e p r e p a r a t i o n

analysis of the r e s u l t s .
Hobert C arr

c o m m i t t e e me mb e r ,

o f t h e s u p p o r t and e n c o u r a g e m e n t p r o v i d e d by

H i c h a r d F e a t h e r s t o n c a n d D r . J a m e s McKee,
I am d e e p l y

support,

s t u d y and t h e e n t i r e d o c t o r a l p r o ­

t o t h a n k Dr.

f o r h i s w i s e and v a l u a b l e c o u n s e l
1 am a l s o a p p r e c i a t i v e

for his

of this

r e s e a r c h and t h e

T am a l s o g r a t e f u l

to

statistical

L a r r y S c h a f t e n a a r and

fo r t h e i r helpful, su g g e s tio n s .

I would l i k e t o
h i s h elp and c o u n s e l.
o f Education,

1 would l i k e

ilpeeinl

necessary m ailing

e x p r e s s my a p p r e c i a t i o n

t o th a n k t h e M ichigan Department

Education C ervices,

lists.

t o Dr . J o h n B r a c c i o f o r

f o r p r o v i d i n g me w i t h t h e

I am a l s o g r a t e f u l t o

th e Michigan Associa­

t i o n o f il ch o o l P s y c h o l o g i s t s

for i t s

particularly

th e scho o l p s y c h o l o g i s t s and d i r e c t o r s

indebted to

of special education
Finally,

it

all

support and encouragement.

i n M i c h i g a n who p a r t i c i p a t e d
is

w ith deep a f f e c t i o n

in th i s

and g r a t i t u d e

study.
that I

I am

e x p r e s s my a p p r e c i a t i o n

t o my w i f e ,

J o A n n , ami s o n ,

support, p atien ce,

and u n d e r s t a n d i n g .

I am a l s o

for her assistance

in t h e p r e p a r a t i o n ,

typing,

m anuscript.

The d e v o t i o n

constant source

and u n s e l f i s h

of m otivation

for the

studies.

ii i

David,

grateful

and e d i t i n g

sacrifice

successful

for th eir

t o J d Ann
of th is

o f my f a m i l y w a s a
c o m p l e t i o n o f my

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page
L I S T OF T A B L E S .....................................................................................................................................
L I S T OF F I G U R E S ................................................................................................................................

vi
X

Chapter
I.

II.

III.

INTRODUCTION

.....................................................................................................................

1

Problem
...............................................................................................
H e e d f o r t h e S t u d y ................................................................................................
P u r p o s e o f t h e S t u d y ...........................................................................................
O v e r v i e w o f t h e S t u d y ......................................................................................

1
6
8

RELEVANT LITERATURE .....................................................................................................

9

I n t r o d u c t i o n ................................................................................................................
H istory o f School Psychology in th e United S ta t e s
. . .
R ecent Changes i n t h e A c t i v i t i e s o f t h e School
.....................................................................................................
Psychologist
S tu d ie s o f th e Role o f t h e School P s y c h o lo g is t in
o t h e r S t a t e s a n d N a t i o n a l l y ................................................................
S t u d i e s o f t h e S c h o o l P s y c h o l o g i s t i n M i c h i g a n ......................
Summary o f R e l e v a n t L i t e r a t u r e ................................................................

9
9
1^
21
27
31

METHODOLOGY..........................................................................................................................

33

Introduction
..........................................................................
D e f i n i t i o n o f T e r m s ...........................................................................................
Population .
..........................................................................................................
D e v e l o p m e n t o f t h e Q u e s t i o n n a i r e ...........................................................
T h e Q u e s t i o n n a i r e ................................................................................................
C o l l e c t i o n o f D a t a ...............................................................
H y p o t h e s e s a n d S p e c i f i c Q u e s t i o n s .....................................................
S t a t i s t i c a l A n a l y s i s ...........................................................................................

33
33
36
37
38
^3
1j 3
^5

iv

Chapter
I V.

V.

Page

ANALYSTS OF R E S U L T S .....................................................................................................

l»8

I n t r o d u c t i o n ...............................................................................................................
G e n e r a l I n f o r m a t i o n ..........................................................................................
T e stin g o f Hypotheses
...............................................................................
Perceived R e la tiv e Importance o f th e F if ty - F iv e
S p e c i fi c A c t i v i t i e s in th e Id e a l Role of t h e School
P sy ch o lo g ist w ith S ig n if i c a n tChi-Squares I d e n t i f i e d
Rankings of th e Eight
M a j o r A c t i v i t i e s ...........................................
C h i l d r e n Who S h o u l d R e c e i v e P r o f e s s i o n a l P s y c h o l o g i c a l
S e r v i c e s from t h e S c h o o l P s y c h o l o g i s t i n t h e I d e a l
R o l e ..........................................................................................................................
S e t t i n g s f o r S c h o o l P s y c h o l o g i c a l A c t i v i t i e s ...........................
P r o f e s s i o n a l NeedG o f S c h o o l P s y c h o l o g i s t s i n t h e
T d e a l R o l e ..........................................................................................................
P r o f e s s i o n a l A r e a s I n Wh i c h S c h o o l P s y c h o l o g i s t s
Heed t o I m p r o v e S k i l l s a n d C o m p e t e n c i e s i n Vi ew
o f C h a n g e s Wh i c h a r e T a k i n g P l a c e i n T h e i r R o l e . . .

1*8
1*9
58

93
99

105
105
1 10

118

SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................

122

I n t r o d u c t i o n ....................................................
Review o f t h e S t u d y
........................................... . . . . . . . . .
M a j o r F i n d i n g s ..........................................................................................................
D i s c u s s i o n , ..................................................................... . . . . . . . .
Recommondatione
. . . . . . . . .
.....................................................
I m p l i c a t i o n s f o r F u t u r e R e s e a r c h ...........................................................

122
12 2
123
128
133
135

RIRLIOGRAPHY ..........................................................................................................................................

137

APPENDICES
Appendix
A.

E i g h t M ajor and F i f t y - F i v e S p e c i f i c A c t i v i t i e s
S c h o o l P s y c h o l o g i s t ....................................................

of

the
1.1*1*

R.

Q u e s t i o n n a i r e U s e d i n t h e S t u d y .......................................................................

1 50

0,

C o v e r L e t t e r E x p l a i n i n g t h e Q u e s t i o n n a i r e ............................................

1(*2

D.

Follow-Up L e t t e r

.......................................................

1^3

E.

C h i-S q u are T e s t o f Homogeneity f o r F i f t y - F i v e
S p e c i l ' i c A c t i v i t i e s ..........................................................................................

161*

f o r Non-Respondents

v

LIST OF TABLES

Tabic

Page

1.

Age o f R e s p o n d e n t s ...........................................

2.

S e x o f R e s p o n d e n t s ....................................................................................................

3.

Type o f D i s t r i c t

h.

The S i z e o f t h e P u b l i c S c h o o l S t u d e n t P o p u l a t i o n i n t h e
School D i s t r i c t s o f th e Respondents . . . . . . . . . . .

5.

50

in Which t h e R e s p o n d e n t s w e re Bnployed

50
.

Y ears o f P r o f e s s i o n a l E x p e r i e n c e as a S c h o o l P s y c h o l o g i s t
o r D i r e c t o r o f S p e c i a l E d u c a t i o n .....................................................

.

51

51

.

52

6.

H i g h e s t D e g r e e E a r n e d b y t h e R e s p o n d e n t s .........................................

53

7.

Type o f A p p r o v a l as a S c h o o l D i a g n o s t i c i a n o r D i r e c t o r
o f S p e c i a l E d u c a t i o n ..................................................................................

53

8.

Type o f T e a c h e r C e r t i f i c a t i o n

9.

Level of Teacher C e r t i f i c a t i o n

10.

o f the Respondents

. . . . . .

5^

. . . . .

55

o f the Respondents

P r o f e s s i o n a l Approval o f th e Respondents i n Other
S p e c i a l E d u c a t i o n A r e a s .....................................................................................

55

11.

Years of Teaching Experience o f th e Respondents

.............................

56

12.

P e r s o n n e l t o whom S c h o o l P s y c h o l o g i s t s w e r e
I m m e d i a t e l y R e s p o n s i b l e .....................................................................................

57

13.

U niversities

58

lh .

U n i v e r s i t y D e p a r t m e n t s Whi ch h a v e T r a i n e d S c h o o l
P s y c h o l o g i s t s ................................................................................................................

5°

H o y t's I n t e r n a l C o n s is te n c y Measure fo r E i g h t Major
A ctivities
..........................

59

15.

Whi ch h a v e T r a i n e d

School P s y c h o lo g is ts

. . . .

16.

I n t e r c o r r e l a t i o n s Among t h e E i g h t M a j o r A c t i v i t i e s

........................

60

17.

Me a n s o f t h e E i g h t M a j o r A c t i v i t i e s o f t h e S c h o o l
P s y c h o l o g i s t fo r T ea ch in g E x p e r ie n c e x Group
...........................

62

vi

Table
18.

19.

20.

21.

22.

23.

2U.

25.

26.

27.

28.

29.

30.

31.

32 .

Page
Two - wa y F i x e d E f f e c t s ANOVA o n T e a c h i n g E x p e r i e n c e a n d
Group Membership— Dependent Measure:
D i a g n o s i s ......................

63

Two- wa y F i x e d E f f e c t B AIJOVA o n T e a c h i n g E x p e r i e n c e
and Group Membership— Dependent M easure:
P s y c h o - E d u c a t i o n a l P l a n n i n g ..........................................................................

6U

Two - wa y F i x e d E f f e c t s AIJOVA on T e a c h i n g E x p e r i e n c e
and Group Membership— D ep en d en t
Measure:C h ild Therapy

.

Two - wa y F i x e d E f f e c t s ANOVA o n T e a c h i n g E x p e r i e n c e a n d
Group Membership— Dependent Measure:
Parent Counseling

65

.

66

Two - wa y F i x e d E f f e c t s ANOVA o n T e a c h i n g E x p e r i e n c e a n d G r o u p
Membership— Dependent Measure:
Community R e l a t i o n s h i p s
.

66

Two- wa y F i x e d E f f e c t B ANOVA o n T e a c h i n g E x p e r i e n c e a n d G r o u p
Membership— Dependent Measure:
Program C o n s u l ta t io n
.
.

67

Two - wa y F i x e d E f f e c t s ANOVA o n T e a c h i n g E x p e r i e n c e a n d
Group Membership— Dependent Measure: A d m i n i s t r a t i o n
o f S pecial Education
..........................................................................................

68

Two - wa y F i x e d E f f e c t s ANOVA o n T e a c h i n g E x p e r i e n c e a n d
Group Membership— Dependent Measure: R esearch
.......................

69

Me a n s o f t h e E i g h t M a j o r A c t i v i t i e s o f t h e S c h o o l
P s y c h o l o g i s t f o r P r o f e s s i o n a l E x p e r i e n c e xGroup

71

Two - wa y F i x e d E f f e c t s ANOVA o n P r o f e s s i o n a l
and Group Membership— Dependent Measure:

. . . .

Experience
Diagnosis

. . .

72

Two - wa y F i x e d E f f e c t s ANOVA o n P r o f e s s i o n a l E x p e r i e n c e
and Group Membership— Dependent M easure:
PsychoE ducational Planning
.....................................................................................

72

'l*wo-way F i x e d E f f e c t s ANOVA 011 P r o f e s s i o n a l E x p e r i e n c e a n d
Group M e m b e r s h ip — D ep en d en t M easure: C h i l d T h e r a p y . . .

73

I Wo - w a y F i x e d E f f e c t s ANOVA o n P r o f e s s i o n a l E x p e r i e n c e a n d
Group M embership— Dependent Measure: P a r e n t C o u n s elin g

.

7^

Two - wa y F i x e d E f f e c t s ANOVA o n P r o f e s s i o n a l E x p e r i e n c e
and Group Membership— Dependent M easure:
C o mm u n i t y
R e l a t i o n s h i p s ................................................................................................................

75

Two- wa y F i x e d E f f e c t s ANOVA o n P r o f e s s i o n a l E x p e r i e n c e
and Group Mem bership— D ep en d en t M eusure:
Program
Consultation
................................................................................................................

76

vi i

Table
33.

3*4.

35*

36.

37*

38,

39*

bO.

bl.

bp.

bi.

bb.

b ‘5.

Page
Two- wa y F i x e d E f f e c t s AIJOVA o n P r o f e s s i o n a l E x p e r i e n c e
and Group Membership— Dependent Measure:
A d m i n i s t r a t i o n o f S p e c i a l E d u c a t i o n .....................................................

78

Two- way F i x e d E f f e c t s ANOVA o n P r o f e s s i o n a l E x p e r i e n c e
and Group M e m b e r s h ip — D e p e n d e n t M e a s u r e : R e s e a r c h

80

Me a ns o f t h e E i g h t M a j o r A c t i v i t i e s
Psychologist for Size x D i s t r i c t

. . .

o f th e School
x G r o u p .............................

82

T h r e e - w a y F i x e d E f f e c t s ANOVA o n T y p e o f S c h o o l D i s t r i c t
and S i z e o f D i s t r i c t and Group M embership—
Dependent Measure:
Diagnosis
.
T h r e e - w a y F i x e d E f f e c t s ANOVA o n T y p e o f S c h o o l D i s t r i c t
and S iz e o f D i s t r i c t and Group Membership— Dependent
Measure:
P s y c h o - E d u c a t i o n a l P l a n n i n g .....................................

8b

.

85

T h r e e - w a y F i x e d E f f e c t s ANOVA o n T y p e o f S c h o o l D i s t r i c t
and S i z e o f D i s t r i c t and Group M embership— Dependent
Measure:
Child Therapy . . . .
................................................................

86

' T h r e e - w a y F i x e d E f f e c t s ANOVA o n T y p e o f S c h o o l D i s t r i c t
and S i z e o f D i s t r i c t and Group M embership— Dependent
Measure:
P a r e n t C o u n s e l i n g ............................................................................

87

T h r e e - w a y F i x e d E f f e c t s ANOVA o n T y p e o f S c h o o l D i s t r i c t
and S i z e o f D i s t r i c t and Group M embership — Dependent
M e a s u r e : C o m m u n i t y H e ! a t i o n n h l p c ............................................................

08

T h r e e - w a y F i x e d E f f e c t s ANOVA o n T y p e o f S c h o o l D i s t r i c t
and S i z e o f D i s t r i c t and Group M em bership— Dependent
Measure: Program C o n s u l ta t io n
. ............................................................

90

T h r e o - w n y F i x e d E f f e c t s ANOVA o n T y p e o f S c h o o l D i s t r i c t
and S i z e o f D i s t r i c t and Group M e m b e r s h i p — D e p e n d e n t
M e a s u r e : A d m i n i s t r a t i o n o f S p e c i a l E d u c a t i o n ............................

90

' H i r o e - w a y f i x e d E f f e c t s ANOVA on T y p e o f S c h o o l D i s t r i c t
and S i z e o f D i s t r i c t and Gro up M e m b e r s h ip — D e p e n d e n t
Measure: Research
.................................................................................................

91

Perceived R e la tiv e importance o f th e F i f t y - F i v e S p e c ific
A c t i v i t i e s in t h e I d e a l Role o f t h e School P s y c h o l o g i s t
w i t h S i g n i f i c a n t C h i - S q u a r e s I d e n t i f i e d ...........................................

9b

Mean R a n k i n g s o f E i g h t A c t i v i t i e s :
R e la tiv e Importance
in b o t h t h e P r e s e n t and I d e a l R ole o f t h e School
P s y c h o l o g y s t .........................................................................

vii i

.

Table
U6.

*4 7 .

!i8.

*49 •

50.

Page
Eight A c tiv itie s :
P e r c e n t a g e o f Time t o S p e n d i n t h e
I d e a l R o l e o f t h e S c h o o l P s y c h o l o g i s t .......................................

102

Mean R a n k i n g s o f E i g h t A c t i v i t i e s :
Adequacy o f P r e p a r a t i o n
t o Perform in th e I d e a l Role of t h e School P s y c h o lo g is t .

103

Comparison o f Four Rankings o f E i g h t Major A c t i v i t i e s by
School P s y c h o lo g is ts :
K endall's C oefficien t of
C o n c o r d a n c e ............................................................................................................

10*4

Comparison o f Four Rankings o f E i g h t M ajor A c t i v i t i e s
by D ire c to rs of S p e c ia l Education:
K endall's
C o e f f i c i e n t o f C o n c o r d a n c e ..................................................................

10*4

C h i l d r e n Who S h o u l d R e c e i v e P r o f e s s i o n a l P s y c h o l o g i c a l
S e r v i c e s from t h e S c h o o l P s y c h o l o g i s t i n t h e I d e a l R o l e

.

106

51.

Numb er o f S t u d e n t s t o b e S e r v e d b y t h e S c h o o l P s y c h o l o g i s t

.

107

52.

V ario u s Programs S erv ed by t h e S ch oo l P s y c h o l o g i s t s

53.

' Hie S c h o o l P s y c h o l o g i s t ' s I m m e d i a t e S u p e r v i s o r i n t h e
I d e a l R o l e ...........................................................................................................

5*i.

. . . .

108

109

Y e a r s o f Re c omme nde d T e a c h i n g E x p e r i e n c e f o r S c h o o l
P s y c h o l o g i s t s ...............................................................................................................

Ill

55*

Teacher C e r tif ic a tio n

fo r School P s y c h o lo g is ts

.................................

Ill

5(i.

Legal Licensing Level

for

S c h o o l P s y c h o l o g i s t s .................................

112

57.

A ccountability

Psychologists

.................................................

113

58.

Minimal Degree fo r Sch oo l P s y c h o l o g i s t s

.................................................

113

59.

Use o f P a r a p r o f c s s i o n a l s by t h e S c h o o l P s y c h o l o g i s t

60.

Professional A ffiliatio n s

61.

"Private

62.

P r o f e s s i o n a l I m p r o v e m e n t o f S c h o o l P s y c h o l o g i s t s b y Me a n s
o f Four A c t i v i t i e s as P e r c e i v e d by t h e R espondents
. . .

117

P r o f e s s i o n a l A r e a s i n Wh i c h S c h o o l P s y c h o l o g i s t s N e e d
t o Improve S k i l l s and Com petencies as P e r c e i v e d by
School P s y c h o lo g is ts
..........................................................................................

119

P r o f e s s i o n a l A r e a s i n Wh i c h S c h o o l P s y c h o l o g i s t s N e e d t o
Improve S k i l l s and C o m p e te n c ie s a s P e r c e i v e d by
D ire c to rs o f S p e c ia l Education
................................................................

121

63.

6 )1 .

for School

Practice"

. . . .

llA

.......................

115

.......................................

Il6

fo r School P sychologists

fo r School P sy ch o lo g ists

ix

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure
1.

2.

3.

*4 .

5.

6,

Page

G r o u p x Amount o f P r o f e s s i o n a l E x p e r i e n c e I n t e r a c t i o n
...............
for the Variable— Community Relationships

75

G r o u p x Amount o f P r o f e s s i o n a l E x p e r i e n c e I n t e r a c t i o n
f o r t h e V a r i a b l e — P r o g r a m C o n s u l t a t i o n ....................................

77

Group x Amount of Professional Experience Interaction for
th e V a ria b le — A dm inistration of S p ecial Education
P r o g r a m s ...............................................................................................................................

79

Group x S i z e o f D i s t r i c t
Parent Counseling
.

Interaction for the V ariable—
...............................

87

Group x S i z e o f D i s t r i c t I n t e r a c t i o n f o r t h e V a r i a b l e —
Co mmu n i t y R e l a t i o n s h i p s
...................... ,

89

Group x S i z e o f D i s t r i c t x Typo o f D i s t r i c t I n t e r a c t i o n
f o r t h e V a r i a b l e — R e s e a r c h ................................................................................

91

x

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

Problem
The p r e s e n t

r o l e o f t h e (school p s y c h o l o g i s t

n process of transform ation.
which a r e t a k i n g p l a c e
for the

it

To g a i n

is

some i n s i g h t

into the

necessary to understand the

in

changes

S t a t e Program

E d u c a t i o n o f t h e M e n t a l l y H a n d i c a p p e d w h i c h was i n i t i a t e d b y

the Michigan Department o f P u b lic I n s t r u c t i o n
title,

in Michigan i s

"School

was s e l e c t e d
children

D iagnostician

i n 19^9 b y A c t 2 l h .

f o r th e M entally Handicapped Program,"

i n 1osB f o r t h o s e p e r s o n s r e s p o n s i b l e

for the educational

The f u n c t i o n o f t h e S c h o o l
Department o f P u b lic

The

programs

for identifying

for the m entally handicapped.

D i a g n o s t i c i a n wns d e s c r i b e d

I n s t r u c t i o n monogrnph

(ih'jfl) a s

in

a Michigan

follows:

Th e Dc h o o l D i a g n o s t i c i a n h a s m a j o r r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r t h e s t u d y o f
c h i l d r e n r e f e r r e d as c a n d i d a t e s f o r M en tally Handicapped
Programs . . . .
Th e i d e n t i f i c a t i o n a n d a s s e s s m e n t o f m e n t a l l y
h a n d i c a p p e d c h i l d r e n i s t h e c h i e f t u s k o f t h e Mehool D i a g n o s t i c i a n .
As, r e c e n t l y
tion

in

as

l ‘>66 t h e M i c h i g a n D e p a r t m e n t o f P u b l i c

a monograph s u g g e s t e d t h a t

only t h a t

portion

of the school

m entally handicapped p u p il s .
program

t h e Dchool

D iagnostician

m e m b e r s h i p who a r e

referred

Instruc­

"serves
as p o s s i b l e

He m u s t s e r v e t h e m e n t a l l y h a n d i c a p p e d

fu l1 time."
During th e

problems.

] o 6o ' s

I t was a p e r i o d

sch o o l p s y c h o lo g y in M ichigan
o f ra p id growth

1

f a c e d ma n y

in t h e number o f s c h o o l

2

psychologists.

Many s c h o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t s

felt

f r u s tr a t e d because they

were l i m i t e d t o

fu n c tio n only in t h e m e n ta lly handicapped program w hile

t h e i r t r a i n i n g had p r e p a r e d them f o r b r o a d e r f u n c t i o n i n g
The I 9 6 0 ' s s a w M i c h i g a n s c h o o l d i a g n o s t i c i a n s
sio n a l groups:

divided

in the

schools.

i n t o two p r o f e s ­

The M i c h i g a n S o c i e t y o f S c h o o l P s y c h o l o g i s t s

affiliated

w i t h t h e M ic h i g a n P s y c h o l o g i c a l A s s o c i a t i o n and t h e M i c h i g a n A s s o c i a ­
tion

of Educator P sychologists

a f f i l i a t e d w ith the Michigan Education

A ssociation.
T h r e e e v e n t s have o c c u r r e d
encouraging to
cipitate

since

1970, however, which have been

s c h o o l p s y c h o lo g y i n M ich ig an and have h e l p e d t o p r e ­

change

in th e

I'ole.

The f i r s t w as t h e

Michigan A s s o c i a ti o n of School P s y c h o lo g is ts
t h e two p r e v i o u s p r o f e s s i o n a l
school

groups.

p s y c h o l o g i s t s were a b l e t o

mandatory
children

i n December o f

for all

The t h i r d

that

School

o f School

and m e n t a l l y h a n d i e n p p e d

p a s s a g e o f House b i l l .
This b i l l

for

a l 1 children

Diagnostician

provided

w h i c h become
fo r comprehensive

and e f f e c t i v e l y

changed

f o r th e M e n ta lly Handienpped Program t o

Psychologist.
and t h e

did n o t , however, s p e c i f i c a l l y

psycho]ogist.

o f th e Mandatory S p ecial

1973*

services

The m a n d a t o r y b i l l
bill

in Michigan,

o f 1973.

P u b l i c haw 393 on J a n u a r y 9 ,

the t i t l e

time

speak w i t h one v o i c e .

em otionally,

e v e n t wa s t h e

school psychological

first

1971, making G peciul E d u c a tio n programs

physically,

by t h e P a l i

i n 1979 w h i c h d i s s o l v e d

3ro r t h e

T h e s e c o n d e v e n t was t h e p a s s a g e
Education b i l l

founding o f the

Th e l e g i s l a t i o n

comprehensive p s y c h o lo g ic a l
define the role

pointed to

services

o f the school

the necessity

for expanding

3
the

ro le of the

school p sy ch o lo g ist to

fo r a l l handicapped c h ild r e n ,
r e l a t e d to the a c t i v i t i e s
importance of th e se

p l a c e on a n a t i o n a l
psychology

continues,

of the

role

is

involved

emerge as c l e a r l y

relevant

state,

and s k i l l s

and

(1972, p.

feasible

15)

a f e l t need w i t h i n

psychologist,
as

states,

necessary to

This turm oil

stream of education

system."

education

it

roles

psychology."

special

i s becoming e v i d e n t t h a t

Farling

(197J,

p.

continue

i n Die f u t u r e

is

3),

a school

to be considered

really

children

a s s u g g e s t e d b y Dunn (19611) h a s

questionable."

room c o n c e p t

into

special

education programs.
perceptual

services

(Coleman,

th e need to

and p r e s c r i p ­

b e g i n n in g t o be implemented

Th e e m p h a s i s u p o n p r o g r a m m i n g f o r
handicaps,

i n t o which th e

New u n d e r s t a n d i n g s o f IQ a n d t h e

is

i n t o th e main­

created

f o r c h i l d r e n on an i n d i v i d u a l

Th e r e s o u r c e

education.

Ho

d u e t o many c h a n g e s t a k i n g p l a c e w i t h i n s p e c i a l

programs

learning

tested

that

i m n g e o f how we w i l l b e s t b e a b l e t o

basis.

ch ild ren 's

suggests

for school psychologists

Emphasis upon i n t e g r a t i n g

learning d is a b ilitie s ,

l)

d e s i r e t o ma k e u s e o f t h e

psychologists,

tive

opened a gap in

fo r school

"Whether o u r s e r v i c e s

is

education n atio n ally .

plan educational

the

special

(3973, p.

in speaking

still

of school

are also taking

in a f u l l blown i d e n t i t y c r i s i s . "

we n e e d t o d e v e l o p a new p u b l i c
fill

details

and t h e r e l a t i v e

in te g ra te d or successfully

"Although e d u c a to r s

talents

any o f th e

school p sy ch o lo g ist

John G uiderbaldi

no w e l l

and h i n d s

did not specify

school psychologists

of the

level.

" . . .

Catteral

it

activities.

Changes in t h e

"school

but

include psychological serv ice s

and e m o t i o n a l

sciiool

p s y c h o l o g i s t may f i t .

importance of c u l t u r a l

1 9 6 (1) h a s

created

problems has

influences

new p r o b l e m s

in

upon

h

Changes i n g e n e r a l e d u c a t i o n a l s o h a v e i m p l i c a t i o n s
psychologists,
flexibility

B n p h a s is upon i n d i v i d u a l i z a t i o n

in programs has r e s u l t e d

for handicapped ch ild re n
utilization

longer dismiss

districts,

1.

and r e g u l a r e d u c a t i o n p r o g r a m s ca n no

a l . ( 1 9 7 1 ) h a v e s u m m a r i z e d s ome o f t h e s e

(P ia n n v.

findings:

c h ild re n in t h e i r primary language.

C a l i f o r n i a C t n t c Hoard o f E d u c a t i o n ,

1970)

T r a c k in g system s have been foundt o d i s c r i m i n a t e againG t
students

8.

in them.

( Hobson v .

P a r e n t s must be i n c lu d e d
affect their
Education,

children.

Hansen,

interest

in the

1967)

(A rreola v.

C a l i f o r n i a Board o f

1968)

rights

' "*rf>

of children

is

evident

and p a r e n t s .

p s y c h o l o g i s t s m u s t l e a r n how t o u s e t h e

children

the

in m ajor e d u c a t i o n a l d e c i s i o n s which

A new e m p h a s i s u p o n " d u e p r o c e s s "

school

i n making e d u c a t i o n a l

a ffe c t the ro le of the school psychologist.

P s y c h o l o g i s t s must t e n t

T.

as r e a d i ly .

a ls o have been i n f l u e n t i a l

changes which d i r e c t l y

and i n d i v i d u a l i z e d

fo r th e e d u c a tio n o f c h i l d r e n has been

"problem" c h i l d r e n

The c o u r t s

ct

i n t h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f new o p t i o n s

in th e m ainstream o f e d u c a tio n such as th e

A ccountability

p l a c e d upon school

Boss,

o f l e a r n i n g and g r e a t e r

o f r e s o u r c e room p r o g r a m s , t e a c h e r a i d e s ,

instruction.

for school

It

in t h e growing
Is c l e a r t h a t

law t o meet t h e n e e d s o f

and a v o i d d o i n g a n y t h i n g a g a i n s t t h e r i g h t s

of children

or

th e ir parents.

He e d f o r t h e H t u d y
llie p re c e d in g d i s c u s s i o n p o i n t s
place

in education

out

s o me o f t h e c h a n g e s t a k i n g

i n M ic h ig a n and n a t i o n a l l y which h a v e i m p l i c a t i o n s

5

f o r s ch o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t s and t h e i r
increasingly apparent th a t
Michigan is

provide g re a te r
as

1.
vant

role

in need of r e d e f i n i t i o n

t h e changes t a k i n g pla ce

tions

the

clarification

planning

of this

This study
role.

i s becoming

in th e lig h t o f

is

Tt h a s

in

an a t t e m p t t o

important

im plica­

for the

state-w ide

It

It

in serv ice meetings

information regarding the

i n M i c h i g a n and t h e r e l a t i v e

a s p e r c e i v e d by d i r e c t o r s
s h o u ld be h e l p f u l

school p sychology

is changing.

should provide r e l e ­

Department o f Education concerning th e

psychologists.

which t h e r o l e

special educa­

in o v e r a l l Gtate

program by p o i n t i n g o u t a r e a s in

s h o u l d a l s o be h e l p f u l

for

of

school

in planning

p s y c h o l o g i s t s by p r o v i d i n g

areas

in which G k ills

and c o m p e te n c ie s need

For U n iv e r s it y T r a i n i n g

P r o g r a m s . — With

increased

improved.

how t h e r o l e o f t h e s c h o o l
field,

and c l a r i f i c a t i o n

of the school p s y c h o lo g is t

and s c h o o l

P.

It

school psychologist

For th e f t a t e D epartm ent o f E d u c a t i o n . — I t

importance of h is a c t i v i t i e s

t o he

of the

future.

follows:

role

tion

in the

in e d u c a tio n .

information to the S ta te

ideal

role

psychologist

the u n iv e rs itie s w ill

t h e i r school

i.
directors

For S p e c ia l

of a c t iv it ie s

a s s e s s t h e needs o f

p r o g r a m s and p o s s i b l y

programs

fo r school

should provide th e

a b e t t e r u nderstanding of the p e r ­

psychologist.

are considered

t o d e v e l o p new

psychologists.

Education A d m i n i s t r a t o r s .— I t

of special, e d u c a tio n w ith

c e iv e d r o l e o f th e school

p e r c e i v e d by t h o s e ou t i n t h e

he e n a b l e d t o b e t t e r

psychology t r a i n i n g

t r a i n i n g m o d e l s and i n s e r v i c e

is

knowledge of

im portant

With a kn o w le d g e o f what k i n d s
for

school psychologists to

6

p e r f o r m a s p e r c e i v e d "by b o t h s c h o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t s
special education,

the d irecto rs

d e liv e ry system of s p e c ia l
to the e ffic ie n c y

•4 .
school

r e s p o n d e n t , : ’. ,

psychologists1 role

by t h e r.chool
hopefully

rela tio n sh ip to

importance o f school

A better

it

and t h e i r

t . . improved

study,

by p o i n t i n g

varied

activities

out

all

interested

educators

education.

psychological

activities

role.

w ithin

that

different, ru le

and d i r e c t o r s

of special

as p e r ­

school

p e rc e p tio n s hold
e d u ca tio n should

i n t e r a c t i o n b e t w e e n t h e two g r o u p s .
relative

in

by p o i n t i n g

activities

o f t h e :i c h o o l

of the role

review t h e i r r o le

the

the perceived

understanding

special

inform ation to

should h elp t o c l a r i f y

understanding of the

psyeholog is ts

leal

and b e a b l e t o c o n t r i b u t e

t o e n a b l e them t o c r i t i c a l l y

and t h e i r

c e i v e d by t h e

education serv ices

im prove upon t h e

P s y c h o l o g i n t n . — Tt s h o u l d p r o v i d e

psychologists

out the r e l a t i v e

should be a b le t o

of school psychological s e rv ic e s .

F o r r.chool

the schools

and d i r e c t o r s o f

lliis

i m p o r t a n c e o f t h e many

p s y c h o ]o g is t, should provide a b e t te r

of the

r . c hool

in p r o v id i n g

psychologist

in Michigan

improved e d u c a t i o n a l

for

programs

for

cli i 1 d i*en .

P u r p o s e o f t h e ft.udy
’111 i s

ties

of the

stnly
school

deals, w i t h b o t h t h e g e n e r a l
psychologist

merely th e d i a g n o s t i c
s p e c ti v e which

includes

e m p h a s i s u p o n what, t h e
role

rather

activity

than

in M ichigan.
1 ut, r a t h e r

a variety
school

and s p e c i f i c
It

it. w i l l

of d iffere n t

u p o n w h a t lie i s

doing a t

the

is. not, l i m i t e d t o
take a broader per­

activities.

psychologist, w ishes

activi­

It places

t.o do i n h i s

present

ideal

time in h is

role.

7

It
in t h i s
the

is

important th a t d ir e c to r s

study,

school

g is t w ith

Ihe d ire c to rs

the

special

education personnel

of special

im mediate s u p e r v i s o r ,
education

are

capped c h i l d r e n .
assumes

is

director

are gen erally

education

of special

the

involved

on h i s
school

staff.

related

I n many c a s e s

psychologist's

in th e e d u c a t i o n a l
the ro le t h a t

of

of the school psycholo­

both th e school p s y c h o l o g i s t

Frequently,

directly

is

e d u c a t i o n be i n c l u d e d

aware of the a c t i v i t i e s

psych o lo g ist through the i n t e r a c t i o n

the d ir e c to r

special

o f specia]

and t h e d i r e c t o r o f

planning

for handi­

a school psychologist

to the philosophy

and e x p e c t a t i o n s

e d u c a t i o n who c o o r d i n a t e s

of th e

e d u c a t i o n programs

for

h a n d i c a p p e d e h i .1d r e n .
'1110 p u r p o s e o f t l i i s
of the a c t i v i t i e s
relative

of the

study

is

to

arrive

school p s y c h o lo g i s t

t i m e and e n e r g y t o b e d e v o t e d t o

the perception:;

of both

school

a t a new u n d e r s t a n d i n g

i n M i c h i g a n and o f t h e

these

psychologists

activities

b a s e d upon

and d i r e c t o r s

of sp ecial

education.

In o r d e r t o u n d e r s t a n d t h e c o n c e p t o f r o l e

this

It

study,

calls

"role

on " o v e r t

is,

i m p o r t a n t t o di f f e r e n t i u t e

enactment"

social

and " r o l e

b e t w e e n what H a r b i n

expectation."

conduct" whereas

role

Hole enac tm e nt

expectations

of c o g n itio n s --b e lie fs , subjective p r o b a b il it ie s ,
Knowledge— which s p e c i f y
and d u t i e s ,
position"

th e ap p ro p ria te conduct,

(Harbin,

expectation,"
special
actual

in r e l a t i o n

that

education

IhbB,
is,

p.

to

study

c a r r y i n g out o f a c t i v i t i e s .

the

(ld68)

focuses

and e l e m e n t s o f
roles the r ig h ts

iccupying a p a r t i c u l a r

f o c u s e s upon " r o l e

what school p s y c h o l o g i s t s

in Michigan p e r c e i v e

in

are "collections

complementary

for persons

This

as u t i l i s e d

role

and d i r e c t o r s

of

to be r a t h e r thun th e

n

Overview o f t h e Study
The r e m a i n d e r o f t h i s

thesis

is

organized

in t h e

following

manner :
In C hapter II
In C h a p t e r
cussed.

III

literature

relevant to

the m ethodology used

The q u e s t i o n n a i r e ,

"The h o l e

Michigan" along with d e f i n i t i o n

of the

this

study i s

reviewed.

in th e study w i l l be d i s ­
School P s y c h o l o g i s t

o f t e r m s and h y p o th e s e s w i l l

in

be

explai nod.
Chapter

IV c o n t a i n s

the

results

of the s t a t i s t i c a l

analysis

of

t h e obtninod dntn.
C h a p t e r V p r e s e n t s a summary o f t h e d a t a , t h e c o n c l u s i o n s
reached,

a n d r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s w h i c h may b e u s e f u l

ogy program

in Michigan.

to the School Psychol­

CHAPTER I I

RELEVANT LITERATURE

Tn t p o d u c t i on

tain

T h is c h a p t e r summarizes t h e r e s e a r c h

and

literature

t o t h e r o l e o f t h e .school p s y c h o l o g i s t

and

is relevant to th is

particular
school

study.

The f i r s t

psychology

in th e U n ite d

development of th e
th e more r e c e n t
Th e t h i r d
school

role.

chnngos

section

studies

States

in t h e

and t r a c e s

functions

of th e school

psychologist

literature

In o r d e r to g ain a b e t t e r

Helping handicapped c h i l d r e n p r i o r

history

the
need

identification
for

special

and p l a c e m e n t

in Michigan.

of school

medical

H a n d i c a p p e d c h i l d r e n were g e n e r a l l y t a k e n
Around t h e

The f o u r t h

section

A brief

chapter.

understanding of the

sary.

institutions.

of the ro le of th e

Psychology in
States

a b r i e f d i s c i n ' s i on o f t h e

special

studies

concludes th is

study,

orien ted with a s tro n g

some o f

school p sy ch o lo g ist.

and n a t i o n a l l y .

H i s t o r y 6r fc[hool
the United

disability

of the

of

the evolutionary

discusses b rie fly

some o f t h e

in o t h e r s t a t e s

s u mma r y o f t h e r e l e v a n t

b r ie f ly with the h is to ry

The s e c o n d s e c t i o n

reviews b r i e f l y

psychologist

reviews

section deals

which p e r ­

to

reason for t h i s

psychology

1 0 0 0 was g e n e r a l l y

and c l i n i c a l

orientation.

from s c h o o l s and p l a c e d

tu rn of the century the
of problem c h ild r e n

knowledge and t e c h n i q u e s .

9

is neces­

In

interest

in

pointed out the

According to E is e re r

(bkli),

10

the

first

psychological

clinic

w h i c h f o c u s e d on t h e l e a r n i n g p r o b l e m s

o f c h i l d r e n wa s e s t a b l i s h e d

i n 1896 by Witmer a t

Pennsylvania.

first

I n 1.899* t h e

Study and Pedagogic

public

the U niversity

of

school Department of Child

I n v e s t i g a t i o n was e s t a b l i s h e d

in Chicago.

In 1908,

t h e e m e r g e n c e o f t h e M e n t a l H e a l t h Mo v e me n t a n d c h i l d g u i d a n c e c l i n i c s
gave an im petus

t o t h e movement

ment o f t h e Pinct-f.im on T e s t s
contribution

(Cray,

1963).

(White and H a r r i s ,

of Intelligence

Cray

present the h isto ry

tied

development o f sp e c ia l

in with the

and as
to

such

fymonds

Mutt i n

i t wa s c l i n i c a l

the C ta te s began to pass

Hew Y o r k wa s t h e
In

perilous

first

for

the

retarded,

in o r ie n t a ti o n .

According

first

used by

required

l ‘h>0 , t h e r e w e r e 9 3 s t a t e s

in

17 s t a t e s

(Hodges,

(Pennett,

According to v a rio u s
increased

from

1 in

increase

a feeling

l ‘>f)0 t o

children
(K isorer,

of school

o f urgency to

certify

i 9 6 0 ).

evaluations.

a person

(Hodges,

I n 19' f O, c e r t i f i c a t i o n

t h e number o f s c h o o l

SPO i n 1 9 5 0 ,

was

psychologists

psychologists

in I960,

Phi D e l t a K n p p n n , 1 9 6 7 ;

improve t h e

I960).

such

to

a n d W a s h i n g t o n D . U . wlii e h h a d

and 9000 i n

H ennett , 1970).

a f t e r W o r l d War 11 w a s d u e

quality

a n d a n i n c r e a s i n g d e ma n d f o r s p e c i a l
1963; Hodges,

requirem ents

1970).

surveys

lOoY ( M n g a r y a n d M e a e h n n , 1 9 o 3 ;
The m a rk e d

certification

from e n g a g i n g i n p s y c h o l o g i c a l ,

s t a t e i n 1935 t o

c e r t i f i c a t i on r e q u i r e m e n t s

to

out th a t

1 ‘>;M.

prevent unqualified

lias

point

p s y c h o l o g y was c l o s e l y

programs

and d i a g n o s t i c

(1955)

( i c l i ; 1) t h e t e r m " s c h o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t " w a s

flowly

I960).

o f school

Hie d e v e l o p ­

i n 190^ made a s i g n i f i c a n t

( 1 9 6 3 ) and C u t t n

from 1900 t o t h e

1 9 6 1 ).

of education

for

education services

all

11

I n 1 9 *j 6 5 D i v i s i o n 1 6 o f t h e A m e r i c a n P s y c h o l o g i c a l A s s o c i a t i o n
wa s o r g a n i z e d t o

serve th e p r o f e s s i o n a l heeds o f school p s y c h o lo g ists

who r e a l i z e d t h e n e e d f o r b e t t e r
themselves.

In 195^, D iv is io n

C o n f e r e n c e a t We s t r o i n t ,
this

a n d i n c r e a s e d c o m m u n i c a t i o n among

l 6 o f A.P.A.

Hew Y o r k ,

c o n f e r e n c e wa s t o o f f i c i a l l y

p s y c h o l o g i s t and o u t l i n e

The b a s i c

1.

needs

conclusions

D efinition:

of the

t r a i n i n g and e x p e r i e n c e

tional

2.

in

(Putts,

education.

and t o

functions,

tim e.
follows:

a psychologist

He u s e s h i s

with

specialized

a nd i n t e r p e r n o n a l r e l a t i o n ­
enrich the

r e c o g n i z e nnd

1..D9 9 , p .

e x p e r i e n c e and

deal w ithexcep­

3 0 ).

30)

M e a s u r in g and i n t e r p r e t i n g
emotional

P.

p.

of th e school

conference were as

] earning,

(P utts,

The p u r p o s e o f

responsibilities,

personnel to

children,

children"

Functions:
A.

school

role

psychologist is

knowledge o f a s s e s s m e n t ,

growth o f a l l

recognize the

fo r the f i r s t

"The s c h o o l

ships to a s s i s t

on A u g u s t 2 2 - 3 1 .

the d u t i e s ,

c o m p e t e n c i e s , and t r a i n i n g

o rg a n iz e d th e Thayer

development

the

intellectual,

social,

and

of children.

Identifying exceptional

c h i l d r e n a n d c o l 1a b o r a t i n g

planning o f a p p r o p r ia te

educational

and s o c i a l

in th e

placements

and p r o g r a m s .
P.

D e v e l o p i n g ways t o

facilitate

the

learning

n nd a d j u s t m e n t

of c h ild re n .
D.

Kncournging and i n i t i a t i n g
research

findings

for

research,

the solution

and h e l p i n g t o u t i l i z e

o f school

problems.

12

E.

Diagnosing e d u c a tio n a l and p e rs o n a l
collaborating

disabilities,

and

in th e p la n n in g o f r e - e d u c a t i o n a l program s.

T h e r e wa s c o n s i d e r a b l e

discussion a t the

conference concerning

the r o le o f psychotherapy in school p s y c h o lo g ic a l p r a c t i c e .
A l t h o u g h t h e r e wa s a g r e e m e n t
ried out,

in general

that

it

t h e r e was n o a g r e e m e n t c o n c e r n i n g p s y c h o t h e r a p e u t i c

procedures

t o u s e and t h e e x t e n t t o w h ic h

as a p r o p e r

function o f the

Hi e r e was a d e b a t e o v e r t h e

it

could be reg n rd ed

school psychologist

1.

(C utts,

1955).

d e fin itio n o f psychotherapy.

wa s a g r e e m e n t t h a t p s y c h o t h e r a p y b e p r a c t i c e d
level

should be c a r ­

There

o n l y by d o c t o r a l

personnel.

' Ihe T h n y o r C o n f e r e n c e a l s o d i s c u s s e d t h e
by s c h o o l

psychologists,

training,

and s a f e g u a r d s a g a i n s t u n q u a l i f i e d p e r s o n n e l .

levels

levels

qualifications

of tra in in g ,

o f t r a i n i n g were ag reed upon:

principles

school

a D h , D r o q u i r e i n e n t nnd p s y c h o l o g i c a l

needed
of
Two

psychologist with

e x a m i n e r w i t h a M. A.

requi reinent.

I h e ' I h u y e r C o n f e r e n c e was i m p o r t a n t
profession

o f school

potentialities

psychology

of the school

for th e

needs, o f t h e e d u c a t i o n a l

(ihbY),

i t marked a t u r n i n g p o i n t

however i t

first

psychologist

faceted

in t h a t

recognized

the

t i m e and r e c o g n i z e d

the

in re la tio n

enterprise.
in the

it

field

to

t h e many-

A c c o r d in g t o Magary
o f r.chool

psychology,

a p p e a r e d t h a t t h e c o n f e r e n c e wa s m o r e c o n c e r n e d a b o u t m a i n ­

ta in in g standards

than meeting the sh o rtag e o f personnel

and m e e t i n g t h e n e e d s
o r i e n t a t i o n vus

fairly

of school

children.

pervasive,

Also,

in the

field

the c lin ic a l-d ia g n o s tie

T h e C o n f e r e n c e ma de i t s

contribution

13
by e m p h a s i z in g t h e mix o f p s y c h o l o g y and e d u c a t i o n
roles

and t h e d i a g n o s t i c ,

consulting,

and r e s e a r c h

o f the school p sychologist.

on d o c t o r a l

l e v e l t r a i n i n g may h a v e b e e n u n r e a l i s t i c

The temphasis

in terms

of press­

i n g manpower n e e d s .
In 1958,
titled,

a committee

from A.P.A. D i v i s i o n

" T h e P s y c h o l o g i s t on t h e

e m p h as i s upon t h e

liaison

Pardon

in m a tte rs

According to V a l e t t

th e re were th r e e general
and g u i d a n c e ,

school

areas

consultation,
(l9b5)

in 1 9 ^

lack o f a c l e a r d e f i n i t i o n

o f functioning:

attested

It

of adm inistration,

( 1963) th is

and i n d i v i d u a l

rep ort pointed
psychological

psychological

to the

en­

This r e p o r t put g r e a t e r

b e t w e e n p s y c h o l o g y and e d u c a t i o n .

e m p h a s i s on s e r v i c e t o t h e
nn d c u r r i c u l u m .

School S t a f f . "

16 w r o t e a r e p o r t

fact

of school psychology.

put
policy,
out th a t

counseling

evaluation.

t h a t t h e r e was a
In th a t y ear the

l i e t h e s d a C o n f e r e n c e was s p o n s o r e d b y t h e A m e r i c a n P s y c h o l o g i c a l A s s o c i a ­
tion

for the purpose of d ir e c tin g

attention

to the

role

of the school

psychologist.

’Hie C o n f e r e n c e r e c o m m e n d e d t h a t

the c o lle c tio n

of data concerning the developing school p sychologist

r o l e s i n c e t h e r e was n o t

encouragement be given to

a v a i l a b l e any s t a t e m e n t c o n c e r n in g what s c h o o l

p s y c h o l o g i s t s were d o in g and what s h o u ld b e e x p e c te d o f them.
Up t o t h i s
for school

t i m e t h e r e was

psychology.

D ivision

little

and t h e m a j o r i t y

members.

With t h e

rapid

ogists'

Hesponse t o

A ssociation to

level

of p ra c tic in g

since

its

admissions

school psychologists

standards
were not

growth o f school psychology s in c e 1950, t h e r e

had not been a c o n c o m ita n t
psychologists.

a national

lb o f th e American P s y c h o lo g ic a l

A s s o c i a t i o n hnd n o t b e e n v e r y e f f e c t i v e
were h i g h

leadership at

i n c r e a s e i n c o m m u n i c a t i o n among s c h o o l
inquiries

s e n t by Die Ohio f c h o o l

school p sychologists

in various

parts

Psychol­
of the

1U

United S ta t e s
tion

i n d i c a t e d a keen i n t e r e s t

and e s t a b l i s h i n g n a t i o n a l p u r p o s e s

was h e l d

in March,

function

of the

1969, the

school psychologist.

ro le of the

One o f

its

school

psychologist

in th i s

its

diagnostic

orientation

of the
its

education

A ssociation

programs

during th is

its

education

to

integrated

role

in s p e c ia l

are

p e r v a s i v e and s i g n i f i c a n t .

o f communication

education philosophy

for handicapped c h ild re n ,
services

for a ll

uf th e school

Hecent Changes in t h e A c t i v i t i e s
t h e School. P s y c h o l o g i s t
The c h a n g e s t a i l i n g p l a c e

1960's with

and g r o w t h o f

a new v e h i c l e

classrooms

im pa ct upon t h e

n clinical-

'Jlie f o u n d i n g o f t h e N a t i o n a l

on p r o v i d i n g p s y c h o l o g y c n l

b e g u n t o h a v e an

in th e United

Luring th e 1960's profound

as

th e change

peak during th e

classrooms

in g e n e r a l .

Psychologists

f o r school, p s y c h o l o g i s t s ,

emphasis

reported

the tu rn of the

t i m e wa s g e n e r a l l y

to have taken p l a c e .

o f Pchool

from s e g r e g a t e d

school psy ch o lo g ist
beginning a t

o r i e n t a t i o n which rea c h e d

changes appeared

the

The f o l l o w i n g y e a r on M a r c h lJ+,

chapter.

t h e p r o ] i f e r a t i 011 o f s p e c i n ]
special

r e g a r d i n g t h e r o l e and

in t h e U n ite d S t a t e s which i s

has been very b r i e f sin ce

century.

(1968) a t t h i s

f i r s t p r o j e c t s wa s t o u n d e r t a k e a s t u d y o f t h e

I n s u mma r y t h e h i s t o r y
Htates

An i n i t i a l m e e t i n g

Farling

for n a tio n a l guidelines

communica­

N a t i o n a l A s s o c i a t i o n o f S c h o o l P s y c h o l o g i s t s was f o u n d e d i n

Louis.

inter

and g o a l s .

1 9 6 8 ,in Columbus, Ohio.

m e e t i n g made a p l e a

St.

in developing t e t t e r

in th e r o l e

and

c h i l d r e n had

psychologist.

of

of the school psychologist

The l i t e r a t u r e

abounds w ith d i s c u s s i o n

15
and r e s e a r c h a r t i c l e s

concerning these

. Sc hool P s y c h o l o g y , 10: , ° ( 1 9 7 ? ) ,

for

sp ecial education with im p lic atio n s
Tn g e n e r a l ,

Kennedy ( 1 9 7 1 )

interest

diagnostic aspects.
states,

aspects
hardon

"school

assistance

psychologists

the

et

and d i a g n o s t i c

less

of

n l . (1970), th e re
aspects

model

need to

at

is

and t e a c h i n g .

i s no l o n g e r p r a c t i c a l
rather

than th e
diagnostic

develop a lte r n a te

IQ

wa y s

a n d w h i c h o f f e r mo r e

feme o f t h e

include

in

of the ro le

learning

controversial

t o the t e a c h e r s . "

for

to changes

(lp7<?» P* J O f l ) i n d i s c u s s i n g

he b r i e f l y mentioned.

discussed here

was d e v o t e d

should he s t r e s s e d

t h e s c h o o l p s y c h o ! o g i s t 1s r o l e
will

The e n t i r e J o u r n a l o f

school psychology.

the c l i n i c a l

t o ass es s, b e h a v i o r which a r e
direct

for

in the p ro c e s s e s

suggests t h a t

and t h a t t h e r o p e d i a l

tests

example,

as s u g g e s t e d hy H e r r o n ,

l e n s e m p h a s i s upon t h e c l i n i c a l
a n d an i n c r e a s i n g

changes.

least

suggested

changes

in

seven a c t i v i t i e s which

Th e y may o v e r l n p t o

s ome e x t e n t h u t

ideas, t h e y convoy r a t h e r

are

than as m u tu ally e x c lu ­

sive a c t i v i t i e s .

K d u c a t i o n a l i h- or . cr i p t i on
and R e m e d i a t i o n
Increasingly
tional

strategies.

A s h l o e k and P t e p h e n
Harris

(Ipol.)

all

there

is

an e m p h a s i s

Ke n n e d y

( l n7 l) »

( l l' n n ) ,

Ynlott

perceive

upon e d u c a t i o n a l

1’o r n o s s

(rdi-j),

rem ediation with

and

(l'*7 0 ), S tep h e n s
Roger

(bhdi),

a strong

hlaneo

in n a tu re
( l ° 7i )

as the key

placed great

lit6 s c h o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t s

function of

school

emphasis

in

on t h e
are m ulti-

psychologists,

im p o rtan ce upon r e m e d i a t i o n .

( 1 0 . ( 1 ' ’.'. o f D i v i s i o n

( l lJ7 o ) ,

and W h i t e and

recommendation o f s p e c i a l i s e d m a t e r i a l s and t e c h n i q u e s which
sensory

instruc­

o f A.T.A.)

hy s u r

eying

lie r e c e i v e d

lfi

3700 p s y c h o - e d u c a t i o n a l
classified,

edited,

recommendations t o aid c h i l d r e n ,

and c o m p i l e d them i n t o a ma nua l

experienced p ro fe s s io n a is .
its

extremely small,

approach

unrepresentative

to very complex p r o b le m s ,

school p s y c h o lo g ists

Teacher

strategies

knowledge and s k i l l s .
children,

i . hc

discusses,

the

for

"cook book"

interest

emphasizes h elp in g te a c h e rs

among

in

in s e rv ic e meetings

( 1f

1) , p . e r k o w i t z

(l°<Vf), C a r l s o n
role.

f o u r types, id’ i n t e r v e n t i o n

in t h e i r

consultant role:

Things

done a r o un d t h e

Tilings

done t o

(1973),

the stu d en t -

serving a ll

are co n sid ere d very

(1968), Williams
and o i l v o r m a n

Catterul.

( I ' l ' f O)

strategies

student

implement

e d u c a t i o n a l and p s y c h o l o g i c a l

The i m p o r t a n c e o f a t e a m a p p r o a c h ,

importance o f th in

Tilings

i.

illustrates

a nd t r a n s m i t t i n g

Fine and T y l e r

( l ‘> M ) , !iagar.v

1.

activity

rind p n r t i e i p n t i n g

important.

gists

for i t s

and

C o n s u ] t a t i on

educational

stress

s t u d y may b e c r i t i c i z e d

sample and

it

for t r a i n e r s

in r e m e d i a t i o n .

This p a r ti c u la r

Gr a y

Although t h i s

and he

t h a t c a n bo a c c o m p l i s h e d b y t h e

(1969)

fill

in b in model

f o r school

- Environmental

Installed

(1972)*

psycholo­

Intervention

Intervention

stu d en t - Assigned

] n t e r v e n t i on

b.

Ti l i ngs,

t h a t en n be don e w i t h t h e

student -

Transactional

1n t e r v e n t i on

This

approach

f o c u s e s m o r e 011 f o l l o w t h r o u g h

looks nt both the

l e a r n e r and t h e s o c i a l

a n d l e s s ; 011 d i a g n o s i s .

setting.

It

17

B e h a v i o r Management C o n s u l t a t i o n
A l t h o u g h t h i n a c t i v i t y may o v e r l a p w i t h t h e
immediately above,
tioned

it

separately.

is

s o mu c h a t t e n t i o n

teachers

of handicapped c h ild re n

are desirous

behavior m odification s tr a te g ie s

Busskind,
activity

it

activity.

and F r a n k s
for school

in

discussed
i s men­
children

re g u la r classroom

o f o b t a i n i n g i n f o r m a t i o n and t e c h ­

n i q u e s on ho v t o manage c h i l d r e n .

ment o f t h i s

that

With t h e e m p h a s i s u p o n e d u c a t i o n f o r a l l

and upon t h e e d u c a t i o n
programs,

receiving

activity

The i n f l u e n c e
has

also

Bops ( l 9 7 l ) f F i n e

o f G kin n er (1938)

and

h a d an i m p a c t on t h e d e v e l o p ­
and T y l e r

( 1 9 6 9 ) , and Mayer ( 1 9 7 3 ) h a v e

(1971), Franks,
all

emphasized t h i s

psychologists.

P s y c h o t h e r a p y and C o u n s e l i n g
Jackson
ogist will

be a t h e r a p e u t i c

and d e v e l o p m e n t
but with

(J 070) proposes

in

school

a new p e r s p e c t i v e

to psychometric
to p ractice

assistants

c o u n s e l o r who e f f e c t s

"clients."

importance of the th e ra p y
b y Ke n n e d y

( ] ‘V l )

because of

the

is

or

facilitative

personality

be a s s i g n e d

school psychologist

therapy.
(Idol)

role.

role

the c lin ic a l

change

orientation

te s tin g w ill

and W h i t e and H a r r i s
However, t h i s

school psych ol­

a clinical

which would e n a b l e t h e

who s u g g e s t s t h a t

lack

This

in t h a t p s y c h o m e tr ic

individual., group,

Benrique:’ (ldbli),

a new m o d e l i n w h i c h t h e

stress

the

l i as b e e n c r i t i c i z e d

model

o f s u f f i c i e n t m a n p o w e r t o do t h e

Schimmoler

is

im practical

Job w e l l .

Co mmu n i t y K e l n t i o n s h i p s
H eilly

(lOflp)

between t h e g o als

suggests

that

there

should be a r e l a t i o n s h i p

o f t h e community and t h e g o a l s o f t h e

school

18

psychologist.

He s u g g e s t s

th a t the

v a ria n c e o f a school system is th e
to s ta rt.

Gray

( 1 9 6 3 ) and V a l e t t

single

largest

c o n trib u to r to the

community and t h a t t h i s
(1963) stress

the

is the place

importance of

community i n v o l v e m e n t .
G i l b e r b e r g and S i l b e r b e r g
in r e l a t i o n
school

to

t h e community.

districts

Being d i r e c t l y
is p resently
bo a n a g e n t

should

tied

the case,

the

should

a community s e t t i n g .
p s y c h o - c d u c a t i onal

topic

or e d u ca tio n al estab lish m en t as

school p sy ch o lo g ist

function

an i n t e r e s t i n g

community p s y c h o - e d u c a t i o n a l c l i n i c s .

schools

f o r change w ith in

psychologist

discuss

They a s k t h e q u e s t i o n w h e t h e r o r n o t

subsidize

into the

(1971)

that

school.

outside

Hrantley

Therefore,

o f the

(l°7l)

lim its his

school

ability

the

to

school

e n v i r o n m e n t and

also discusses

the

in

concept of

centers.

Hesearcii
This
Stephens
all

role

(l°YO),

is

in c r e a s i n g l y being emphasized

Gray

(I'hVl),

in the

literature.

Ames ( T l ' f l ) , a n d W h i t e a n d H n r r i a

(1961)

em phasize this, r o l e .

O ther Holes
Austin
the

school

sees
ogist

psychologist

school
cannot

culture

( 1 ■!■(;’ ) v i e w s

that

school

a s an " a x i o l o g i s t . "

psychology as a v a lu e
"remain neutral,
is

t h o s e who s u g g e s t t h a t

the

must s p e a k o u t

legal

science

in the

changing rap id ly "

for the

psychology

school

as a value
filvennnn

in th a t

f '() .

and e d u c a t i o n a l

is

n child

rights

psychol­

conflicts

T h is view i s

psychologist

and

( l l)<iO) a l s o

th e school

face of e v a lu a tiv e

(p.

science

reluted

in a
to

advocate

of children.

and

19

C a t t e r a l and Hinds
ogist

as a c h ild

(1972)

see the emerging r o l e

Kennedy

school

(1971)

school psychol­

advocate.

Gray ( 1 9 6 3 ) p o i n t s
needs o f th e

of the

out th a t

s c h o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t s must meet t h e

i n t wo a r e a s :

s c h o o l l e a r n i n g and m e n ta l h e a l t h .

recommends d e v e l o p m e n t a l and p r e v e n t i v e m e n t a l h e a l t h

programs.
K iserer

(19^3)

talks

about

1.

Assessment r o l e s

2.

Remedial

3-

Consultant

t.

Kducator r o l e s

9.

Research roles. - re s e a r c h

He s u g g e s t s

roles

that

five

- evaluation

o f problem

- development o f rem edial

roles

- to p a re n ts ,

- inservice

t h e main go a l

of the

improvement o f e d u c a t i o n a l

youth"

1OH) .

school

in the

school

us a s o c i a l

diagnostic

school

role to

view t h e sch o o l
have a g r e a t e r
the t i t l e

and s c h o o l p e r s o n n e l

training

psychologist

opportunity

H e r r o n , e t nl . , (l'ffO) p e r c e i v e t h e
expert

planG

community

and t e a c h e r

continuing
(p .

roles:

school

for a l l

is

"the

c h i l d r e n and

p s y c h o l o g i s t as an

v h o s e Job would he t o m a i n t a i n and e n h a n c e t h e

le a rn in g system.

They e m p h a s i s e moving from a

consul t a t i o n , rem e d iatio n ,

p s y c h o l o g i s t would he
involvement

in s c h o o l,

and r e s e a r c h .

In t h e i r

a p u r t o f u team o f e d u c a t o r s ,
and w i l l

not be i s o l a t e d behind

of "psychologist."

Bennett

(id'/d))

discusses

t h e wide v a r i e t y

o f wa y s i n w h i c h t h e

29

school psychologist
Tt

-i

role.

functions,

and he c o n c l u d e s

is

no s i n g l e

H

The t e s t

s t a t e m e n t of a modern e c l e c t i c

school psychologist i s

articulated

suggest, t h a t th e r e s p o n s i b i l i t y

hy H erro n ,

o f the

paraprofessionals

is

personnel,
encouraged.

s h o u ld be p s y c h o l o g i c a l

ment w i t h t h e community i s
s u g g e s t e d a s a way t o

encouraged.

change a t t i t u d e s

and

"educational

rem ediating,

cooperative

involvement.

Recommendations need t o
to

They

p sy ch o lo g ist begins

and re s e a rc h

services

ro le o f the

a l . (1970),

They d i s c u s s

m o d i f i c a t i o n " w i t h e m p h a s i s on c o n s u l t a t i o n ,
r e l a t i o n s with school

view o f t h e

et

school

not ends w ith the p r o c e s s o f e v a l u a t i o n .

There

there

l)se o f
be p e r t i n e n t .

a ! 1 school c h ild ren .

Involve­

"Therapeutic m od ificatio n "
of

i n d i v i d \ m l r. , g r o u p s ,

is

and

fam ilies.
I n s u mma r y ,
psychologist's

it

It

all

model

to

is being suggested

b y ma n y t h a t

and t h e

W riters
role

are

of the

and t h e

stressing
school

psychologist

community a r e

services

for all

t h e need

all

children

Total

d*tl.) :

He i s

from

and a p p l i e d

psychology

should

e m p h a s i s on r e m e d i ­

ecological

approach to

school , p a r e n ts ,

the

tenchers,

comprehensive p sy cho log ical

are being encouraged.

o n e who " b r i n g s

school

m a t e r i a l s and t e c h n i q u e s .

in which th e

was a n t i c i p a t e d b y M a g a r y ' s d e f i n i t i o n
p.

a strong

for a total

involved.

practical,

school

recommendat io n o f e d u c a t i o n a l

in t h e

in v o lv e a change

a behavioristic,

b e c o m e s c h o o l and t e a c h e r o r i e n t e d w i t h
ation

the changes

ro le which are b ein g d iscussed

a clinical-diagnostic
model.

appears th a t

Th e c h a n g i n g r o l e

o f the school

psychologist

a psychological

r e f e r e n c e t o b e a r upon a s e t o f s c h o o l - r e l u t e d

frame of

o h s e r v u tio n s or

21

b ehaviors, with the

end in view o f f a c i l i t a t i n g

learning,

a n d s e l f - a c t u a l i z a t i o n , f o r a s ma n y s c h o o l c h i l d r e n

creativity,

as p o s s i b l e . "

S t u d i e s o f t h e Role o f t h e S chool P s y c h o l o g i s t
i n o t h e r S t a t e s and n a t i o n a l l y
A s u r v e y wa s c o n d u c t e d i n 195^* a t t h e T h a y e r C o n f e r e n c e o f 960
school p s y c h o lo g i s t s
the United S ta te s

from v a r i o u s

(Sutts,

1955)*

o f f u n c t i o n s and a s k e d t h a t
n present
gists

function

present

higher.
1.
9.
3.
)(.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
111.
11.

them t o

wa s r a n k e d

and d e s i r a b l e

were t h a t

"clerical"
Following

districts

throughout

The q u e s t i o n n a i r e c o n t a i n e d

each be ranked

s ame f o r b o t h

vidual te s tin g "

school

a list

in o rd er o f im portance

as

a n d t h e n r e r a n k e d a c c o r d i n g t o how s c h o o l p s y c h o l o ­

s h o u l d p e r f ’o m

ranks were th e

size

be m a x im a lly e f f e c t i v e .
present

first

roles.

and d e s i r a b l e

and " i n t e r v i e w s "

The c h a n g e s

is

the d esirab le

role

the

functions."Indi­

ranked second

from p r e s e n t

wa s l o w e r a n d " s p e c i a l

Ing e n e r a l ,

to

in both

desirable

e d u c a t i o n p r o g r a m s " wa s

according to

functions:

Individual te stin g
Interview s - p u p ils , p a r e n ts , school personnel
.Special e d u c a t i o n p rogram s
O rganizing, g iv in g , in t e r p r e ti n g group t e s t s
C lerical
In-service train in g
Public r e la t i o n s
A d m i n i s t r a t i o n and s u p e r v i s i o n
Remedi al work in b a s i c s k i l l s
Fducntlon programs - develop c u rric u lu m
Hesenrch
-•

The s t r o n g

e m p h a s i s on t e s t i n g ,

program s and t h e

interview ing,

l a c k o f e m p h a s i s on r e m e d i a l

development s u g g e sts

and s p e c i a l

education

work a n d c u r r i c u l u m

a strong d ia g n o stic -c lin ic a l

orientation

rather

t h a n an a p p l i e d o r i e n t a t i o n .
These

findings

are generally

in ag reem en t w ith

t wo p r e v i o u s

role

studies.

In 1950,

major functions
testing

2 0 5 me mb e r s o f D i v i s i o n l 6 o f A . P . A .

included individual

{C u t t s , 1 9 5 5 ) .

school psychologists

t i n e was a l l o t c d ;

Cmith

testing,

170 a d m i n i s t r a t o r s ,

c o n f e r e n c e s , and p r e p a r i n g c a s e

in C a lifo rn ia .

15^ p s y c h o l o g i s t s ,

and 27

functions,

psychologists

thut psychologists

agreed

should perform t h a t

function.

The s t u d y

involved

f a c u l t y members.

o v e r 86% o f t h e a d m i n i s t r a t o r s

eleven o f th e twelve

fix

providing psychological services

For
and

a b s o l u t e l y must o r p r e f e r a b l y

of the tw elve questions

to d iffe re n t

d e a lt with

types of d i s a b i l i t y

A p r o b l e m w i t h t h e Hmith s t u d y was t h a t o f l o o k i n g a t t h e r o l e

o f the school
perspective

psychologist

in which s c h o o l

psychologist

in to th e various kinds

investigated the various

roles

in Iowa as p e r c e iv e d by p s y c h o l o g i s t s
school

This study s o l i c i t e d

teachers

and a s e v e n - p o i n t

therapist,

indicated

that

of activ­

(N = 1 0 0 ) a n d

the actual

s c a l e was u s e d t o

diagnostician,

(H = 2 9 6 ) .

and d e s i r e d

rate a c tiv itie s .

role

Roles

c o n su lta n t, m ental liy g ien ist,

and e d u c a t i o n a l programmer.
teachers

of the school

f r o m 21 s c h o o 1 d i s t r i c t s

opinions regarding both

included psychom etrician,
researcher,

insight

diagnostic

p s y c h o l o g i s t s may b e c o m e i n v o l v e d .

( l ‘l 6 9 )

randomly s e l e c t e d

functions,

in C a l i f o r n i a from a very n a r r o w ,

and n o t p r o v i d i n g

Huberts

niques

in C alifornia kept d iaries

( i 9 6 0 ) i n an u n p u b l i s h e d d o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n a n a l y z e d

th e role of the school psychologist

ities

and g ro u p

r a n k e d h i g h e s t a n d c o m p r i s e d 'J0% o f t h e i r t i m e .

histories

groups.

conferences,

A ls o i n 1950 t h e C a l i f o r n i a D e p a r t m e n t o f

Education reported t h a t
o f how t h e i r

testing,

stated their

Chi-square te c h ­

a t t a c h more i m p o r t a n c e t o t h e

23

psyehometrician

role

t h a t more e m p h a s i s
therapist

role.

psychologists

t h a n do t h e p s y c h o l o g i s t s .

s h o u ld b e p l a c e d upon t h e m e n t a l h y g i e n i s t

Th e c o n s u l t a n t

(U = 2 5 1 ) ,

study of th e

counselors

and s c h o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t s

( 1969) used th e

The s u b j e c t s

and

r o l e was v i e w e d m o r e f a v o r a b l y b y

doctoral

c ro s s -ro le j^erccption of school

Gunter

stated

t h a n by t e a c h e r s .

I n an u n p u b l i s h e d

workers

Both groups

to highly

a t an e m p i r i c a l

perception

(N = 2 5 *0 , s c h o o l
(IJ = 2 ^ 7 )

appropriate.

grouping o f

items.

scale

and

social

in G eorgia,

1^6 i t e m P u p i l P e r s o n n e l S p e c i a l i s t

r a n k e d e a c h i t e m on a J j - p o i n t

inappropriate

self-role

Inventory.

r a n g in g from h i g h l y

F a c t o r a n a l y s i s wa s u s e d t o a r r i v e
Results

indicated that

specific

f u n c t i o n s were u n iq u e ly and in d e p e n d e n tl y a p p r o p r i a t e to e a c h o f t h e
three

roles

and a l s o

three

specialists.
Pansinger

p sy c h o ! ogi s t s
testing

t h a t ma n y f u n c t i o n s w e r e f o u n d t o b e c h a r e d b y a l l

(19(10) d i d

a 5-y e a r follow -up

in which t h e y had t o ran k

16 f u n c t i o n s .

and c o n f e r e n c e s w e r e t h e most d e s i r e d

a n d 19(>7.

Research, public

programs d ecre ase d
diagnostic

in

relations,

importance

Individual

functions

in both

and work w i t h s p e c i a l

from 1962 t o

1967.

1962

education

Reduction in

a n d p a p e r wo r k w a s d e s i r e d .

Ta n ( l 9 b B )
ro le o f the school
psychologists

in an u n p u b l i s h e d d o c t o r a l
psychologist

and d i r e c t o r s

in

Illinois

of special

Personal P ata,

dissertation

education.
of

School P s y c h o lo g is ts ' s Perform ance,

P articipation,

studied the

as p e r c e iv e d by sch o o l

d a t a by u se o f a q u e s t i o n n a i r e which c o n s i s t e d

g ist's

study of Minnesota

He o b t a i n e d h i s
four s e c t i o n s :
School P s y c h o lo ­

and S c h o o l P s y c h o l o g i s t ' s A t t r i b u t e s .

Th e

2li

sample p o p u l a t i o n

included

school p s y c h o lo g ists.
the chi-square

36 d i r e c t o r s

S tatistical

for te stin g the

a n a ly se s used

and p s y c h o l o g i s t s

in I l l i n o i s

school p sychologist.

of variance to

of T an's

D ifferences

than th e

education

directors
studies

bers about special

group:;
was

of

special

of

the g i f t e d ,

school

in the

.Hi which

perceptions.
diagnostic

a close

of

of

practice

the d ia g n o stic

for psychol­

and c o n s u l t a t i o n

school

psychologists'

o f t h e two

performances

a g r e e m e n t b e t w e e n t h e two g r o u p s '
school

psycho! ogi s t s

s h o u l d ma ke

a l 1c h i l d r e n .

According to T a n 's
the school

role

b o a r d mem­

The r a n k o r d e r c o r r e l a t i o n

b o t h group:; a g r e e d t h a t

studies

witli school

and p r i v a t e

strongly

lO e a t e g o r i e s o f t h e
indicated

of the

directors

in th e fo llo w in g a c t i v i t i e s :

consultation

psychologist..

the

p s y c h o l o g i s t s w e r e more p o s i t i v e

education programs,

Doth g r o u p s em ph n si s c d

role o f the

stu d y were t h a t

o f o p i n i o n wore g e n e r a l l y more

fchoo]

ogists.

s t u d y were

determ ine the

had s i m i l a r p e r c e p t i o n s

of degree than of d ir e c tio n .

diagnostic

in t h i s

o f t h e g r o u p means b e t w e e n t h e two g r o u p s .

The g e n e r a l c o n c l u s i o n s

the

e d u c a t i o n and 102

d i f f e r e n c e between o p in io n s o f th e

t wo r e s p o n d e n t g r o u p s a n d t h e a n a l y s i s
significance

of special

p sy chologist's

study

the

rankings, o f th e

10 c a t e g o r i e s

of

p e r f o r m a n c e w e r e as, f o l l o w s . :
11i r e c t o r s

Diagnostic studios
1’o l l o w - u p s t u d i e s
C o n s u l t a t i o n t.o t e a c h e r s
bpcciul placement of c h ild r e n
C o n s u l t a t i o n t o admi n i s t r a t o r s .
C o n f e r e n c e s w i t h p u p i l s andp a r e n t s
Research
C o mmu n i t y C e r v i c e s
Curriculum planning
Psychotherapy

1
2
i
7
l>
n
7
3
'>
111

1~s.y ci iol og i s t s

1
‘>
2
3
t>
It
H
10
7

Tan's

study had a "response

set" b u ilt

into

it

because the

q u e s t i o n n a i r e w a s o r g a n i z e d b y c a t e g o r i e s w h i c h may h a v e i n f l u e n c e d
how t h e

resp o n d en ts answered the

parts of his

items

in th a t

category.

study d e a lt w ith t r i v i a l m a tte r s ;

A l s o , some

f o r ex am p le, t h e r e were

questions

r e g a r d i n g w h e t h e r o r n o t t h e s c h o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t was m a r r i e d ,

a parent,

and w e l l groomed and n e a t .

mentioned te n

functions

b a s e d o n l y on p r e s e n t
tr e n d s were not

o f school

( 3 (')7 l )

studied

psychological

from t h e

functions

on a f o u r - p o i n t

functions

included

screening

for placement,

state

school

in f t .

in

The h i g h e s t

and

included

responses

wa s u n d e r t a k e n t o p r o v i d e
eertification

point

task

national

from

lowest.
have been

As w a s m e n t i o n e d

(hAfP)

survey,

Slid school

by t h e

soon a f t e r

its.

completed

in

psychologists.

comprehensive d a ta re g a rd in g

professional

lim ited

was u n d e r t a k e n

requirem ents, background,

function,

f u t u r e d e v e 1o p m e n t s .

this

Hemedial

comprehensive study o f th e

i sycliol ogi sts.
This

IP

ranking

insorvicc.

population.

for a national

1‘h i o .

rank

psychometric e v a lu a tio n ,

up t o t h i s

or a p a rtic u la r

of fehooj

Loui s,

and

cited

of 11o personnel

area s, w er e risked t o

counseling,

p s y c h o ] o g i s t , and

founding

role

A total

of importance.

parent

studios

Association

ation,

so t h a t r o l e

p sy c h o lo g y as viewed by s u p e r ­

teacher consultation,

national

training,

school

cervices.

scale

t h e r e was a n e e d

I d ’fO h y UAf'l',

above

t h e s e r a n k i n g s were

functions

and p s y c h o t h e r a p y w e r e r a n k e d t h e

t o one p a r t i c u l a r

role o f the

desired

la rg e st m etropolitan

Most o f t h e

previously

wa s u n f o r t u n a t e t h a t

ra th e r than

directors

instruction

rankings of th e

indicated.

Kirschner
visors

it

In t h e

such t h i n g s

professional

n e e d s and p r o b l e m s ,

It
as

affili­

salary,

and

26

The r o l e a n d f u n c t i o n o f s c h o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t s a s d e t e r m i n e d b y
this

national

s tu d y a p p e a re d to b e dominated by a c t i v i t i e s

dual psycho-educational evalu atio n ,
conferences.

T h i s was t r u e

projection.

Individual

professional

activity

for both the c u r r e n t

c o u n s e l i n g was a l s o

in both c u r r e n t

e m p h a s i s wa s p l a c e d o n c o n s u l t i n g
tio n than

in t h e

current

b e h a v i o r a l management,
frequently

report w riting,

identified

role.

and p a r e n t - t e a c h e r

role

and id e a l r o l e

considered

and i d e a l

activities

of indivi­

an i m p o r t a n t

projections.

in the

ideal

G reater

role p ro je c ­

R e g u l a r and s p e c i a l program e v a l u a t i o n ,

and e d u c a t i o n a l program p la n n in g were th e m ost
areas

for c o n s u lta tio n

in the

ideal

role

project]on.
According to t h e
ment

RASP s t u d y t h e s k i l l s

i n c l u d e d p s y c h o l o g i c a l a nd e d u c a t i o n a l

programming, b e h a v io r m o d i f i c a t i o n
sional
desired

ooinmun i c a t i o n .

to improve t h e i r

ro le s as

e m p h a s i s on d i a g n o s i s a n d
When t h e
what

internal

school

aspects

t i o n o f school

diagnosis,

planning,

This in dicated

that

"change ag en ts"

school
for

a national

effort

due o f t h e

by p r o f e s s i o n a l

b e made t o e x a m i n e a n d c l a r i f y

function of the school

pated educational

i n t h e HASP s t u d y a b o u t

and m e n t a l h e a l t h

This, w a s a v e r y

atten­

r e s o lu tio n w ithin the p ro fe s s io n ,

o f tlie s t u d y was " T h a t

r o l e and

place less

psychology needed the n atio n al

frequently mentioned.

future

and t o

report w ritin g .

p s y c h o 1o g i s t s

associations

and p r o f e s ­

school p sy ch o lo g ists

p s y c h o l o g i s t s were asked

of

educational

counseling,

the

and f u n c t i o n w e r e most

ogists'

most in need o f d e v e lo p ­

psychologist

needs o f

complete and thorough

the

role

recommendations
school
current

psychol­
and

in te n n s of a n t i c i ­

students"

(p.

(Hi).

study and provided

much h e l p f u l

inform ation.

was b r i e f a n d g l o b a l
extent

H o w e v e r , t h e s e c t i o n on r o l e

in emphasis.

school psychologists

It

also

failed to

p erfo rm each a c t i v i t y

and f u n c t i o n

ask to what

and t h e

im portance

o f each a c t i v i t y .

Studies

of the School P sy ch o lo g ist
in Michigan

P r i o r t o i 9 6 0 t h e r e wa s n o r e s e a r c h
psychology

in Michigan.

number o f a t t e m p t s

to

school p sy ch o lo g ical

During t h e

1960' s,

services.

In

1962, t h e

requirements

by means, o f a s u r v e y .

s c l 100 I d i s t r i c t s

however,

and r e m u n e r a t i o n

the

your d i a g n o s t i c i a n s . "

The s t u d y a s s u m e d t h a t

t h e d i a g n o s t i c i a n was d i a g n o s t i c
The r e s u l t s

tation

fi r e a s

checked th is

development -

ment - P l ^ ;
-

follows:

function;

Teacher s e le c tio n -

P55; P u b l i c

D elations -

questionnaires

Age, s e x , J o b t i t l e ,

testing

9/5;

functions of th e

fu n ctio n s which are b a s i c t o
the general

T e a c h e r C o u n s e l i n g - 66/1; C a s e
-

Inservice

PJJ; R e s e a r c h -

9]£; Curriculum d e v e lo p ­
training

- P/5; C o n s u l ­

P55.

( 9 6 . 6 ^ o f POY) f r o m s c h o o l

h a n d i c a p p e d progriutis s e r v e d ,

of

P a r e n t C o u n s e l i n g - 9**55 o f t h e

in a 1 9 b i unpu b lish e d study

district

function

of mentally handicapped

3’up i 1 c o u n s e l i n g

b e a s k e and A u s t i n
returned

f r o m *<3

w h i c h hu d m e n t a l l y h a n d i c a p p e d p r o g r a m s w e r e a n a l y z e d .

"Please chock those

history

of school

Data from a d m i n i s t r a t o r s

school d ia g n o s tic ia n :

adm inistrators

in

D e tro it Public Schools

Only one q u e s t i o n on t h e s u r v e y p e r t a i n e d t o

children.

t h e r e were a

s t u d y s ome o f t h e p r o b l e m s a n d t r e n d s

studied th e p ro fessio n al
diagnosticians

concerning school

r e v i e w e d 117

diagnosticians.

s i z e by m e m b e r s h i p , t y p e s
number o f d i a g n o s t i c i a n s

of m entally

in the sy stem ,

adm inistrative

data,

and t y p e s o f t e s t s

s a l a r y , work l o a d ,

used.

As i n t h e p r e v i o u s

i n t e r e s t wa s f o c u s e d m o r e o n g e n e r a l
t h a n on f u n c t i o n .
their

time

It

in th e

and r e c o r d s ,

travel.

Individual

in d if f e r e n t ta s k s ,

research

and d e m o g r a p h i c

did s u g g e s t t h a t

f o llo w in g ways:

reports

time spent

cited,

inform ation r a th e r

school d ia g n o stic ia n s

Individual assessm ent,

c o n s u lta tio n , individual

school

in n a t u r e .

Age, c o x ,

and s a l a r y w er e s t u d i e d .

determine the u n iv e rs ity

attended

hy t h e

degree of s a t i s f a c t i o n

with t r a i n i n g .

its e lf directly

functions

to the

An i n t e r e s t i n g

degrees,
This

school

However,

of the

school

t o e a c h o f ‘O' i n t e r m e d i a t e

‘>fd s c h o o l

superintendents.

principal.

the q u e s tio n n a ire ;

IIP

services.

school

included

The* s t u d y p o i n t e d
It. a l s o

hroador role
all

this

in th e

study a ls o

indicated

s c h o o l s and

sought t o

it

did not

address

diagnostician.
1066.

superintendents

A total

He s e n t
and

q u e s t i o n n a i r e was
of

16 9 c o m p l e t e d

s u p e r i n t e n d e n t s a n d 9 -i e l e m e n t a r y

out t h e need

that

sice of

d i a g n o s t i c i a n and t h e

The a d d i t i o n a l

t o h e c o m p l e t e d hy a n e l e m e n t a r y

principals..

and

(19610 was

title,

s t u d y wa s c o m p l e t e d hy S w a n s o n i n

two q u e s t i o n n a i r e s
district,

research,

assessment took the m a jo rity o f time.

demographic

district,

spent

group t e s t i n g ,

counseling,

The J a m e s A. Dunn s t u d y o f s c h o o l d i a g n o s t i c i a n s
basically

the

the

to expand p s y c h o l o g i c a l

diagnostician

function

competently

s h o u l d asruune a
In working w i t h

children,

L esiak's

study

(l'O l)

entitled

" M i c h i g a n Dehool

Psychologists:

IO6 O - I 0 7 0 " i s

p ro h ah ly th e most com prehensive s tu d y to d a t e ,

o f DIO s c h o o l

p s y c h o ] o g i st. s r e s p o n d e d

attempted to explore the background,

A total

t o a DP i t e m q u e s t i o n n a i r e w h i c h
professional

practices

and

procedures

for providing

university training,

service,

role

and p r o f e s s i o n a l

listed

and d e s c r i p t i v e t h a n
functions

the previous

in te rm s o f tim e

importance of the

regarding

issues.

R ole and

and f u n c t i o n and g e n e r a l

f u n c t i o n was o n l y one s m a l l p a r t o f t h i s
plete

concerns

functions.

study, but
studies.

spent

rather

The p e r c e n t a g e

below i n d i c a te th e p erce n tag e o f th e
major p o r ti o n o f working time

i t wa s m o r e com­

However,

than

it

only

the r e l a t i v e

figures

for each a c t i v i t y

s c h o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t s who s p e n t t h e

in th a t

activity.

C urrent time s p e n t :
Individual assessm ent
Preparation of w ritten reports
donforoneos
Planning e d u c a tio n a l programs
Id eal time spent:
Individual assessment
Planning e d u c a t i o n a l programs
Conferences
General c o n s u lta tio n
Lesiak also
more i n - s e r v i c e

found t h a t

education,

school

general co n sultation,

and p l a n n i n g o f e d u c a t i o n a l p ro gram s
t h e way o f w r i t i n g
were d i a g n o s i s
ub i 1 i t i e
cited

sation

to a ll

and t h e n e e d

additional

in

skills

r e m e d ia tio n o f l e a r n i n g di

teelmiqui.

c o n c e r n s were a d e s i r e

children

program e v a l u a t i o n ,

The t h r e e m o s t d e s i r e d

and b e h a v i o r m o d i f i c a t i o n

t o do_

fo r c h ild re n w hile doing le s s

of le arn in g d i s a b i l i t i e

professional

services

reports.

psychologists preferred

i'he m o s t

frequently

to provide psychological

for a strong

professional

organi­

in the s t a t e .
In a r e c e n t

s u r v e y o f :?0 o s c h o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t s

by t h e M ichigan A s s o c i a t i o n o f f e h o o l

Psychologists

(idyp)

completed

regarding

inservice

30
needs,

the

following to p ic s

o f i n t e r e s t were o f c o n c e r n t o them.

1.

The u s e o f t h e

2.

A diagnostic-prescriptive

approach t o

3.

A lternative

standardized

approaches to

description

.

Legal:

5.

school p s y c h o lo g ist as

goals,

wa s i n t e r e s t i n g

and r e g u l a t i o n s ,

d i r e c t l y with th e

was.

testing:

"behavioral

liability,

an d due p r o c e s s

to note t h a t

of the
- What i s

It

r e s p o n d e n t s were con­
a school psychologist?"

A ccountability

Although t h i s

that

pre-school education

r e q u i r e m e n t s , competency based programs.

cerned with "hole d e f i n i t i o n

6 .

consultant

and d e v e l o p m e n t a l l e a r n i n g

new r u l e s

Training:

a behavioral

s t u d y wa s c o n c e r n e d w i t l i i n s e r v i c e

functions of the

th e school p sy chologists
It

tills time

t h e r e w e r e no s t u d i e s

interest

in the h isto ry

devoted

p s y c h o l o g i s t and what h i s

in t h e

functions

of school

exclusively to

activities

and

role

of behavioral

Of t h e

the

and a c t i v i t i e s

functions

six

studios

of the

concerning the general

psychologists;

cited,

the

psychology in Michigan
role o f the

school

functions, should bo.

in Michigan have been demographic

in i n t e r e s t .

briefly

pointed out

and d i n g n o s i s - p r e s c r i p t i o n .

lip t o

the stu d ie s

it

had q u e s t i o n s c o n c e r n i n g wliat t h e i r

also pointed out t h e i r

consultation

school p sy ch o lo g ist,

needs and not

in o r i e n t a t i o n

t wo d i d n o t d e a l

school p s y c h o lo g is ts ;

expansion of th e

services

at

Most o f
or general

a l l with

one d e a l t
o f school

t w o c o n t a i n e d u q u e s t i o n o r t w o c o n c e r n i n g how s c h o o l

31
psychologists

spent th e ir

school psychologists
time s p e n t,
studies

tim e; one c o n ta in e d q u e s tio n s

sp en t t h e i r tim e, what

is

the "ideal" m ajority

and w h a t a d d i t i o n a l s k i l l s w e r e n e e d e d .

d i d n o t p r o v i d e muc h i n s i g h t

psychologist

in M ichigan.

s tu d ie s were

f o r t h e most

the p e rsp e c tiv e

In g e n e r a l,
of th e

of

these

school

which were d i s c u s s e d

p art gen era l r a th e r than

ca ses t h e a c t i v i t i e s were d is c u s s e d
spent" r a th e r than

into the ro le

The a c t i v i t i e s

c o n c e r n i n g how

specific.

in these
In most

from t h e p e r s p e c t i v e o f " t i m e
of its

importance t o

the role

of

the school psycho!ogist.

fhimmnry o f H e l e v a n t L i t e r a t u r e
The r o l e o f t h e s c h o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t
experienced

a b r ie f but

number o f s c h o o l
attention

psycho!ogists

on t h e p r o b l e m s

activities

psychologists
practical,

since

The r a p i d

the

discussion

changes

in

the

model.

and t h e i r

ogist.

The r e s e a r c h

descriptive,
and t h e

relative

mo d e l

and what
t h e r e has

of school

to a b e h a v io ris tic ,

activities

of the

school

psychologist,

study those various

im portance to th e r o le

of the school

little
activi­
psychol­

in Michigan has g e n e r a lly been demographic,

and more c o n c e r n e d a b o u t s a l a r i e s ,

s i s e o f school

ra th e r than

ten years

focused

A l t h o u g h ma ny w r i t e r s h a v e s u g g e s t e d

research has a c tu a lly been c a rrie d out to
ties

last

of changing th e o r ie n ta tio n

from a c l i n i c a l - d i a g n o s t i c

and a p p l i e d

psychologist is

W ithin th e

has

increase in the

S e c o n d Wo r l d War h a s

o f what a s c h o o l

he should engage in .

been c o n s id e r a b le

various

stormy h i s t o r y .

in th e U nited S t a t e s

districts

s e r v e d by t h e

upon t h e a c t u a l a c t i v i t i e s

training
school

procedures,

psychologist

of the school p sychologist.

32

A lso, most of th e r e s e a r c h t o d a t e has
than as

it

should be.

described the role

as

is

rather

CHAPTER IT I

METHODOLOGY

Introduction
This
data.

chapter

fo c u s e s upon t h e methodology u sed

Included are se c tio n s

p o p u la tio n sampled,
and s p e c i f i c

d e a lin g with

definition

to obtain

the

of term s, the

th e development of th e q u e s ti o n n a ir e , hypotheses

questions,

statistical

analysis,

and t h e

collection

of

the d ata.
It

is

im portant,

each o f t h e terms

used

first

in the

of a ll,

to

provide a d e fin itio n

for

study.

D efinition

o f Terms

Id e a l Hole
Ideal

role

refers

to

a set

o f m a j o r a n d s p e c i f 1c a c t i v i t i e s

th e s c h o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t as p e r c e i v e d w ith v a r y in g d e g r e e s
by s c h o o l
It

is

psychologists

a r o l e which

to be,

not

is

and d i r e c t o r s

of special

in the p e r f e c t

sense,

of importance

education

p e r c e i v e d by t h e r e s p o n d e n t s

as

b u t r a t h e r as they

of

in M ichigan.

they wish

prefer it;

it
it

is

a perceived p referab le ro le.

Specific

A ctivities
Specific a c t iv it ie s

refer to

fifty-five

particular

w h i c h may b e p e r f o r m e d b y t h e s c h o o l

psychologist

list

i n A p p e n d i x A.

of these a c tiv itie s

is

provided

id

in th e

functions

ideal

role.

These a c t i v i t i e s

A

3>4
a r e subsumed u n d e r t h e e i g h t m a j o r a c t i v i t i e s

d escrib ed below.

Major A c t i v i t i e s
Major a c t i v i t i e s

re fe r to eight

general

f u n c t i o n s w h i c h may

be p e r f o r m e d by t h e

school psy cho log ist

in the i d e a l

combinations of the

fifty-five

activities

activities.

1.

They i n c l u d e t h e

specific

role.

Selected

define t h e s e major

following;

D i a g n o s t i c T e s t i n g a n d E v a l u a t i o n . — The s c h o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t

ma k e s a d i a g n o s t i c

s t u d y o f a c h i l d by means o f v a r i o u s m e a s u r e m e n t

instrum ents or techniques to determine the
difficulties

in s c h o o l.

There are te n

reason

specific

for the c h ild 's

activities

within th is

major a c t i v i t y .

2.

Te a c h e r C o n s u l t a t i o n ami P r . y c h o - K d u c a t i o n a l

I n d i v i d u a l C h i l d r e n . — The s c h o o l
and s c h o o l

personnel

u n i q u e a mi

specific

Planning

psychologist co n su lts with teachers

in p l a n n i n g a c h i l d ' s s c h o o l program
to that

individual

p s y c h o l o g i c a l and e d u c a t i o n a l

for

and which

principles.

There

which is

i s b a s e d upon sound
are six

specific

a c t i v i t i e s w ith i n t h i s major a c t i v i t y .

3.

P s y c h o t h e r a p y a n d / o r C o u n s e l i n g w i t h C h i l d r e n . — The s c h o o l

c h o lo g ist gives d i r e c t

sup po rtive h elp to the c h i l d

improve o r

change t h e c h i l d ' s

readily to

a school

activities

behavior

within th i s

major a c t i v i t y .

i n an a t t e m p t t o

s o lie c a n a d a p t h i m s e l f mor e

learning environment.

There

psy­

are four s p e c ific

35

I*.

P a r e n t C o n s u l t a t i o n . — Th e s c h o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t h e l p s t h e p a r e n t s

u n d e r s t a n d t h e p s y c h o l o g i c a l and e d u c a t i o n a l n e e d s o f t h e i r
There a r e

5.

four sp e c ific

activities

w ithin t h i s

children.

major a c t i v i t y .

C o mmu n i t y H e l a t i o n s h i p s . — T h e s c h o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t w o r k s w i t h i n

t h e community i n an e d u c a t i o n a l
l i a is o n between th e

and i n f o r m a t i v e manner and p r o v id e s a

s c h o o l and t h e

handicapped c h ild re n .

community r e g a r d i n g p r o g r a m s f o r

There a re n in e s p e c i f i c

activities

w ithin th i s

major a c t i v i t y .

6.

School

ogist provides
curriculum,

C u r r i c u l u m and Pr og ram C o n s u l t a t i o n . — The s c h o o l p s y c h o l ­
recom m endations and i n f o r m a t i o n

and p r o g r a m m i n g

in th e

the q u a lity of the educational
change.

There are twelve

regarding

school d i s t r i c t

special needs,

in o r d e r t o improve

p r o g r a m and b r i n g a b o u t e d u c a t i o n a l

specific

activities

w ith in t h i s mnjor

activity.

'{.

Adm inistration

psychologist
nel,

coordinates

and m a ke s s p e c i a l

ing.

There are six

H.

of sp ecial
special

within

it

w ithin

and s c h e d u l ­

t h i s major a c t i v i t y .

p s y c h o l o g i s t by means o f v a r i o u s

i n f o n n a t i o n , answer q u e s t i o n s ,

e d u c a tio n a l needs o f c h ild re n
activities

supervises person­

such as t r a n s p o r t a t i o n

activities

R e s e a r c h . — The school

which c o n f r o n t e d u c a t i o n a s

specific

education programs,

arrangements

specific

niques seeks to g a t h e r

K d u c a tl o n P r o g r a m s . — The s c h o o l

tech­

or solve problems

a t t e m p t s t o m e e t t h e p s y c h o l o g i c a l and
in a school

setting.

t h i s major a c t i v i t y .

There are

four

36

P o p u l a t ion
The p o p u l a t i o n

f r om w h i c h t h e

d a t a wan d e r i v e d

for th is

i n c l u d e d t h e t o t a l number o f s c h o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t s and d i r e c t o r s
special

education

i n t h e S t a t e o f M i c h i g a n who m e t t h e

study
of

following

c r i t o r i a:

1.

D irectors
This
of

o f special education
title

special

refers to a l l

education

in t h e

t h o s e who a r e

employed

K t a t c o f M i c h i g a n and a p p r o v e d as

s u c h hy t h e M ich ig nn D e p a r t m e n t o f K d u c a t i o n
form t h e

as d i r e c t o r s

duties of a d ire c to r of special

a n d t h o s e who p e r ­

o d u c n t i o n h u t who may

n o t h e a p p r o v e d hy t h e M i c h i g n n D e p a r t m e n t o f K d u c a t i o n .

<?.

f.chonl

psychologists

This t i t l e

refers, to a l l

Department o f K ducntion's
p o ra ry o r permanent)
in t h a t

capacity.

criteria

as. a s c h o o l

(Note:

at

diagnostician

( c i t h e r tem­
and a r e employed

Law

, which e f f e c t i v e l y

s c h o o l p s . y c h o l o g i s t , had n o t y e t gone i n t o

the time th e

T here were l t d
gists

to

for approval

The t e n n school, d i a g n o s t i c i a n

h e r e b eca u se Michigan P u b l i c
the t i t l e

t h o s e who h a v e m e t t h e M i c h i g n n

directors

of

ti.

used

changed
effect

s t u d y wa s c o n d u c t e d . )

of special

education

a n d l(h‘> s c h o o l

i n t h e P t u t e o f M i c h i g a n who m e t t h e a b o v e c r i t e r i a

population

is

psycholo­

for a total

t

r

D e v e l o p m e n t o f the? Q u e s t i o n n a i r c
I n o r d e r t o d e t e r m i n e how t h e
tors

school

of sp e c ia l education perceived the

psychologist

in Michigan

of a c tiv itie s

i t wa s c o n s i d e r e d e x p e d i e n t t o c o m p i l e a l i s t

which c o u ld th en be e v a l u a t e d by t h e

fifty-five

and d i r e c ­

id e al ro le of the school

r a t e d and r a n k e d a c c o r d i n g t o r e l a t i v e
included th e

psychologists

specific

respondents

importance.

activities

and

These a c t i v i t i e s

and e i g h t m ajo r a c t i v i t i e s

defined previously.
Tlie i n i t i a l
a careful
detailed

exam ination

organized

literature

o f th e school

psychologist

activities

i n t o e i g h t meaningful

o f t h e q u e s t i o n n a i r e was

of the relevan t

i s s u e s which c o n f r o n t e d him.

The a c t i v i t i e s

which
and t h e

were

com b in atio n s which have been d efin e d

e ig h t major a c t i v i t i e s .
Although th e

questionnaire

sch ool p s y c h o l o g i s t s ,
perceptions
should

in the c o n s tr u c t io n

and a n a l y s i s

t h e many v a r i e d

many i m p o r t a n t

as th e

step

services

in which th e y

and i n w h a t

areas

they

A prelim inary
the w r i t e r 's

was a l s o c o n s i d e r e d

of the respondents

receive

settings

it

regarding

from s ch o o l
should work,
needed t o

around th e a c t i v i t i e s
im portant to

of d is a b ilitie s

psychologists,

the appropriate

s o me o f t h e i r p r o f e s s i o n a l

improve t h e i r

for th e ir

A p i l o t study
a selected

needs,

t o t h e members o f
consultants

from t h e

in t h e C o lleg e o f Kducation a t Michigan

suggestions,

of this

which

com petencies.

g u i d a n c e co m m ittee and t h e r e s e a r c h

Ctate U niversity

of

o b tain the

the types

q u e s t i o n n a i r e wa s s u b m i t t e d

O ffice of Research C on su ltatio n

utilizing

centered

revised

group of school

and a r e v i s i o n was w r i t t e n ,

q u e s t i o n n a i r e wa s c o n d u c t e d ,
psychologists,

directors

of special

education,

trainers

a t Michigan f t a t e

o f school

U niversity,

psychologists,
and c o n s u l t a n t s

Department of Kducation - f p e c i a l
this

pilot

tent,

s t u d y wa s t o

and d i s c o v e r

inconvenient

further

instances

spacing,

of this

shortened,

Kducation C erv ices.

study,

The p u r p o s e o f

refin e the questio nnaire,

and awkward f o r m a t .

pilot

colleagues

from t h e M i c h i g a n S t a t e

of m isunderstanding,

questionnaires, were d i s t r i b u t e d
a result

professional

the length

s ome c o n t e n t wa s c h a n g e d ,

con­

poor w ording,

A total

and a t o t a l

revise

o f D9 p i l o t

o f DO w e r e r e t u r n e d .

of the

As

q u e s t i n n n a i r e was

and c h a n g e s

i n w o r d i n g and

format

were made.
A list
directors

o f t h e n a me s a n d a d d r e s r . e s

of spec ini

(’d u c a t i o n wa s o b t a i n e d

o f Kducation - fp e c in l
t h o s e who me t t h e

of school

Kducation K ervicos.

criteria

as o u tlin ed

p s y c h o l o g 5s t s

and

from t h e M i c h i g a n D e p a r t m e n t
This

list

included a l l

previously.

' Hi e Q u e s t i <>nnai r e
'Hit? q u e s t i o n n a i r e
parts

(see

1.
tion

Appendix

Ueneral

in

Information

f o r m was. d i v i d e d

or d ir e c to r of sp ecia l

D a g o . — The p u r p o s e

into

o f ex p e r i • - nee a s

education,

highest degree obtained,

approval

training.

,> f t h e

r e g a r d i ng a g e , s o : , t yj «•

number o f y e a r s

type of u n iv e rsity

final

nine

I1) .

p a g e was t o o b t a i n d a t a

which employed,

its.

amount o f

and c e r t i f i c a t ion

A different

general

district

a soil- .1

teaching

general

inform a­
in

p r y c h o l o g i s t

experience,
inform ation,

and

i n f o r m a t i o n p a g e was

39

designed f o r each group.
used as i d e n t i f y i n g
district,

The i n f o r m a t i o n o b t a i n e d

data.

Some o f t h e

inform ation

from t h i s

p a g e was

- t y p e and s i z e o f

amount o f p r o f e s s i o n a l e x p e r i e n c e as e i t h e r a s c h o o l p s y c h o l ­

og ist or d irec to r of sp ecial
was u s e d a s

education,

independent v a r ia b le s

amount o f t e a c h i n g e x p e r i e n c e -

in th e

statistical

analysis of role

perception.

2.
of the

A ctivities
fity-five

psychologists

o f th e School P s y c h o l o g i s t . — This

specific

activities

( s e e A pp en dix A).

w h i c h may b e p e r f o r m e d b y s c h o o l

To a v o i d a r e s p o n s e

r e s p o n d e n t s may s e l e c t a n s w e r s on t h e b a s i s
ing, these a c t i v i t i e s

were i n t e n t i o n a l l y

the questionnaire.

The r e s p o n d e n t s
relative

in which t h e
group­

s c r a m b l e d by p l a c i n g them i n

them one a t a t i m e t o p r o v i d e

following

set

o f major a c t i v i t y

a h a t n nd s e l e c t i n g

according to the

section consisted

a random o r d e r

in

checked each o f t h e a c t i v i t i e s
im portance s c a l e ,

and t h e y were

s c o r e d a c c o r d i n g t o t h e number i n p a r e n t h e s i s .
A.

Mu s t P e r f o r m

(Ucoro:

The s c h o o l

H.

5)

p s y c h o l o g i s t MUTT p e r f o r i n t h i s

i s a m a j o r and e s s e n t i a l

function of the

Uhould P e r f o r m

It)

The s c h o o l
It

is

(Moore:

psychologist

a meaningful,

activity.

highest p rio rity .

THOlIhU p e r f o r m t h i s

significant,

It

and d e s i r a b l e

activity.
function

of

me di um p r i o r i t y .
C.

May P e r f o r m

(Mcore:

The s c h o o l
he w i s h e s .

It

3)

p s y c h o l o g i s t MAY p e r f o r m t h i s
is

a minor

function of

i s p e r m i s s a b 1e and a c c e p t a b l e .

activity

low p r i o r i t y

but

if
it

JiO

D.

Should Not Perform

The s c h o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t
ity.

It

is

2.)

(Score:

SHOULD NOT p e r f o r m t h i s , a c t i v ­

not a d e s ir a b l e o r meaningful

function

for the

school psychologist.
E.

M u s t Dot F e r f o r m

(Score:

l)

The s c h o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t MUST HOT p e r f o r m t h i s
It

is

n o t an e s s e n t i a l

or leg itim ate

activity.

function for the

school p sy c h o lo g ist.
The p u r p o s e o f t h i s
the r e la tiv e
school

im portance of p erform ing each

psychologist

A score

p a r t o f t h e q u e s t i o n n a i r e wa s t o d e t e r m i n e

from o n e t o

in the

ideal

of the a c t i v i t i e s

of the

r o l e as p e r c e i v e d by t h e r e s p o n d e n t s .

f i v e wa s g i v e n

for each

r e c e i v i n g a f i v e a n d a " Mu s t H o t " r e c e i v i n g

r e s p o n s e w i t h a "Must"
a one.

Total scores

for

each major a c t i v i t y were o b t a i n e d .

3.

Relative

t o rank t h e i r
relative
it

I m p o r t a n c e o f A c t i v i t i e s . — Th e r e s p o n d e n t s w e r e a s k e d

perceptions of the

importance to

i s now) and i n t h e

only

eig h t major a c t i v i t i e s

the school p sy ch o lo g ist
ideal

role

as p re v io u s ly

item in t h e q u e s t i o n n a i r e which

purpose o f in clu d in g
r o l e witli t h e

ideal

it

was t o

in t h e

included

as t o

present

defined.

their
role

(as

T h i s was t h e

the p re s e n t r o l e .

The

p r o v i d e a means of comparing t h e p r e s e n t

r o l e acc o rd ing to the

perceived

importance1 o f th e

e ig h t major a c t i v i t i e s .

1).
asked to

R e l a t i v e Ti me A l l o t m e n t o f A c t i v i t i e s . — T h e r e s p o n d e n t s w e r e
specify the percentage

ceived as necessary

for the

of professional

school psychologist

tim e which t h e y
in t h e

ideal

per­

role

to

It l

spend i n

5.

each of th e

eig h t major a c t i v i t i e s .

Adequacy o f P r e p a r a t i o n

asked t o

rank t h e i r

perceptions

degree o f p re p a ra tio n

6.

f o r A c t i v i t i e s . — The r e s p o n d e n t s w e r e
of the

in each o f th e

school p sy c h o lo g ists'

e ig h t major a c t i v i t i e s .

Children Pcceiving Professional. Psychological

Services

t h e S c h o o l P s y c h o l o g i s i , . — Th e r e s p o n d e n t s w e r e a s k e d t o
what e x t e n t n in e t y p e s
c h ild re n with v a rio u s
services

from t h e

of children

indicate to

i n c l u d i n g n o r m a l c h i l d r e n and

school psychologist

1 - Must r e c e i v e

3 - May r e c e i v e

service;

7.

from

types of handicaps should receiv e p ro fe s s io n a l

c od e was u s e d :

receive

relative

in the

service;

ideal

role.

The f o l l o w i n g

?. - N h o u l d r e c e i v e

^ - Nhould Not r e c e i v e

service;

service;

5 - M u s t IJot

service.

Nettings

were asked

f o r Nchool

to answer t h r e e

mental

condition:',

of the

school
A.

questions

psycho!ogist

in the

What s h o u l d b e t h e

asked
hUllO

A c t i v i t i e s . . — Th e r e s p o n d e n t s

relating

to the

setting

surrounding the performance of the various

school

b.

Psychol ogi cal

psychologist
to

ideal

check one o f

activities

role.

s i so o f t h e
should

or e n v iro n ­

student

service"

five categories

p o p u l a t i o n which t h e

The r e s p o n d e n t s w e r e
ranging

f r o m N000 t o

.

What p r o g r . u n s s h o u l d be* s e r v e d "
and t h e
to the

r e s p o n d e n t s were asked to
follow ing code:

3 - May N e r v e ;

h -

Ne v e n p r o g r a m s w e r e l i s t e d
cheek each one a c c o r d in g

1 - Must N e r v e ;

N h o u l d No t N e r v e ;

M - Nhould N erve;

‘> - M u s t Not N e r v e .

C.

To whom s h o u l d
responsible?
the

B.

s c h o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t s ho m o s t

Five p r o f e s s i o n a l p erso nn el were l i s t e d

r e s p o n d e n ts were ask ed t o

and

cheek one.

P r o f e s s i o n a l Needs o f t h e P c h o o l P s y c h o l o g i s t . — The r e s p o n d e n t s

were asked t o answer n in e
needs o f th e

questions

school p sy ch o lo g ist

teaching experience,

d ealin g with v ario u s

in th e

certification

in " p r iv a t e p r a c t i c e , "

a n d how t o

q u e s t i o n s which were a s k e d .
affiliations

professional

The q u e s t i o n

1 - Must B e l o n g ; P -

requesting the
ing code:

respondents

1 - Mu s t P o ; P -

Years of re q u ir e d
degree necessary,
freedom t o engage

concerning p ro fe s s io n a l

eight professional

Should Belong;

structured

organisa­

check each one a c c o r d in g t o t h e

5 - Must Not B e l o n g .

i m p r o v e m e n t was

professional

improve p r o f e s s i o n a l l y were t h e

and r e q u e s t i n g t h e r e s p o n d e n t s t o

- S h o u l d Not B e l o n g ;

role.

affiliations,

was s t r u c t u r e d by l i s t i n g

following code:

ideal

requirem ents, the

use o f p a r a p r o f e s s i o n a l s , p r o f e s s i o n a l

tions

immediately

3 - May B e l o n g ;

The q u e s t i o n

by l i s t i n g

concerning

four a c t i v i t i e s

t o check e a c h one a c c o r d i n g t o t h e
N h o u l d P o ; 3 - May P o ; )| -

and

follow ­

Nhould Not P o ;

5 - Mu s t N o t ])o.

9.

I m p r o v e m e n t o f ( C o m p e t e n c i e s . — T h i s war. t h e o n l y

question

in t h e q u e s t i o n n a i r e .

specific

professional

o g is ts needed to

areas

open-ended

The r e s p o n d e n t s w e r e a s k e d t o

in which th e y

improve o r u p g r a d e t h e i r

perceived
skills

the

list

the

school p sy ch o l­

and c o m p e t e n c i e s .

1*3

C o ll e c t io n o f Data
A m a i l i n g was s e n t t o t h e
i n t e r e s t on F e b r u a r y 1 3 , 1 9 7 3 .
one q u e s t i o n n a i r e ,
the

questionnaire

addressed envelope

( s e e A p p e n d i c e s B and C).

r e s p o n d e n t s and i n c r e a s i n g

r e t u r n e d 9 9 ( 6 6 %).

tionnaires

of

A f o l l o w - u p l e t t e r was

the r a te of retu rn

( 70/0

Two o f t h e

( s e c A p p e n d i x I )).

education.

while d i r e c t o r s

questionnaires

an aly sis because o f e rro rs

were r e t u r n e d

Three q u e s tio n n a ir e s
count:

return

o f 1417 q u e s t i o n n a i r e s o r 75% w e r e r e t u r n e d b y s c h o o l

318 q u e s t i o n n a i r e s

the s t a t i s t i c a l

for the

f o r t h e purpose o f c o n t a c t i n g t h e non-

p s y c h o l o g i s t s and d i r e c t o r s o f s p e c i a l
returned

in the population o f

E n c l o s e d was a l e t t e r o f e x p l a n a t i o n ,

and a s ta m p e d ,

m a i l e d on F e b r u a r y <?fl, 1 9 7 3 ,

A total

5 58 p e o p l e

to the

sender because

d ire c to r of special

psychologists

of special

education

could not be used in
completion.
of a faulty

were com p leted b u t were n o t

two were r e c e i v e d t o o l a t e

s p e c ify whether i t

in

fchool

included

for consideration

had b e e n c o m p l e t e d by a s c h o o l

'Two q u e s ­
address.
in th e above

and o n e

failed

to

psych o lo g ist or

education.

H y po th eses and H p c c i f i c

Questions

Hypotheses
Hypothesis

I:

T h e r e i s an i n t e r a c t i o n b e t w e e n t h e amount o f
t e a c h i n g e x p e r i e n c e and g r o u p m e m b e r s h ip ( s c h o o l
psychologists or directors, of special education)
on t h e p e r c e p t i o n o f t h e i d e a l r o l e o f t h e s c h o o l
p s y c h o l o g i s t on e a c h o f t h e e i g h t m a j o r a c t i v i t i e s .

Hypothesis

II:

T h ere i s an i n t e r a c t i o n betw ee n amount o f p r o f e s ­
s i o n a l e x p e r i e n c e as e i t h e r a school p s y c h o l o g i s t
o r d i r e c t o r o f s p e c i a l e d u c a t i o n and g r o u p member­
s h i p on t h e p e r c e p t i o n o f t h e i d e a l r o l e o f t h e
s c h o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t 011 e a c h o f t h e e i g h t m a j o r
activities.

u

Hypothesis I I I :

fpecific
1.

T h e r e i s an i n t e r a c t i o n b e t w e e n t y p e a n d s i z e
o f school d i s t r i c t in which th e scho o l p s y c h o l o g i s t
and d i r e c t o r o f s p e c i a l e d u c a t i o n a r e employed and
g r o u p m e m b e r s h i p on t h e p e r c e p t i o n o f t h e i d e a l
r o l e o f t h e s c h o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t on e a c h o f t h e
e ig h t major a c t i v i t i e s .

Questions
What i s t h e

relative

importance o f the e ig h t major a c t i v i t i e s

of the school psychologist

in the p re s e n t

r o l e as r a n k e d by s c h o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t s
education,

r o l e and in the

ideal

and d i r e c t o r s o f s p e c i a l

a n d w h a t i s t h e e x t e n t o f a g r e e m e n t b e t w e e n t h e t wo

groups.

What s h o u l d b e t h e r e l a t i v e
to

spend)

ogist

time a l lo tm e n t

o f the e ig h t major a c t i v i t i e s

in th e

( p e r c e n t a g e o f time

o f the school psychol­

id e al , r o l e a s p e r c e i v e d by s c h o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t s and

d irectors of special

education,

and w hat

is the ex te n t of

a g r e e m e n t b e t w e e n t h e two g r o u p s ?

3.

How p r e p a r e d

is the

major a c t i v i t i e s

school psychologyst to perform the e ig h t

in t h e

o g i s t s anti d i r e c t o r s

ideal

r o l e a s r a n k e d by s c h o o l p s y c h o l ­

of special

e d u c a t i o n , and w h a t i s t h e

e x t e n t o f a g r e e m e n t b e t w e e n t h e t wo g r o u p s . ?

It.

What i s t h e e x t e n t o f a g r e e m e n t w i t h i n

each group between t h e

rankings of the e ig h t major a c t i v i t i e s
ideal role,

adequacy of p r e p a r a tio n ,

in the p re s e n t r o l e ,

a n d a mo u n t o f t i m e t o

spend?

5.

Whnt c h i l d r e n s h o u l d r e c e i v e p r o f e s s i o n a l

psychological
«►

1*5

services from the school psychologist in the ideal role as
perceived by school psychologists and directors of special
education?

6.

In what settings or under what environmental conditions should
the school psychologist perform professional services as per­
ceived by school psychologists and directors of special
education?

7.

What arc the professional needs which help school psychologists
become approved and certified, keep informed, and meet the
continuing demands of their role in the schools as perceived
by school psychologists and directors of special education?

8.

In what professional areas do the school psychologists need to
improve their skills and competencies as perceived by both
school psychologists and directors of special education?

Statistical Analysis
To test the three hypotheses the univariate analysis of variance
was used to test each of the eight dependent variables (Finn, 1968).
Kirk (1968, p. 1 9 8 ) discusses the

ugc

of a statistical measure

called the Estimate of the strength of Association.

It enables one to

find out what proportion of the variance in the dependent variable is
accounted for by a specific source of variation.

It must be emphasized

that, if the sample size is sufficiently large as is the case with this
present study, a trivial association between an independent variable and
a dependent variable may achieve statistical significance.

The use of

U6

this statistic in this study was helpful in determining if there was a
meaningful difference or not.
To test the distributional agreement of school psychologists
and directors of special education on each of the fifty-five specific
activities, the chi-square test of homogeneity was used (Conover,
1971, p. 150).
Kendall's Coefficient of Concordance (Conover, 1971* P* 270)
was used to measure the extent of agreement within each group between
present role, ideal role, adequacy of preparation, and time to spend in
each of the eight major activities.

Kendall's Coefficient of Con­

cordance was also used to look at the extent of agreement between the
Gchool psychologists and directors of special education for the present
role, ideal role, adequacy of preparation, and time to spend in each of
the eight major activities.
In order to determine the internal consistency of the items
within each of the eight major activities, Hoyt's (19^1) Internal
Consistency Coefficient was calculated.

This coefficient looks at the

extent to which the items measure the same variable - the major activ­
ity.

It is in essence a reliability index based on the analysis of

variance theory.

"The coefficient of reliability of a test gives the

percentage of the obtained variance in the distribution of test scores
that may be regarded as true variance, that is, as variance not due
to the unreliability of the measuring instrument" (Hoyt, 19^1* p. 153).
For the remainder of the data, summation and percentage
statistics were used.

U7

The statistical programs were run on the digital computer at
the Michigan State University Computer Center using hoth the CDC 6500
and the CDC 3600.

CHAPTER IV

AHALY5IS OF RESULTS

Introduction
This chapter focuses upon the results of the questionnaire and
the statistical analyses which were used to study the data.

The first

section of the chapter is concerned with general information which
describes and compares the school psychologists and directors of
special education according to age, sex, type and size of school
district, amount of experience, and certification.

The second section

deals with the testing of the three null hypotheses in on attempt to
discover if amount of teaching experience, amount of professional
experience as a school psychologist or director of special education,
and type and size of school district have any effect upon role percep­
tion as defined by the eight major activities.

The testing of these

hypotheses will also determine if there are any statistically signifi­
cant differences between school psychologists and directors of special
education concerning their perceptions of the eight major activities
in the ideal role of the school psychologist.

The perceived relative

importance of the fifty-five specific activities and the statistically
significant differences between the respondent groups on these activ­
ities are detailed in the third section of this chapter.

The fourth

section deals with the rankings of the eight major activities according
to perceived present role, ideal role, adequacy of preparation, and

*40

h9

time to spend in the performance of the eight major activities.

An

explanation of which children should receive psychological services
from the school psychologist in the ideal role is given in section five
of this chapter.

The sixth section discusses the settings for school

psychological activities as perceived hy the respondents.

The seventh

section details the perceived professional needs of school psychologists
in Michigan.

The final section describes the professional areas in

which school psychologists need to improve skills and competencies.

General Information
The total number of respondents to the general information items
of the questionnaire included 317 school psychologists and 97 directors
of special education.

Because of various omissions of information by

the respondents, the number of respondents within each table may differ.

Age

In general the school psychologists as a group were younger
than the directors of special education (see Table l).

A total of

58.6% of the school psychologists were below the age of 39 whereas
only h i . 9% of the directors of special education were below this age.
A total of 5 6 .W

of the directors of special education were between

1*0 and 59 years of age whereas only 39 Ji# of the psychologists were
within this age group.

Sex

As shown in Table 2 the school psychologists as a group had a
slightly higher percentage of males (565) to females

whereas the

large majority of the directors of special education were males (83.55).

50

TABLE 1.— Age of Respondents.

Less
than 30

Psychologists
(N = 307)
Directors
(H = 9>0

50-59

%

(H)

20.5 (63) 38.1(117)

28.6

(88)

10.8

5-3

36.2

(3>0

20.2

%

Group

Uo-J*9

30-39

%

00

(N)

(5) 36.2 (3]0

%

60+
%

(N)

(33)

2

(6)

(19)

2.1 (2)

(H)

TABLE 2.— Sex of Respondents.

Female

Male
Group

%

Psychologists
(N = 316)
Directors
(N = 97)

56
83.5

%

00

(178)
(8 1 )

U

16.5

00

(136)
(1 6 )

Type of District in Which Employed
As shown in Table 3 the majority of school psychologists (62.7/*)
and directors of special education (53$) were employed in local school
districts.

A total of 35.7$ of the school psychologists and h^% of

the directors of special education were employed in intermediate school
districts.

P u b lic
in th e

School S tu d en t P o p u la tio n
E m ploying D i s t r i c t

As shown in Table

approximately a third of the school psychol­

ogists worked in each of three district sizes witli student populations

51

of 0-9999 (33.15?), 10 ,000-2)* ,999 (37.3)?), and 25,000+ (29.6)?).

A total

of 1*2 .75? of the directors of special education worked in a district
size of 0 - 99 99 , 38 .55? worked in a district size of 10 ,0 0 0 - 21* ,9 9 9 » and
lB.8 ?E worked in a district size of 2 5 , 0 0 0 or more.

TABLE 3.— Type of District in Which the Respondents were Employed.

Local
Group

Psychologists
(N = 31^')
Directors
(H = 9 6 )

5?

(H)

Intermedi ate

5?

Other*

00

%

00

62.7 (197)

35.7 (112)

1.6

(5 )

53

1*5

2

(2 )

(51)

(1*3)

* "Other" refers to those employed in specific schools or
psycho-diagnostic clinics.

TABLE )*.— The Size of the Public School Student Population in the School
Districts of the Respondents.

0-9999
Group

Psychologists
(N = 311)
Directors
(N = 96)

%

00

1 0 ,000-pl* ,999

%

00

2 5 ,0 0 0 +
%

00

33.1 (103)

3 7 . 3 (1 1 6 )

29.6

(92)

It,?.7

3 8 .5

18.8

(1 8 )

()tl)

(37)

Years of Professional Experience
as a School Psychologist or
Director of Special Education
It is evident that school psychologists as a group had les3
experience in their positions than did the directors of special education

52

in their positions (see Table 5).

A total of k6,6% or almost half

of the school psychologists had l-l* years of experience as a school
psychologist.

A total of 38.3# of the directors of special education

had 1—i* years of experience, Ul.5# had 5-9 years of experience, and

1 9 .2 # had 10+ years of experience.

TABLE 5*— Years of Professional Experience as a School Psychologist
or Director of Special Education.

0

l-li

Group

%

(H)

Psychologists
(M = 313)
Directors
(N = 9 J0

.6

(2 )
(l)

1

%

5-9
(N)

%

(N)

L6.6 (lh6)

35.2 (lio)

17.6

(55)

38.3

111.5

19*2

(18)

(N)

(36)

%

10 +

(39)

Highest Degree Earned
Two-thirds of the school psychologists {66%) and two-thirds
(6 7 .5#) of the directors of special education earned their M.A. or M.S.
degree as their highest degree (see Table 6).

A total of 20# of the

school psychologists and 18 # of the directors of special education
attained the Educational Specialist degree.

A total of 13# of the

school psychologists and 13.5# of the directors attained either the
Ed.D or Ph.D.

Approximately one-third of each group had degrees above

the M.A. or M.S. level whereas only 1# of both groups had less than an
M.A. or M.S. degree.

53

TABLE 6 .— Highest Degree Earned hy the Respondents.

BS or BA

MS or HA

Group

#

(N)

#

Psychologists
(N = 315)
Directors
(N = 96)

1

(M

66

1

(l)

Ed.S

Ed.D

%

(N)

#

(N)

(208)

PO

(6 p)

5

67.5 (6 5 )

18

(17)

6.2

Fh.D

(N)

#

(l6 )

(H)

8

(6 )

(25)

7*3

(7)

Type of Approval as a School
Diagnostician or Director
of Special Education
The majority of school psychologists (85$) had permanent
approval as a school diagnostician in Michigan, and 15# had temporary
approval (see Table 7).

A majority of the directors of special educa­
A total of lh% had

tion (62#) had permanent approval in Michigan.

temporary approval, 1 7 # received "grandfather" approval, and 7 # vere
not approved.

TABLE 7.— Type of Approval as a School Diagnostician or Director of
Special Education.

Temporary
Group

Psychologists
(N = 3 1 6 )
Directors
(N = 96)

#

Permanent

(N)

#

Grandfather* Not Approved*

(H)

#

0'7)

85

(2 6 9 )

X

lL
(13)
__________

62

(60)

17

15

* Does not apply to School Psychologists

(II)

X
(1 6 )

#

X

7

(N)

X
(7 )

5*4
Type of Teacher Certification
In order to be approved as a school psychologist in Michigan
it is not essential to have a teacher certificate, while it is necessary
for the directors of special education.

A total of 31# of the school

psychologists in Michigan did not have a teacher certificate (see
Table 8 ).

The majority of both school psychologists (5*J#) and direc­

tors of special education (8 9 J 4#) had permanent teacher certificates.

TABLE 8 .— Type of Teacher Certification of the Respondents.

Provisional

%

Group

Psychologists
(N = 311)
Directors
(« = 9 ]<)

11
3.2

(N)

(3 M
(3)

Permanent

%

5*4

Life

(N)

(168)

8 9 .>4 (8 L )

#

I4
5.3

Not Certified

%

(IJ)

(13)

31

(5)

2.1

(11)

(9 6 )
(2)

Level of Teacher Certification
As shown in Table 9, 21.7# of the school psychologists had
elementary certification, 31.7# had secondary certification, and lU%
had both elementary and secondary certification.

A total of 22# of the

directors had elementary certification, 31# had secondary certification,
and I45# had both elementary and secondary certification.

Professional Approval in Other
Areas of Special Education
As shown in Table 10, 81.5# of the school psychologists did not
have approval in any other area of special education.

A total of 8 7 #

of the directors of special education, on the other h a n d , had approval

55

in at least one other area of special education with 27% having approval
in more than one special education area.

It can be concluded that

directors of special education as a group had a much stronger back­
ground in special education than did the school psychologists.

TABLE 9.— Level of Teacher Certification of the Respondents.

Elementary

%

Group

Psychologists
(N = 300)
Directors
(M = 91)

Secondary

%

00

%

00

21.7 (65)

31.7 (95)

22

31

(20)

Both Elementary
and Secondary Hone of Above

(2 8 )

lti

(>*2)

1*5

(fcl)

(N)

%

00

32.6 (98)
(2)

2

TABLE 10.— Professional Approval of the Respondents in Other Special
Education Areas.

1
o
0

a h
C

cd

p
o
•H

H
;»

o
P
P.
ft

<P

Psychologists
(N = 317)
Directors
(N = 97)

%

.c o

cd U
■p d
a p
ai at
>: k

(13)

a o)
ai P
cj U
ft o
r/j D

( N)

( M)

61. 5 ( 257)
13

•rJ

P

•X

Group

n
o

B

(26)

27

(26)

%

3

( H)

(9 )

16.5 0 6 )

T3

W

O *H cd
(J

tO

C
ft O

cd

QJ
3 3
«) o
<u o
P f t -H
O WP
%

1*

cd

4i
P

X! to -H
P
P
P cd

u u u
U& 0
O P 'tf
s o w

( H)

(N)

( HO

3.5 (11)

1 6 . 5 ( 16)

27

(2 6 )

56

Years of Teaching Experience
As shown in Table 11, 29*1# of the school psychologists did not
have any teaching experience.

Only lU.5% of the school psychologists

had more than 10 or more years of teaching experience.

The directors

of special education, on the other hand, had considerably more teaching
experience than did the school psychologists.

Only 3,2# of the direc­

tors had no teaching experience, and slightly more than half or 51.1%
had 10 or more years of teaching experience.

TABLE 11.— Years of Teaching Experience of the Respondents.

1-h

0

%

(N)

29.1

(89)

3.2

(3)

Group

Psychologists
(N = 3 0 5 )
Directors
(N = 9 1*)

10+

5-9

(N)

%

(N)

%

(M)

33.1(101)

23.3

(71)

lh.5

(MO

(10)

35.1

(33)

51.1

(1*8)

%

10.6

Employment of Directors of Special
Education as School Diagnosticians or
School Psychologists (Respondents:
special education directors only)
A total of 21 out of 96 directors or 22# have had employment
experience as school diagnosticians or school psychologists.

Levels of Certification for School
Psychologists according to the Psychol­
ogist Registration Act (Respondents:
school psychologists only)
A total of 10 out of 290 (3-5#) were certified at the consulting
psychologist level.

A total of 35 (12#) were certified at the

psychologist
or

1*8. 5 / 0

level.

were

total

of

noted

that

certified

1 Oh o r

particular

it

A plurality

certified

if; n o t n e c e s s a r y

school

school

at, t h e p n y c h o l o g i c a l

wcro n o t

'*,(•>%

of the

at

examiner

any l e v e l .

t o lie c e r t i f i e d

psychologist

decides

psychologists

to

at

(N = l T l

level.
(it

A

should be

any l e v e l u n l e s s

a

engage

in p r i v a t e

practice.)

psychologists

( ' >8( 0 w e r e

immediately

P e r s o n n e l t o whom Mc hool P s y c h o l o g i s t s
w e r e I mmcdi a t e l y h c s p o n s i b l e f d e s p o n d e n t : ’ :
s c h o o l p s y c h o l < g.i s t . s o n l y )
'I’h e m a j o r i t y

o f Die

r e s p o n s . i I * 1e t o a I ' i r e c t o r

school

o f Mpccinl

TATLh I P . — P e r s o n n e l t o whom Mc h o o l
liespons i bl e.

Kducation

( see Table

P s y c h o l ng i s t, s, w e r e

Immediately

(Iroup

bireetor
of
birector
of
Uuper i n t e n d e i i t
I'irector
inother

If).

(II)

%

P u p i l I’e r s o n n e l
Mpecial K ducation

10

58
'{

i’o o r d i i i a t u r o f 1' s y c l i o l t , gi cm 1 M e r v i r e s

U ( Mchool

Psychologists)

=

IS
.1o

(80)
(l8b)
(Mb)
(1*8)
(81.)

-.1

P n i v e r s . i t i o s A t t e n d e d by Mc h o o l
1T y c h o 1i p i s t S' ( h<' spoi l l e n t s :
s c h o o l p s y c h o l op i s. ts. o n l y )
As s h o w n

in Table

V.'ayne M t n t e U n i v e r s i t y
gists

in t h e

state

I T . V;,'; U n i v e r s i t y
trained

11,

Michigan

( MT'.') h a v e t r a i n e d

o f M ichigan.
o f Michigan

‘Mi; o t h e r U . U .

ft a te

most

. f the

( M8 . V,’.') am i

school

V.Vsteru M i c h i g a n U n i v e r s i t y

trained

colleges,

U niversity

I f . b e n t r a i

trained

1U.88,

psycholo­
trained

Michigan U n iv e r s ity

58
TABLE 13.— Universities Which have Trained School Psychologists.

Group

Michigan State University
Wayne State University
Western Michigan University
University of Michigan
Central Michigan University
Other U.S. college or university

%

00

23.3
23
17. **
15.5
8
12.8

(72)
(70)
(5*0
(148)
(2 5 )
Ci*o)

N (School Psychologists) = 309

University Departments Which have
Trained School Psychologists
(Respondents: school psychologists only)
The plurality of the school psychologists (31%) were trained in
psychology departments at the various universities (see Table lh).
Education departments accounted for the training of 28 # of the school
psychologists.

A total of lh,6# were trained in Joint programs com­

bining both the education and the psychology departments.

A total of

I 5 J 1# of the school psychologists answered this question by describing
the department as educational psychology! since it was not Known
whether this was a program located in an education or psychology depart­
ment, this was retained as a separate category.

Testing of Hypotheses
Before the null hypotheses were tested, Hoyt's Internal Con­
sistency Coefficient was calculated for each of the eight major
activities to determine the extent to which each of the items which
comprised a major activity were measuring the same thing, that is, the
extent to which the items were unidimensional (see Table 15).

These

59

TABLE lU.— University Departments Which have Trained School
Psychologists.

Group

Psychology
Education
Educational Psychology
Education and Psychology
Other

%

(N)

37
28
15 1 U. 6
5

(105)
(78)
(li3)

(in)
(HO

N (School Psychologists) = 281

TABLE 15.— Hoyt's Internal Consistency Measure for Eight Major
Activities (II = hit).

Internal
Consistency

Activity

Diagnosis
Psycho-Educational Planning
Child Therapy
Parent Consultation
Community Relationships
School Program Consultation
Administration of Special Education Programs
Research

.71
.59
.6h
.32
.76
.83
.71
•7Ji

coefficients were relatively high except for Psycho-Educational Plan­
ning (.59) and Parent Consultation ( . 3 . ? ) .

Because of these smaller

coefficients, it became more difficult to find significant differences
in the analysis of variance.
As shown in Table 1.6, the correlations between the eight major
activities of the school, psychologists were generally low which indi­
cates that responses to each of the eight major activities were
relatively independent.

All of the 28 correlations fell below .50

ttt
at
(0
a
tn tn
o o
(D
o (FI
a <0 a a a
a n M- tn R
Q H* tn F El
rF
aP. a <-f
p P
t*1 rF <>
Li* H- tJ L' o o
n a a
p)

c+

H'

o
y

o

o
o
to n
10 y
M a
P a

at
p
a
to
a

H1 r,cF■

o

rF

)->•

O
a
tn
a'

■J

ro

£-

LO

ro

3

at
'<n1
ao
t
ft
p.
i:
o
P
rF
tn

U

►
a
fe
r*
ei

£
y
o

w

t —*

(T\

in

M*

o

a
p

•

t—

r\i

Io

o
p
a
tn

(Ft

ro

ro

CF

(0
H*
a

H'r)
0)

►
0

LO

O
a1
H- at
t->
6
a
tT1 a (0 a
a on
p

t-

ori

|

ro

4|

r

L*J

fo

Uj

o\

CT\

o
o

on

e*

n
o

o
o

Diagnosis

PaychoKducut ional
Plann Lng

Chi Id
Therapy

I
I
r-t
a
rt
ro
a
o
o
a
a
ro
M
(
a
cF
HO
a
w
h
o
a
m
rt-

a"
(0
t*3
M
<F)
arF

i?
o
a
>■

C _u

o

rF

-l

00

ro

IO

lo

1 .0

t--

C\
oo

o
o

o

at)

o\

Parent
CounseLing

o

o

Community
Relationships

H*
Hrr
HID
W

LO
Co

ro

Prograjn
Consultation

o

o

oo
o

Administration
oi' Special
EducatIon

o
o

Research

o

o

09

6l

except th e
ning

(.5 l)»

c o r r e l a t i o n betw een D ia g n o s is and P s y c h o -E d u c a tio n a l P la n ­
th e c o r r e l a t i o n b etw een School Program C o n s u lta tio n

C o m m u n it y R e l a t i o n s h i p s

( . 63),

and t h e c o r r e l a t i o n betw een S c h o o l

C o n s u l t a t i o n and A d m i n i s t r a t i o n o f S p e c i a l E d u c a t i o n P r o g r a m s
For each h y p o t h e s i s t e s t
included

in th e s t a t i s t i c a l

to m issing data.

design v arie d

used in o rd er to d eterm in e th e p ro p o rtio n

decision

rule

in a l l

a t th e

.05 l e v e l .

a t the

.05

lev el

somewhat due i n m ost c a s e s
a p ercentage

S tren g th o f A sso ciatio n

d ep en d e n t m easure a c c o u n te d

statistic—

I9 6 0 , p.

1 9 8 ) — was

o f th e to t a l variance

t e s t s was t o

(The a s t e r i s k s
for

(K irk,

f o r by each s i g n i f i c a n t

statistic al

(*5M *

t h e number o f s u b j e c t s w hich w e re

For each h y p o th e sis t e s t

th e E stim ate o f th e

and

effect.

reje ct

in each t a b l e

o f the

The

the n u ll h y p o th e sis

in d ic a te

sig n ifican ce

th at p articu la r e ffe c t.)

H ull H ypothesis I
T h ere in no i n t e r a c t i o n b e tw e e n t h e amount o f t e a c h i n g e x p e r i ­
ence and g ro u p m em bership ( s c h o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t s o r d i r e c t o r s o f s p e c i a l
e d u c a t i o n ) on t h e p e r c e p t i o n o f t h e i d e a l r o l e o f t h e s c h o o l p s y c h o l o ­
g i s t on e a c h o f t h e e i g h t m a j o r a c t i v i t i e s .
Th e d e s i g n s u s e d t o t e s t
effects

A nalyses o f V a r ia n c e , one

v ariab les.

The g r o u p

school p sy ch o lo g ists
(N = 8 9 ) .
0 years,
d esign

th is

9-9 y e a r s ,

fix ed

e ig h t dependent

(N = 38**) h a d t w o l e v e l s :

(N = .999) a n d d i r e c t o r s

in w hich t h e r e

of s p e c ia l edu catio n

i n d e p e n d e n t v a r i a b l e had f o u r

a n d 10+ y e a r s .

lev els:

T h i s w as an u n b a l a n c e d

was an u n e q u a l number o f s u b j e c t s p e r c e l l .

Because o f t h i s u n b a la n c e d d e sig n
source of v a ria tio n

fo r each o f th e

independent v a r ia b le

The t e a c h i n g e x p e r i e n c e
1 -U y e a r s ,

h y p o t h e s i s w ere tw o-w ay

independently.

it

was n o t p o s s i b l e
T a b l e 17 i n d i c a t e s

to t e s t

each

t h e m e a n s and

TABLE I T - — Means o f t h e t i g h t M a j o r A c t i v i t i e s o f t h e S c h o o l P s y c h o l o g i s t f o r T e a c h i n g E x p e r i e n c e
x Group (I* = 331*).

Means o f t h e E i g h t A c t i v i t i e s

i

r-**

o
u
d

*u
C3
CJ
c-i

E
O
EL

H
e
c

to

— <
a

to
1 -H C
0 -u i~t
jn d
c
o
o c
>i d
d
n d
H
t a t

H
O
d
C
3
o

p c
ip 0
C —1
3 -P
£ d
c <—
l
O <U
u c

37
96
69
1*3

1*1*. 17
1*1.89
1*1.96
11.26

26.25
2 6 . 1*6
26.1*3
26.71*

11.37
1 1 . 1*1
11.09
1 1 . 1*1*

12.61*
15.09
15.16
15.00

30.37
30.90
30.61
30.51

1 - 1*

3
Q

26.00
21*. 1*1*

5 -9
10+

31
1*6

1*L. 67
1*1.89
1*3.16
1*3.00

25.1*2
25.67

11.67
9.67
10.00
10.39

15.67
ll* . 7 8
15.91
15.02

3.70

2 . 1*0

2.15

1.81*

o

*
0
EL
3
O
u

U3

?

o
EL
*
W

d
o
>- ■H

0

School
Psychologists

Directors
of Special
Education

1 - 1*

5-9
10+

0
+>
Ll O
O
o
£>

—

p
d
.—

\ Tj

.

'—\

■Ll iP
~
o
CJ

0

Pooled
Standard
Deviation

O
-H
tn
0
c
M
a

c

0

EL
n o
■
—1 Li
-P V
J£ JO
U F

P
d
o
t
d
Cl o

c
o
■H
-p
d
= -p
1—1 d rH
0 Li 3
op to d
OC
o L O
W CL CJ
1*2 . 2 2

c
o
"H
-p
d rH
Li d C
pi —i o
31 O Ip
■p d -P
d el d
■LUO
«
3
■o L d
co w

x:
o
Li
d
<u
tn
d
05

1*1.1*7

16.55
16.32
16.90
15.58

12.85
13.16
13-!*6
13.26

33.67
28.33
29.71*
29.71*

1*2.33
35.89
38.13
39.33

16.67
l l *.22
11.06
IU .50

13.33
12.78
12.68
13.20

3.61

5.36

3.01*

2.10

1*2.27
1*2 . 1*2

63

pooled s ta n d a rd d e v i a t i o n s
ber of su b jects per c e ll

on t h e e i g h t

d e p e n d e n t m e a s u r e s a n d t h e num­

in th e d e s ig n .

D i a g n o s i s . — As sh o w n i n T a b l e 1 8 , t h e r e was n o s i g n i f i c a n t
in teractio n

e f f e c t b e tw e e n amount o f t e a c h i n g e x p e r i e n c e and g r o u p

m e m b e r s h i p on t h e v a r i a b l e

of D iagnosis.

Moo, th e

amount o f t e a c h i n g

e x p e r i e n c e h a d no s i g n i f i c a n t e f f e c t u p o n t h e p e r c e p t i o n o f t h e
ta n c e of D iagnosis

in t h e

id e a l ro le

was a s i g n i f i c a n t g r o u p m a i n e f f e c t .
means f o r t h e two g r o u p s

of th e

education

school p s y c h o lo g ist.

indicated th a t

in th e

id eal ro le

The p r o p o r t i o n

dependent m easure accounted

f o r by t h i s

of th e

school

s l i g h t l y more im p o r ta n t by th e

( me an = 1*1* . 6 ) t h a n b y t h e d i r e c t o r s

(mea n = 1*3.0).

There

A com parison o f th e w e ig h te d

p s y c h o l o g i s t , D i a g n o s i s w as p e r c e i v e d a s
school p sy c h o lo g ists

im por­

of sp ecial

of the t o t a l v a ria n c e o f th e
g r o u p e f f e c t w as 3 . 0 $ s u g g e s t i n g

t h a t t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n t h e d e p e n d e n t v a r i a b l e a n d g r o u p was
nmol1 .

TABLE l f l . — Two-way E i x e d E f f e c t s AUOVA on T e a c h i n g E x p e r i e n c e a n d G r o u p
M em bership— D ependent M easure:
D iagnosis.

Bounces o f
V ariation

G ro u p
Teaching e x p e rie n c e
I n t e r n e t i on
Error

dl’

1

3
3
376

Mean
fquare

175.03
8.57
1 0 . YM
13.70

F ratio

18.77
.l« i
.78

p.

less

than

, 0 0 0 b*
.501*7

6U

Psycho-Educational Planning.— As shown in Table 19» there was
no significant interaction effect between amount of teaching experience
and group membership on the variable of Psycho-Educational Planning.
A l s o , t h e amount o f t e a c h i n g e x p e r i e n c e had no s i g n i f i c a n t e f f e c t upon
the p e rc e p tio n of th e
ideal r o le
effect.

im portance o f P sy ch o -E d u catio n al P lan n in g in th e

o f the school p s y c h o lo g is t.

A c o m p a r i s o n o f t h e w e i g h t e d m e an s f o r t h e t w o g r o u p s i n d i c a t e d

t h a t in th e

ideal

ro le

P l a n n i n g was p e r c e i v e d
ogists
P 5.5).

T h e r e w as a s i g n i f i c a n t g r o u p

(mean = ? 6 J i )

o f th e s c h o o l psychologyG t, P s y c h o -E d u c a tio n a l
a s s l i g h t l y more i m p o r t a n t by t h e

t h a n by t h e d i r e c t o r s o f s p e c i a l e d u c a t i o n

The p r o p o r t i o n o f t h e t o t a l

accounted

f o r by t h i s

school psychol­
(mean =

v a r ia n c e o f t h e d ep en d e n t m easure

g r o u p e f f e c t was 2 . 6 % s u g g e s t i n g t h a t t h e a s s o c i a ­

t i o n b e t w e e n t h e d e p e n d e n t v a r i a b l e an d g r o u p w as r e l a t i v e l y

sm all.

TABLE 1 9 . — Two-way P i x c d E f f e c t s AUOVA on T e a c h i n g E x p e r i e n c e a n d G r o u p
Membership*— D e p e n d e n t m e a s u r e :
P sy ch o -E d u catio n al P lanning.

Eourcca o f
V ariatio n

G ro up
Teaching E x p erien ce
In teractio n
Error

Mean
fjquare

df

1

E ratio

63.97
3Ji5

3
3

10.07

.00
.93

3 ,00

376

p.

le s s than

.0011*
.6 1 6 9
,66B7

9*77

P h i l d T h e r a p y . — As shown i n T a b l e 3 0 , t h e r e was n o s i g n i f i c a n t
in teractio n

e f f e c t b e tw e e n amount o f t e a c h i n g e x p e r i e n c e

m e m b e r s h i p on t h e v a r i a b l e o f (’h i I d T h e r a p y .

and g ro u p

A lso , t h e amount o f t e a c h ­

i n g e x p e r i e n c e h a d no s i g n i f i c a n t e f f e c t u p o n t h e p e r c e p t i o n o f t h e
im portance o f C hild Therapy

in th e

id e a l school

psych o lo g ist ro le .

65

T h e r e w as a s i g n i f i c a n t g r o u p e f f e c t .

A com parison o f t h e w eig h ted

m e a n s f o r t h e tw o g r o u p s i n d i c a t e d t h a t i n t h e
p s y c h o l o g i s t , C h i l d T h e r a p y was p e r c e i v e d a s
the school p sy ch o lo g ists
education

(mean = 1 0 . ? ) .

ideal ro le

of the

school

s l i g h t l y more i m p o r t a n t b y

(mean = 1 1 . 3 ) t h a n b y t h e d i r e c t o r s

of sp ecial

The p r o p o r t i o n o f t h e t o t a l v a r i a n c e o f t h e

dependent measure acc o u n ted

for by t h i s

g r o u p e f f e c t was U . 3 %t s u g g e s t ­

in g a s m a l l r e l a t i o n s h i p betw een t h e d e p e n d e n t v a r i a b l e and g ro u p .

TABLE 2 0 . — Two-way F i x e d E f f e c t s AEOVA on T e a c h i n g E x p e r i e n c e a n d G r o u p
M em bership— Dependent M easu re:
C hild Therapy.

Sources of
V ariation

Group
T eaching E x p erien ce
In teract!o n
Error

df

Mean
Square

1
3
3
376

62,83
2.69
3.03
. 60

1’ r a t i o

p.

le s s than

.0001#
.6255
.5780

17.99
• 58
. 66

P a r e n t C o u n s e l i n g . — As s h o w n i n T a b l e 2 1 , t h e r e was n o s i g n i f i ­
cant

in teractio n

e f f e c t p r e s e n t b e tw e e n amount o f t e a c h i n g e x p e r i e n c e

a n d g r o u p m e m b e r s h i p on t h e d e p e n d e n t v a r i a b l e o f P a r e n t C o u n s e l i n g .
A lso ,th e

a m o u n t o f t e a c h i n g e x p e r i e n c e h ad n o s i g n i f i c a n t

the perception of th e

im portance o f P a re n t C o u n se lin g

school p sy c h o lo g ist ro le .
the p erce p tio n s

T h e r e w a s no s i g n i f i c a n t

of Parent C ounseling.

in th e

ideal

d i f f e r e n c e between

o f s c h o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t s and d i r e c t o r s

t i o n on t h e v a r i a b l e

e f f e c t upon

of sp ecial educa­

66

TABLE 2 1 . — Two-way F i x e d E f f e c t s AIIOVA on T e a c h i n g E x p e r i e n c e a n d G r o u p
M em bership— D ependent M easu re:
P a re n t C ounseling.

Sources o f
V ariatio n

df

Group
Teaching e x p e rie n c e
In teractio n
Error

Mean
Square

F ratio

7.1(2
6.2h
2.96
3.37

1

3
3
376

p.

2.20
1.05
.00

l e s s than

.1300
.1375
.**525

Com m un ity B e l a t i o n s h i p s . - - A s sh o w n i n T a b l e 2 2 , t h e r e was n o
sig n ifican t

in teractio n

e f f e c t b e t w e e n amount o f t e a c h i n g e x p e r i e n c e and

g r o u p m e m b e r s h i p on t h e v a r i a b l e o f C o m m u n it y E c l a t i o n s h i p s .
t e a c h i n g e x p e r i e n c e had no s i g n i f i c a n t
the

e f f e c t upon th e p e r c e p t i o n

i m p o r t a n c e o f Co mm uni ty R c l a t i o n c h i p s

o g ist ro le.

in th e

ideal

T h e r e was a s i g n i f i c a n t g r o u p e f f e c t .

w e ig h te d means f o r t h e two g r o u p s i n d i c a t e d t h a t
the

Amount o f
of

school psychol­

A com parison o f th e

in th e id e a l r o l e

of

s c h o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t , C o m m u n it y R e l a t i o n s h i p s w as p e r c e i v e d a s

s l i g h t l y more i m p o r t a n t by t h e
by t h e d i r e c t o r s

s c h o o l pr.yclioIogir.tn

o f s p e c ia l ed u cation

(mean -

( m ea n = 2 0 . 7 ) .

th e t o t a l v a ria n c e o f th e dependent m easure accounted

30.6) than

The p r o p o r t i o n o f
f o r by t h i s

group

TABLE 2 2 . — 'IVo-way F i x e d E f f e c t s AHOVA on T e a c h i n g E x p e r i e n c e an d G r o u p
M em bership— D ependent M easure:
Com munity R e l a t i o n s h i p s .

G ourees o f
V ariation

Group
Teaching E x p erien ce
In teractio n
E rror

df

1
3
3
3 76

Mean
Gquare

5 3 . 7 1’
1.07
2*i.7i
13.05

F ratio

h . 1 :l
.08
1 PH)

p.

le s s than

. 0 *t3 2 #
.9696
.1300

67

. 8 % w h i c h s u g g e s t s t h a t t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p "be twee n t h e d e p e n d ­

e f f e c t was

e n t v a r i a b l e a n d g r o u p was v e r y s m a l l .

P r o g r a m C o n s u l t a t i o n . — As shown i n T a b l e 2 3 , t h e r e was n o
sig n ifican t

in teractio n

e f f e c t b etw een amount o f t e a c h i n g e x p e r i e n c e

and g r o u p m e m b e r s h i p on t h e v a r i a b l e o f P r o g r a m C o n s u l t a t i o n .

A lso ,th e

a m o u n t o f t e a c h i n g e x p e r i e n c e h a d no s i g n i f i c a n t e f f e c t u p o n t h e p e r c e p ­
tio n of the

im p o rta n c e o f Program C o n s u l t a t i o n

p sy chologist r o le .

in th e

i d e a l gcj o o l

T h e r e w as a s i g n i f i c a n t g r o u p e f f e c t .

o f t h e w e ig h te d means i n d i c a t e d t h a t

in th e

A com parison

id e a l ro le o f the school

p s y c h o ! o g i s t , P r o g r a m C o n s u l t a t i o n w as p e r c e i v e d a n s l i g h t l y m o r e
im p o r t a n t by t h e
to rs

of special

school

psy ch o lo g ists

education

(mean = )j2 . 2 ) t h a n b y t h e d i r e c ­

(mean = 3 8 . 7 ) •

The p r o p o r t i o n o f t h e t o t a l

v n riu n ce o f th e dependent m easure accounted
was

s u g g e s tin g a sm all

f o r by t h i s

group e f f e c t

r e l a t i o n s h i p betw een th e dependent v a r i a b l e

and g r o u p .

TAHLK : M . — T w o - w a y F i x e d E f f e c t s AIIOVA o n T e a c h i n g E x p e r i e n c e a n d G r o u p
Memberslii p — I m p e n d e n t M e a s u r e :
Program C o n s u l t a t i o n .

Pounces o f
V ariation

Group
Teaching expericnee
I n t e r a e t i on
Error

df

Mean
1'qunre

1
3
i

8) i C . 3 ) i
1. 6 o
83.60

376

c H.78

V

ratio

f’d . 3 0

.06
1.86

p.

less

.0001*

. 0 8 : ’7
.1381

than

68
A d m inistration

t h e r e was no s i g n i f i c a n t

in teractio n

e f f e c t b e tw e e n amount o f t e a c h i n g

e x p e r i e n c e a n d g r o u p m e m b e r s h i p on t h e v a r i a b l e
S p ecial E ducation.
sig n ifican t
tio n

A lso ,th e

E ducation

of A d m in istratio n of

amount o f t e a c h i n g e x p e r i e n c e h ad no

e f f e c t upon th e p e r c e p t i o n

o f S pecial

2k,

o f S p e c i a l E d u c a t i o n . — As sho wn i n T a b l e

in th e

id eal

of the

im portance o f A d m in istra ­

school p sychologist r o le .

There

was a s i g n i f i c a n t g r o u p e f f e c t .

A co m p a riso n o f t h e w e ig h te d means

in d icated

of the

th at

in th e

ideal ro le

t i o n o f G p e c i a l E d u c a t i o n w as p e r c e i v e d
the school p sy c h o lo g ists
education

(mean = .11*. M .

school p s y c h o lo g ist, A dm inistra­
a s s l i g h t l y m or e i m p o r t a n t b y

(mean = l 6 .lt) t h a n by t h e
The p r o p o r t i o n

dependent m easure acco u n ted

f o r by t h i s

d irecto rs

of

o f the t o t a l v a ria n c e

special
o f the

g r o u p e f f e c t was 7 *1 /5 , s u g g e s t ­

ing o n ly a sm all a s s o c i a t i o n betw een t h e d ep en d e n t v a r i a b l e

and g ro u p .

TABLE f i t . — Two-way E i x c d E f f e c t s AIJOVA o n T e a c h i n g E x p e r i e n c e a n d G r ou p
M em bership— D ep en d en t M e a su re :
A d m in istra tio n of G pecial
Educat i o n .

fiources o f
V ariatio n

Group
'feaching e x p e r ie n c e
interaction
Error

1
1
1
176

B e s e u r c h . — As sh o w n
in teractio n

Mean
fquare

df

F ratio

f8n.ni
7*61
1S . 1 8
O.fl

-jO.15
.81
1 . 6 ‘j

p.

less

.0 0 0 1 *
.1(866
. 170 ^

i n T a b l e f h , t h e r e w as n o s i g n i f i c a n t

e f f e c t p r e s e n t betw een amount o f t e a c h i n g e x p e r ie n c e

g r o u p m e m b e r s h i p on t h e

dependent v a ria b le

of ilesearch.

a m o u n t o f t e a c h i n g e x p e r i e n c e h a d no s i g n i f i c a n t

than

A lso, t h e

e f f e c t upon t h e

and

69

perception of the importance of Research in the ideal school psycholo­
gist role.

There was no significant difference between the percep­

tions of school psychologists and directors of special education on the
variable of Research.

TABLE 2 5 * — Two-way F i x e d E f f e c t s ANOVA on T e a c h i n g E x p e r i e n c e a n d G r o u p
M em bership— D epen dent M easure:
R esearch.

.S o u rc e s o f
V ariation

Mean
Square

df

Group
T eaching ex p erien ce
In teractio n
E rror

1

F ratio

.>48
.97
.60

2.09
1* . 2 8
2.65
>4.1*0

3
3
376

In sum mary,none o f t h e e i g h t
f o r t h e r e w ere n o s i g n i f i c a n t

p.

less

than

. 1+906
J 4 0 51
.6137

s u b - n u l l h y p o th e se s w ere r e j e c t e d

in teractio n

effects.

In a d d i t i o n , t e a c h i n g

e x p e r i e n c e had n o s i g n i f i c a n t e f f e c t u p o n how s c h o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t s a n d
d ir e c to r s of sp ecial

education p erceiv ed th e

id e a l ro le o f the school

p s y c h o l o g i s t on t h e e i g h t m a j o r a c t i v i t i e s .

A lso, the d if f e r e n c e

b e tu e e n the id e a l

p sychologists

to rs

o f school

and d i r e c ­

o f s p e c i a l e d u c a t i o n on s i x o f t h e e i g h t m a j o r a c t i v i t i e s w e r e

statistic ally
g ists

ro le p ercep tio n s

sig n ifican t.

to perceive

D iagnosis,

T h e r e was a t e n d e n c y
P sycho-E ducational

Co m m u ni ty R e l a t i o n s h i p s , P r o g r a m C o n s u l t a t i o n ,
S pecial

for school psycholo­
Planning,

P hild Therapy,

a nd A d m i n i s t r a t i o n o f

E d u c a tio n Program s a s s l i g h t l y more i m p o r t a n t t h a n t h e d i r e c t o r s

o f s p e c ia l education.

However, t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p b etw ee n t h e s e

six

d e p e n d e n t v a r i a b l e s a n d g r o u p was s m a l l , a n d i n g e n e r a l t h e d i f f e r e n c e s
i n t h e me ans w e r e n o t c o n s i d e r e d v e r y m e a n i n g f u l .

TO

Null Hypothesis II
There is no interaction between amount of professional experi­
ence as either a school psychologist or director of special education
and group membership on the perception of the ideal role of the
school psychologist on each of the eight major activities.
The d e s i g n s u s e d t o

test th is

h y p o t h e s i s w ere two-way f i x e d

e f f e c t s A n a l y s e s o f V a r i a n c e , one f o r
v ariab les,

The g r o u p i n d e p e n d e n t v a r i a b l e

school p sychologist
(N = 8 5 ) .
lev els:

in d icates

a proportional

null

a t a b l e o f random num bers.

To t e s t t h i s

h y pothesis

independent t e s t i n g o f each source o f v a r i a t i o n .

t h e m e an s anti p o o l e d s t a n d a r d d e v i a t i o n s on t h e
per c e ll

in t h e

random rem oval

of su b jects

m e m b e r s h i p was i n c l u d e d

T.

T a b l e 26

e ig h t depend­

design.

h y p o t h e s i s t h e g r o u p m ain e f f e c t w i l l n o t b e t e s t e d

i n t h e g r o u p m a in e f f e c t

it

The u s e o f a p r o p o r t i o n a l d e s i g n

was a l r e a d y c o n s i d e r e d u n d e r N u ll H y p o t h e s i s
hero

h ad two l e v e l s :

d e s i g n b y d r o p p i n g Mj s u b j e c t s

e n t m e a s u r e s and t h e num ber o f s u b j e c t s
th is

(N =

in d ep en d en t v a r i a b l e had t h r e e

5 - 9 y e a r s , 10+ y e a r s ,

was p o s s i b l e t o u t i l i z e

allow ed fo r

e ig h t dependent

(N = 2 5 5 ) and d i r e c t o r s o f s p e c i a l e d u c a t i o n

The p r o f e s s i o n a l e x p e r i e n c e
1-1* y e a r s ,

u tilizin g

each o f t h e

In

since

it

The o n l y d i f f e r e n c e

( w e i g h t e d m eans) would b e due t o t h e

t o make t h i s

in th is

design

design p r o p o r ti o n a l.

Group

in o r d e r t o remove t h e v a r i a t i o n

due t o t h e g r o u p e f f e c t and t h e r e b y make t h e t e s t i n g

of th is

hypothesis

more p r e c i s e .

P i a g n o s i s . — As s h o w n i n T a b l e
in te ra c tio n

27 , t h e r e was n o s i g n i f i c a n t

e f f e c t b e tw e e n th e amount o f p r o f e s s i o n a l e x p e r i e n c e as

e i t h e r a school

p s y c h o lo g i s t or d i r e c t o r o f s p e c ia l

m e m b e r s h i p on t h e d e p e n d e n t v a r i a b l e

o f D iagnosis.

e d u c a t i o n and g ro u p
A l s o , t h e amount o f

TAELZ 2 6 . — Means o f t h e n i g h t M a j o r A c t i v i t i e s o f t h e S c h o o l P s y c h o l o g i s t f o r P r o f e s s i o n a l
E x p e r i e n c e x Orcup (D = 3 l 0 ) .

ionti

Means o f t h e E i g h t A c t i v i t i e s

□h
d
0
Ih
c

School
Psychologists
D irectors
of S pecial
Education

o

0 ** y
•H
o o u*
a
o
d 0 p4
CJ
>->

X

1-1

ID —
1
—i
M o y
y y o
0

G X3 ~
3 3 o
H
J. H
M

Cl
H
r>
O
d
M
d
—i
—1

!--1
d
d
0 to
1 —I c
O P “1
.d d d
cjcjc

S 3 d
n -d rH
n a n

d o
Oh o

10.99
11.31
12.27

11.67
15.03
15.21

30.02
30.26

-P 01

d n
o d
a d

5 -9
10+

51

11.52
11.75
15.37

1-1

31
31
17

1 3 .26
13.12
12.33

25.82
26.00
21.21

10.38
10.18

9.91

15.53
15. l l
H .5 9

3.66

2.32

2.09

1.31

Pooled
Standard
D eviation

26.35
26.22

P

>> ci
-p d
—' o
C -H

Q.
*d d
u
—
4 O
6 p

102
102

5 -9
10+

26.66

SO

d

d p

§ H
d
E
O (U
O 00

p

r-f
0
0
Oh
o
01

d
-P
§M r3H
«1
0 C
H o
o

d r-t
« d a

P

-H

*H

0)

era

c
a
■3
<

o

cj

eu d
00 o
d
Oh -d
OW

.d

0
Ih
d
OJ
01
a

32.53

11.61
H .69
11.17

15.89
16.12
18.08

13.01
13.07
13.78

29.32
31.09
27.82

39 - 29
39.11
35.53

15.26
11.68
11.9l

12.50
13.11
12.82

3.19

5.22

2.86

2.11

72

p r o f e s s io n a l e x p erien ce as e i t h e r a school p sy c h o lo g ist o r d i r e c to r o f
s p e c i a l e d u c a tio n had no s i g n i f i c a n t e f f e c t upon th e p e r c e p t i o n o f t h e
im portance o f D ia g n o sis

in th e

id e a l school p sy ch o lo g ist ro le .

TABLE 2 7 . — Two-way F i x e d E f f e c t s AHOVA on P r o f e s s i o n a l E x p e r i e n c e a n d
G r o up M e m b e r s h i p — D e p e n d e n t M e a s u r e :
D iagnosis.

Sources of
V ariation

df

Group
P ro fe s sio n a l E xperience
In teractio n
Error

1
2

n
33><

Mean
Square

173.77
6 .8l
6 .5 0
13 J )2

F ratio

p. l e s s

than

. 0001 )*
.6025
. 6166

12.95
.51
. 1)8

P s y c h o - E d u c n t , i o n a l P l a n n i n g . — As sh o w n i n T a b l e 2 8 , t h e r e was
no s i g n i f i c a n t i n t e r a c t i o n
e x p e rie n c e as e i t h e r

e f f e c t b e tw e e n t h e amount o f p r o f e s s i o n a l

a school p s y c h o lo g ist or d ir e c to r o f s p e c ia l

e d u c a t i o n a n d g r o u p m e m b e r s h i p on t h e d e p e n d e n t v a r i a b l e
E d ucational P lanning.
e i t h e r a school

A l s o , t h e amount o f p r o f e s s i o n a l

o f Psycho-

e x p e rie n c e as

p s y c h o l o g i s t o r d i r e c t o r o f s p e c i a l e d u c a t i o n had no

s i g n i f i c a n t e f f e c t upon t h e p e r c e p t i o n o f t h e
E d u ca tio n a l P lanning

im portance o f Psycho-

in th e id e a l school p s y c h o lo g is t r o l e ,

TABLE 2 8 , — Two-way F i x e d E f f e c t s ANOVA on P r o f e s s i o n a l E x p e r i e n c e a n d
G roup M e m b e r s h i p — D e p e n d e n t M e a s u r e :
P sycho-E ducational
PI mi ni n g .

Sources of
V ariation

G ro up
P ro fe s sio n a l E xperience
Interactio n
E rro r

df

1
2
2
33*i

Mean
Gquare

1)8. 38
18.15
11 . 2 9
5.36

F ratio

9.01
o1 '~
1>-r|
-

.

.

2.10

p.

less

than

.0029*
.1053
.1835

73

Child Therapy.— As shown in Table 29» there was no significant
interaction effect between amount of professional experience as either
a school psychologist or director of special education and group
membership on the dependent variable of Child Therapy.
s i g n i f i c a n t p r o f e s s i o n a l experience m a i n effect.

There was a

The weighted means

indicated that as the amount of professional experience increased, the
importance o f C h i l d Therapy increased s b perceived b y both groups.
(Mean s f o r a m o u n t o f p r o f e s s i o n a l e x p e r i e n c e :
5-9 y e a rs = 1 1 .1 ;

10+ y e a r s = 1 1 . 7 * )

1-^ y e a rs = 1 0 .8 ;

The p r o p o r t i o n o f t h e t o t a l

v a r ia n c e o f t h e dependent m easure a c c o u n te d

f o r by th e p r o f e s s i o n a l

e x p e r i e n c e e f f e c t was 1 . 5 % , s u g g e s t i n g a s m a l l a s s o c i a t i o n b e t w e e n t h e
d e p e n d e n t v a r i a b l e an d a m o u n t o f p r o f e s s i o n a l

experience.

TABLE 2 9 . — Two-way F i x e d E f f e c t s AUOVA on P r o f e s s i o n a l E x p e r i e n c e a n d
Croup M embership— D ependent M easure : C h ild T h e ra p y .

I’o u r e c s o f
Variation

Croup
Professional
In teractio n
Error

E xperience

df

Mean
Oquare

1
2
2
3 3 )j

80.2^1
16.70
12.66
1*. 3T

P a r e n t C o u n s e l i n g . — As sh ow n i n T a b l e

F ratio

20.21
3.82
2.90

3 0 , the n u ll

p. less than

.0001*
.0228*
.0565

hypothesis

fo r th e d ep en d en t v a r i a b l e o f P a r e n t C ou n selin g could n o t be r e j e c t e d
f o r t h e r e was no i n t e r a c t i o n

effect.

The a m o u n t o f p r o f e s s i o n a l

e x p e r i e n c e d i d n o t have any s i g n i f i c a n t e f f e c t on t h e p e r c e p t i o n o f t h e
id e al ro le o f the
P aren t C ounseling.

school p s y c h o lo g ist

1' o r t h e

dependent v a r ia b le of

lh

TABLE 3 0 . — Two-way F i x e d E f f e c t s AUOVA o n P r o f e s s i o n a l E x p e r i e n c e and
Group M em bership— D ep e n d e n t M e a s u r e : P a r e n t C o u n s e l i n g .

Sources o f
V ariatio n

df

G roup
P ro fe s sio n a l E xperience
In teractio n
Error

Mean
Square

1
O
£_
n
33>«

F ratio

T.T7
2.73
9-69
3.1*0

mo re y e a r s

.1311*
.1*1*89
.0590

31» t h e r e w a s a

e f f e c t b e t w e e n amount o f p r o f e s s i o n a l e x p e r i ­

e n c e a n d g r o u p m e m b e r s h i p on t h e d e p e n d e n t v a r i a b l e
tio n sh ip s.

The m e a n s i n d i c a t e d t h a t

o f C o m m u n it y R e l a ­

s c h o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t s w i t h 10 o r

o f p r o f e s s i o n a l e x p e r i e n c e an compared t o

school psycholo­

g i s t s w i t h l e s s e x p e r i e n c e p e r c e i v e d Community R e l a t i o n s h i p s
im portant

for the school p sy ch o lo g ist

d irecto rs

o f s p e c i a l e d u c a t i o n w i t h 10 o r more y e a r s

in th e id e a l

e x p e r i e n c e as compared t o d i r e c t o r s w ith
t o be l e s s

im portant

le ss than

2.29
.80
2.85

Co m m un ity R e l a t i o n s h i p s . — As sho wn i n T a b l e
sig n ifican t in teractio n

p.

(see F igure l ) .

a s more

r o l e , w hereas the
of pro fessio n al

lens e x p e rie n c e p e rc e iv e d i t

This

in teractio n

e f f e c t accounted

f o r 5 . 0 8 % o f t h e t o t a l v a r i a n c e o f t h e d e p e n d e n t m e a s u r e and i n d i c a t e d
on ly a s m a ll r e l a t i o n s h i p between t h e dependent v a r i a b l e

and t h e

source o f v a r ia tio n .
T h e r e was a s i g n i f i c a n t p r o f e s s i o n a l e x p e r i e n c e m a i n e f f e c t .
The m e a n s i n d i c a t e d t h a t a s t h e a m o u n t o f p r o f e s s i o n a l e x p e r i e n c e
increased,

th e

i m p o r t a n c e o f Co m m un ity R e l a t i o n s h i p s

ceiv ed by b o th g ro u p s .
years - 20.0;

increased

(Means f o r p r o f e s s i o n a l e x p e r i e n c e :

5 - 9 y e a r s = 3 0 . 5 ; 10+ y e a r s = 3 1 . ) .

as p er­

1 - !t

The p r o p o r t i o n o f

75

the t o t a l v aria n ce of th e

dependent m easure accounted fo r by th e p r o ­

f e s s i o n a l e x p e r i e n c e e f f e c t was 1 . 8 # s u g g e s t i n g t h a t t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p
between t h e

d e p e n d e n t v a r i a b l e and p r o f e s s i o n a l e x p e r i e n c e was s m a l l .

TABLE 3 1 . — Two-way F i x e d E f f e c t s ANOVA on P r o f e s s i o n a l E x p e r i e n c e a n d
Group M em bership— D ependent M easure:
Co m m u ni ty
B elatio n sh ip s.
»■■■< m .1 « I«|
Sources o f
V ariatio n

df

G roup
P r o f e s s io n a l Experience
In teractio n
Error

in
P.
•H
.c
in
a
o
Cl ■H
P 4->
o a)
o
( O 4)
n;
c
a) :
(U 4J
[1
o
o

Mean
Square

1
?.

2
33)i

F ratio

55.07
53.07
126.53
12.19

)<.52
) i. 35
10.38

p.

le s s than

.0 3 li 3 *
. 0136*
. 0001*

33
30
31

n

4

30

1

29
28

27
Fsychologi st:

D irecto rs

1 -h y ea rs
5 -9 years
10+ years

F i g u r e 3 . — G r o u p x Amount o f P r o f e s s i o n a l
f o r t h e V a r i a b l e — C o m m u n it y H e l a t i o n s h i p s .

E xperience I n te r a c tio n

76

P r o g r a m C o n s u l t a t i o n . — As sh o w n i n T a b l e 3 2 , t h e r e was a s i g n i f ­
icant in teractio n

e f f e c t b e tw e e n amount o f p r o f e s s i o n a l e x p e r i e n c e and

g r o u p m e m b e r s h i p on t h e d e p e n d e n t v a r i a b l e
means i n d i c a t e d t h a t

o f Program C o n s u l t a t i o n .

The

s c h o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t s w i t h 10 o r m o r e y e a r s o f

p r o f e s s i o n a l e x p e r i e n c e a s compared t o

sch o o l p s y c h o lo g is t s w ith l e s s

e x p e r i e n c e p e r c e i v e d P rogram C o n s u l t a t i o n a s more i m p o r t a n t f o r t h e
school p sy c h o lo g ist in th e

id e a l r o l e , w hereas th e d i r e c t o r s o f s p e c i a l

e d u c a t i o n w i t h 10 o r m o r e y e a r s o f p r o f e s s i o n a l e x p e r i e n c e a s c o m p a r e d
to

d i r e c t o r s w ith le s s

experience p erceiv ed i t

to be l e s s

im portant

(see F igure 2 ).

I t sh o u ld be n o te d , how ever, t h a t t h i s

in teractio n

e f f e c t accounted

f o r 3 .'{ 6 % o f t h e t o t a l v a r i a n c e o f t h e d e p e n d e n t

m easure s u g g e s tin g o nly a v ery sm all r e l a t i o n s h i p betw een th e d ependent
v a r i a b l e and t h e

source o f v a r ia tio n .

Amount o f p r o f e s s i o n a l e x p e r i ­

e n c e h a d no s i g n i f i c a n t e f f e c t u p o n t h e p e r c e p t i o n o f P r o g r a m C o n s u l t a ­
tio n

In th e

ideal

school p sy c h o lo g ist r o le .

TABLE 3 2 , — Two-way F i x e d E f f e c t s ANOVA o n P r o f e s s i o n a l E x p e r i e n c e a n d
Group M em bership— D ependent M easu re:
Program C o n s u l t a t i o n .

G ources o f
V ariatio n

Group
Professional
In teractio n
E rror

E xperience

df

Mean
G q ii a r e

1
2
2
33^

36.17
2 2 ) i . 37
27.29

F ratio

30. B7
1.33
B.22

p.

less

than

.0001*
.2672
.OOOh*

77

1*5

I* 1
C!
o
•H
4>

lip
1

111

-P

O t/1
O C3
t/) o
o
§
n
0) d
Z-: u
uo
o
£

1*0

2
1

39
38
37
38
75
Psychologi s t s

D irectors

1:

1 - 1| y e a r s

3:

10+ y e a rs

5-9 y e a r s

F igure
C r o u p x Amount o f P r o f e s s i o n a l
f o r th e V u r i a b i e — Program C o n s u l t a t i o n .

H xperiencc I n t e r a c t i o n

78
A dm inistration
t h e r e w as a s i g n i f i c a n t

o f S p e c i a l E d u c a t i o n . — As sh own i n T a b l e 3 3 ,
in teractio n

e f f e c t betw een amount o f p r o f e s ­

s i o n a l e x p e r i e n c e a n d g r o u p m e m b e r s h i p on t h e d e p e n d e n t v a r i a b l e
A dm inistration of S pecial

E ducation.

p s y c h o l o g i s t s w i t h 1 0 o r m or e y e a r s
pared to
tratio n

The means i n d i c a t e d t h a t

e x p e rie n c e p e r c e iv e d A dm inis­

o f S p e c i a l E d u c a tio n as more i m p o r ta n t f o r t h e
id eal r o l e ,

w hereas th e

This i n t e r a c t i o n e f f e c t

school p sy ch o lo ­

d i r e c t o r s o f s p e c ia l ed u ca tio n w ith

10 o r more y e a r s o f p r o f e s s i o n a l e x p e r i e n c e

w ith l e s s experience p e rc e iv e d i t

school

o f p r o f e s s i o n a l e x p e r i e n c e a s com­

school p s y c h o lo g is ts w ith l e s s

g i s t in th e

as com pared t o d i r e c t o r s

to be le s s

im portant

(see F ig u re

a c c o u n t e d f o r 8.0& o f t h e t o t a l v a r i a n c e

th e d ep en d e n t measure and i n d i c a t e d

of

3).

of

o n ly a sm all r e l a t i o n s h i p betw een

th e d e p en d e n t v a r i a b l e and th e s o u r c e o f v a r i a t i o n .

Amount o f p r o ­

f e s s i o n a l e x p e r i e n c e had no s i g n i f i c a n t e f f e c t upon t h e p e r c e p t i o n o f
A d m i n i s t r a t i o n of G pecial. E d u c a tio n

in th e

id e a l school psy ch o lo g ist

ro le.

TABLE 3 3 . — Two-way F i x e d E f f e c t s A130VA on P r o f e s s i o n a l E x p e r i e n c e a n d
G r o up M e m b e r s h i p — D e p e n d e n t M e a s u r e :
A dm inistration o f
Special E ducation,

Gourees o f
V ariatio n

G r ou p
P rofessional
In teractio n
E rror

Experience

df

1
P
P
3 3 1*

Mean
Gquure

PbO.lO
17.33
1 .3 7 .0 3
8 . IE

F ratio

33.0.?
P . 13
lf'.fll

p.

less

than

.0001*
. 1 P 10
. 0001*

T9

Mean Score
(Administration of Special

19

18

3

17
I/)

yu

16

o
f4
n.
r!
o
•H
+)
fl)
t)
:i
tJ
to

35

Ui

1

lJ*
33
IS
11
P sychologists
1:
O.

3:

action

D irecto rs
1 -H y e a r s
9-9 y ears
10+ years

F i g u r e 3 . - - G r o u p x Amount o f P r o f e s s i o n a l P x p e r i e n c e I n t e r ­
f o r th e V a r ia b l e — A d m in is tr a tio n o f I'p e c in l K ducntion Program s.

8o

R e s e a r c h . — As s h o v n
in teractio n

i n T a b l e 3^* t h e r e w a s no s i g n i f i c a n t

e f f e c t b e tw e e n amount o f

p r o f e s s i o n a l e x p e r i e n c e and g ro u p

m e m b e r s h i p on t h e d e p e n d e n t

v a ria b le of R esearch.

p r o f e s s i o n a l e x p e rie n c e did

n o t h a v e a s i g n i f i c a n t e f f e c t on t h e

p erce p tio n o f th e id e a l ro le o f th e
ent variab le

A l s o , t h e amount

school p sy c h o lo g ist

of

fo r the depend­

of R esearch.

TABLE 3*1.— Two-way F i x e d E f f e c t s AKOVA on P r o f e s s i o n a l E x p e r i e n c e a n d
G r ou p M e m b e r s h i p — D e p e n d e n t M e a s u r e :
R esearch.

Eourcos of
V ariatio n

df

Group
P ro fe s s io n a l E xperience
In teractio n
Error

In

Mean
Square

1

3.09
10.07
9.02

o
<-

school

2.03

in teractio n

p sy c h o lo g ists w ith

h y p o th e ses w ere r e j e c t e d

effects.

T h e r e was a s l i g h t

10 o r m o r e y e a r s

e x p e r i e n c e a s compared t o s c h o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t s w i t h l e s s
perceive

Community R e l a t i o n s h i p s ,

an d A d m i n i s t r a t i o n
the

ideal

d irecto rs

of Special

ro le of th e
o f special

of p ro fessio n al
experience to

Program and C u rric u lu m C o n s u l t a t i o n ,

E d u c a t i o n P r o g r a m s a s mo re i m p o r t a n t i n

school p s y c h o lo g ist.

On t h e o t h e r h a n d , t h e

e d u c a t i o n w itli 10 o r more years, o f p r o f e s s i o n a l

e x p e r i e n c e a s compared t o d i r e c t o r s w ith l e s s
t h e s e same t h r e e v a r i a b l e s
school p s y c h o lo g ist.

.3507
.1059
.1335

.0 7
2.26

summary, t h r e e o f t h e e i g h t s u b - n u l l

for

le s s than

33*4

as t h e r e w ere t h r e e s i g n i f i c a n t
tendency

p.

F ratio

as l e s s

In a d d i t i o n ,

im portant

experience perceived
in th e id e a l r o l e o f th e

t h e amount o f p r o f e s s i o n a l

ence e i t h e r as a sch o o l p s y c h o lo g is t or d i r e c t o r of s p e c ia l

experi­

education

81

in g e n e r a l had l i t t l e
a ctiv ities

in th e

e f f e c t upon t h e p e r c e p t i o n o f t h e e i g h t m a j o r

id eal ro le

s l i g h t te n d e n c y , how ever,

of the

school p sy ch o lo g ist.

f o r the re s p o n d e n ts ,

T h e r e was a

as t h e i r p r o f e s s io n a l

e x p e r i e n c e i n c r e a s e d , t o p e r c e i v e C h i l d T h e r a p y a n d C o m m un ity R e l a t i o n ­
s h i p s a s i n c r e a s i n g l y more

im portant.

N ull H ypothesis I I I
T h e r e i s no i n t e r a c t i o n b e t w e e n t y p e a n d s i z e o f s c h o o l d i s t r i c t
i n w hich t h e s c h o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t and d i r e c t o r o f s p e c i a l e d u c a t i o n a r e
e m p l o y e d a n d g r o u p m e m b e r s h i p on t h e p e r c e p t i o n o f t h e i d e a l r o l e o f
t h e s c h o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t on e a c h o f t h e e i g h t m a j o r a c t i v i t i e s .
Th e d e s i g n s u s e d t o t e s t t h i s

h y p o th e s i s w ere a th r e e - w a y fix e d

e f f e c t s A n a l y s e s o f V a r i a n c e , one f o r e a c h o f t h e e i g h t d e p e n d e n t
variab les.

The g r o u p i n d e p e n d e n t v a r i a b l e

G ch o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t s
(H = B o ) .
local

(N = 3 8 ? ) h a d t w o l e v e l s :

(N = ? 9 3 ) a nd d i r e c t o r s o f s p e c i a l e d u c a t i o n

The t y p e o f d i s t r i c t

and i n t e r m e d i a t e

school

i n d e p e n d e n t v a r i a b l e had two l e v e l s :

d istricts.

The s i z e o f t h e d i s t r i c t

i n d e p e n d e n t v a r i a b l e had t h r e e l e v e l s b a s e d upon t o t a l p u b l i c
stu d en t enrollm en t:
larg e

(09,000+).

sm all

( 0 - 9 9 9 9 ) , medium ( 1 0 , 0 0 0 -plt , 9 9 9 ) , a n d

T h i s w as a n u n b a l a n c e d d e s i g n s i n c e t h e r e w a s an

u n e q u a l number o f s u b j e c t s p e r c e l l .
design
en tly .

Because o f t h i s u n b a la n c e d

i t was n o t p o s s i b l e t o t e s t e a c h s o u r c e o f v a r i a t i o n
T herefore,

sig n ifican t

school

independ­

f o r e a c h o f t h e e i g h t A n a l y s e s o f V a r i a n c e , when a

s o u r c e o f v a r i a t i o n was i d e n t i f i e d ,

t i o n were n o t c o n s id e r e d b e c a u s e t h e y were n o t

o ther sources o f v a ria ­
independent o f th e

so u rc e o f v a r i a t i o n w hich h ad been fo u n d t o b e s i g n i f i c a n t .
i n d i c a t e s t h e m e a n s an d p o o l e d s t a n d a r d d e v i a t i o n s
e n t m e a s u r e s and t h e number o f s u b j e c t s p e r c e l l

T a b l e 35

on t h e e i g h t d e p e n d ­

in the d e s ig n .

The

TABLE 3 5 - — Le a ns c f t h e n i g h t L a j o r A c t i v i t i e s
x Group (L = 3 5 2 ) .

of th e School P s y c h o lo g is t f o r Size x D i s t r i c t

Leans o f t h e E ig h t A c t i v i t i e s

12
-U
O O
0 0 CJ
.O “~3
E
3 Cl
►
—
, r>
wJ
o

'J
a
w
J
0
Li
o

School
Psychol­
ogists

L*
-u>
11
■■ i

Cl
tJ
¥J~1

C_l

V
)
0
c
Kj
cs
—

r“"
O
r —
j
0 JJ
-3 3
o o
>1 3
P P

U4

MU

to
c
to
-H
c
c
3

>>
a.
"3 3
i—
< 3
•H CJ

>
"i
•-M

CJ

—j

™|

4->
c
a>
3
3

■u
n
C
3
0
CJ

>. n
-u C
■H O
C —I
3 J->
6

<3

O
CJ

c
o
-u
4J
3
-U
H
3
0
O to 3
C
O
CJ

H
X o
O M
cn a,

3
O
-r-l
-t-j
3 r—
1
3 3 3
4J M O
3 Cl iH
■H D J
3 P. 3
■
h if) y
E
3
3 3 3
c o w

Si
CJ
3
3
V
m
<U
(3

Local

I
2
j

^i
QU
66
55

LL.9 L
-5-23
1*5-35

26.33
26.71
2 6 .8 2

1 1 .L7
11.27
11.75

15-00
lL .71
15.20

29-1*1
30. L5
31. !*0

L2 .ll
1*1.92
L3 .8 2

1 6 , 6L
1 6 .L 8
1 6 . 61*

13.09
13.20
13.82

Interiu* wt.XL*^ C

1
c.
Z

35
1 r*
^5
31

1*3-67
L3 .5 6
uL.1 T

2 6 .1 2
26.33
25-8?

11.03
10.76
11.77

1^.33
15.22
15.33

30.L2
30.96
31.97

1*1.27
1*1 .6 0
1*1 .9 0

16.55
1 6 .2 0
15.67

1 2 .L8
12.98
13.10

t'l

cn

t:

n>

u,
a
p
ct
Ho
a

in co cn
H- H- *-'•
d N M
<t it rt>
C<J IV)
II II II
M t-' o
O 1
4 >» VO
o (J vo
o O VO
o O vO
+ 1
f\)
4
VO
VO
V(J

o
Hp
M

o tj
►
*)
M
(0
n
it
o
U1

U kh
n> n
P- c*
P hi
c►1
Q
t 1 to >u
it C)
It
«'
<)
H- p
t1 m
Hi o
p
t-c p u
H.
o p*
0

Group

t<
o
fJ
P
M

D istrict

IX) r*

M :* ,e

UJ ro

KM

Y-'

M
rj On

* ro
cn H
(Jv—i

Hiunlior o f
G u b je c ’ bi;
I’o r C e l l

U
•)
tf\
fo

£- tro
U
• Y-*
* •
o on —j
o o CO

c- f- ro L
•i) L
•O
<I) vo VO
O r- G \

Diagnosis

*ro
UJ
"J

ro r\> ro
cn on
«i-' • «
0-5 fO o
co ro VO

ro ro ro
ro
* *a> av
•
CDro
o cn M

Pu y c d i o EducatIonaL
Plunnlng

l\J
•
UJ

vu
•
’-J
on

M
O
• vO
*
o CD
o ro

►
-1
fit
r*
o
U>
•Ol

M KJ
V
«J) O
•O C
*
cd cn C
TV
o o —J

O
o
a
t*-

<t
6
C hild
Therapy

o
rt
O'
fD

*
C
D
tr

M
VOI cn
•f- • •
L*J —1u>
OJ CD ON

cn
•
O
Q

u>
•
cn
—J

ro ro ro
O
'v
*OV
•OC
•
IJOOv CD
U> —J ro

ru ro u>
o
CO C
•D*
£U*x) \jy
VQ
o

Community
R elations

cn
•
UJ
CH

U UJ
o«
—
• 1 -1
•
CO H* cn
CO—1cn

U
J £r- U>
CM
• O
■ C
•J
o O
o o —
'J

School
Program
C o n s u l t a t Lon

u>
•
o

I-1
tr cn
* ■ •
CO ro O
CO CD VO

MMM
ru
* • •f=co co ro
O CDoc

Admi n i r>t r a t i o n
o f S pecial
Education

1
M I—
C
O *H C
O
•
*

M
M
ro U
> U• J
•
ro Ov M
o vO M

Research

ro
o
-j
•

CD <J\

—4 CO

£8

cn cn
• •
t- UJ
cr UJ

Parent

C ounseling

t1!
H(? )

tr

c+
>
O
c<r

ft
w

Q)<

g r o u p m a in e f f e c t w a s n o t t e s t e d

since i t

w as a l r e a d y c o n s i d e r e d u n d e r

N u ll H ypothesis I .

D i a g n o s i s . — As shown i n T a b l e 3 6 , t h e r e w e r e n o s i g n i f i c a n t
i n t e r a c t i o n e f f e c t s b e t w e e n "type and s i z e
m e m b e r s h i p on t h e

dependent v a r ia b le o f D iag n o sis.

cant d istric t effect.
t h a t th e respondents

The w e i g h t e d m e a n s

trict:

(Mean o f l o c a l d i s t r i c t :

)i 3. 3 ) .

T h e r e was a s i g n i f i ­

for the d i s t r i c t s

from l o c a l s c h o o l d i s t r i c t s

a s more im p o r t a n t t h a n t h e r e s p o n d e n t s
d istricts

o f sch o o l d i s t r i c t and group

in d icated

p e r c e iv e d D iagnosis

from i n t e r m e d i a t e sch o o l

M i.9 ;

Mean o f i n t e r m e d i a t e d i s ­

The p r o p o r t i o n o f t h e t o t a l v a r i a n c e o f t h e dependent

m easure accounted

f o r by t h i s

d istrict

e f f e c t was 2. 8% w h i c h i n d i c a t e d

o n ly a small r e l a t i o n s h i p b etw ee n th e d e p e n d e n t v a r i a b l e

and Gourcc o f

v ariatio n .

TADLK 3 6 . — T h r e e - w a y F i x e d E f f e c t s ANOVA o n T y p e o f S c h o o l D i s t r i c t
and S i z e o f D i s t r i c t and Group M em bership— D ep en d en t
M easure:
D iagnosis.

Group
Gi z e
Di s t r i c t
Group x Size
S ize x D is tr ic t
Group x D i s t r i c t
Group x S ize x D i s t r i c t
l-'rror

Mean
Gquare

df

1
1
O
*1
1
01
370

.

lO it.yh
s.o)*
173.97
7 .0 9

i—1
O
*—1
O

Gourccs o f
V ariation

1 .0 0
17.99

13.12

F ratio

19 .00
t
13.21
.5)4
.77
. 1)4
1 .37

p.

le e s than

.0003
.7992
.000)i*
. 58)19
. 1*639
. 70)10
.95 91

85
P s y c h o - E d u c a t i o n a l P l a n n i n g . — As shown i n T a b l e 37 » t h e r e w e r e
no s i g n i f i c a n t
d istrict

in teractio n

e f f e c t s b e tw e e n t y p e and s i z e o f s c h o o l

a n d g r o u p m e m b e r s h i p on t h e

dependent v a r ia b le

o f Psycho-

E d u catio n al Planning.

T h e r e was a s i g n i f i c a n t d i s t r i c t e f f e c t .

w e i g h t e d m e an s f o r t h e

d istricts

local, sc h o o l

p erceived P sycho-E ducational

d istricts

im p o rtan t th an the re sp o n d e n ts
local

d istrict:

in d ic a te d th a t th e respondents

The
from

P l a n n i n g a s more

from i n t e r m e d i a t e d i s t r i c t s

Pt>,5; mean o f i n t e r m e d i a t e d i s t r i c t :

(m ea n o f

P5*9).

The

p ro p o rtio n o f th e t o t a l v a r ia n c e o f th e dependent m easure acco u n ted
by t h i s

d i s t r i c t e f f e c t was 1. .0% w h i c h s u g g e s t e d o n l y a s l i g h t

t i o n between

for

asso cia­

th e d e p e n d e n t v a r i a b l e and s o u r c e o f v a r i a t i o n .

TADEE 3 7 - — T h r e e - w a y F i x e d E f f e c t s AIJOVA on Ty p e o f Dcho n] D i s t r i c t a n d
D i z e o f D i s t r i c t and G r o u p M e m b e r s h i p — D e p e n d e n t M e a s u r e :
P s y e h o - E d u c a t io n a l PInnni n g .
r. t --=. — i f . ”

.

Dources

of
Van i at. i : >n

Mean
Pquare

df

Group
;' i z e
i'i s t r i c t
Group x Dize
Dize x D i s t r i c t
Group x D i s t r i c t
Group x Dize x D i s t r i c t
Error

1
-i
1
i' 1
1
O
Ti'O

effects

be tw e en ty p e and

m e m b e r s h i p on t h e d e p e n d e n t v a r i a b l e
of d is tr ic t

nor th e

size

of the

size

less

than

.00011
. 5 1 It S
. 0 p 17*
. 11(18
.Ol'dll
.ot,l 1
. 05ti 1

P.uo

18 , t h e r e w e r e no s i g n i f i c a n t
of

school

district

of Child Therapy.

district

p.

1 1 .OP
.<■7
5 . 11>
D. 1 It
.olt
. 00

1*5. 17
1.75
DO. 05
1 D . 05
. Dl
.01
M'.. 11
5 . (>D

P h i I d T h e r a p y . — As s h o wn i n T a b l e
interaction

E ratio

had

and group

N either

a significant,

the

effect

type

upon

86

th e p e rce p tio n o f th e respondents concerning th e

im p o rtan ce o f C hild

Therapy.

TABLE 3 8 . — T h r e e - v a y F i x e d E f f e c t s AHOVA on Ty p e o f S c h o o l D i s t r i c t
and S i z e o f D i s t r i c t a n d C r o u p M e m b e r s h i p — D e p e n d e n t M e a s u r e :
C hild T herapy.
■ 1■
■ 1 -1

fourccs of
V ariation

Mean
Square

df

Croup
f.i ze
Di s t r i c t
Group x Gize
D ize x D i s t r i c t
Group x D i s t r i c t
Group x Dize x D i s t r i c t
Error

1

86.15
6 . 9)4
16.05
5.67
P . >47
J 40
.29
14.52

t
1
n

1’ r a t i o

_

to
i .

1
O
37 0

p.

.

le s s than

.0001*
.2165
.0602
.2859
.5 7 9 5
.7665
.9373

19.08

1.5)4
3.55
1 26
• 55
.09
.06
.

P a r e n t C o u n s e l i n g . — As shown i n T a b l e 3 9 , t h e r e was a s i g n i f i ­
cant in te ra c tio n

e f f e c t between s i z e

o f school

d istrict

and g ro u p

m e m b e r s h i p on t h e d e p e n d e n t v a r i a b l e o f P a r e n t C o u n s e l i n g
li) .

This i n t e r a c t i o n

increased,

school

ind icated th a t

as th e s iz e

(se e F igure

of the d i s t r i c t

p s y c h o lo g is ts tended to p e rc e iv e

P a re n t C ounseling us

i n c r e a s i n g l y more i m p o r t a n t w hereas d i r e c t o r s o f s p e c i a l e d u c a t i o n
larg e

school d i s t r i c t s

im p o rta n t than d id th e
of th e to ta l

variance

from

( P I , 000+) p e r c e i v e d P a r e n t C o u n s e li n g us l e s s
d irecto rs

in s m a lle r d i s t r i c t s .

o f th e d ep en d e n t measure a c c o u n te d

i n t e r a c t i o n was. 1 . 1 ? a n d i n d i c a t e d o n l y a s m a l l

The p r o p o r t i o n
f o r by t h i s

asso ciatio n

i n t e r a c t i o n and m ea n s c o r e s , on P a r e n t C o u n s e l i n g .

betw een th e

87

TABLE 3 9 - — T h r e e - w a y F i x e d E f f e c t s ANOVA on Ty p e o f S c h o o l D i s t r i c t
and S i z e o f D i s t r i c t and G roup M em bership— D epen d en t
M easure: P a re n t C ounseling.

Sources of
V ariation

df

Group
S i ze
D istrict
Group x S i z e
Size x D i s t r i c t
G r ou p x D i s t r i c t
Group x S i z e x D i r . t r i c t
Error

1
n
1
0
a
c-

in.
1
/

370

Mean
Square

F ratio

7.27
1.77
.0 5
10.32
7.29
.02
2 Jili
3. 38

p.

.0 1
3.05
2 . 1G

.0 1
.72

15 .0

<1>

CJ

O

13

U

to o
fJ
a
at 4*
O'
: :

cj

1 ‘3 J*

15. 2
.15
Mi . 8

CT.1

1l i . 6
Mi.l*
Med i uin

■nan
Gmal 1 :
Med i 11m :
Largo:

Largo

0-0000

1 0 , 1100- 21* , 0 0 0
pl , 000+

F i g u r e 1*.— C r o u p x M iz e o f D i s t r i c t
V a r ia b le — P a re n t C onnzoling.

In teractio n

than

.1143^
-5935
.9075
. ol*8)**
.1172
. 9 1* ! 1*
.1*870

2.15
.52

19.8

(in
t:
rH

less

fo r the

08

Com mu nity R e l a t i o n s h i p s . — As shown i n T a b l e t o , t h e r e was a
sig n ifican t

i n t e r a c t i o n e f f e c t between

s i z e o f s c h o o l d i s t r i c t and

g r o u p m e m b e r s h i p on t h e d e p e n d e n t v a r i a b l e o f Co mm uni ty R e l a t i o n s h i p s
(see F ig u re 5)-

This i n t e r a c t i o n

in d ic a te d t h a t as the s iz e

d istrict

increased,

s h ip s as

i n c r e a s i n g l y m o re i m p o r t a n t , w h e r e a s t h e

d istricts

school p s y c h o lo g ists perceiv ed

o f the

Community R e l a t i o n ­
d irecto rs

from em ail

( 0 - ^ 9 ° ° ) had a t e n d e n c y t o p e r c e i v e Co mm un ity R e l a t i o n s h i p s

a s m o re i m p o r t a n t t h a n t h e

d irecto rs

from l a r g e r

size d i s t r i c t s .

The

p r o p o r tio n o f th e t o t a l v a r ia n c e o f th e d ependent measure a c c o u n te d f o r
by t h i s

i n t e r a c t i o n e f f e c t was 1. $% a n d i n d i c a t e d

t i o n s h i p between th e i n t e r a c t i o n

only a s m a ll r e l a ­

a n d me an s c o r e s o n Co m m u ni ty R e l a t i o n ­

ships .

TABLE t o . — T h r e e - w a y F i x e d E f f e c t s A1J0VA on T y p e o f S c h o o l D i s t r i c t a n d
S i z e o f D i s t r i c t and Group M em b ersh ip — D ep en d en t M e asu re :
Comm unity R e l a t i o n s h i p s .

Sources o f
V ariation

Gr oup
S i ze
Di s t r i c t
G r ou p x S i z e
S ize x D i s t r i c t
G r ou p x D i s t r i c t
G r ou p x S i z e x D i s t r i c t
Error

d l'

1
«*>
1
'1
■i
1
•9
370

Mean
Square

lift.71
99.95
50.60
.97
1 .7°
10.71
19.77

F ratio

t . it
1.01
1 . 6 It
3.9 6
.09
.It
. 8t

p.

le s s than

.0380
.0930
.9019
,0199*
.9709
.7001
.t333

<L)
U
O
o
x;
u h> tn
’n 4’ ti
■H O

jy V, d
r-: il '■t
O (U
r) ru

f . m a l

Medium

1

Mma1 1 :
Me diu m:
Large :

Large

0-999?
10 , 0 0 0 -M)j , ? 9 ?
05,000+

F i g u r e '3 .— Mroup x Mir.c o f D i s t r i c t
b l e — C om m uni ty Hc.l a t i o n s h i p s .

Interactio n

P r o g r a m C o n s u l t a t 1 on .--A:; s h o w n i n T a b l e
sig n ifican t

in teractio n

ican t e ffe c t

111, t h e r e w e r e no

e f f e c t s betw een type and s ic e o f s c h o o l d i s t r i c t

a n d g r o u p m e m b e r s h i p on t h e
N either th e

fo r th e V ari-

type of d i s t r i c t

dependent v a r ia b le
nor th e

o f Program C o n s u l t a t i o n .

sine of th e

upon t h e p e r c e p t i o n o f t h e

d i s t r i c t had a s i g n i f ­

resp o n d en ts concerning th e

i m p o r t a n c e o f P r o g n u n C o n s u l t a t i on .

A d m i n i s t r a t i o n o f Mpocial
t h e r e were no s i g n i f i c a n t
ehool d i s t r i c t
A dm inistrutIon
the

in teractio n

shown i n T a b l e lb?

'

u n i g r o u p m e m b e r s h i p on t h e d e p e n d e n t v a r i a b l e o f
o f Special

size of th e d i s t r i c t

F dueution

eith er

had a s i g n i f i c a n t

th e respondent:; co n cern in g th e
F d ucation.

Kdnoat. i o n . - - A s

th e type o f d i s t r i c t nor

effect

upon t h e p e r c e p t i o n o f

im portance of A d m in istra tio n

o f M pecial

90

TABLE 1*1.— T h r e e - w a y F i x e d E f f e c t s AIJOVA o n T y p e o f S c h o o l D i s t r i c t a n d
S i z e o f D i s t r i c t and Group M e m b ersh ip — D e p e n d e n t M e a s u re :
Program C o n s u l t a t i o n ,

Sources of
V ariatio n

Mean
Square

df

G r ou p
S ize
D istrict
Group x S i z e
S ize x D i s t r i c t
Group x D i s t r i c t
Group x S i z e x D i s t r i c t
E rror

1
nO
1
O
t.

F ratio

851.>42
23-21*
7'* -92
53.
7->4 3
6 . '[6
60.1*7
28.58

n

i
n
c
37 0
_

p.

le s s than

.0 0 0 1 *
, I*)*ItIt
.1061*
.1558
.77114
.6271
.1221

29-79
.81
2.62
1.87
.26
.2 >i
2.12

TABLE UP. — T h r e e - w a y F i x e d E f f e c t s AIJOVA o n T y p e o f G c h o o l D i s t r i c t
a n d S i z e of' D i s t r i c t a n d G r o u p M e m b e r s h i p — D e p e n d e n t
M e a s u r e ; Admi n i s t r a t i o n o f S p e c i a l E d u c a t i o n .

G ources o f
V ariatio n

Group
S ize
D istric t
('.roup x S i z e
Size x D i s t r i c t
Group x D i s t r i c t
G ro u p x S i z e x D i s t r i c t
Error

df

Mean
Square

1
2
1
2
2
1
2
370

2 8 2 . 2lt
2 .69
2.98
6.39
2.51
lit. 23
6.79
9 . J40

V ratio

30.02
.29
.32
.68
.27
1.51
.72

p.

less

than

.0001*
.7510
. 57*40
.5073
.7658
. 219>4
.1*061*

R e s e a r c h . — As s h o w n i n T a b l e h i * t h e r e was a s i g n i f i c a n t G r o u p
by S iz e by D i s t r i c t
Research

in teractio n

( s e e F i g u r e <’>}.

T his

effect

on t h e

in teractio n

s l i g h t tendency for sc h o o l p s y c h o lo g is ts
school d i s t r i c t s
as th e s i z e

in creased .

in d icated

of

t h a t t h e r e w as a

in both l o c a l

to p e rc e iv e o f Research as

o f the d i s t r i c t

dependent v a ria b le

and i n t e r m e d i a t e

i n c r e a s i n g l y snore i m p o r t a n t

The d i r e c t o r s

of sp ecial

91

TABLE I43 . — T h r e e - w a y F i x e r ! E f f e c t s AHOVA o n Type o f S c h o o l D i s t r i c t
and S iz e o f D i s t r i c t and Group M embership— D ependent
M easure:
Research.

Sources o f
V ariatio n

df

Group
Si ze
D istrict
Group x S i z e
Size x D i s t r i c t
Group x Di s t r i c t
Group x S i z e x D i s t r i c t
Error

1
"T
1
'I
t.
O
t-

1
n
17n

Mean
Square

2 . >46
6.99
91.17
>4.73
• 7 >4
.07
16.50
>4 . 27

F ratio

p.

.57
1 . 6h

5 . >42
1.11
.17
.02
1.86

le s s than

.>41489
. 1 9 6 >4
.0205
.3317
.8>4ll
.8978
.0220*

c;

£
Small.
Medium
Large
Local D is tr ic t
S m all:
Medium:
Large:
F i g u r e Ct. — G r o u p x S i z e o f D i s t r i c t
action fo r th e V ariab le— R esearch.

Small
Medium
Large
Interm ediate D is tr ic t
O-GQGd
1 0 , 0 0 0 -S!i , 0 0 9
99,000+
x Type o f D i s t r i c t

In ter­

92

e d u c a t i o n , on t h e o t h e r h a n d , e x h i b i t e d
p attern s

com pletely d i f f e r e n t in te r a c tio n

f o r l o c a l and i n t e r m e d i a t e d i s t r i c t s .

Tn l o c a l d i s t r i c t s

of

medium s i z e , d i r e c t o r s o f s p e c i a l e d u c a t i o n a s c o m p a r e d t o d i r e c t o r s
in l o c a l d i s t r i c t s

o f sm all or la rg e

im p o rta n t, w hereas

in

s iz e p erceived

in term ed iate d i s t r i c t s

o f s p e c i a l e d u c a t i o n as compared t o d i r e c t o r s
of sm all o r la rg e
in teractio n

o f m e di u m s i z e ,
in

s i z e p e r c e i v e d R e s e a r c h as 1e s s

effect

R e s e a rc h as more
d irecto rs

in term ed iate d i s t r i c t s
im portant.

This

f o r 1 . 5% o f t h e t o t a l v a r i a n c e o f t h e

accounted

d e p e n d e n t m e a s u r e a n d i n d i c a t e d t h a t t h e r e was o n l y a s m a l l a s s o c i a t i o n
between t h i s

in teractio n

a n d t h e mean s c o r e s on R e s e a r c h .

In sum m ary,the n u ll
o f the e ig h t t e s t s
d istrict

o f the h y p o th e sis.

in teractio n

a group by s iz e

hyp o th eses could not be r e je c te d

T h e re was a g r o u p b y s i z e by

fo r th e dependent v a ria b le o f R esearch.

in teractio n

from l o c a l d i s t r i c t s

in term ed iate d i s t r i c t s
1’s y e h o - K d u c a t i o n u l

T h e r e was

fo r the dependent v a ria b le s o f P arent

C o u n s e l i n g a n d Co m m u ni ty R e l a t i o n s l i i p s .
for respondents

in seven

T h e r e w as a s l i g h t t e n d e n c y

as compared t o r e s p o n d e n t s

from

t o p l a c e more i m p o r t a n c e u p o n D i a g n o s i s a n d

Planning.

In g e n e r a l ,

it

did

not appear th a t type

o f d i s t r i c t n nd s i z e o f d i s t r i c t h a d v e r y much e f f e c t u p o n how s c h o o l
p s y c h o l o g i s t s am i d i r e c t o r s
m ajor a c t i v i t i e s

o f sp ecial

i n tin? i d e a l

ed u cation

ro le o f the

school

p erceived

the e ig h t

p sy eh o lo g ist.

93

P erceiv ed R e la tiv e Im portance o f th e F if ty - F iv e
S p e c i f i c A c t i v i t i e s in t h e I d e a l Role
o f th e School P sy c h o lo g ist w ith
S i g n i f i c a n t C hi-Squares
Id e n ti fied
In o rd e r t o p o r tr a y th e

id e a l ro le of th e school psy ch o lo g ist

a s p e r c e iv e d by t h e r e s p o n d e n t s , t h e

fifty -fiv e

a c t i v i t i e s w ere ranked

in o r d e r o f im p o r t a n c e a c c o r d i n g t o t h e i r t o t a l w e i g h t e d mean s c o r e s
( s e e T a b l e Mi).
*4.99
J4 J 49
1.99
3 .I 49
P . 99
P . I 49
1.99

For th i s

to
to
to
to
to
to
to

14.50
It.OO
3.50
3.00
P . 50
P . 00
1.50

-

purpose th e

fo llo w in g s c o r e s w ere d e s ig n a te d :

"Must T er form "
" S h o u ld P e r f o r m - High"
" S h o u l d P e r f o r m - Low"
"May P e r f o r m - H ig h "
"May P e r f o r m - Low"
" S h o u ld Not P e r f o r m - H ig h "
" S h o u l d N ot P e r f o r m - Low"

T h e C h i - S q u a r e T e s t o f H o m o g e n e i t y was c a l c u l a t e d
these

fifty -fiv e

the d is tr ib u tio n

sp ecific

.05

a c t i v i t i e s was d i f f e r e n t

and d i r e c t o r s o f s p e c i a l

underlined

i n T a b l e Mi.

w hich a r e u n d e r l i n e d w e re r a t e d

school p sychologists
a c t i v i t y w hich i s

education

(see

underlined

i m p o r t a n t by t h e d i r e c t o r s
th is

T w enty-four o f th e s e
a s m o r e i m p o r t a n t by t h e

th a n by t h e d i r e c t o r s o f s p e c i a l e d u c u t i o n .
a nd i d e n t i f i e d by t e n a s t e r i s k s

only a c t i v i t y w ith a s i g n i f i c a n t

p sychologists;

d ete rm in e w hether

T w en ty -fiv c o f th e s e d if f e r e n c e s w ere s i g n i f i c a n t a t th e

l e v e l and a r e

activ ities

in ord er t o

on e a c h o f t h e s e s p e c i f i c

for school psy ch o lo g ists
A ppendix K).

activ ities

f o r each o f

chi

of sp ecial

activ ity

lo g ic a l re p o rt to th e parents
t i o n a l needs o f t h e i r c h i l d , "

reuds

as

s q u a r e w h i c h was r a t e d
e d u c u t i o n t h a n by t h e
follow s:

The

was t h e
a s more
school

"Give a w r i t t e n psycho­

c o n c e rn in g th e p s y c h o lo g i c a l and educa­

9)4

TABLE M * . — P e r c e i v e d R e l a t i v e I m p o r t a n c e o f t h e F i f t y - F i v e S p e c i f i c
A c t i v i t i e s in th e Id e a l R ole o f th e S chool P s y c h o lo g is t
w i t h S i g n i f i c a n t Chi S q u a r e s I d e n t i f i e d .

T otal
W eighted
Means

Must P e r f o r m ( h . 9 9 - ) * . 50)

P i a g n o s e am] e v a l u a t e t h e i n t e l l e c t u a l a n d c o g n i t i v e
d if f ic u ltie s of children

38.

U. 8 2

P r e s e n t and i n t e r p r e t t h e s p e c i f i c d i a g n o s e s o f
c h i l d r e n ' s problem s t o e d u c a t i o n a l p e r s o n n e l

50.

D is c u s s t h e c h i l d ' s problem w i t h t h e t e a c h e r a s one
o f t h e m e a n s o f d i a g n o s i s and e v a l u a t i o n

14.81

D eterm ine th e e l i g i b i l i t y of c h i l d r e n f o r one o f t h e
ty p e s o f a v a i l a b l e s p e c i a l e d u c a tio n program s

U .7 6

D i a g n o s e and e v a l u a t e t h e l e a r n i n g
child ren

1* . 6)1

15.

)‘5 .

lit.

1*3.

d isab ilities

H

ll.

CO

17 .

of

A d m i n i s t e r and s c o r e i n d i v i d u a l s t a n d a r d i z e d t e s t s
a s o ne o f t h e moans o f d i a g n o s i s an d e v a l u a t i o n

14.59

In c lu d e p a r e n ts in school p sy c h o -e d u c a tio n a l, p la n n in g
to d is c u s s th e p s y c h o lo g ic a l and e d u c a tio n a l needs
of t h e ir child

1*.57

C o o p e r a t e w i t h and u t i l i r . e t h e c e r v i c e s o f t h e v a r i o u s
p s y c h o l o g i c a l and e d u c a t i o n a l a g e n c i e s a v a i l a b l e i n
t h e community

>4 . 5 0

S h o u l d P e r f o r m - High ( >i. 149- 1*. 0 0 )

)*s.

3.

*-

i

3P.

D i a g n o s e ami e v a l u a t e t h e p e r c e p t u a l - m o t o r p r o b l e m s
of children

I1.I 49

P r e s e n t and i n t e r p r e t t h e n u m e r i c a l s c o r e s o f t e a t s
to ed u catio n al personnel

h.lilj

O bserve th e c h i ld in th e c la s s ro o m o r r e a l l i f e s i t u a ­
t i o n a s one o f t h e means o f d i a g n o s i s and e v a l u a t i o n

l«.l»3

Btudy t h e s o c i a l c a s e h i s t o r y o f t h e c h i l d
t h e m e a n s o f d i a g n o s i s a nd e v a l u a t i o n

1* .1*3

a s one o f

95
TABLE M . ~ ( c o n t ' a . )

S hould P e rfo n n

8.

ia.

39-

5>*.

30.

D iagnose and
d iso rd ers of

97*

H igh

th e

T o tal
W eighted
M eans

( >4. >49->4. 0 0 )

affec tiv e

and

em otional,

>4.33

Make s u g g e s t i o n s t o e d u c a t i o n a l p e r s o n n e l f o r
b e h a v io r m anagement a n d /o r B e h a v io r M o d if ic a tio n
o f c h i l d r e n w ith a d ju stm e n t problem s

>4. 16

A d m in is te r and s c o r e i n d i v i d u a l p r o j e c t i v e
s t a n d a r d i s e d t e s t s a s one o f t h e mcanc o f
d ia g n o s is and e v a lu a t io n

l*.lU

or non-

P re sc rib e s p e c ific cu rricu lu m m a te r ia ls to rem ediate
th e e d u c a tio n a l and le a r n in g pro b lem s o f c h i ld r e n

>4 . 0 >4

P re s c rib e th e use o f te c h n iq u e s
o f v isu a l-m o to r c o o rd in a tio n in

>4.02

S hould

1(9.

ev alu ate
ch ild ren

-

Perfonn

-

to rem ediate
ch ild ren

problem s

Low ( 3 . 9 9 - 3 * 5 0 )

C o n su lt w ith a d m i n i s tr a t o r s
e d u c a tio n a l program s

reg ard in g

ways

to

im prove

3.98

M ake h o m e v i s i t a t i o n s t o c o n s u l t w i t h p a r e n t s r e ­
g a rd in g t h e p s y c h o lo g ic a l and e d u c a t i o n a l needs o f
th e ir ch ild
Im prove t h e le v e l
th e handicapped

of

1(0.

P rovide

m eetings

3>(.

B enign a l t e r n a t i v e p ro g ra m s f o r e x c e p t i o n a l c h i l d r e n
such a s r e s o u r c e room s a n d / o r d i a g n o s t i c l e a r n i n g
cen ters

3.68

M ak e p r e s e n t a t i o n s t o
general psy ch o lo g ical
clii l d r e n

P .T .A . g ro u p s c o n c e r n i n g t h e
and e d u c a t i o n a l n e e d s o f

3.68

D iagnose and e v a l u a t e
of ch ild ren

th e

19.

'<7.

13.

in serv ice

public

aw areness

of

th e

needs

3.86
of

3.79
for

3 . 7>4

teachers

so cial

and

fam ily

problem s

3.60

96
TABLE I4 U. — (cont'd)

S hould

51.

37.

1 fi.

28.

Perform

-

Work a s a m em ber o f a c o m m i t t e e t h a t i s e x p l o r i n g a
p a r t i c u l a r e d u c a tio n a l problem in th e s c h o o l d i s t r i c t

3.60

Recommend n e e d e d
program s

3.59

changes

D issem inate in fo rm atio n
and e c o n o m ic c o n d i t i o n s

9.

1*.

2l*.

6.
52.

7.

53.

!*8.

in

th e

cu rriculum

o f education

r e g a r d i n g how s o c i o l o g i c a l
can a f f e c t c h i l d r e n 's le a r n in g

C o o p erate w ith s e v e r a l sch o o l d i s t r i c t s t o so lv e
l a r g e r com m unity-w ide or c o u n ty -w id e e d u c a t i o n a l
problem

May P e r f o r m

29.

T o tal
W eighted
Means

Low ( 3 . 9 9 - 3 . 5 0 )

- H ig h

3.55

a

3 . 5 J*

(3.1*9-3.00)

S e r v e on c o m m u n i t y b o a r d s w h i c h a r e c o n c e r n e d w i t h
th e needs of the handicapped

3.1*9

Improve t h e e d u c a t i o n a l o p p o r t u n i t i e s o f e t h n i c
m i n o r i t y groups, w i t h i n t h e s c h o o l p r o g r a m

3-1*8

W rite p o l i t i c a l r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s
educational le g is la tio n

3.1*5

co n cern in g needed

Make p r e s e n t a t i o n s t o c i v i c o r g a n i s a t i o n s ,
s e r v i c e c l u b s , and church g ro u p s
H e lp t o

community

d e v e l o p community m e n t a l h e a l t h p ro g ra m s

3.1*3
3.39

P e rfo rm r e s e a r c h b y r e v i e w i n g and s u m m a r is in g p e r t i n e n t
p r o fe s s io n a l 1i t e r a t u r e

3.39

Perform r e s e a r c h by d e s ig n in g and c a r r y i n g ou t e x p e r i ­
m ental s t u d i e s

3.33

Help t o
policy

3.30

form ulate

sp e c ia l education a d m in istra tiv e

A t t e n d s c h o o l b o a r d m e e t i n g s t o p r e s e n t new i d e a s t o
b o a rd members

3.25

97

TABLE hU.— (cont'd.)

May P e r f o r m - H i g h ( 3 . ^ 9 - 3 . 0 0 )

33.

18.

22.

25.
5.

Total
W eighted
Means

P erform r e s e a r c h by u s i n g in f o r m a l in f o r m a t i o n
g a th e rin g te ch n iq u es such as d is c u s s io n s o r
in terv iew s w ith te a c h e rs , a d m in is tr a to r s , and/or
parents

3.214

Engage in e d u c a t i o n a l a n d / o r v o c a t i o n a l c o u n s e li n g
w ith stu d e n ts

3.23

Conduct i n d i v i d u a l o r g ro u p s e s s i o n s w ith c h i ld r e n
in a th e ra p e u tic e f f o r t t o b rin g about em o tio n al,
a t t i t u d i n a l , a n d /o r b e h a v i o r a l change

3.22

Perform research by designing and using surveys

3.21

Recommend n e e d e d c h a n g e s i n t h e t e a c h e r s t a f f i n g o f
e d u c a t i o n a l programs

3.19

May P e r f o r m - Low ( 2 . 9 9 - 2 . 5 0 )

19•

35.

26.

23.

55-

10.

Give a w r i t t e n p s y c h o l o g i c a l r e p o r t t o t h e p a r e n t s
c o n c e r n i n g t h e p s y c h o l o g i c a l and e d u c a t i o n a l needs o f
t h e i r c h i 1d **********
D e s i g n , s u b m i t , and e v a l u a t e p r o p o s a l s f o r e d u c a t i o n a l
p r o g r a m s f u n d e d by f e d e r a l a n d s t a t e a g e n c i e s

2.99

Recommend needed changes in the physical structure and
equipment of the school plant or playground

2.98

P a r t i c i p a t e in re c ru itm e n t o f s t a f f
t i o n programs

2 . 9 !*

fo r s p e c ia l educa­

Help to develop sheltered workshop programs in the
community

2.90

Help to develop employment opportunities for the
handicapped in the community

2.86

Coordinate a group achievement testing program for the
general educational program

2 .7 9

98

TABLE UU .— (cont'd. )

T otal
W eighted
Means

May P e r f o r i n - Low ( 2 . 9 9 - 2 . 5 0 )

90.
1.

hO.

Engage d i r e c t l y w i t h c h i l d r e n i n r e c r e a t i o n a l

therapy

2 .6 't

Help t o d e v e lo p r e c r e a t i o n a l a c t i v i t i e s f o r t h e h a n d i ­
capped in t h e community o u t s i d e o f t h e s c h o o l
environm ent

2.6 2

O r g a n iz e and s u p e r v i s e one o f t h e s p e c i f i c e d u c a t i o n a l
program s w ith in th e t o t a l s p e c i a l e d u c a tio n program

2.6 0

S h o u ld Not P e r f o r m - High ( 2 . h 9 - 2 . 0 0 )

s p e c i a l e d u c a t i o n pe;r s o n n e l

21.

S upervise

36.

Rem ediate l e a r n i n g problem s by d i r e c t l y t u t o r i n g c h i l d r e n

S h o u l d N ot P e r f o r m -

31.

2.148
2.03

Low ( 1 . 9 9 - 1 - 5 0 )

Make transportation arrangements for exceptional children

1.89

99

R ankings
Present

ami

Tdeal

R oth t h e
tio n

w ere

ashed

im portance
now)

and

w ere

in

itie s

school
to

the

th e

very

of

rank

th e

to

school

th eir

agreem ent betw een
.^6

As
both

h1) ,

th e

in d icated

school

ro le

of

considered
activ ity
cate

teac h ers
a

apply

an d /o r

in

and

p sychological

change

and

program .

These

d irecto rs

present

th e

(as

ro le.

As

th eir

it

and
to
for

is

shown

in

ed ucation

e i g h t m ajor

.90

was

educa­

to

ro le

of sp ec ia l

both

of

mean r a n k i n g s

d irecto rs
to

be

th e

P lan n in g
in

w ere

and

of

sp ecial

m ore

ac tiv ­

ideal

ro les.

m easure

the

the

as

present

the

w h ich may
sp ecial

p rin cip les

in d icate

education

are
th at

in

the

im p o rtan t

about
in

in d i­

helping

th e

planning

P sycho-E ducational

ami C h i l d

a c tiv ities

T able

T h is may

much c o n c e r n e d

C ounseling

four

m ore

and

by

p sy ch o lo g ists

ro le.

D iagnosis

in

ac tiv ity

school

id eal

perceived

ed u catio n

a slig h tly

educational

Parent

as

im portant

alth o u g h

very

F ollow ing

first

o rien ted

d irecto rs

id eal

o f th e

p sy ch o lo g ist,

im portance w ere

and b e h a v io r

present

th e

sp ecial

according

ran k in g s

s um o f t h e

p sy ch o lo g ists

C ounseling.

ch o lo g ists

th e

school

school

in

tw o g r o u p s ,

school, p s y c h o l o g i s t

school

the

of

ro le.

con sid ered

the

the

c h ild 's

P lan n in g

th e

P sych o -K d u cu tio n al

of

th at

id eal
by

in

d irecto rs

C oncordance , w hich was u sed

p sychologists

D ia g n o sis, was

ideal

of

for

of

and

on t h e

p sy ch o lo g ist

extent

and

A c tiv itie s

ac tiv ities

in

im portance

p sy ch o lo g ists

C o effic ien t

ro le

e ig h t m ajor

agreem ent

school

and

psy ch o lo g ist

K e n d a ll's
of

M ajor

p sy ch o lo g ists

school

close

the

E ig h t

R oles

according

h') y

T able

to

o f the

P sy chotherapy

very
both

p erceiv ed

ch ild -cen tered
school
the

psy­

school

100

TABLE 1*5-— Mean B a n k i n g s o f E i g h t A c t i v i t i e s :
R e l a ti v e Im portance in
b o t h t h e P r e s e n t a nd I d e a l R o l e o f t h e S c h o o l P s y c h o l o g i s t . 1

P sychologists
Pres.

Role

D irecto rs

I d e a l Role

Pres.

Role

I d e a l R ole

D iagnosis

1 .DO (1)

?.. 06 ( 2)

1.31

(1 )

1.70

P sy ch o -E d u cati onal
PIanning

? . o 6 ( ?)

1.86

2.07

( 2)

1.91 (2)

P arent C o n sultation

3.15

(3)

3.1*0 ( 3 )

3 . 3 3 (3)

3. 53 ( 3)

C hild Therapy

5.50

(5)

J4 . 3 B <M

5 . >*3 ( 5)

It. 60 ( 5)

Ecliool P rogram
C o n s u l t a t i on

it. an

(JO

14.78 ( 5 )

It . lit <M

14.50 ( M

Research

6.70

(a)

6 . P 8 (7)

6.51 (7)

5.97

Community
R elati onships

5.76

(6 )

6.25

(6)

5.73 ( 6 )

6 .00 ( 7 )

A dm inistration of
f p e c i a l E ducation

6 . 6 ? (7)

6.98

(8 )

7.1*9 ( 8 )

7.71

(1)

(1)

( 6)

(8)

■^The o r d e r o f t h e e i g h t a c t i v i t i e s i n t h e l e f t - h a n d c o l u m n i s
b a s e d u p o n t h e sum o f t h e me an r a n k i n g s f o r t h e i ( l e a l r o l e o f t h e
s c h o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t a s p e r c e i v e d by b o t h s c h o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t s a n d
d ire c to rs of sp ecial education.
N u m b e r s i n p a r e n t h e s i s i n d i c a t e new
r a n k i n g s d e r i v e d fr om t h e me an r a n k i n g s .
I t s h o u l d b e n o t e d t h a t a lo w
n u m be r i s a h i g h e r r a n k i n g .

101

p s y c h o l o g i s t s as c h i l d - c e n t e r e d and as a b e h a v i o r change a g e n t in t h e
schools.
The c h a n g e s

from t h e p r e s e n t t o t h e

id e a l ro le of th e school

p s y c h o lo g i s t w ere c o n s id e r e d s u r p r i s i n g l y m inim al w ith i n b o th g ro u p s .
The K e n d a l l C o e f f i c i e n t o f C o n c o r d a n c e b e t w e e n t h e p r e s e n t a n d t h e
i d e a l r o l e w as v e r y h i g h
directo rs

(.9 6

fo r school p sy ch o lo g ists

o f sp ecia l education).

p re se n t w ith th e

id eal

r o le , both

and

for

.9 9

When c o m p a r i n g mean r a n k s o f t h e
school p sy c h o lo g ists

o f s p e c ia l e d u c a tio n p erce iv ed a g r e a t e r need in th e

and d i r e c t o r s

id e a l r o le than

in

t h e p r e s e n t r o l e t o p r o v i d e more p s y c h o - e d u c a t i o n a l p l a n n i n g , p s y c h o ­
th e ra p y a n d /o r c o u n se lin g w ith c h i ld r e n ,
p erce iv ed a l e s s e r need in th e

id e a l ro le than

d i a g n o s i s , community r e l a t i o n s h i p s ,
education program s.
in th e

ideal

D irectors

and r e s e a r c h .

Doth g r o u p s

in th e p re s e n t

for

and a d m i n i s t r a t i o n o f s p e c i a l

o f s p e c ia l ed u ca tio n p laced l e s s

r o l e upon sch o o l program c o n s u l t a t i o n

em phasis

than d id th e school

psychologists.

P e r c e n t a g e o f Time t o Upend
Doth t h e s c h o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t s

and d i r e c t o r s

of s p e c ia l educa­

t i o n were a s k e d t o s p e c i f y t h e p e r c e n t a g e o f p r o f e s s i o n a l ti m e w hich
th ey p erc e iv e d as n e c e ssa ry fo r th e
each o f th e

e ig h t m ajor a c t i v i t i e s

school p s y c h o lo g is t t o
in th e

id eal

ro le.

spend in

As sh ow n i n

T a b l e *t6, b o t h s c h o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t s

a nd d i r e c t o r s

w ere in g e n e r a l

amount o f t i m e w h ich s h o u l d b e

a g r e e m e n t as t o t h e

sp en t in th e v a r io u s a c t i v i t i e s .

When t h e s e a c t i v i t i e s

one t o e i g h t a c c o r d i n g t o t h e t i m e t o
school p s y c h o lo g is t,

o f s p e c ia l education

spend in th e

w ere r a n k e d from

id eal ro le

t h e two g r o u p s w ere i n p e r f e c t a g r e e m e n t .

of the
It

10?

a p p e a r e d t h a t t h e l a r g e s t d i f f e r e n c e b e tw e e n t h e tw o g ro u p s was i n t h e
d iag n o stic a re a ; the

directo rs

o f s p e c ia l education p laced a s lig h t ly

g r e a t e r e m p h a sis upon t h e tim e w h ic h s h o u ld b e s p e n t i n d i a g n o s t i c
te n tin g .

Both g ro u p s p e r c e i v e d t h e

m a jo r it y o f h i s tim e

school p s y c h o lo g is t as spending th e

in D ia g n o stic T e stin g and P sy c h o -E d u catio n al

I1] a n n i n g .

TABLE 1(6.— E i g h t A c t i v i t i e s :
P e r c e n t a g e o f Time t o S p e n d i n t h e I d e a l
B ole o f t h e S chool P s y c h o l o g i s t .

Psychologists

D irectors

30.2

37.2

23.0

23.5

13.3

11.5

1 1 .6

9.5

8.5

8 .0

Research

5. U

It.7

Community R e l a t i o n s h i p s

It.5

U.6

3-5

1 .0

Diagnosis
Psycho-Educational
Parent

Planning

C onsultation

Child Therapy
Cchool C urriculum

A dm inistration

and

Program C o n s u lta tio n

of Epecial

Education

Adequacy o f P r e p a r a t i o n
for A c tiv itie s
The s c h o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t s

and d i r e c t o r s

asked to rank th e e i g h t m ajor a c t i v i t i e s

o f s p e c i a l e d u c a t i o n w ere

according to

the ex ten t school

p s y c h o l o g i s t s were p r e p a r e d t o p e r f o r m them i n t h e i d e a l r o l e o f t h e
school p s y c h o lo g ist.

As shown i n T a b l e 1(7,

the school p sy c h o lo g ists

and d i r e c t o r s were i n p e r f e c t a g r e e m e n t w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e r e l a t i v e

10 3

rankings o f th o s e e i g h t
p sychologists
E ducational

activ ities.

B oth groups p e r c e i v e d t h e

a s more a d e q u a t e l y p r e p a r e d in D i a g n o s i s

P lanning th a n

i n C o m m u n it y R e l a t i o n s h i p s

school

and P s y c h o -

and A d m i n i s t r a t i o n .

TABLE 1*7-— Mean R a n k i n g s o f E i g h t A c t i v i t i e s :
Adequacy o f P r e p a r a t i o n
t o Perforin i n th e I d e a l R o le o f th e S c h o o l P s y c h o l o g i s t .

D irecto rs

P sy ch o lo g ists

1.10

1.11

2.6U

2.82

Parent C o n s u lta tio n

3.66

3-70

C hild T herapy

o
LO

CO

Piagnosi s

U.B3

Pchool C u rr ic u lu m and Program C o n s u l t a t i o n

5 -1**

1| .9 3

Research

5 .6 1

5 .M

Community R e l a t i o n s h i p s

6. l6

5.82

6 . 58

7.35

Psycho-E ducational

P lanning

A dm inistration of P pecial

E ducation

E x ten t o f Agreement
Between t h e R a n k in g s
Ruinmaries o f t h e c o m p a r i s o n s o f t h e r a n k i n g s
p sy ch o lo g ists
C o efficien t

and d i r e c t o r s

of sp ecial

ed ucation u t i l i s i n g

o f Concordance a re p r e s e n te d

high c o r r e l a t i o n s

in Tables

i n d i c a t e th a t w ith in b o th groups
are

f o r both sch o o l

e ig h t m ajor

activ ities

alm ost i d e n t i c a l

id eal ro le ,

th e adequacy of p r e p a r a tio n ,

K e n d a ll's

hR a n d ^ 9 .
the

rankings

These
o f the

for the present r o le ,

and p e r c e n t o f tim e t o

the

spend.

lo t

TABLE L 8 . — C o m p a r i s o n o f F o u r R a n k i n g s o f E i g h t M a j o r A c t i v i t i e s b y
School P s y c h o lo g is ts :
K endall’s C o e ffic ie n t of
C oncordance.

P resent
R ole

Ideal
R ole

I d e a l Role

.96

Adequacy o f P r e p a r a t i o n

.95

.98

% o f Ti me t o S p e n d

.99

.98

Adequacy o f
P rep aratio n

1.00

TABLE t 9 . — C o m p a r i s o n o f F o u r R a n k i n g s o f E i g h t M a j o r A c t i v i t i e s b y
D i r e c t o r s o f !I p c c i a l E d u c a t i o n :
K e n d a ll's C o e ffic ie n t of
Concordance.

Present
Role

Ideal
Rol e

I d e a l Role

.99

Adequacy o f P r e p a r a t i o n

• 90

.99

% o f Time t o S p e n d

.90

• 99

Adequacy o f
Preparation

1.00

105

C h i l d r e n Who S h o u l d R e c e i v e P r o f e s s i o n a l
P s y c h o l o g i c a l S e r v i c e s from t h e
School P s y c h o lo g is t in th e
Id e a l Role
As sh ow n i n T a b l e 5 0 , b o t h t h e s c h o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t s a n d d i r e c ­
t o r s o f s p e c i a l e d u c a tio n p la c e d a g r e a t e r em phasis upon p ro v id in g
p s y c h o lo g i c a l s e r v i c e s t o t h e m e n t a l l y r e t a r d e d th a n t o any o f th e o t h e r
ch ild ren .

F ollow ing th e m e n ta lly r e ta r d e d th e school p s y c h o lo g is ts

d ir e c to r s o f s p e c ia l ed u catio n p laced
learn in g d isab led ,

and

im p o rta n c e upon s e r v i n g t h e

e m o t i o n a l l y d i s t u r b e d , and t h e m u l t i p l y - h a n d i c a p p e d .

B oth t h e s c h o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t s and d i r e c t o r s
ceiv ed th e norm al c h ild

o f s p e c ia l ed u cation p e r­

as n o t having a high p r i o r i t y

fo r rece iv in g the

serv ice s of th e school p sy ch o lo g ist.

S ettin g s

fo r School P sy ch o lo g ical
A ctiv ities

Humber o f S t u d e n t s t o b e S e r v e d
b
t h e Sc hool. P s y c h o l o g i s t
As sh o wn i n T a b l e 5 1 , a m a j o r i t y o f b o t h t h e
o g ists

and d i r e c t o r s

present ra tio

education

o f one s c h o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t

A ccording t o t h i s
6 l/S o f t h e

of sp ecial

a decrease

in the

f o r 5000 s t u d e n t p o p u l a t i o n .

d a t a 8 1 ?! o f t h e s c h o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t s

d irecto rs

stu d en ts or le s s

d esired

school psychol­

of sp e c ia l education d esired

fo r every school p s y c h o lo g ist.

i n M ich ig an and

a ratio

o f P500

106

I
I

TABLE 5 0 * — C h i l d r e n Who S h o u l d R e c e i v e P r o f e s s i o n a l P s y c h o l o g i c a l
S e r v i c e s from t h e S ch o o l P s y c h o l o g i s t i n t h e I d e a l R o le
(P ercentage o f R espondents).

iH cj
° £
X. 01

91.5

7.5

tn tn

M entally
R etarded

90

9

0

L earning
D isabled

OS

l!<

3

.5

.5

65

28

E m otionally
D isturbed

78

10

3

.5

.5

71.3

OO
t- t-

M u ltiply
H andicapped

53.9

39

13.5

.5

.5

60.5

31

V isually
H andicapped

33-5

30

32.5

3.5

.5

23

>43

D e a f a nd H ar d
o f H earing

33

31

31

>4.5

.5

2h

O rthopedically
H andicapped

33

30

32.5

h

.5

C.i f t e d

on

Mi. 5

30.5

.5

Normal C h i l d

13

93

51

0

•5
9

1.

oj

S £
of v
S to

Must Not
Serve

1

tJ

Should
Not S e r v e

i-H <U
O t
XV
to to

(U
£
<Td a*
<U r | t/J
{»>
O +J
d
,£3 O
tn to K

Must
Serve

D irectors
Must Not
Serve

Must
Serve

P sy chologists

1

0

0

7

0

0

6 . >4

0

0

8.5

0

0

33

1

0

Jill

31

1

0

27

>40

33

0

0

17

20

50

3

0
<-

11

20

61

3

5

•O
3

107

TABLE 5 1 . — Humber o f S t u d e n t s t o b e S e r v e d b y t h e S c h o o l P s y c h o l o g i s t .
l-J

2000

Group

%

P sychologists
(U = 3 1 5 )
Di r e c t o r s
(H = 9 7 )
T otals

(N)

(26)

i*o ( 1 6 5 )

%

-

1■

1

I"

3000

2500

I*1* ( 1 3 9 )
27

II L. I .

(N)

%

5000

1*000

(N)

%

(N)

%

(N)

37 ( 1 1 5 )

13

(>40)

3

(U )

3

(10)

3>*

(33)

21

(20)

7

(7)

11

(11)

36 ( l h B )

15

(6 0 )

1*

(10 )

5

(21)

V a r i o u s P r o g r a m s Which May b e
Served by th e School P s y c h o l o g i s t
As shown i n T a b l e 5 2 , p r o g r a m s w h i c h h a v e a s p e c i a l e d u c a t i o n
e m p h a sis w ere c o n s i d e r e d t o b e o f more im p o r ta n c e f o r t h e s c h o o l
psychologist to
program s

for th e

serve th a n o th e r h in d s o f program s.
school p s y c h o lo g is t t o

programs housed in the r e g u l a r
o g i s t s and 96% o f th e d i r e c t o r s

s e rv e were s p e c i a l e d u c a tio n

sc h o o l s i n c e 90% o f t h e s c h o o l p s y c h o l­
of s p e c ia l education perceived th a t th e

sc h o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t "must s e r v o " t h e s e p ro g ram s.
n o t e d t h a t 6 h% o f t h e s c h o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t s

A lso , i t

s e r v i n g day s t u d e n t s .

s h o u ld be

an d '{]% o f t h e d i r e c t o r s

p e rc e iv e d t h a t th e school p s y c h o lo g is t "must se rv e "
schools o r f a c i l i t i e s

The m o s t i m p o r t a n t

sp e c ia l education

W h e r e a s a l m o s t 50% o f t h e

s c h o o l p s y c h o lo g i s t s p e r c e i v e d t h a t th e y "must s e r v e " r e g u l a r s c h o o l
p r o g r a m s , o n l y 2h% o f t h e
school psy ch o lo g ists
p sy ch o lo g ists

d ire c to rs p erceiv ed t h i s .

( 8 0 /S) a n d d i r e c t o r s

o g ists

( 6 l/J) p e r c e i v e d t h a t s c h o o l

" m u s t " 01* " s h o u l d s e r v e " r e g u l a r p r o g r a m s t o some d e g r e e .

P r e - s c h o o l pro g ram s were c o n s i d e r e d
p sychologists

However, b o t h

i m p o r t a n t a s 83% o f t h e s c h o o l

and 80% o f t h e d i r e c t o r s p e r c e i v e d t h a t

"m ust" o r "sh o u ld s e r v e " t h e s e p ro g ram s.

school p sy ch o l­

R esid en tial school

( by p e r c e n t a g e o f r e s p o n d e n t s ) .
|
|

TArLE 5 2 . — V a r i o u s P r o g r a m s S e r v e d b y t h e S c h o o l P s y c h o l o g i s t s

wc h o o l Psyc h o l o g i s t 3

Prcgrar.

>i

S p e c ia l Education
Programs^

511

90

S p e c ia l Education
Schools^

307

P r e - S c h o o l P r og r am s

+j
0

O

TJ
■—

T?

a

jJ
to
3

=i
O -4J
JC 0

9

1

63.5

22

12

2

311

37

26

17

-

R e g u l a r S c h o o l P ro g r a m s 310

28

32

17

R e s i d e n t i a l Schools

30^

19

13.5

I n s t i t u t i o n a l P r og r am s

302

12.5

Sumner S c h o o l

307

9-5

53

:i

\
J
0
u;
11

>i
aJ
2

Should
Hot

■P
n
3

*3
3
0
33

D irectors

-P
CO

1

97

96

3

1

-

-

97

71

18

7

2

2

-

97

39

23

16

1

1

2

1

97

22

37

35

2

2

20

15.5

7

97

27

13

29

18.5

12.5

13

39

21

12.5

97

25

9

32

16.5

17.5

30

56

2

.5

97

12

26

53

8

1

^H oused i n t h e r e g u l a r s c h o o l
^ S e p a r a t e s c h o o ls s e r v i n g day s t u d e n t s

-

-

.5

109

program s,

i n s t i t u t i o n a l program s,

c o n s id e re d as im p o rta n t
the p l u r a l it y

a n d s um me r s c h o o l p r o g r a m s w e r e n o t

for th e school p sy ch o lo g ists to serve sin ce

o f th e re s p o n se s w ere in th e

"may s e r v e " c a t e g o r y .

Th e S c h o o l P s y c h o l o g i s t ' s I m m e d i a t e
S u p e rv is o r in th e I d e a l P ole
As shown i n T a b l e 5 3 , t h e m a j o r i t y

(57#) o f th e s c h o o l p sy c h o l­

o g is ts d e s ir e d to be im m ediately r e s p o n s i b l e t o a d i r e c t o r o r c o o rd in a ­
t o r of p s y c h o lo g ic a l s e r v i c e s , w hereas th e m a jo r ity o f d i r e c t o r s
s p e c ia l education

( 5 8 . 5# ) d e s i r e d t h a t G c h o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t s

of

s h o u ld be

im m e d ia te ly r e s p o n s i b l e t o them .

TABLE 5 3 . — The S c h o o l P s y c h o l o g i s t ' s
Ideal P o le,

Im m ediate S u p e r v is o r in t h e

ip
° ^
u uo
O
O *H
4-> UD
v. al o to

■p
c
o
T1
n
0
•p
0
ai
Ih
n
a

Group

Q>

r

0
(j
ai
in
■H
n

Ct
Ct
0

10

ft*

R
at
n,

C)

*

(

R

•rH
O

ai
o.

1.0

1.,
0

m

t*

N)

P s y c h o l o g i s t s IP
(36)
(N = 31P )
D irectors
1 0 .5 {30)
(N = 9 6 )
T otals
11
()( 6 )

r

3

t-i

H
*r-4

PP

4->

a
-H
R
0
O.
t/j
1
to

(N )

O

CJrH <U

+J
O

-H O CJ
T) Xi -rl

<1) P O
r o
L

a>
.R
s

•H
O 10 CJ
Q U
IQ

( N)

(N)

%

5

(17)

57

(179)

14

(12)

5 0 *5 ( 5 6 )

0

(0 )

28

(27)

3

(3)

30.5(1PM

U

50. 5(206)

14

( 15)

(17)

for school psychological

t h e m a j o r i t y o f b o t h r e s p o n d e n t gro u ps were i n a g r e e ­

ment t h a t a sc h o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t s h o u ld s e r v e a s t u d e n t p o p u l a t i o n
o f 250 0 o r l e s s .
settin g s

( N)

(68)

To summari*.’. e t h e s e t t i n g s
activ ities,

0
■p
a)
O
R
Ih

They b o t h a l s o

fo r school p sy ch o lo g ists

agreed t h a t
to serve

t h e most im p o r ta n t

included th o se

110

s e t t i n g s w hich h ad e i t h e r a s p e c i a l e d u c a tio n o r p r e - s c h o o l e m p h a s is .
T h e r e was a s l i g h t

d ifferen ce

o f opinion as to th e

r e g u la r school program s sh o u ld be s e rv e d , w ith th e
g ists

e x t e n t to w hich
school psycholo­

p e r c e iv in g t h e s e p rogram s a s more im p o rta n t t h a n t h e d i r e c t o r s .

A l s o , t h e r e was s o m e d i f f e r e n c e

o f o p i n i o n a s t o whom t h e

p s y c h o lo g is t sh o u ld be im m ediately r e s p o n s ib le .
favored a d ir e c to r

school

The s c h o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t

or co o rd in a to r o f p sychological

serv ice s as h is

im m ediate s u p e r v i s o r w hereas t h e d i r e c t o r o f s p e c i a l

education

favored

h im self as th e s u p e rv iso r.

P r o f e s s i o n a l Needs o f S ch o o l P s y c h o l o g i s t s
in th e I d e a l Pole
Y e a r s o f Rec ommended T e a c h i n g
Experience fo r School
P sychologists
As shown i n
of th e d ire c to rs
g ists

T a b l e 5^»

3^% o f t h e s c h o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t s a n d 2 6 %

o f sp e c ia l ed u ca tio n perceived t h a t

n e e d e d no t e a c h i n g

experience.

( 3 6/5) o f t h e s c h o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t s

school psy ch o lo ­

S l i g h t l y m ore th a n o n e - t h i r d

a n d 30% o f t h e

d irecto rs

A t o t a l o f 66%

e d u c a tio n p e r c e iv e d t h a t 1-2 y e a r s were s u f f i c i e n t .
of th e

s c h o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t s w ould l i k e

te a c h in g e x p e rie n c e w hereas
w ould l i k e them t o
th e d ire c to rs

of th e

school p sy c h o lo g ists than d id th e
but very

few o f t h e

y e a r s o r more.

s c h o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t s t o h a v e some
d irecto rs

h a v e some t e a c h i n g e x p e r i e n c e .

of s p e c ia l ed u catio n

of sp ecial

of

sp e c ia l ed u catio n
It

is

evident th a t

f a v o r e d more t e a c h i n g e x p e r i e n c e

for

school p sy ch o lo g ists them selves,

respondents p erceiv ed

it

s h o u l d b e a s much a s

fiv e

Ill

TABLE 5*4*— Y e a r s o f Be comm e n d e d T e a c h i n g E x p e r i e n c e f o r S c h o o l
Psychologi s t s .

0

00

%

Group

P sychologists
(H = 317)
D irectors
(N = 9 7 )
T otals

1-2

3-U

00

%

%

5+

%

(N)

(H)

3J(

(109)

36

(113)

23

(72)

7

(23)

26

(25)

30

(29)

38

(37)

6

(6 )

(109)

7

(29)

3 2 J j ( 1 3 J<)

Teaching C e r t i f i c a t i o n
School P s y c h o lo g is ts

3)4.3 ( l J42)

26.3

for

A t o t a l o f 60% o f t h e s c h o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t s e i t h e r a g r e e d o r
stro n g ly agreed th a t

s c h o o l p s y c h o lo g is ts should have a t e a c h e r 's

c e r t i f i c a t e w hereas a t o t a l
tio n agreed or s tro n g ly

o f f2% o f t h e d i r e c t o r s

agreed (see T ab le 55).

TABLE 5 5 - — T e a c h e r C e r t i f i c a t i o n

fo r School P s y c h o lo g is ts .

S tro n g ly
Agree
Group

P sychologists
(N = 3 l M
D irecto rs

%

of s p e c ia l educa­

A gree

%

00

00

D isagree

S trongly
D isagree

%

tit
to

00

00

31

(98)

29

(92)

2 It

(714)

1(1

( ho)

31

(30)

25

( pi t)

3

(3)

(122)

2 lt

(98)

13

(53)

16

(50)

(H = 97)
T otals

33.5

(138)

29-5

112

Legal L icen sin g Level fo r
School P sy ch o lo g ists
A t o t a l o f 6 8# o f t h e

s c h o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t s and 71# o f t h e

d i r e c t o r s o f s p e c i a l e d u c a tio n w ere o f th e
o g ists

should be l e g a l l y

lic e n s e d a t the

opinion th a t school p sy ch o l­

school psych o lo g ist le v e l

( see Table 5 6 ).

TAPLK 5 6 . — L e g a l

L icen sin g Level fo r School P s y c h o lo g is ts .

C onsult.
Psych.
Croup

#

(H)

Psych.

Psych.
Exam.

School
Psych.

O ther

#

( H)

#

(N)

#

#

(H)

(ii)

None
#

(N)

P sychologists
(H = 311)

2

(7 )

17

(5*0

8

(25)

68

(212)

2

(5)

3

(8)

D irectors

3

(3)

l 1*

(13)

10

(10)

71

(68)

1

(l)

1

(l)

( N = 96)
T otals

2.5

(280)

1

(6 )

(10)

16.5

(6 7 )

9

(35)

69

2

A ccountability for
Cchool P s y c h o l o g i s t s
As sho wn i n T a b l e 57 ♦ a t o t a l o f 6 8 # o f t h e s c h o o l p s y c h o l o ­
g ists

and 8 0 # o f t h e d i r e c t o r s

stro n g ly

agreed t h a t school

of sp ecial

p s y c h o lo g is ts should be acc o u n tab le

according to s p e c if ie d

behavioral

psyeho]ogists

agreed th a t

according to
d irecto rs

stro n g ly

sp e c ifie d behavioral

of sp ecial

ed u catio n agreed or

o b jectiv es.
they

O n l y 1 3# o f t h e s c h o o l

sh o u ld be h e ld a c c o u n ta b le

o b j e c t i v e s , w h e r e a s 1( 1 # o f t h e

ed ucation stro n g ly agreed.

(9)

113

TABLE 5 7 . — A c c o u n t a b i l i t y

f o r School P s y c h o l o g i s t s .

S tro n g ly
Agree
G ro up

(N)

%

13

(ho)

5 ^ .5

1*1

(39)

20

(79)

%

P sychologists
(H = 3 0 5 )
D irecto rs
( N = 96)
T o tals

A gree

S trongly
D isagree

D isagree

%

00

00

%

00

(35)

(166)

21

(6M

11.5

I18

( 146)

10

(10)

1

(1)

53

(212)

IB

(7>0

9

( 36)

M inim al D egree f o r
Gchool P s y c h o l o g i s t s
The s c h o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t s a nd d i r e c t o r s
were in v e ry c l o s e

for d irecto rs
o g ist

should

agreem ent c o n c e rn in g t h e m inim al d e g re e

The m a j o r i t y

psychologists .

( 6 0 . h% f o r

i d e a l l y have a t

Degree

for

school p sy ch o lo g ists

of sp e c ia l education) p erce iv ed

TABLE 5 8 . — M i n i m a l

of s p e c ia l ed ucation

l e a s t a M. A.

th at

o r M .S .

the

school

:a n d 6 7 #

school psychol-

degree

(s e e Tnble 5 8 ).

f o r Gchool P s y c h o l o g i s t s .

P. A . o r
B . G.

M.A. o r
M.S.

Group

C*

T sychoi ogi s t s
(H = i l l )
Pi r e c t o r s
(N = 9 7 )
T otals

1. 3

00

68.

3

( 0

O

(7)

%

( H)

Ed . 8

%

00

Ed.D

%

00

P h .D
00

%

00

(913)

27

( 8 It)

1

(3)

2.3

(7)

67

(6 5 )

27

(2 6 )

1

(1)

2

(2 )

60

(278)

27

1

00

2

(9)

(no)

llU

Use o f P a r a p r o f e s s i o n a l s b y
th e School P s y c h o lo g is t
A p p r o x i m a t e l y 60% o f b o t h s c h o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t s
of s p e c ia l education
sio n al aides

agreed or s tr o n g ly agreed t h a t tr a in e d

s h o u l d b e u t i l i z e d w he n a p p r o p r i a t e

of psychological t e s t s

(see Table

paraprofes-

i n t h e a d m i n i s t r a t i on

59).

TABLE 5 9 . — Use o f P a r a p r o f e s s i o n a l s b y t h e

School P sychologist *

S trongly
Agree

Agree

%

(h)

%

20.3

( 6 )4 )

3 9 - 1* (12*0

25

(79)

15.3

(1*8)

19

(l8)

U2

(hO)

30

(29)

9

(9)

20

(82)

h0

( 16 )4)

26

( 108)

1*4

(57)

Group

P sychologists
(N = 3 1 5 )
D irectors
(N = 9 6 )
T otals

and d i r e c t o r s

(H)

D isagree

S trongly
D isagree

%

%

(N)

(TO

P ro fessio n al A f filia tio n s for
School P s y c h o lo g is ts (H e sp o n d en ts:
School P s y c h o lo g is ts o n iy )
As shown i n T a b l e 6 0 , m o s t o f t h e n e g a t i v e
a ffiliatio n

feelings

w ith a p r o f e s s io n a l o r g a n iz a tio n were re s e rv e d

education a s s o c ia tio n s a t th e n a t io n a l,
moot p o s i t i v e

f e e l i n g s w ere r e s e r v e d

School P s y c h o lo g is ts

as

state,

concerning
fo r the

and l o c a l l e v e l s .

f o r th e M ichigan A s s o c i a ti o n o f

in d ic a te d by a t o t a l

o f 00% o f t h e

school

p s y c h o l o g i s t s who s u g g e s t e d t h a t t h e y m u s t o r s h o u l d b e l o n g .
o f '{1% o f t h e s c h o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t s

The

suggested t h a t

they m ust o r sh o u ld

belong t o t h e N a tio n a l A s s o c ia tio n o f School P s y c h o l o g i s t s .
m ately h a l f o f th e s c h o o l p s y c h o lo g i s ts th o u g h t t h a t th e y
t o th e M ichigan P s y c h o lo g ic a l A s s o c i a t i o n ( 5 3 / 0 ,

A to tal

A pproxi­

"may b e l o n g "

C ouncil f o r

115

E xceptional C hildren
ic a l A ssociation

(53^),

(52^).

and D i v i s i o n

16 o f t h e A m e r ic a n P s y c h o l o g ­

On a n a t i o n a l l e v e l s c h o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t s

in

M ichigan p e r f e r r e d t h e N a t i o n a l A s s o c i a t i o n o f S ch o o l P s y c h o l o g i s t s t o
D i v i s i o n l 6 o f t h e A m erican P s y c h o l o g i c a l A s s o c i a t i o n .

TABLE 6 0 . — P r o f e s s i o n a l A f f i l i a t i o n s f o r S c h o o l P s y c h o l o g i s t s
p ercentage o f p s y c h o lo g is ts ).

Croup

CEC1
NEA
MEA
Local
MASP
MPA
HASP
D iv. 16

(by

M us t
Belong

S hould
B elong

May
Belong

S hould
H ot
Belong

N

%

%

%

%

303
290
299
290
305
300
300
299

6
U
5
0.3
52
12
25
11

1 CEC
NEA
MEA
Local
MAGP
MPA
HASP
D i v . 1C

-

Jil
1»4
1)4
20
30
33
J46
36

53
70
6B
5 8 . J4
9.5
53
29
52

Mu st
Not
Belong

10
10
11

%

2
3
2.3
.5

-

2

-

-

-

1

C o u n c i l :f o r E x c e p t i o n a l C h i l d r e n
N atio n al E ducation A ss o c ia tio n
M i c h i g a n E d u c a t i on Ass o c i a t i o n
L o c a l E d u c a t i o n As s o c i a t i o n
M ichigan A s s o c i a t i o n o f S chool P s y c h o l o g i s t s
M ichigan P s y c h o l o g i c a l A ssoci a t i o n
N ational A sso c ia tio n o f School P sy c h o lo g is ts
D i v i s i o n 16 - A m e r i c a n P s y c h o l o g i c a l A s s o c i a t i o n

"P riv ate P ractice" for
School P sy c h o lo g ists
T h e r e was a d i f f e r e n c e o f o p i n i o n on t h i s
school p sy c h o lo g ists
A m ajority

and d i r e c t o r s

o f special

item e x p r e s s e d by

educution

(0155) o f t h e s c h o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t s e i t h e r

agreed th a t th e y should be

(see T able 6 l ).

a g r e e d 01* s t r o n g l y

fre e to engage in " p r iv a t e p r a c t i c e . "

116

However, a m a j o r i t y

(60#) o f t h e d i r e c t o r s

o f s p e c ia l education e ith e r

disagreed or stro n g ly d isag reed th a t school p sy ch o lo g ists

s h o u ld be

f r e e to engage in " p r iv a te p r a c t i c e . "

TABLE 6 l . — " P r i v a t e P r a c t i c e "
-■ ■■ ■ *

.1

1 <

■ 11

■

f o r School P s y c h o l o g i s t s .

11 ■ ■ .i

S trongly
Agree

■

■

—1 1 —

,

i ii

j

^

Agree

1— i—

■

1 j

1

1

S trongly
D isagree

D isagree

G r ou p

#

(N)

#

(N)

#

(N)

#

(N)

P sychologists
(H = 3 1 1 )
D irectors

29

(9 1 )

52

(l6l)

lU

(MO

5

{15)

5

(5)

35

>40

(38)

20

(19)

( 3}i )

(N = 96)

P r o f e s s i o n a l Improvement o f
S c h o o l P s y c h o l o g i s t s by Means
o f Four A c t i v i t i e s
As shown i n T a b l e 6 2 ,
directo rs

t h e m a j o r i t y o f s c h o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t s and

o f s p e c i a l e d u c a t i o n were in g e n e r a l ag ree m en t t h a t

psychologists

"m ust" o r " s h o u l d " engage in t h e s e a c t i v i t i e s

im prove p r o f e s s i o n a l l y ,

school

in order to

The r e a d i n g o f p r o f e s s i o n a l j o u r n a l s b y s c h o o l

p s y c h o l o g i s t s was s t r o n g l y r e c o m m e n d e d a s a " m u s t " a c t i v i t y b y 6 8 . 6 # o f
of th e school
education.

psychologists

A to tal

and 6 1 . 5# o f t h e d i r e c t o r s o f s p e c i a l

o f 95.6# o f th e sch o o l p s y c h o lo g is ts

and 91*7#

o f the d irec to rs, o f s p e c ia l e d u ca tio n p e rc e iv e d t h a t school psycholo­
g ists

"m ust" or " sh o u ld " r e a d p r o f e s s i o n a l

Jo u rn als.

T h e r e was a s l i g h t d i f f e r e n c e o f o p i n i o n b e t w e e n t h e t w o g r o u p s
w ith r e s p e c t to a tte n d a n c e a t

conferences.

A t o t a l of 52.7# o f th e

sc h o o l, p s y c h o l o g i s t s p e r c e i v e d t h a t s c h o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t s
c o n f e r e n c e s a s c o m p a r e d t o o n l y 21# o f t h e d i r e c t o r s .

"m ust" a t te n d

A t o t a l of

TABLn 6 2 . — P r o f e s s i o n a l I m p ro v em en t o f S c h o o l P s y c h o l o g i s t s by ' l e a n s o f F o u r A c t i v i t i e s
P e r c e i v e d by t h e R e s p o n d e n t s ( i n P e r c e n t ) .

’t o s t Do

S h o u l d Do

May Do

D ir.

Psych.

D ir.

Psych.

D ir.

V i s i t School Programs

25

I 0 .7

2 g.t

59.3

25-6

23

E n ro ll in U n iv e rsity
Courses

ll

11.5

13.1

50

36.3

36.5

A ttend Conferences

52.7

21

39

29

3

23

F.ead P r o f e s s i o n a l
Journals

65.6

61.5

27

30.2

2.1

N (School P s y c h o lo g is ts )
= 3il
N ( D i r e c t o r s o f S p e c i a l E d u c a t i o n ) = ?6

5.2

S h o u l d Not Do

Must Not Do

Psych.

Psych.

-

D ir.

D ir.

-

-

1

.3

-

1*3

2

.3

1

-

1

.3

2.1

117

Psych.

as

118

9 1 . 7$ o f

school p sy ch o lo g ists p erceiv ed th a t

"m ust" o r " s h o u l d "

a tte n d conferences

school psych o lo g ists

as com pared t o 70% o f th e

d irecto rs.
A p p r o x i m a t e l y 50% o f b o t h r e s p o n d e n t g r o u p s p e r c e i v e d t h a t
school p s y c h o lo g is ts

"should" v i s i t

d istricts

in u n iv e rs ity

and e n r o l l

Of t h e

four a c t i v i t i e s ,

sch o o l program s in
courses.

en ro llin g

in u n iv e r s ity

l e a s t e m p h a s iz e d a c t i v i t y w i t h more t h a n o n e - t h i r d
groups s t a t i n g

th a t school p sy ch o lo g ists

Professional
Need t o
in

o f 959

f ro m 2 7 7 s c h o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t s

sp ecific

A l t h o u g h t h e r e w a s so me o v e r l a p

w ere ex p re sse d

order

from 7 ^ d i r e c t o r s

of

t o t a l o f 237 r e s p o n s e s

in to

to preserve

in th e c a t e g o r i e s ,

all

th e e s s e n ti a l

th is

id eas

( s e e T a b le s 6 } and 6 li).

im prove t h e i r c o m p e te n c ie s

diag n o stic

(7 7 0 r e s p o n s e s

th e m ajor t h r u s t o r em phasis o f

The s c h o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t s p l a c e d
to

A

T h e se r e s p o n s e s w ere sum m arized and o r g a n iz e d

was c o n s i d e r e d n e c e s s a r y i n
which

the q u e s tio n n a ire .

from t h e r e s p o n d e n t s

a n d 1.89 r e s p o n s e s

c a t e g o r i e s w hich p r e s e r v e d

each r e s p o n s e .

o f b oth resp o n d en t

A reas i n Which S c h o o l P s y c h o l o g i s t s
Improve P k i l l s and C o m p eten cies
View o f C hanges Which a r e
Taking P la c e in T h e ir
Hole

resp o n ses w ere r e c e iv e d

sp ecia l ed u catio n ).

c o u r s e s was t h e

"may" do t h i s .

T h i s was t h e o n l y o p e n - e n d e d q u e s t i o n i n
to tal

o th er school

th e m ost em phasis

in D ie a r e a o f d i a g n o s t i c

o u t o f 770

upon t h e

testin g .

(31%) d e a l t w i t h d i a g n o s i s .

need
A

In th e

a r e a c o n s i d e r a b l e e m p h a s i s w as p l a c e d u p o n t h e d i a g n o s i s

learn in g d i s a b i l i t i e s
psy ch o lo g ists

and c l i n i c a l

or p e rso n a lity

diagnosis.

a l s o p la c e d g r e a t em p h asis upon im p ro v in g s k i l l s

School
in

of

119

counseling a n d /o r psychotherapy w ith c h ild re n

and p s y c h o - e d u c a t io n a l

plan n in g .
The d i r e c t o r s o f s p e c i a l e d u c a t i o n p l a c e d t h e m o s t em p h asis
upon s c h o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t s b e c o m in g m ore k n o w l e d g e a b l e i n
m aterials,

and t e a c h i n g t e c h n i q u e s .

s tr e s s e d w ith
d iagnosis

D iagnostic

curriculum ,

t e s t i n g was a l s o

a s p e c i a l e m p h a s is upon im p ro v in g c o m p e te n c ie s

of learning d i s a b i l i t i e s .

D irecto rs

p l a c e d c o n s i d e r a b l e i m p o r t a n c e upon t h e
t o im prove s k i l l s

o f s p e c ia l ed u cation

need f o r s c h o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t s

in p s y c h o - e d u c a t i o n a l p l a n n i n g ,

c o n s u ltin g w ith te a c h e rs ,

p u b lic

in the

c o m m u n ic a tin g and

r e l a t i o n s , team a p p r o a c h , u n d e r s t a n d ­

able r e p o r ts ,

and know ledge o f s c h o o l p r o c e d u r e s ,

the te a c h e r 's

ro le.

p sychologists

i n M i c h i g a n h a v e n o t e a c h i n g e x p e r i e n c e may b e r e s p o n s i b l e

for th is

The f a c t

th at

approxim ately

th e

c l a s s r o o m , and

a th ird

o f the school

la c k o f aw areness o f th e t e a c h e r ’ s co n ce rn s as p e rc e iv e d by

th e d ir e c to r s

o f sp ecial ed u catio n .

TABLE 6 3 . — P r o f e s s i o n a l A r e a s i n W h i c h S c h o o l P s y c h o l o g i s t s Need t o
Im prove C h i l l s and C o m p e te n c ies as P e r c e i v e d by Dehool
P sy ch o lo g ists (T otal resp o n ses:
770),

P r o f e s s i o n a l A rea

D iagnostic T e s tin g
D iag n o sis and re m e d ia tio n o f l e a r n i n g
d i s a b i l i t i e s (93)
C lin ic a l diag n o sis (6 8 )
- D ia g n o s is o f e m o tio n a l d i s t u r b a n c e (93)
- P r o j e c t i v e t e s t i n t e r p r e t a t i o n (90)
- P e r s o n a l i t y ( a f f e c t i v e ) d i a g n o s i s (17)
P r e - s c h o o l (19)
G en eral d i a g n o s t i c s k i l l s (15)
Beading ( 1 0 )
O ther t y p e s o f h a n d ic a p s (97)

Number o f
Hesponses

937

120

TABLE 63. — (cont’d. )

H um be r o f
Responses

P r o f e s s i o n a l Area

C ounseling a n d /o r p sy c h o th era p y w ith c h i ld r e n

92

P s y c h o -e d u c a tio n a l P lanning and e d u c a tio n a l p r e s c r i p t i o n s

83

B e h a v io r management s k i l l s
Behavior m o d if ic a tio n (29)
B eh av io r management c o n s u l t a t i o n

)»9

Teacher C o n su ltatio n
U nderstanding o f

(2 l)

and I n s e r v i c e

>+7

school curricu lu m , re s o u rc e s , m a te ria ls

P aren t C o n su ltatio n

U2
35

T h e o re tic a l understandings
( E m p h a sis on l e a r n i n g t h e o r y ,
and c h i l d d ev e lo p m e n t)

32
p erso n ality

th e o ry ,

R e s e a r c h and r e s e a r c h m ethods

22

T r a i n i n g i n human r c l n t i o n s h i p s
( E m p h a s i s on i n t e r p e r s o n a l s k i l l s ,
l i s t e n i n g and i n f l u e n c i n g o t h e r s )

16

P sy ch o lo g y t r a i n i n g programs s h o u ld
and a p p l ie d a s p e c t s o f t h e r o l e

p u b lic

stress

re la tio n s,

the p ra c tic a l
1 )*

A d m in i s t r n t i v e u n d e r s t a n d i n g s

13

C om m unity-school r e l a t i o n s

9

P o litical-leg al

7

understan d in g s

P c l'in in g and w r i t i n g b e h a v i o r a l

o b jectiv es

Croup-work s k i l l s
C l i n i c a l e x p e r i e n c e s witli e m o t i o n a l l y
O ther

6
6

d istu rb e d ch ild ren

5
55

121

TABLE 6 h . — P r o f e s s i o n a l A r e a s i n W h i c h S c h o o l P s y c h o l o g i s t s We e d t o
I m p r o v e S k i l l s a n d C o m p e t e n c i e s a s P e r c e i v e d "by D i r e c t o r s
o f S pecial Education (T otal responses:
109)*

Humber o f
Responses

P r o f e s s i o n a l Area

Knowledge o f c u r r i c u l u m , m a t e r i a l s ,
techniques

and t e a c h i n g
25

D iagnostic te s tin g
General (3 ); P e r s o n a lity (2 ); G ifte d ( l ) ;
P sycho-m otor ( l ) ; P e r c e p t u a l h a n d ic a p s ( l ) ;
H eading ( 2 ) ; P r e - s c h o o l ( 2 ) ; E m o tio n a l
d is tu r b a n c e (P ); L ea rn in g d i s a b i l i t i e s (9)

23

Psycho-educational

22

p l a n n i n g and e d u c a t i o n a l p r e s c r i p t i o n s

P u b l i c r e l a t i o n s a nd s t a f f c o m m u n i c a t i o n ; i n t e r p e r s o n a l
s k i l l s ; t e a m a p p r o a c h a n d c o o p e r a t i o n ; make r e p o r t s
more u n d e r s t a n d a b l e

18

T e a c h e r c o n s u l t i n g an d i n s c r v i c e

16

T each in g e x p e r i e n c e ; know ledge o f s c h o o l p r o c e d u r e s ;
a w a r e n e s s an d u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f t h e c l a s s r o o m a n d
the te a c h e r 's ro le

lL

C ounseling a n d /o r p sy c h o th era p y w ith

D*

child ren

P arent counseling

12

T h e o r e t i c a l u n d c r s ta n d i ngs
P e r s o n a l i t y t h e o r y ( l ) ; L e a r n in g t h e o r y (P)
C hild developm ent ( P ) ; Em otional and a f f e c t i v e
u n d e r s ta n d in g s ( 2 ) ; P h y s io lo g y ( l ) ; O rganic
problem s ( l )

0

B e h a v io r management s k i l l s

8

H esearch

5

Improved u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f a l l
O ther

areas o f e x c e p tio n a lity

It
19

CHAPTER V

SUMMARY, C ONC L US I ONS , AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Introduction
This
study,
for

chapter

m ajor

future

consists

findings,

of

discussion,

This
ro le

school

latio n

of th e

school

recom m endations,

of the

changes

in M ichigan

in s p e c ia l

of the

school

out to

study th e s e

ro le

v ario u s

activ ities

sciiool

in th e
the

role

necessary

Recent court

E ducation

(1973) have

(1971)

le g is­
and

im p licatio n s

p sy ch o lo g ist.

changer,

in th e a c t i v i t i e s

re s e a rc h has a c t u a ll y been c a r r ie d
and t h e i r r e l a t i v e
Previous

p sychologist

in em phasis and h av e

activ ities
To o b t a i n

little

p s y c h o l ogi s t .

of th e

m a k i n g u p an

ed u catio n .

o f th e school

have sugg ested v ario u s

school

been dem ographic
v ario u s

the

im plications

e d u c a tio n p h il o s o p h y , and r e c e n t

Psychological. S e rv ic e s

p sy ch o lo g ist,

of the

activ ities

in c lu d in g M andatory S p e c ia l

A l t h o u g h many w r i t e r s

cerning th e

and

of

Study

o f sp ecial

f o r ch an g e and e x p a n s io n o f t h e r o l e

ro le

review

p s y c h o l o g i s t i n M ich ig an ac p e r c e i v e d by

and d i r e c t o r s

C om prohensive School

the

a b rief

s t u d y was c o n c e r n e d w i t h v a r i o u s

psych o lo g ists

litig a tio n ,

parts:

research.

Review

ideal

five

failed

of the
data

research

im p o rta n c e in
stu d ies

con­

in M ichigan have g e n e r a lly
to

adequately

d e sc rib e the

school, p s y c h o l ogi s t .
a

IPS

questionnaire

was

designed

to

123

e licit

responses

education

from b o th s c h o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t s

concerning th e

and f i f t y - f i v e

sp ecific

school p sy c h o lo g ist.

rela tiv e

naires

(66% ).

w hether th e

of sp ecial

The u n i v a r i a t e a n a l y s i s

in t h e

retu rn ed

o f v a r i a n c e was used t o

o f th e respondents

e d u c a t i o n on e a c h o f t h e

th e

o f the e i g h t m ajor a c t i v i t i e s
relativ e

tim e allo tm en t

needing p s y c h o lo g ic a l
a ctiv ities,

and d i r e c t o r s

sp ecific

the

of

activ ities.

The

o f C o n co rd an c e was u s e d t o c o m p a re t h e p e r c e i v e d

adequacy o f p r e p a r a t i o n

stu d ied .

fifty -fiv e

u p on

e ig h t m ajor

'Hie C h i - s q u a r e T e s t o f H o m o g e n e i t y w a s u s e d t o t e s t

K endall C o e f f i c i e n t

ro le,

h a d an y e f f e c t

on e a c h o f t h e

d i s t r i b u t i o n a l a g r e e m e n t o f sciiool p s y c h o l o g i s t s

rankings

determ ine

th e am ount of p r o f e s s i o n a l

and t h e t y p e a n d s i z e o f s c h o o l d i s t r i c t

activ ities.

318 q u e s t i o n ­

a school p sy c h o lo g ist or d ir e c to r of s p e c ia l

the r o le p e rc e p tio n s

sp ecial

id e al ro le o f the

e d u c a t i o n r e t u r n e d 99 q u e s t i o n ­

amount o f t e a c h i n g e x p e r i e n c e ,

e x p erien ce as e i t h e r
education,

in clu d ed

The s c h o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t s

(78 %) w h i l e d i r e c t o r s

o f sp ecial

im p o r ta n c e o f e i g h t m ajor a c t i v i t i e s

activ ities

naires

and d i r e c t o r s

an d t h e

in

the p r e s e n t r o le ,

fo r each a c t i v i t y ,

fo r th e a c t i v i t i e s .

serv ices,

pro fessio n al

th e

settin g s

needs

'Jbe t y p e s
for

th e

school

o f th e sciiool

'Hie r e s p o n d e n t s w e r e a l s o a s k e d t o l i s t

in w hich th e y p e r c e i v e d

and t h e

school p s y c h o lo g ists

the

id eal

rela tiv e

of c h ild re n
p sychological

p s y c h o l o g i s t w ere

p ro fessio n al
needing to

areas

im prove

t h e i r com petencies..

M ajor F i n d i n g s
1.

T h e r e was a s t a t i s t i c a l l y

school p sy c h o lo g ists

s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e betw een

a n d d i r e c t o r s ’, o f s p e c i a l

e d u c a t i o n on t h e i r

th e

1214

percep tio n s o f th e

id eal ro le

e ig h t m ajor a c t i v i t i e s .
d irecto rs

o f t h e s c h o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t on s i x o f t h e

The s c h o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t s ,

as compared t o t h e

o f s p e c i a l e d u c a t i o n , had a s l i g h t te n d e n c y t o p e r c e iv e t h e

follow ing a c t i v i t i e s

as more i m p o r t a n t :

D iagnosis
P sycho-E ducational P lanning
C hild Therapy
C om m uni ty R e l a t i o n s h i p s
Program C o n s u l t a t i o n
A d m i n i s t r a t i o n o f S p e c i a l E d u c a tio n Progarms
In g e n e r a l t h e

d ifferen ces

i c a n t , w ere sm all
su ltatio n

i n mean s c o r e s , w h i l e s t a t i s t i c a l l y

and n o t c o n s i d e r e d v e r y m e a n i n g f u l .

sig n if­

P a r e n t Con­

a nd R e s e a r c h w e r e p e r c e i v e d a s e q u a l l y i m p o r t a n t b y b o t h

respondent groups.

2.

Amount o f t e a c h i n g e x p e r i e n c e h a d no e f f e c t u p o n how t h e s c h o o l

p s y c h o lo g i s t s and d i r e c t o r s
ro le o f th e school

1.

o f s p e c ia l education perceived th e id e a l

p s y c h o l o g i s t on e a c h o f t h e e i g h t m a j o r a c t i v i t i e s .

Amount o f p r o f e s s i o n a l e x p e r i e n c e a s e i t h e r a s c i i o o l p s y c h o l ­

o g i s t o r d i r e c t o r o f s p e c i a l e d u c a t i o n h a d no e f f e c t u p o n how t h e
school
id eal

psychologists
role of th e

activ ities.
R elationships

and d i r e c t o r s

s c i i o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t on s i x o f t h e

'Hie p e r c e i v e d

i m p o r t a n c e o f I’h i l d

increased s lig h t ly

ence o f b o th r e s p o n d e n t g ro u p s

.

o f special, ed u c a tio n p erce iv ed th e
e i g h t m ajor

T h e r a p y a n d Co m m un ity

as t h e amount o f p r o f e s s i o n a l e x p e r i ­

in creased .

The t y p e o f s c h o o l d i s t r i c t

(lo c a l or in term ed iate)

t h e r e s p o n d e n t s w e r e e m p l o y e d d i d n o t h a v e an e f f e c t
respondents p e rc e iv e d the i d e a l ro le o f th e school

in w hich

u p o n how t h e

p s y c h o l o g i s t on s i x

125

of th e e i g h t m ajor a c t i v i t i e s .
respondents

T h e re was a s l i g h t t e n d e n c y f o r

from l o c a l d i s t r i c t s

in term ed iate d i s t r i c t s

to

as

com pared t o

respondents

from

p e r c e i v e D ia g n o s is and P s y c h o - E d u c a t io n a l

P la n n i n g a s more i m p o r t a n t .

Ibe sice

5.

of th e

school

d i s t r i c t had no e f f e c t upon t h e

c e p tio n o f th e e i g h t m ajor a c t i v i t i e s

in th e id e a l r o le o f th e

per­
school

psych o lo g ist.

6.

T h e r e war. a v e r y h i g h

p sy ch o lo g ists
activ ities
relativ e

and d i r e c t o r s

in t h e

id eal

im portance.

c o r r e l a t i o n b e t w e e n how t h e

of sp ecial

ro le

of th e

e d u c a t i o n ra n k e d t h e e i g h t m ajor

school

p s y c h o lo g is t a c c o rd in g to

The r a n k i n g s b y r e l a t i v e

e ig h t m ajor a c t i v i t i e s

in th e

school

im portance o f t h e s e

i d e a l r o l e , b a s e d u p o n t h e m ea n r a n k i n g s

o f b o th resp o n d en t g ro u p s , a re g iv en in rank o rd e r below .
Di a g n o s i s

T sycho-K ducational
Parent

P Ianning

Ponsultation

( 'h i I d I b e i ' a p y
Pehool Program C o n s u lta tio n
Hesenrrh
( ' omi nuni t y P e l a t i o n s h i p s

A d m in istra tio n o f T pecial

Y.
school

D iagnosis, and P s.y e h o -E d n c u tio n a l
psy o h o lo g ists

the m ajor p o r tio n

0.

E d u c a tio n Program s

and d i r e c t o r s

of th e

sciiool

to both th e

p rep aratio n

of sp ecial

p s y c h o lo g is t's

The e i g h t m a j o r a c t i v i t i e s ,

according

P la n n i n g w ere p e r c e i v e d by

rela tiv e

and t h e r e l a t i v e

as d e s e r v in g

tim e.

as r a n k e d by th e

sciiool p s y c h o l o g i s t s '

in each a c t i v i t y

education

resp o n d en ts
adequacy o f

a llo tm e n t o f tim e to

126

spend i n e a c h a c t i v i t y ,

had ra n k in g s

m ajor a c t i v i t i e s

id eal r o le

9.

in th e

activ ities
by b o t h

in th e

id e a l ro le of th e

The m a j o r i t y

special
sional

in th e p r e s e n t r o l e

education
services

sidered

the

to

most

handicapped.

learning

The m a j o r i t y

The m a j o r i t y

sciiool

p s y c h o l ogi s t s

sciiool

program s, special
pre-school

A m ajority

ordinator
whereas

day

of

of

them selves

be

the

the

programs,

a

school

groups

student

provide

programs

special

directors

provide
child

psychologist
disturbed,

were

in

were

in

of

housed

education

in

was
to

to

the

con­

serve

and

2500

the

that
or

agreement

servi ce

of

profes­

agreement

population

groups

"should"

and

psychologist

em otionally

respondent

education

less.

that

regular
regular

schools

or

fa cil­

students.

of

school

psychological

u m ajority

for

serve

or

and

The m e n t a l l y r e t a r d e d

respondent

both

"must"

psychologists

school

disabled,

should

12.

Id.

school p s y c h o lo g is t as p e rc e iv e d

school

the

child

of both

psychologist

serving

that

im portant

m ultiply

a sciiool

the

al 1 childi-en.

by

11.

the

of both

desired

followed

school,

and t h e r a n k in g s o f t h e s e

respondent groups.

10.

they

o f the school p sy ch o lo g ist.

T h e r e wan a v e r y h i g h c o r r e l a t i o n b e t w e e n t h e r a n k i n g s o f t h e

e ig h t m ajor a c t i v i t i e s

ities

id e n tic a l t o th e rankings o f th e

of
the

the

psychologists

desired

services

to

be

directors

of

special

school

their

psychologists'

a

director

im mediate
education

supervisors.

or

co­

supervisor,
desired

that

121

1^4.

A m ajo rity

p sy ch o lo g ists

15.

o f both

respondent groups

school

p erceived th a t school

sh o u ld have a te a c h in g c e r t i f i c a t e .

A m ajo rity

o f both

respondent groups p erceiv ed th a t

p sy ch o lo g ists

sh o u ld be l e g a l l y

p sy ch o lo g ist"

le v e l.

17*

th at

s h o u l d h a v e some t e a c h i n g e x p e r i e n c e .

A m ajo rity

p sy ch o lo g ists

16.

o f both re sp o n d e n t g ro u p s p e rc e iv e d

A m ajo rity

certified

or licensed

at

o f both re sp o n d e n t groups p e rc e iv e d

p s y c h o lo g is t s h o u ld be h e ld

accountable according to

school

a "school

th at

th e school

sp ecified behav­

io ra l o b jectiv es.

18.

A m ajority

psychologist

19.

should

A m ajo rity

p ro fessio n al aides
tratio n

be

A m ajority

free

to

directors

the

most

have

respondent

at

least

groups

a M.A.

that

the

school

degree.

o f both r e s p o n d e n t g ro u p s
should be u t i l i z e d

perceived

agreed t h a t

when a p p r o p r i a t e

train ed

in th e

para-

adm inis­

o f p sy chological t e s t s .

90.

21.

of both

engage

of
in

of special

Regarding
positive

Psychologists

and

the

"private
education

disagreed

tow ard

N ational

psychologists

practice"

professional

feelings
the

sciiool

agreed

whereas
w ith

the

M ichigan

A ssociation

of

a m ajority

this

affilia tio n s,

that

they
of

should

the

position.

school

psychologists

A ssociation
fchool

of

fchool

P sychologists.

had

128

22.

The m a j o r i t y o f s c h o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t s

and d i r e c t o r s

of sp ecial

e d u c a tio n w ere in g e n e r a l agreem ent t h a t s c h o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t s
or "sh o u ld " engage in th e v i s i t a t i o n
in u n iv e r s i ty

courses, atten d

"m ust"

o f o th e r school program s,

enro ll

c o n f e r e n c e s , and re a d p r o f e s s i o n a l

jo u rn als ■

23.

The s c h o o l

p s y c h o lo g ists p laced

improve t h e i r c o m p e te n c ie s

em p h asis upon t h e n e e d t o

in th e a re a of d ia g n o s tic

t e s t i n g w ith

im p o r ta n c e p l a c e d upon t h e d i a g n o s i s

of learn in g d i s a b i lit ie s

and

p erso n ality -em o tio n al

The d i r e c t o r s

education

d isab ilities.

of special

p la c e d em p h a sis upon s c h o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t s becom ing more k n o w le d g e a b le
in c u rric u lu m m a t e r i a l s

and t e a c h i n g t e c h n i q u e s .

and e v a l u a t i o n o f l e a r n i n g d i s a b i l i t i e s
tors

of sp ecial

education.

The need

and t h e need t o b e s e n s i t i v e
i m p o r t a n t by t h e d i r e c t o r s

were a l s o

fo r school

im prove t h e i r c o m m u n ic a tio n s and p u b l i c

s t r e s s e d by d i r e c ­

p sychologists

relatio n s

to the te a c h e r s '

of sp ecial

D iagnostic t e s t i n g

to

sk illG w ith te ach ers

c o n c e rn s w ere c o n s id e r e d

education.

D iscuss!on
The i d e a l

ro le of th e

a r o l e whi ch c a n b e c a l l e d
is

sciiool p s y c h o l o g i s t

ideal, in t h e s e n s e o f i t s

im portant to und erstan d t h a t t h i s

school

psych o ]o g ists

an d d i r e c t o r s

lim ited to th e p referen c es
perceptions

of teach ers,

and o t h e r e d u c a t o r s
perceived r o le

is a ro le

study

general a d m in istra to rs,
in th i s

lim ited to th e p referen ces

It

a s p e r c e i v e d by o n l y
it

o f t h e s e two g ro u p s o f r e s p o n d e n t s .

included

is not

being p e r f e c t .

o f s p e c i a l e d u c a t i o n , an d

p rin cip als,

are not

in t h i s

study.

D ince i t

o f two g r o u p s , t h e

is
The

parents,
is

a

resu lts

of

129

th is

stu d y should be u n d ersto o d and i n t e r p r e t e d w ith t h i s

p ersp ectiv e

in m ind.
The i d e a l r o l e
school psychologists
faceted ro le

o f t h e s c h o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t was p e r c e i v e d by

and d i r e c t o r s

co n sistin g

how ever, t h a t D ia g n o sis

o f s p e c i a l e d u c a tio n as a m u l ti ­

of a v ariety

of a c tiv itie s .

and P s y c h o - E d u c a t i o n a l P l a n n i n g w e r e p e r c e i v e d

as t w o o f t h e m o r e i m p o r t a n t a c t i v i t i e s
the

id eal ro le

in th e s e

suggested th a t th e

tak e
g ists

activ ities.

p lace.

However, t h i s

and d i r e c t o r s

P i n g n o s i s os v e r y
c h ild r e n w ith

school p s y c h o lo g ist in

Many w r i t e r s

ac tiv ities

study

im p o rtan t but t h a t

a v arie ty

it

i n M ichigan p e r c e iv e d
should be m odified to

of d is a b ilitie s .

psycho-educational

T h e re was a l s o

th e

a p erceived

p l a n n i n g w h i c h may r e q u i r e

id eal

ro le

as a d i a g n n s t i c - p r e s c r i p t i v e
ro le.

I t was p e r c e i v e d

of th e
ro le

as a r o le

r a th e r than

em otional problem s,
em phasis upon

th a t school p sy ch o lo g ists

scrip tio n

of v ario u s

In sum, i t

a clin ica l-d iag n o stic

i n w hich s c h o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t s

s p e c ia l education classroom s, b u t r a th e r
diagnose v arious

em phasis

s c h o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t was p e r c e i v e d

lo n g e r m erely d iu g n o s e m ental r e t a r d a t i o n

psychologists

serve a l l

T h e r e w as a p e r c e i v e d

h av e a know ledge o f c u r r ic u lu m and t e a c h i n g t e c h n i q u e s .
appeared th a t

to

th a t school psycholo­

on d i a g n o s i n g c h i l d r e n w i t h l e a r n i n g d i s a b i l i t i e s ,
and m u l t i p l e h a n d i c a p s .

f o r many

should be s u b s t i t u t e d

in d icated

o f sp e c ia l ed u catio n

tim e

and r e s e a r c h e r s h a v e

s t r o n g em phasis on d i a g n o s i s w hich e x i s t e d

s h o u ld b e c h a n g e d and o t h e r
its

o f th e

and t h a t a m a j o r i t y o f t h e s c h o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t ' s

.should b e s p e n t

years

T t w as e v i d e n t ,

no

and d e t e r m in e e l i g i b i l i t y
as

problem s w ith

ed u catio n al tech n iq u es

a ro le

in w hich s c h o o l

an e m p h a s i s on t h e
and p r o c e d u r e s .

pre­

I t was

for

130

perceived

as a r o l e w hich

is

c h i l d - c e n t e r e d and b e h a v i o r change o r i e n t e d

w i t h a n e m p h a s i s on i n v o l v e m e n t o f p a r e n t s
The d i f f e r e n c e s
ogists

and d i r e c t o r s

in

The f a c t

th a t

c ith e r as

school p s y c h o l­

although s t a t i s t i c a l l y

and should n o t b e c o n s id e re d

very m eaningful.

22% o f t h e d i r e c t o r s o f s p e c i a l e d u c a t i o n h a d e x p e r i e n c e

a school

contrib u tin g

r o l e p e r c e p t i o n betw een t h e

of sp e c ia l ed u catio n ,

s i g n i f i c a n t , w ere sm all

and t e a c h e r s .

d i a g n o s t i c i a n o r s c h o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t may h a v e b e e n a

factor to

these

sm all d i f f e r e n c e s

in t h a t

th is experience

as a s c h o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t may h a v e s e n s i t i z e d some o f t h e d i r e c t o r s
s p e c ia l e d u ca tio n to p e r c e iv e the r o l e
tions

o f th e school p s y c h o lo g ists .

A I g o ,

p e r c e p t i o n b e tw e e n t h e two r e s p o n d e n t
agreem ent w ith th e e d u c a tio n a l
a l s o may i n d i c a t e t h a t

in

a s i m i l a r w ay t o t h e

and p s y c h o l o g i c a l n e e d s

in

th eir

ro le

general

of ch ild ren .

s c h o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t s and d i r e c t o r s

e d u c a tio n have been com m unicating w ith

percep­

the sm a ll d if f e r e n c e s

g r o u p s may i n d i c a t e

of

It

of s p e c ia l

e a c h o t h e r a n d s h a r i n g common

i dens.
H ie p e rc e iv e d
Hoi a t i o n s h i p s

in creased

respondent groups
o g ists

as

ch ild ren

compared t o

T h i s m ay i n d i c a t e t h a t

school
in

T h e r e was a s l i g h t
tric ts

t h e amount o f p r o f e s s i o n a l

o f sp ecial

a need fo r t h e

s h i p s w it]) b o t h

as

increased.

and d i r e c t o r s

perceived

i m p o r t a n c e o f C h i l d T h e r a p y a n d Community
e x p e rie n c e o f both
as school

p sy ch o l­

e d u c a tio n gained e x p e r ie n c e th e y
p sy ch o lo g ist to have

clo ser r e l a t i o n ­

s c h o o l a n d t h e community a t
tendency

respondents

for

from

respondents
in term ed iate

large.

from l o c a l
d istricts

d is­
to

more i m p o r t a n c e u pon D i a g n o s i s and P s y c h o - E d u c n t i o n u l H a n n i n g .
p articu lar

e f f e c t may b e d u e t o t h e

fact

th at resp o n d en ts

place
This

from l o c a l

131

school d i s t r i c t s

may b e c l o s e r t o t h e n e e d s o f c h i l d r e n

o r p e r h a p s th e y a r e u n d e r more im m ed iate p r e s s u r e

and t e a c h e r s ,

to p rovide th ese

servi c e s .
In a g e n e r a l
ing e x p e r i e n c e ,

way,

amount o f

p sy ch o lo g ist or d ir e c to r
sciiool d i s t r i c t
o g ists

did n o t a p p e a r t h a t

of sp ecial

of sp ecial

the school p s y c h o lo g ist

ed u catio n ,

in t h e

th ere

reg ard in g th e d ir e c tio n

is

id eal

the

amount o f t e a c h ­
e ith e r a school

and t y p e and s i z e

e f f e c t u p o n how t h e

education

m eaningful, d i f f e r e n c e

respondent groups,

the

p r o f e s s io n a l e x p e rie n c e as

h ad any a p p r e c i a b l e

and d i r e c t o r s

to be l i t t l e

it

perceived

ro le.

the

p sy ch o l­

activ ities

S ince th e r e

in r o le

of

a ls o appeared

p e r c e p t i o n b e tw e e n t h e tw o

encouraging p ro sp ect

in w hich t h e

school

of

school

f o r agreem ent

psycho lo gy program is

p roceeding.
The i d e a l
tio n s

r o l e w as p e r c e i v e d

of th e p re se n t

ro le,

and i t

may n o t c h a n g e v e r y m u c h .
sim ilarity
engaged
tors

in p e r c e p t i o n

in v a rio u s

of sp ecial

p sy c h o l ogi s t .
sciiool

It
is

n sp ects

ed u catio n

is

th at

as very

is

th erefo re

th e percep­

p o ssib le

th a t the r o le

sp ecu lated

th at

the

p s y c h o l o g i s t s may a l r e a d y

sciiool

o f what t h e school
perceived

to be th e

T h e r e was. s o m e i n d i c a t i o n

psychol ogi s t ,

sim ilar to

in c o m p a ris o n t o

1o g i s t s a n d d i r e c ­

id eal

ro le

in th e

present

more e m p h a sis p l a c e d upon p s y c h o - e d u c a t i o n a l

for t h i s

psycho

that

th e

the reaso n

of the school

ideal

ro le,

p lan n in g ,

be

role o f th e

t h e r e may b e
ch ild

th erapy,

a nd r e s e a r c h .
The i d e a l
a stro n g

sp ecial

ro le

ol' t h e

ed ucation

school

p s y c h o l o g i s t was p e r c e i v e d

o rien tatio n

grams w ere c o n s i d e r e d more i m p o r t a n t t o

in th a t

sp ecial

to have

education p ro ­

se rv e than o th e r ty p es o f

132

program s such as
r e s id e n tia l or

r e g u la r sch o o l program s,

i n s t i t u t i o n a l program s.

be th e d i s a b i l i t y

continued to

sciiool p s y c h o l o g i s t o u g h t t o

as th e
provide

serv ice.

A m ajo rity

o f both

school p sy c h o lo g ist
It

M ental r e t a r d a t i o n

a r e a w hich was p e r c e i v e d b y t h e r e s p o n d e n t s

more i m p o r t a n t o ne t o w h ic h t h e
psychological

s um me r s c h o o l p r o g r a m s ,

should be n o te d

r e s p o n d e n t g ro u p s were in ag ree m en t t h a t

should

serv e n stu d en t p o p u latio n

a

o f 2500 o r l o s s .

t h a t t h e A d m i n i s t r a t i v e Code f'om m ittec on S p e c i a l

E d u c a tio n o f t h e M ic h ig a n D e p a rtm e n t o f E d u c a t i o n recommended a u t h o r i ­
s a t i o n o f one ap p ro v ed
pupils

in a tte n d a n c e

the d ia g n o s tic ia n s

s p e c ia l education d ia g n o s tic ia n

in o r d e r t o

w ith

nil

"facilita te

sp ecial

and t o p e r m i t r e a s o n a b l e u t i l i z a t i o n
research

and e v a l u a t i o n

.

.

.

."

f o r e a c h 2500

ap p ro p riate

education

in teractio n

program s and s e r v i c e s ,

o f tire d i a g n o s t i c i a n s

(l9f>9, p .

of

f o r program

93)

T h e r e w e r e some d i f f e r e n c e s , h o w e v e r , b e t w e e n t h e s c h o o l
psy ch o lo g ists

and d i r e c t o r s

on who s h o u l d s u p e r v i s e
psychologists

should

slig h t

tendency

school

p sy ch o lo g ists

o l' s p e c i a l

school

being acc o u n tab le

psy ch o lo g ists

engage in

for d ire c to rs

"p riv ate

p ractice."

rated

sp ecified

fifty -fiv e

' H i e r e was a l s o a
in com parison to

behavioral

a c tiv itie s

p sychologists

o b jectiv es.

having a s ig n i f i c a n t

a s more i m p o r t a n t by t h e d i r e c t o r s

e d u c a t i o n t h a n by s c h o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t s

and e d u c a tio n a l

and t o w h a t e x t e n t s c h o o l

t o p l a c e more e m p h a sis upon sciiool

The o n l y o n e o f t h e

w ritte n p sychological

They d i d n o t a g r e e

o f s p e c ia l ed u catio n

according to

c h i - s q u a r e w hich was

ed ucation.

report to

need:: o f t h e i r

reads

th e p aren ts
c h ild ."

as

follow s:

concerning th e

A to tal

of sp ecial

"G ive a
psychological

o f 95^ o f t h e s c h o o l

133

psychologists

3 &% o f t h e d i r e c t o r s

as com pared t o

p erceived th a t th e sch o o l p s y c h o lo g ist
a ctiv ity .

of sp ecial

education

"m ust" o r " s h o u ld " p e rfo rm t h i s

T h i s may i n d i c a t e t h a t t h e d i r e c t o r s

o f s p e c i a l e d u c a tio n in

c o m p a riso n t o t h e s c h o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t s have more c o n c e r n f o r due p r o c e s s
co n sid eratio n s

and p a r e n t i n v o l v e m e n t i n p s y c h o - e d u c a t i o n a l p l a n n i n g .

I t a l s o may i n d i c a t e
to sh a rin g

th a t th e school p sy ch o lo g ists

th e ir c o n fid e n tia l p sy ch o lo g ical

fin d in g s w ith p a r e n ts .

R egarding p r o f e s s i o n a l a f f i l i a t i o n s
the

than to ed u catio n a s s o c ia tio n s .

p sy ch o lo g ists
tio n

o f school p sy ch o lo g ists,

sc h o o l p s y c h o lo g i s t s gave a h ig h e r p r i o r i t y

atio n s

in d icated

o f Pchool

than

A sso ciatio n .

P sy ch o lo g ists

d e s i r e an a f f i l i a t i o n

o rg an io atio n , it

fo r th e N ational A sso cia­

fo r D iv isio n

P sychological

to p sy ch o lo g ical a sso c i­

The l a r g e m a j o r i t y o f s c h o o l

a g reater preference

P sy ch o lo g ists

are not p redisposed

l6

o f t h e A m erican

I f t h e M ichigan A s s o c i a t i o n o f S ch o o l

should keep t h i s

w ith a n a t i o n a l

po in t

psych o lo g ical

in m ind.

Roc omm e n d a t i on s
Rased upon b o t h
current

trends

mid h a p p e n i n g s

recom m endations a r e

1.
serv ices

Pchool
to

info rm atio n

field

in

th is

study

of ed u catio n ,

and upo n

the

follow ing

suggested.

p sychologists

all

in th e

reported

ch ild ren .

should

provide com prehensive p s y c h o lo g ic u 1

The a p p r o a c h

should be c h ild

centered

and

b e h a v io r change o r i e n t e d .

P.

School

psychologists

p sycho-educationul
and c o n s u l t a t i o n

p lan n in g ,

s h o u l d become i n v o l v e d
th e w ritin g

w ith te a c h e r s .

in th e p ro cess

of

of ed u catio n al p re s e rip tio n s ,

3.3**

3.

School p s y c h o lo g ists

in t h e

should s t r i v e

s c h o o ls by means o f e f f e c t i v e

to

p ublic

strengthen th e ir

relatio n s

The s c h o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t s h o u l d b e c o m e m o r e s e n s i t i v e
the

sc h o o l program .

5.

process

S tate-w id e

o g ists,

or o th e r groups
as th e y p e r t a i n

involve p a re n ts

s p o n so re d e i t h e r by t h e M ichigan

M ichigan A s s o c i a t i o n o f S ch o o l P s y c h o l­

to

learn in g d i s a b i l i t i e s ,
.S k ills of th e
tech n iq u es

for p re sc rip tio n ,

th e ra p y needs to be e x p lo re d .

6.
school

effectiv ely

The p r e s e n t
child ren

for every school

7.

ratio

and p s y c h o in terest

in

com m unicate and c o n s u l t

needs to be s tu d ie d .

o f one s c h o o l

should be reduced to

p sychologist

a lev el

fo r every

o f 7*300 s c h o o l

hOOO

ch ild ren

psy ch o lo g ist.

of sp ecial

The c o n c e r n s

The grow ing

How t o

A d ia lo g u e should be s t a r t e d

d irecto rs

em otional d i s t u r b a n c e s ,

school p sy c h o lo g ist in th e use

e d u c a t i o n a l p la n n in g need t o be u p g ra d e d .

parents

in th e d iag n o s­

sh o u ld em phasize th e developm ent o f d ia g n o s t ic

of ed u catio n al m a te ria ls ,

w ith

b e tw e e n school, p s y c h o l ogi s t s

e d u c a tio n t o e x p l o r e problem s o f m utual

regarding

su p erv isio n ,

"p riv ate

u s e o f c o n f i d e n t i ul. p s y c h o l o g i c n l

and

concern.

p r a c tic e " by school

p s y c h o l o g i s t s , a c c o u n t a b i l i t y by means o f p e r f o r m a n c e o b j e c t i v e s ,
th e

of

educate c h ild r e n .

in s e r v ic e m eetings

and m u l t i p l e h a n d i c a p s .

ch ild

to th e needs

and c o n s u l t w i t h them when n e c e s s a r y .

D epartm ent o f E d u c a tio n , t h e

sk ills

to

The s c h o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t s h o u l d

tic-p rescrip tiv e

and com m unication.

Ho n e e d s t o b e c o m e a n e f f e c t i v e m e m b e r o f a t e a m

o f p r o f e s s i o n a l s vho d e s i r e

t.

im age

in fo rm a tio n w ith

parents

and

should

135
he d iscu ssed .

8.

U n iv ersity tra in in g

p ro fessio n al

program s sh o u ld h e o r i e n t e d t o t r a i n i n g

sciiool p s y c h o l o g i s t s

in th e

sk ills

and c o m p e te n c ie s n eed e d

t o p ro v id e com prehensive p s y c h o lo g ic a l s e r v i c e s .
A.

T h e r e s h o u l d h e an e m p h a s i s u p o n t h e
d isab ilities
ally

d istu rb ed ,

handicapped
U.

including th e m entally
the

learning

d iagnosis
retard ed ,

d isab led ,

of vario u s
th e em otion­

th e m u ltip ly

and o t h e r s .

There sh o u ld

be an e m p h a s i s upon t h e p r o c e s s e s

and t e a c h i n g .

The s c h o o l

p sychologist

of learning

in t r a i n i n g

should

become f a m i l i a r w ith t h e d e v e lo p m e n t o f c u r r i c u l u m , t h e u s e
o f educatio n al
ed u catio n al
U.

I'chool
at

m aterials

mend

psy ch o lo g ical

Tin? s c h o o l

so t h a t

r e c o g n i sed

p sy ch o lo g icts

as a p r o f e s s io n a l

t o am en d t h e s t a t e

"sciiool

in clu d e atten d an c e
parent conferences,

licen sin g

act

group sh o u ld recom ­
for

levels, o f p s y c h o l­

p s y c h o l og i s t s " c a n b e c o m e o n e o f t h e

leg ally

1 e v e 1s .

A dditional

and s i " e

should

in th e class,room .

Im p licatio n s

1.

in tern sh ip s

p sy ch o -ed u catio n al p lanning m eetin g s,

leg islatio n

o g ists

an d p s y c h o -

p rescrip tio n .

and o b s e r v a t i o n s

.

and t e c h n i q u e s ,

research

is

A lthough te a c h in g
o f school

d istrict

fo r F u tu re K esearch
necessary

experience,

had v ery

in t h e

follow ing a re a s :

p ro fessio n al

little

effect

e x p e r i e n c e , and t y p e

upon t h e p e r c e p t i o n

136

of th e r o le of th e

school p sy c h o lo g ist,

confidence th a t th e s e v a ria b le s
actu ally p racticed .

2.

R esearch

the

c a n n o t b e s t a t e d w i t h any

have no e f f e c t upon t h e r o l e

is

and d i r e c t o r s

e d u c a tio n a l program s

should be d i r e c t e d

f i n d i n g how t h e

most e f f e c t i v e

in

tow ard
th is

th ere

o f sp e c ia l education

for c h ild re n .

study

its

an i n c r e a s i n g

c o u n s e l i n g and
t h a t m odels

in terest

feasib ility

expressed

in view o f d ue p r o c e s s

need f o r

and p o s s i b l e

in t h i s

effectiv e­

inv o lv ed .

study

co n sid eratio n s,

for parent

it

is

f o r r e l a t i n g w ith p a r e n t s b e d e v e lo p e d and t h a t

be designed to

can be

expended t o d e f i n e and

and t o o u t l i n e t h e n e c e s s a r y r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s

In view o f t h e

R esearch

p articu la r ac tiv ity .

s h o u ld be an e f f o r t

develop th e c o n ce p t, to

h.

is

area.

school p sy ch o lo g ist

B ince s c h o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t s p e r c e i v e d

ch ild th erap y ,

ness,

it

im p o r ta n c e o f com m unicating and c o n s u l t i n g w i t h t e a c h e r s

and p l a n n i n g p r e s c r i p t i v e

3.

as

recommended t o e x p l o r e t h i s

B oth s c h o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t s

stressed

it

recommended
research

f i n d e f f e c t i v e ways t o c o m m u n ic a te and c o n s u l t w i t h

parents.

5.

stu d ies

s h o u l d b e u n d e r t a k e n t o e x p l o r e how p u r a p r o f e s s i o n a l s

can be m ost e f f e c t i v e l y

used

in com plem enting th e

ro le

o f th e school

psychologi s t .

6,

R t u d i e s s h o u l d be made t o o b t a i n

an u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f t h e

th e sc h o o l p s y c h o lo g is t as p e rc e iv e d by t e a c h e r s ,
to rs,

p rin cip als,

parents,

and o th e r e d u c u to r s .

general

ro le

adm in istra­

of

BIBLIOGRAPHY

B IBLIOGRAP HY

A merican P s y c h o l o g i c a l A s s o c i a t i o n .
" T h e P s y c h o ] o g i s t on t h e S c h o o l
S taff."
1958.
(M im eographed.)
Ames.

"The E d u c a t i o n a l P s y c h o l o g i s t a s E d u c a t i o n a l
V i e w p o i n t s , Ji T : 3 ( M a y , 1 9 7 1 ) , ; ? l - fi 3 .

In q u irer."

A s h b a u g h , W. II. a n d P a r d o n , J . I .
"The S c h o o l P s y c h o l o g i s t . "
A
b r o c h u r e p u b l i s h e d by t h e A m erican P sy ch o l o g i c a l A s s o c i a t i o n ,
1967.
A s h l o c k , P. a n d S t e p h e n s , A.
E d u c a tio n a l Therapy in th e E lem entary
S c h o o l : An E d u c a t i o n a l A p p r o a c h t o L e a r n i n g P r o b l e m s o f
Phi 1 d r o n .
New Y o r k :
C h a r l e s C. T h o m a s , 1 9 9 6 .
A ustin, John.
"School P sy ch o lo g y as a V alue S c i e n c e . "
og y P i g e s t , 1:1. ( W i n t e r , 1 9 7 2 ) * 9 - 1 3 .

S>chool P s y c h o l ­

"Why P a r a p r o f c s s i o n n l s ? "
N ational A sso ciatio n of School
P sy ch o lo g i s t s N e w s le ttc r , 1 ( Septem ber , 1971) * ^
P a c k s t r o m , C. H. a n d H u r s h , G. I).
w estern U n iv e rsity P r e s s ,

Survey R e s e a rc h .
1993.

C hicago:

N orth­

B a k e r , F . B. a n d M a r t i n , T . J .
"F ortap:
A F o rtra n T e st A nalysis
P ack ag e."
M ichigan S t n t e U n i v e r s i t y , C o lle g e o f E d u c a tio n ,
O f f i c e o f R e s e a r c h C o n s u l t s . ! i o n , O c c a s i o n a l P a p e r , No. 1 0 ,
J u l y , 1070.
P a r d o n , J . E.
"Overview o f I s s u e s - I m p l ic a t io n ::
in School P s y c h o lo g y ."
J o u r n a l o f School
(1 9 7 S ), S07-P1I.

fo r F u tu re T rends
P s y c h o l o g y , 1 0 :P

--------------- , e d .
"P ro blem s and I s s u e s in School P sy ch o lo g y - l'lb h ,"
J o u r n a l o f S c ii o o l P s y c h o l o g y , 3 : 9 ( 1 9 8 )1- 8 9 ) , T—h h .
B elcher,

E s t h e r L.
" R e s u l t s o f a S urvey o f M ichigan School D ia g n o s ­
t i c i a n Program f o r t h e M e n ta lly H a n d ic a p p ed ."
U npublished
R e p o r t , S p r i n g , l l>80.

B ennett,

V. P. C .
"Who i s a S c h o o l P s y c h o l o g i s t 7
(A nd Wliut D o es He
D o)."
J o u r n a l , o f S c h o o l P s y c h o l o g y , 8 : 3 (1 9Y G )» 1 9 8 - 1 7 1 .

1 37

138

B e r k o v i t z , H.
"The C h i l d C l i n i c a l P s y c h o l o g i s t i n t h e S c h o o l s :
C o n su ltatio n ."
P sychology in t h e S c h o o ls , 5 (1 9 6 8 ) , 118-12U.
E e r s o f f , D.
"S ch o o l P s y c h o lo g y and S t a t e D iv i s i o n s o f S p e c i a l
E ducation:
A S u g g e stio n f o r C hange."
J o u rn a l o f School
P s y c h o l o g y . 9 =1 ( 1 9 7 1 ) , 5 8 - 6 0 .
B l a n c o , R.
"A F o c u s on R e m e d i a t i o n i n S c h o o l P s y c h o l o g y . "
School Psychol o g y , 9 :3 0 9 7 1 ) , 261-269.

Journal of

B o w e r , E. M.
"P sychology in th e S c h o o ls:
C onceptions, P ro c e sse s,
and T e r r i t o r i e s . "
Psychology in th e S c h o o ls , 1 (1 9 6 (0 , 3 -1 2 .
B r a n t l e y , J . C.
" P s y c h o - E d u c a t i o n a l C e n t e r s and t h e S c h o o l P s y c h o l o ­
g ist."
P sychology in t h e S c h o o l s , 8 (O c to b e r, 1 9 7 1 ), 313-310.
C a l i f o r n i a D epartm ent o f E d u c a tio n .
" R e p o r t o f t h e S u b - C o m m i t t e e on
t h e P s y c h o l o g i s t s ’ and P s y c h o m e t r i s t s 1 C r e d e n t i a l s , "
May 5 , 1 9 5 0 .
C a r d o n , B. W. a n d F r e n c h , J . L .
" O r g a n i z a t i o n a nd C o n t e n t o f G r a d u a t e
Programs in S ch o o l P s y c h o lo g y ."
Jo u rn a l of School P sychology,
7 :2 (1 9 6 8 -6 9 ), 28-32.
C arlson, Jon.
"C onsulting:
F a c i l i t a t i n g School C hange."
Psychology D i g e s t . 2:1 ( W in te r, 1 9 7 3 ), 20-25.

School

C a t t c r a l l , C.
"M easuring School P s y c h o lo g y 's P r o f e s s i o n a l i s m ."
Comnium q u o ,
N ational A s s o c ia tio n o f School P s y c h o lo g is ts ,
1:1 ( F a l l , 1 0 7 2 ) .
" T ax on om y o f P r e s c r i p t i v e I n t e r v e n t i o n s . "
School P sy ch o lo g y . 8 :1 , (1 9 7 0 ), 5-12.

Journal of

---------------, a n d H i n d s , R.
" C h ild A d v o c a te - Em erging R o le f o r t h e
School P s y c h o lo g is t,"
School P sychology D i g e s t , 1 :1 ( W in te r ,
l ‘> 7 2 ) , 1 ) j - 2 2 .
C lair,

T . N. a n d K i r a l y , J .
"A c c o u n ta b ility for th e School P sychol­
o g ist."
P sychology in t h e S c h o o l s , 8 (O c to b e r, 1 9 7 1 ), 318-321.

C o l e m a n , J tunes 8 .
E q u ality o f E d u catio n al O p p o rtu n ity .
P .C .:
11.Si. D e p a r t m e n t o f H . E . W . , 1 9 9 6 .
C o n o v e r , W. J .
P r a c t i c a l N onparam etric S t a t i s t i c s .
W i l e y an d S o n s , I n c . , 1(>71.

W ashington,

New Y o r k :

C u t t s , Norma E . , e d .
School P s y c h o lo g is ts a t M id-C entury.
D .C .:
A m erican P s y c h o l o g i c a l A s s o c i a t i o n , 1955.

John

W ashington,

139

D ansinger, 3. 5.
"A F i v e Y e a r F o l l o w - u p S u r v e y o f M i n n e s o t a G c h o o l
P sy ch o lo g ists."
Jo u rn a l o f School P sy chology, 7:3 (1966- 6 9 ) ,
>47-53.
D e tr o it P u b lic S ch o o ls.
"A S u r v e y o f t h e P r o f e s s i o n a l R e q u i r e m e n t s ,
D u tie s and R em uneration o f School D i a g n o s t i c i a n s . "
U npublished
study, 1962.
D ornback,
F. a n d D a w s o n , F . L.
"School P s y c h o lo g ists:
An U n i n f o r m e d
V ictim o f C hange."
R a tio n a l A sso ciatio n of School P sycholo­
g i s t s , 2 : 2 {Summer, 1 9 7 0 ) .
D u n n , J a m e s A.
"School D ia g n o stic ia n s
o f M ichigan, 196>i .

S u rv ey ."

Ann A r b o r :

U n iv ersity

D u n n , L l o y d M.
" S p e c i a l E d u c a t i o n f o r t h e M i l d l y R e t a r d e d — I s Much o f
It Ju stifiab le?"
E x c e p t i o n a l C h i l d r e n , 35:1 (S e p te m b e r,

1 9 6 8 ), 5 - 2 2 .
E iserer,

P a u l E.
The G chool P s y c h o l o g i s t . W a s h in g t o n , D .C .:
C e n t e r f o r A p p l i e d R e s e a r c h i n E d u c a t i o n , I n c . , 1963*

The

F a r l i n g , W i l l i a m H.
"The P r o b le m s and P o t e n t i a l s o f G chool P s y c h o lo g y
in 1969,"
J o u rn a l o f Gchool P sy c h o lo g y , 7 :2 (1 9 6 8 -6 9 ), 33-35.
--------------- "W ill t h e R eal G chool P s y c h o l o g i s t P le a s e G tand U p."
G c h o o l P s y c h o l o g y D i g e s t , 1 : 2 ( S p r i n g , 39 7 2 ) , 3 - 5 .

The

F i n e , M. a n d T y l e r , M.
" C o n c e r n s and D i r e c t i o n s i n T e a c h e r C o n s u l t a ­
tio n ."
J o u r n a l o f G c h o o l P s y c h o l o g y , 9 : >4 ( 1 9 7 1 ) , >»36-M6t.
F in n , Jerem y.
U n i v a r i a t e and M u l t i v a r i a t e A n a ly s is o f V a ria n c e and
C ovariance.
B u ff a lo , R .Y .:
S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y o f New Y o r k , 10(>8.
Forneos.

" E d u catio n al P r e s c r ip tio n fo r th e School P s y c h o lo g is t."
J o u rn a l o f School P s y c h o lo g y , 8:2 (lO y o ), 96- 9 8 .

Franks,

C. M . , G u s s k i n d , D. J . , a n d F r a n k s , V.
"behavior M o d ificatio n
and t h e Gchool P s y c h o l o g i s t . "
P r o f e s s i o n a l Gchool P s y c h o lo g y .
E d i te d by G o ttseg en and G o t t s e g e n .
Pew Y o r k :
G r im e a n d
S t r a t t o n , 1969, 359-399.

G i e b i n k , J . W, a n d R i n g n e s s , T . A.
"On t h e R e l e v a n c y o f T r a i n i n g i n
School P sychology."
J o u r n a l o f G c h o o l P s y c h o l o g y , 8 : 1 ( l ‘> 7 0 ) ,
>• 3-1*7.
G o t t s e g e n , M. G.
"The R ole o f t h e S c h o o l P s y c h o l o g i s t ."
P rofessional
School P sychology.
E d i t e d b y G o t t s e g e n find G o t t s e g e n .
Rev
York:
G rune and S t r a t t o n , i 9 6 0 , 2 - 1 7 .

1J|0

G r a y S . W.
Tho P s y c h o l o g i s t i n t h e S c h o o l s .
R in e h a rt and W in sto n , I n c . , 1963.

New Y o r k :

H o lt,

O u id e rb a ld i, John.
"Gchool P sychology : A D evelopm ental D ia g n o s is ."
The G c h o o l P s y c h o l o g y D i g e s t , 1 : 1 ( W i n t e r , 1 9 7 2 ) , 1 - 3 .
G u n t e r , N e i l C.
" S e l f - r o l e P e rc e p tio n and C r o s s - r o le P e rc e p tio n o f
Gchool C o u n s e lo r s , G chool S o c i a l W o rk ers, and Gchool P s y c h o l­
o g ists."
U npublished D o c to ra l D i s s e r t a t i o n , U n iv e r s ity o f
G e o rg ia , 1969.
H c n r i q u c z , V e r a G.
"A G c h o o l P s y c h o t h e r a p i s t R e p o r t s on h e r W o r k . "
Psycho] ogy i n t h e S c h o o l s , 1 ( 196)() , 2 2 -2 6 .
H e r r o n , W. G. , G r e e n , M . , G u i l d , M. , S m i t h , A . , K a n t o r , R. E .
C o n t e m p o r a r y .Sc ho ol P s y c h o l o g y .
S cran to n , P enn.:
Intext
E d u ca tio n a l. P u b l i s h e r s , 1970.
H o d g e s , W. L.
"The C e r t i f i c a t i o n o f S c h o o l P s y c h o l o g i s t s . "
P s y c h o l o g i s t , 15 ( i 9 6 0 ) , 3 )16 - 3 )1 9 .
H o p s , H.

"The G c h o o l P s y c h o l o g i s t a s a B e h a v i o r M anagem ent C o n s u l t a n t
in a S p e c ia l C lass G e t t i n g ."
J o u rn a l o f Gchool P sy ch o lo g y ,
9 : Ji ( 1 9 7 1 ) , 1<73-1*83.

H oyt, C y r i l .
"Test R e lia b ility
P sychom etrika, 6 (Ju n e,
H u t t , R.

A m erican

E s tim a te d by A n a ly s is o f V a r ia n c e ,"
19)»l), 1 5 3 -1 6 0 .

B. W.
"The S ch o o l P s y c h o l o g i s t . "
15 ( 1 9 2 3 ) , 1(8-51.

P sychological C li n ic ,

J a c k s o n , J . II.
" P s y c h o e d u c a tio n a l Therapy as th e P rim ary A c t i v i t y
o f th e School P s y c h o lo g is t,"
Jo u rn al o f School P sychology,
0 :3 (1 9 7 0 ), 186-190.
J o u r n a l o f Gchool P s y c h o lo g y .
" S p e c ia l E ducation
Im p l ic a t io n s fo r Gchool P s y c h o lo g y ," 10:2

in T r a n s itio n :
(1972).

K e n n e d y , D. A.
"A P r a c t i c a l A p p r o a c h t o G c h o o l P s y c h o l o g y . ”
o f G c h o o l P s y c h o l o g y , 9 : ( W i n t e r , 1 9 7 1 ) , )iR!i-!iB0.
K irk,

Journal

R o g e r E.
E x p e rim e n ta l D esign P ro c e d u re f o r t h e B e h a v io ra l
S cien ces.
B elm ont, C a l i f o r n i a :
B rooks/C ole P u b lis h in g
Co m p a n y , I 9 6 0 .

K i r s c h n e r , P. E.
" S c h o o l P s y c h o l o g y a s Viewed b y t h e S u p e r v i s o r s o f
School P sy c h o lo g ic a l S e r v ic e s ."
J o u r n a l o f Gchool P s y c h o lo g y ,
9 : 3 ( 1 9 7 1 ) , 3)i 3-3J i 6 .
L e a s k e , P . , and A u s t i n , J .
" S u rv e y o f P s y c h o l o g i c a l W orkers em ployed
in M ic h ig a n a s S c h o o l D i a g n o s t i c i a n s and S c h o o l P s y c h o l o g i s t s . "
U npublished R e p o rt, O c to b e r, 1963.

iia

L e s i a k , W. J .
"The M i c h i g a n S c h o o l P s y c h o l o g i s t :
1960-1970."
Mount
P leasan t:
C e n t r a l M i c h i g a n U n i v e r s i t y , An u n p u b l i s h e d s t u d y ,
1972.
M agary, Jam es F.
"A S c h o o l P s y c h o l o g i s t i s
S c h o o l a , 3 ( 1 9 6 6 ) , 3 ^ 0 - 3 )a .

.

.

.

P sychology in th e

---------------, e d .
School P s y c h o lo g ic a l S e r v i c e s :
In Theory and P r a c t i c e .
E n g l e w o o d C l i f f s , IE j T : " P r e n t J c e - H a l 1 , I n c . , 1 9 6 7 *
---------------, a n d Mcacham, M.
"The Growth o f S c h o o l P s y c h o l o g y i n t h e L a s t
D ecade."
J o u rn a l of School P sych o lo g y . 1 (J a n u a ry , 1963) , 5-13.
M ayer, 0. Hoy.
"B ehavioral C onsulting:
U sing B ehavior M o d if ic a tio n
P rocedures in th e C o n su ltin g R e la tio n s h ip ."
School Psychology
D i g e s t , P:1 ( W i n t e r , 1 9 7 3 ) , P 5 - 3 0 ,
M c D a n i e l , L. J . and A h r , A. E.
" T h e G ch o o l P s y c h o l o g i s t a s a R e s o u r c e
P e r s o n I n i t i a t i n g and C o n d u c t i n g I n - S e r v i c e T e a c h e r E d u c a t i o n . "
P s y c h o l o g y i n t h e S c h o o l s , P ( 1 9 6 5 ) , P2Q-P2U.
M i c h i g a n A s s o c i a t i o n o f Gchool. P s y c h o ] o g i s t s .
"Survey o f I n s e r v ic e
Heeds o f S c h o o l P s y c h o l o g i s t s in M ic h ig a n ."
U npublished s tu d y ,
1972.
M ichigan D epartm ent o f E d u c a tio n .
"F a c ts a b o u t t h e M ichigan School
D ia g n o s ti c ia n f o r th e M e n ta lly H andicapped P ro g ram ."
i960.
( Mi m e o g r a p h e d . )
---------------F a c t s a b o u t t h e M ichigan S chool D i a g n o s t i c i a n f o r th e
ly H andicapped P rogram ."
1Q66,
( M im eographed.)

M ental­

---------------" P r e l i m i n a r y R e p o r t - M ic h ig a n A d m i n i s t r a t i v e Code C o m m ittee
on S p e c i a l E d u c a t i o n . "
M ay , 1 9 6 9 .
"The School D i a g n o s t i c i a n
H andicapped P ro g ra m ."
1958.

S e rv ic e fo r th e S t a t e M entally
(M im eographed.)

R a t io n a l A s s o c i a t i o n o f School P s y c h o l o g i s t s .
" N a tio n a l, R egional,
and S t a t e S u rv e y o f S c h o o l P s y c h o l o g i s t s . "
W ashington, D .C .:
U. G. D e p a r t m e n t o f H e a l t h , E d u c a t i o n , a n d W e l f a r e , 1 9 7 1 .
P n y n e , S t a n l e y L.
The A rt o f A sk in g Q u e s t i o n s .
P r i n c e t o n U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1951*
Phi
R aj,

D elta Kappnn, 6 8 :1 0
Des.

P rin ceto n ,

New J e r s e y :

(June, 1967).

The D esig n o f Sample S u r v e y s .

R e g e r , R.
School P s y c h o lo g y .
Thomas, 1965.

New Y o r k :

S p rin g field ,

Illin o is:

M cG raw -H ill,
C h a r l e s C.

1972.

Ih 2

R e g e r , R.
"The T e c h n o lo g y o f S c h o o l P s y c h o l o g y . "
P s y c h o l o g y , 5 ( 3 9 6 7 )* 1 ^ 8 - 1 5 5 *

Journal

o f School

R e i l l y , D avid.
"G oals and R o le s o f S ch o o l P s y c h o lo g y :
A C o m m un ity
Based M o d el."
J o u rn a l of School P sy ch o lo g y , 7 :3 (1968-69)*
35-37.
R o b e r t s , R.
" P e r c e p t i o n s o f A c tu a l and D e s ir e d R ole F u n c ti o n s o f
G c h o o l P s y c h o l o g i s t s b y P s y c h o l o g i s t s an d T e a c h e r s . "
Psychol ogy i n t h e G c h o o l s , 7 : 2 ( A p r i l , 1 9 7 0 ) , 1 7 5 -1 7 8 .
R o s s , G. L . , J r . , D e Y o u n g , H. 0 . , a n d C o h e n , J . G,
C onfro n tatio n :
S p e c i a l F d u c a t i o n P la c e m e n t and t h e Law ."
E xceptional C h ild re n ,
38:1 (G eptem ber, 1 9 7 1 ), 5-1 2 .
Garb i n ,

T . R. a n d A l l e n , V. L.
"R ole T h e o r y ."
The h a n d b o o k o f S o c i a l
P sychology.
F d i t e d b y G. L i n d z e y a n d E . A r o n s o n .
R eading,
M assachusetts:
A d d ito n -W e s 1ey P u b l i s h i n g Company, 2 : 1 , 1 9 6 8 .

G chim m oler, G i l .
"The S c h o o l P s y c h o l o g i s t a s a T h e r a p i s t . "
N ational
A s s o c i a t i o n o f Gchool P s y c h o l o g i s t s , 1:1 ( A p r i l , 1971) , 6 - 1 1 ,
G i l b e r b c r g , N. a n d C i l b e r b e r g , M.
" C h o u ld .Schools Have P s y c h o l o g i s t s . "
P sychology in th e G c h o o ls, 9 (1 9 7 1 ), 321-320.
G i l v e r m a n , H. L.
tio n s."

"Gchool P sy ch o lo g y :
D iv e rg e n t R ole C o n c e p t u a li z a ­
P sychology in th e G c h o o ls , 6 :3 (1 9 6 9 ), 266-271.

G k i n n e r , B. F .
The B e h a v i o r o f O r g a n i s m s .
C e n t u r y - C r a f t s , 1938.

New Y o r k :

A ppleton-

G m i t h , E. E. " T h e E f f e c t s o f C l e a r a n d U n c l e a r R o l e E x p e c t a t i o n s on
Group P r o d u c t i v i t y and D el'ensi v e n e s s , "
J o u r n a l o f Abnormal
P s y c h o l o g y , 55 ( 1 9 5 7 ) , 21 3 - 2 1 7 .
G m i t h , Tom E.
"An A n a l y s i s o f t h e R o l e o f t h e G c h o o l P s y c h o l o g i s t
in th e G tuto o f C a l i f o r n i a . "
U npublished d o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a ­
t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y o f G outhern C a l i f o r n i a , 1962.
G t e p h e n s , T. M.
" P sy c h o lo g ic a l C o n s u lta tio n to Teachers o f L earning
and B e h a v i o r a l l y H a n d ic a p p e d C h i l d r e n U s in g a B e h a v i o r a l
M odel."
J o u r n a l o f Gchool P s y c h o l o g y , 8:1 ( 1 9 7 0 ) , 1 3 - 1 8 .
G w n n s o n , H. K,
" A d m i n i s t r a t o r s F avor Expanded P s y c h o lo g ic n l
M i c h i g a n E d u c a t i o n J o u r n a l , Ma^ 1 , 19(>o.
Sym onds, P. J .
"The Gchool P s y c h o l o g i s t in g P s y c h o l o g y . 6 (191)2), 1 7 3 -1 7 6 .

1 9 ^2 ."

Journal

A id."

o f C o n su lt­

I >t 3

Tan, Jam es.
"R ole o f t h e School P s y c h o lo g is t as P e r c e iv e d by th e
I l l i n o i s S chool P s y c h o l o g i s t s and D i r e c t o r s o f S p e c i a l Educa­
tio n ."
U npublished d o c to ra l d i s s e r t a t i o n , I l l i n o i s S ta te
U n i v e r s i t y , 1968.
T r a c h t m a n , G. M.
"Change from W i t h i n :
R o le s , G o a ls, and P o l i t i c s in
School P s y c h o lo g y ."
N atio n al A s s o c ia tio n of School P sychol­
o g i s t s , 3 : 7 ( S e p t e m b e r ^ 1 9 7 1 ) , 9-77!
V. P . , G u t t e n t a g , I I . , L e i b m a n , 0 . B . , a n d L e v i n , E . S .
" T h e B l i n d Hen a n d t h e E l e p h a n t :
Four P ercep tio n s o f School
P s y c h o lo g y ."
J o u r n a l o f S chool P s y c h o lo g y , 3:^ (1969)* 1 -2 2 .

----------------- ,

V alett,

E lk in ,

R o b e r t E.
The P r a c t i c e
W i l e y h S o n s , 19f>3.

of School P sy ch o lo g y .

New Y o r k :

W h i t e , M. A. a n d H a r r i s , M. W.
The S c h o o l P s y c h o l o g i s t .
H a r p e r and B r o t h e r s , l ^ L ] .

John

New Y o r k :

W i l l i a m s , D on .
"C o n su ltatio n :
A Broad F l e x i b l e R o l e f o r Gchool
P sy ch o lo g ists."
P s y c h o lo g y i n t h e G c h o o l s , 9:1 (197-9).

APPENDIX A

EIGHT MAJOH AND F I F T Y - F I V E SP EC IF IC ACTIVITIES
OF THE GCHOOL PSYCHOLOGIST

APPENDIX A

EIGHT MAJOR AND F I F T Y - F I V E S P E C I F I C A CT IV ITI ES
OF THE SCHOOL PSYCHOLOGIST

I .

D iagnostic T estin g

and E v a lu a tio n

The s c h o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t m a k e s a d i a g n o s t i c
c h i l d by means o f v a r i o u s m e a s u r e m e n t i n s t r u m e n t s
to determ ine th e reaso n s

fo r the

A.

d ia g n o s e and e v a l u a t e

B.

Types o f pro b lem s t o

c h ild 's

and c o g n i t i v e

study o f a
or techniques

d ifficu lties

1.

In tellec tu al

P.

P e rc e p tu a l-m o to r problem s

3.

L earning d i s a b i l i t i e s

It.

A f f e c t i v e and e m o tio n a l d i s o r d e r s

‘3 .

Doc i n i a n d f a m i l y p r o b l e m s

in s c h o o l.

d ifficu lties

Mean s o f d i a g n o s i s
1.

A d m i n i s t e r and .score i n d i v i d u a l

stan d ard ized te s ts

P.

A d m in ister and s c o re in d i v id u a l
standardized te s ts

p ro jectiv e

3.

D iscuss th e

c h ild 's

It.

O bserve th e

ch ild

3.

S tudy t h e

problem w ith th e

in th e

toucher

classroom or r e a l l i f e

so c ia l case h isto ry

ILL

or non­

of the c h ild

situ atio n

1145
II.

T ea ch er C o n s u l t a t i o n and P sy ch o E d u ca tio n a l P lan n in g f o r I n d iv id u a l
C hildren
The s c h o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t c o n s u l t s w i t h t e a c h e r s
school p e rso n n e l in p la n n in g a c h i l d 's
u n i q u e a nd s p e c i f i c

to th a t

and

s c h o o l program w hich i s

i n d i v i d u a l and w h ich i s b a s e d upon

sound p s y c h o l o g i c a l and e d u c a t i o n a l p r i n c i p l e s .
A.

111.

F unctions
P.1 a n n i n g

of the

school p sy ch o lo g ist

in P sy c h o -E d u c a tio n a l

].

P r e s e n t and i n t e r p r e t t h e n u m e ric a l
ed u catio n al personnel

scores

of te s ts

to

P.

P r e s e n t and i n t e r p r e t t h e s p e c i f i c d i a g n o s e s o f
c h i l d r e n 's problem s t o e d u c a tio n a l p e rs o n n e l

1.

D eterm ine th e e l i g i b i l i t y o f c h i l d r e n f o r one o f th e
typer, o f a v a i l a b l e s p e c i a l e d u c a t i o n p rogram s

It.

Make s u g g e s t i o n s t o e d u c a t i o n a l p e r s o n n e l
management a n d / o r B e h a v io r M o d i f i c a t i o n
w ith a d ju s tm e n t problem s

5.

P ro sc rib e s p e c if ic cu rricu lu m m a te r ia ls to rem ediate
t h e e d u c a t i o n a l and l e a r n i n g p r o b le m s o f c h i l d r e n

f>.

P r e s c r i b e th e u se o f te c h n iq u e s t o re m e d ia te problem s
o f v i s u a l - m o to r c o o r d i n a t io n in c h i l d r e n

for b ehavior
of ch ild ren

P sychotherapy a n d /o r C ounseling
wi t h C h i l d r e n
The s c h o o l
th e ch ild

p sy ch o lo g ist g iv es

i n an a t t e m p t t o

d irect

supp o rtiv e help

im prove o r change t h e

b e h a v i o r so he can a d a p t h i m s e l f more r e a d i l y

to

to

c h ild 's
a school, l e a r n ­

ing en v iro n m en t.
A.

T echniques o f c h i l d
1.

therapy

in terv en tio n

Conduct i n d i v i d u a l o r group s e s s io n s w ith c h ild r e n
t h e r a p e u t i c e f f o r t t o b r i n g about, e m o t i o n a l ,
u t t i t u d i n a l , a n d /o r b e h a v io ra l change

in

a

1)46

IV.

2.

Engage In e d u c a t i o n a l a n d / o r v o c a t i o n a l c o u n s e li n g w ith
stu d en ts

3.

Remediate learning problems by directly tutoring children

U.

Engage directly with children in recreational therapy

Parent C o n su ltatio n
The s c h o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t h e l p s t h e p a r e n t s u n d e r s t a n d
t h e p s y c h o l o g i c a l and e d u c a t i o n a l
A.

V.

Metho d: ; o f c a r r y i n g

needs of th e ir c h ild re n .

out parent co n su ltatio n

1.

Make home v i s i t a t i o n s

to

2.

Make p r e s e n t a t i o n s t o

P .T .A .

3.

Include p a re n ts

I*.

Clive a w r i t t e n

in

c o n s u lt w ith p a re n ts
groups

school P sych o-E ducational planning

p sy ch o lo g ical re p o rt to the p aren ts

C o m m u n it y P e l a t i o n s h i p s
T he s c h o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t w o r k s w i t h i n t h e c o m m u n i t y i n
ed u catio n al

and i n f o r m a t i v e m a n n er and p r o v i d e s a l i a i s o n

betw een t h e

s c h o o l and t h e com m unity r e g a r d i n g p ro g ra m s

an

for

handicapped c h ild r e n .
A.

C o m m u n it y c o n c e r n s
1.

H elp t o d e v e l o p com munity m e n ta l

h e a lth program s

2.

H elp t o d e v e lo p S h e l t e r e d W orkshop prog ram s

3.

H elp t o d e v e lo p r e c r e a t i o n a l a c t i v i t i e s f o r t h e
capped in t h e com munity o u t s i d e o f t h e s c h o o l
envi rom nent

handi­

t*.

Im prove t h e l e v e l o f p u b l i c a w a re n e ss o f t h e e d u c a t i o n a l ,
p s y c h o l o g i c a l , and p h y s i c a l n eed s o f t h e h a n d ic a p p e d

5.

H elp t o d e v e l o p em ploym ent o p p o r t u n i t i e s
hnndi capped

fo r the

1U7

B.

M ethods o f d e v e l o p i n g com munity r e l a t i o n s h i p s
1.

S e r v e on c o m m u n i t y h o a r d s w h i c h a r e c o n c e r n e d w i t h t h e
needs o f th e handicapped

2.

C ooperate w ith s e v e r a l sch o o l d i s t r i c t s t o so lv e a
l a r g e r com m unity-w ide o r c o u n t-w id e e d u c a t i o n a l p ro b le m

3.

Make p r e s e n t a t i o n s t o c i v i c o r g a n i z a t i o n s ,
s e r v i c e c l u b s , and c h u rc h g ro u p s

.

V I.

com munity

C o o p e r a t e w ith and u t i l i z e t h e s e r v i c e s o f t h e v a r i o u s
p s y c h o l o g i c a l and e d u c a t i o n a l a g e n c ie s a v a i l a b l e in
t h e com munity

Gchool C u rric u lu m and Program
C o n su ltatio n
In a v a r i e t y o f ways t h e

school p s y c h o lo g ist provides

re c o m m e n d a tio n s and i n f o r m a t i o n r e g a r d i n g s p e c i a l
cu rricu lu m ,

and program m ing i n t h e sc h o o l

im prove t h e

q u ality

of the

ed u catio n al

d istrict

needs,
in order to

program and b r i n g

about

ed u c a tio n a l change.
A.

Gc hoo l

Program c o n c e rn s

1.

Hecommend n e e d e d c h a n g e s i n t h e p h y s i c a l s t r u c t u r e a n d
equipm ent o f th e school p l a n t o r playground

2.

D esign a l t e r n a t i v e pro g ram s f o r c h i l d r e n s u c h as
r e s o u r c e rooms a n d / o r d i a g n o s t i c l e a r n i n g c e n t e r s

3.

Hecommend n e e d e d c h a n g e s i n t h e
t i o n a l program s

curriculum

Jj .

Hecommend n e e d e d c h a n g e s
e d u c a tio n a l program s

teacher s ta ffin g

5.

D i s s e m i n a t e i n f o r m a t i o n r e g a r d i n g how s o c i o l o g i c a l a n d
econom ic c o n d i t i o n s can a f f e c t c h i l d r e n ' s l e a r n i n g

6.

7.

in th e

Im prove t h e e d u c a t i o n a l o p p o r t u n i t i e s
g ro u p s w ith in th e sch o o l program

o f educa-

of

of e th n ic m in o rity

D e s ig n , s u b m it, and e v a l u a t e p r o p o s a l s f o r e d u c a t i o n a l
p ro g ram s funded by f e d e r a l and s t a t e a g e n c i e s

1h8

B.

M ethods w hich t h e s c h o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t can u t i l i z e
e d u c a tio n a l program recom m endations

t o prom ote

and d i s s e m i n a t e

id eas

and in f o rm a tio n

VT1 .

1.

W rite p o l i t i c a l r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s
ed u catio n al le g is la tio n

2.

Work a s a m e m b er o f a c o m m i t t e e t h a t i s e x p l o r i n g a
p a r t i c u l a r e d u c a tio n a l problem in th e sch o o l d i s t r i c t

3.

C onsult w ith a d m in is tr a t o r s
e d u c a tio n a l program s

!| .

P rovide

5.

A ttend school b o a rd m e e tin g s t o
b o a r d members

in s e r v ic c m eetings

c o n c e rn in g needed

r e g a r d i n g ways t o

im prove

for teachers
p r e s e n t now i d e a s

to

A d m in is tr a tio n o f M pccial
P d u c a tio n Program s
The s c h o o l

p sy ch o lo g ist co o rd in ates

program s, su p erv ises

p erso n n el,

such as t r a n s p o r t a t i o n
A.

A d m in isirativ e
p e r f o mi

and

s>pccial

and makes s p e c i a l

education

arrangem ents

sch ed u lin g .

f u n c t i o n s w hich t h e

school

arrangem ents

p s y c h o l o g i s t may

1.

Make t r a n s p o r t a t i o n

P.

Supervise

3.

P a r t i c i p a t e in r e c r u i t m e n t o f s t a f f
e d u c a t i on p r o g r a m s

for

ii.

Help t o f o r m u l a t e
p o l i ey

administrative

'3.

S u p e r v is e one o f th e s p e c i f i c e d u c a tio n a l program s
w ith in th e t o t a l s p e c i a l e d u c a tio n program

6.

C o o rd in ate a group achievem ent t e s t i n g
g e n e ra l e d u c a t i o n a l program

s p e c ia l education

special

for ex cep tio n al

child ren

personnel

educat. ion

sp ecial

program f o r th e

1U9

VIII.

Research
The s c h o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t b y m e a n s o f v a r i o u s t e c h n i q u e s
seeks to g ath er

in fo rm atio n ,

w hich c o n f r o n t e d u c a t i o n as

answer q u e s tio n s ,
it

a t te m p t s t o meet t h e p s y c h o lo g ic a l

and e d u c a t i o n a l n e e d s o f c h i l d r e n
A.

o r s o lv e problem s

in

a school s e t t i n g .

R esearch T echniques
1.

U se i n f o r m a l i n f o r m a t i o n g a t h e r i n g t e c h n i q u e s s u c h a s
d i s c u s s i o n s o r i n te r vi ew s w i t h t e a c h er s , a d m i n i s t r a ­
tors,

a n d / o r p ar e nt G

2.

Review

and sum m arize p e r t i n e n t p r o f e s s i o n a l l i t e r a t u r e

3.

D esign

and u s e

I*.

D esign

and c a r r y o u t e x p e r i m e n t a l s t u d i e s

surveys

APPENDIX B

QUESTIONNAIRE USED IN THE STUDY

APPENDIX D

QUESTIONNAIRE USED TN THE STUDY

S UR VE Y

THE ROLE OF T11F. SCHOOL PSYCHO LO GI S T IN M IC H I GA N

INSTRUCTIONS

Please take time to read cadi
completely as possible.

Item carefully and respond as

Ignore all numbers in the loft hand column.
be used for data processing.
Please check the appropriate boxes or fill

Please return by February

28,

Those numbers will

in the blnnks provided.

1973

to
Nicholas Fridsma
301 F Erickson Hall
College of Education
Michigan State University
East Lansing, M ic h ig an
A 882 3

Please fill in your name and address below and check here
if you desire the results of this study mailed to you.

NAME
Last

First

Middle Initial

_________ ________________________ _______ ____________________ __
Street

AD DRESS

City

State

150

Zip

15l

GENERAL INFORMATION:

1•

Age

2.

Sex

3.

Type of district

____ 1. Ma le

__1.

(Check)

in whi ch you are employed

(Check one)

Intermediate
Ot he r aettlng

(Specify) _ _ _______________

A.

Total public school student population In the district
e mployed ______________

5.

How many years of experience as a D ir e c t or of Special Education do you
have? ______________

6.

Highest degree earned
(Check one):
___ 3. E d . S . ; ____ A . E d . D . ;

7.

What type of approval do you have as a D irector of Spocinl
from the State Department of Education?
(Check one)

8.

9.

1.

Temporary

2.

Permanent

3.

"Grand fa th er 11

A.

Not approved

1. BS or BA;
5 . Ph. D .

in which you are

____ 2. MS o r MA;

Education

Teach er Certification
A.

16

____ 2. Female

Local

2.
3.

DIRECTORS OF SPECIAL EDUCATION

Type

(Check one)

B.

Level

(Check one)

1.

Provisional_______________________ ____ 1.

Elementary

2.

Permanent

____ 2.

Secondary

3.
.
A.

Life

____ 3.

... Not certified as
a teacher

Both Elementary
and Secondary

____ A.

None of the

above

C.

If you have approval in any arca(B) of special education, please
state the a r e a ( s ) . ______________________________ _____________________

1).

How many years of

teaching experience do you h a v e ? ______________

In your professional educational career have you ever been employed as a
School D iagnostician or School Psychologist?
1.

Yes

2.

No

152
I

GENE RA L INFORMATION:

1.

Age ______________

2.

Sex

3.

Type of district

____ 1. Male

SCHOOL PSYCHOLOGISTS

____ 2. Fem al e

(Check)

In whi ch you are employed

1.

Local

2.

Intermediate

3.

Other setting

(Check one)

(Specify) ____________________

A.

Total public school student p op ulation In the district in which you are
employed _________________

5.

How many years of experience as a School Psychologist do you have? _____

6.

Highest degree earned
(Check one):
3. Ed.S;
A. Ed.D;
5. Ph.D

7.

What typo of approval do you have as a School Diagnostician?

8.

1.

Temporary

2.

Permanent

1.BS or BA;

Type

(Chock one)
1.

B.

Level

(Check one)

Provisional

1.

Elementary

Permanent

2,

Secondary

3.

Life

3.

Both Elementary and

A.

Not certified as a teacher

2

.

A.

9.

10.

11.

?0

Secondary
None of the above

C.

If you have approval In any area(a) of special education,
state the area(s). __ ________

I),

How many yeara of teaching experience do you have?

A cc ording to the Psychologist R egistration Act,
cert If led?
___

'7

(Check one)

Teacher Certification
A.

’5

____ 2. MS or MA;

1.

Consulting Psychologist

2.

Psychologist

3.

Psychological

A.

None of the above

To w h o m are you most

at what

please

level are you

Examiner

immediately responsible?

(Check one only)

1.

Director of Pupil

Personnel

2.

Director of Special

3.

Superintendent

A.

Director or Coordinator of Psychological

5.

Other

Education

Services

( S p e c i f y ) _______________________________________

Where did you receive your graduate training
1.

University

(Specify)

2.

University Department

in School

Psychology?

________________________________
( S p e c i f y ) _______________________________

?•«* ?

153

II

ACTIVITIES O F THE SCHOOL PSYCHOLOGIST

Instruct Iona
The next 55 items be ginning on the following pa ge are specific
activities w hi c h may be performed by School P s y c h o l o g i s t s .

Plea se check

the appropriate box for each activity to specify b ow important y ou perceive
It to be ideally for the School Psychologist to p e r f o r m that activity.
Please check one of the boxes

for each a c t iv i ty a c cording to the following

relative importance scale;
Must P e r f o r m :
The School Psychologist MUST p e r f o r m this activity.
a major and essential

It is

function of the highest priority.

Should P e r f o r m ;
The School
a meaningful,

Psychologist SHOULD perf or m this activity.

significant,

It is

and d e sirable function of medium

priority.
May P e r f o r m ;
The School Psychologist MAY p e rf o r m this a ct ivity

if he wiahca.

It is a minor function of low p riority but it is permisBnble and
acceptable.
Should Not P e r f o r m :
The School Psychologist

SHOULD N OT p erform this activity.

is not a desirable or meaningful

function for the School

It

Psychologist

to perform.
Must Not Perform
The School Psychologist MUST N OT perform this activity.
not an essential

It is

or legitimate function for the School Psychologist

to pe r f o r m .

IHg.3

1514

R e m e m b e r : The basic question you are answering is:
What ideally
Should Be the appropriate activities of the School Psychologist?
('heck one of the boxes on the scale for each activity to specify
how important you perceive it should be for a School Psychologist
in his ideal role to p er form that activity.

CL,

m
1.

help to develop recreational activities for the handicapped
In the community outside of the school environment

1.

Observe the child in the classroom or real life situation
as one of the means of diagnosis and evaluation

1.

Present and interpret
educational personnel

'».

Write political
1egislnt ion

the numerical

m

r i "i ~~ri

scores of tests to
I

representatives concerning needed educational

1

T T 1

1 1'~TT

Recommend needed changes in the teacher staffing of
education programs

i t i ri

6.

Help to develop community mental hea l th programs

7.

Perform research by designing and carrying out experimental
studies

8.

diagnose and evaluate
of children

h.

improve the educational opportunities of ethnic minority
groups wit h i n the school program

I . .1. .1

Coordinate a group achievement testing program for the
general educational program

M i l l

11.

Determine the eligibility of children for one of
of available special educntion programs

i

I,

Improve the level of public awareness of the nccdB of the
hand icapped

II.

Diagnose and evaluate the social and
children

10.

1 *4.

l

i

:i: □

the affective and emotional disorders

1 1 ITT]

the types

i

i

n

family p ro blems of

J_l .-L-U

Include parentB in school psycho-educational planning to
discuss the psychological and educational needs of their
child

m

I1).

Diagnose and evaluate

LLLXl

1(>.

Disseminate information regarding h o w sociological and
economic conditions can affect children's learning

I 1 I-U P

17.

Present and interpret the specific diagnoses of children's
problems to educational personnel

I

18.

T.ngage in educational and/or vocational c ou nseling with
students

I 1 I.-OZ3

l‘>.

(live a w r i t te n psychological report to the parents c o nc e rn ­
ing the psychological and educational needs of their child

i

the learning disabilities of children

I

i

n

I

i

I - U

m

155

T3

o.

u
(A

»0

20.

Engage directly with children in recreational therapy

21.

Supervise special education personnel

22.

Conduct individual or group sesalons with children in a
therapeutic effort to bring about emotional, attltudlnal,
and/or behavioral change

23.

Help to develop sheltered workshop programs in the community

24.

Make prcaentations to civic organizations, community corvicc
clubs, and churcli groups

25.

Perform research by designing and using surveys

26.

Participate in recruitment of staff for special education
programs

27.

Make home visitations to consult with parents regarding the
psychological and educational needs of their child

[-X 1 i
HE
[ TI T
L lL ll

I

O H
[.h i l l ,
LI-1 1

28.

Cooperate with several school districts to solve a larger
community-wide or county-wide educational problem

29.

Serve on community boardH which arc concerned with the needs
of the handicapped

LET

30.

Prescribe the use of techniques to remediate problems of
visual-motor coordination in children

L I. L-L

31.

Make transportation arrangements for exceptional children

32.

Study the social case history of the child as one of the
means of diagnosis and evaluation

33.

69

i/>

Perform researcli by using informal information gathering
techniques such as discussions or interviews with teachers,
administrators, and/or parents

34.

Design alternative programs for exceptional children such
as resource rooms and/or diagnostic learning centers

33.

Recommend needed changes in the physical structure and
equipment of the school plant or playground

r r i .. i

z e e

tZEXH

j

r r z
i z n m

r

c m ...

36.

Remediate learning problems by directly tutoring children

letze

37.

Hecommend needed changes
programs

t :x t t

in the curriculum of education

38.

Diagnose and evaluate the intellectual and cognitive
difficulties of children

39,

Administer and score individual projective or non-standardized
tests as one of the means of diagnosis and evaluation

zi
zi
:::i
zi
]

l e i z e j :.:]

H E ]

156
g
e

o
4
G U
u
o

u

u

CL.

M
3
SC
60

>s

41.

Hake suggestions to educational personnel for behavior
management and/or Behavior M odification of children with
adjustment problems

42.

Consult with administrators regarding ways to improve
educational programs

TTT

4 3.

Cooperate with and utilize the services of the various
psychological and educational agencies available in
the community

T~n

Design, submit, and evaluate proposals for educational
programs funded by federal and state agencies

45.

Administer and score individual standardized tests as
one of the means of diagnosis and evaluation

46.

Diagnose and evaluate the perceptual-motor problems of
children

47.

Make presentations to P.T.A. groups concerning the
general psychological and educational needs of children

48.

Attend school board meetings to present new ideas to
board members

49.

Provide inservico meetings for teachers

50.

Discuss the child's problem with the teacher as one of
the means of diagnosis and evaluation

51.

Work as a member of a committee that 1 b exploring a
particular educational problem in the school district

52.

Perform research by reviewing and summarizing pertinent
professional literature
Help to formulate special education administrative policy

54.

Prescribe specific curriculum materials to remediate
the educational and learning problems of children

55.

Help to develop employment opportunities
capped in the community

for the handi­

3
O

jC
C /1

Organize and supervise one of the specific educational
programs within the total special education program

44.

ss

-o 01
rH cu
3

40.

53.

75

e0

u-t

e

ij
o
w U
01 j
a. Ij
C0)
L,
o

m

m

rrr
r rr
rrr
T'T FT

nr
rr
m:i
rr
rr

IfllO

P»g* 6

157

III

RELATIVE IMPORTANCE OF ACTIVITIES
Please rank the following activities according to their Importance to the
School Psychologist in hia Present Role
to their importance in his Ideal Role

(as it is n o w )

in column 1 and according

(as it should b e )

in column 2.

Please

rank your perceptions of their relative importance to School Psychologists

in

EACH of the eight activities by giving a (1) to the activity which is MOST
important
a (3), a

to perform,
(A), etc.,

activity to perform.
In his Present

a (2 ) to the activity next moBt

etc., until

finally giving an

Please do this two t i m e s , once

Role in column 1

important

to perforin, then

(8 ) to the least important
for the relative importance

and again for the relative importance

in his

Ideal Role in column 2.

10

IV

Present Role

Ideal Role

1.

Psychotherapy and/or counseling w i t h children

______________

____________

2.

Teacher consultation and psycho-educational
planning for individual children

______________

____________

3.

Diagnostic

_________

A.

Research

______________

____________

5.

Community relationships_______________________________ ______________

____________

6.

School

______________

____________

7.

Parent consultation__________________________________________________

____________

8.

A dministration of Special

____________

testing and evaluation

curriculum and p ro gram c onsultation

Education Programs

______________

_________________

RELATIVE TIME A LL OTMENT OF ACTIVITIES
Please specify the percentage of professional time w h i c h you perceive as
necessary for the School Psychologist
activities

<9

to spend

in each of the following

in his ideal r o l e .

1.

Psychotherapy and/or counseling w it h children

________

2.

Teacher consultation and p sycho-educational planning for
individual children

________

3.

Diagnostic testing and ev aluation

________

A.

R es earch

X

5.

Community relationships

2

6.

School

X

7.

Parent consultation

8.

Administration of Special Education Programs

curriculum and p ro gram c onsultation

^
,
________ *

100 %

r+m 7

15^

ADEQUACY OF PREPARATION FDR ACTIVITIES

V

To what extent are School
activities in the ideal

Psychologists prepared

to perform the following

role of the School Psychologist as you perceive

it?

Please

rank your perceptions of the relative adequacy of preparation in each of the
following eight activities by giving a (1) to the activity in which the School
Psychologist

is most adequately prepared, a (2) to the activity in w hi ch he is

next most adequately prepared,

then a (3), a (4), etc., etc., until finally

giving an (8 ) to the activity in which he is least adequately prepared.
60

VI

____ 1.

Psychotherapy and/or counseling wi th children

2.

Teacher consultation and psycho-educatlonal planning for individual
children

3.

Diagnostic testing and evaluation

U,

Research

5.

Community relationships

6.

School curriculum and program consultation

7.

Parent

8.

Administration of Special Educntlon Programs

consultation

CHILDREN RECE1V1NR PROFESSIONAL PSYCHOLOGICAL SERVICES
FROM THE SCHOOL PSYCHOLOGIST
According to your perceptions please indicate to what extent each of the
rhildron listed be lo w should receive professional
the School
1 - Must

Psycho 1ogist

in his ideal

receive s e r v i c e ;

role.

_____ 2 .

Gifted
Visually handicapped

4.

Deaf and hard of hearing

6.
____ 7,
8.

____ 9.

?/B0

child

3.

__ __ 5.

Mentally retarded
Orthopedicully handicapped
Multiply handicapped
Emotionally disturbed
Learning disabled

3 - May receive s e r v i c e ;

5 - Must Not receive s er v ic e .

appropriate code number on the line next
Normal

The following code should be used:

2 - Should receive s e r v i c e ;

U - Should Not receive s e r v i c e ;

1.

psychological services from

Place the

to each of the children listed.

159

VII

SETTINGS FOR SCHOOL PSYCHOLOGICAL ACTIVITIES
1.

2.

In hla Ideal role a School Psychologist should professionally service a
student population of no more than _________ (Check one)

Programs

1.

2000

2.

2500

3.

3000

4.

4000

S.

5000

wh i c h should be served by the School Psychologist

Please Indicate to what extent each of
the programs
served by the School Psychologist In his Ideal role
The following code should be used:
1 - Must S e r v e ;
3 - May S e r v e ; U - Should Not S e r v e ; 5 - M us t not
appropriate code number on the line next to each of
1.

Regular school programs

2.

Special

3.

Pro-school

4.

Summer school programs

5.

3.

education schools

Residential

7.

Institutional programs

To whom should School
one only)

___ 2.
3.

or facilities serving day students

school programs

Psychologists be most

immediately responsible?

(Cherk

Director of Pupil Personnel
Director of Special

Education

Superintendent

A.

Director or C oo rdinator of Psychological

5.

Other

Services

(Specify) ________________ _____________________

PROFESSIONAL STATUS OF SCHOOL PSYCHOLOGISTS
1.

19

Special

in the regular school

programs

6.

1.

VIH

Education programs housed

listed b el o w should be
as you perceive It.
2 - Should S e r v e ;
S e r v e . Place the
the programs listed.

A School Psychologist should h av e a m i n i mu m of_________ years of
experience.
(Check one)
1.

No

2.

1 - 2

years

3.

3 - 4

years

J *.

teaching

5 or more years
P»9* 9

160

VIII

(cont.)

2.

30
3.

A School Psychologist should h av e a t ea ching certificate.
1.

Strongly agree

2.

A gr e e

3.

D is ag r e e

4.

Strongly d isagree

A School Psychologist should b e legally certified or licensed at what level?
(Check one)
1.

C on sulting Psychologist

2.

Psychologist

3.

Psychological Examiner

_4.

School Psychologist

_5.

Other

6.
4.

5.

6.

(Check one)

(Specify) ____

None of the above

A School Psychologist should b e hold acco u n ta bl e a cc ording to specified
behavioral objectives.
(Check one)
1.

Strongly agree

2.

Agree

3.

D is ag r e e

4.

Strongly disagree

A School Psychologist should
(Chock one)
1.

B.A.

or B. S.

2.

H.A.

or M. S.

3.

Ed.

S

4.

Ed.

D

5.

Ph.

D

ideally have at least a_________ degree.

School Psychologists should utilize the assistance of trained poraprofessiona]
aides w he n appropriate in the a d ministration of psychological tests.
(Check
one)
1.

Strongly agree

2.

A gr e e

3.

Disagree

4.

Strongly disagree

Pafi 10

l6l
VIII

(cont.)
7.

Professional Affiliations for School Psychologists
Education may omit this question.)

(Directors of Special

Please check the following organizations according to their degree of
importance to the School Psychologist.
Please use the following code:
1 - Huat B e l o n g ; 2 - Should B e l o n g ; 3 - M ay B e l o n g ; A - Should Not B e l o n g ;
5 - Must Not Belong

8.

9.

37
IX

1.

Council

2.

National Education Association

(NEA)

3.

Michigan Education Association

(MEA)

A.

Local Education Association

5.

Michi ga n A ss ociation of School Psychologists

6.

Michigan Psychological Association

7.

National A ss ociation of School Psychologists

8.

Division 16 (School Psychology Division)
Psychological Association (APA)

for Exceptional C h il d re n

(CEC)

(MASP)

(NASP)

of American

A School Psychologist should be free to engage in "private practice."
(Check one)
1.

Strongly agree

2.

Agree

3.

Disagree

A.

Strongly disagree

In order for a School Psychologist to improve professionally and keep
"up-to-date" he should do the following:
Please check each one according to
the following code:
1 - Must D o ; 2 - Should D o ; 3 - May D o , A - Should
Not D o ; 3 - Must Not Do
1.

Visit school

2.

Enroll

3.

Attend national,

____A.

programs in other school

districts

In university courses

Read professional

state,

regional,

and local

conferences

Journals

IMPROVEMENT OK COMPETENCIES
In what professional areas do you perceive that School Psychologists need to
improve skills and competencies in view of changes which are taking place in their
rol e?

3/80

—

APPENDIX C

COVER LETTER E X P L A I N I N G THE Q U E ST I O NN AI R E

APPENDIX C

COVER LETTER E X P L A I N I N G THE Q UE S TI ONNAI RE

M l( H K . A N

I < >1 I I 1 , 1

< >1

I In

S T ATI -

UMVIRM1Y

1 4 I

111

............

um

I I I 'II N I M il

n i l

i n

I I M

I IH I M

February 9,

II I N

- I M l k U

IN

1141 I

1973

Dear C olleague:
A t t a c h e d in a q u e s t i o n n a i r e f o r c o m p l e t i o n by a l l School P s y c h o l o g l a t e
and D i r e c t o r s of Sp ec ia l e d u c a t i o n in t h e S t a t e o f Michigan,
The r o l e o f t h e School P s y c h o l o g i s t i n M i c h i g a n i s u n d e r g o i n g r a p i d
t r a n s f o r m a t i o n due to th e e x p a n s i o n of Sp ec ia l e d u c a t i o n prog ra ms.
Mandatory S p e c i a l E d u c a t i o n l e g i s l a t i o n , i n c r e a s e d demands f o r s e r v i c e ,
and the r e c o g n i t i o n o f t h e need t o b r o a d e n t h e s c o p e o f scho ol p s y c h o ­
l o g i c a l s e r v i c e s a s e v i d e n c e d by t h e p a s s a g e o f Ho u s e D i l l 5360 w h i c h
b e c a m e M i c h i g a n P u b l i c haw 3 5 3 o n . J a n u a r y 9 , 1 9 7 3 .
The p u r p o s e of t h i n
s t u d y Is t o I d e n t i f y u h a t a c t i v i t i e s t h e School P s y c h o l o g i s t s h o u l d
p e r f o r m and t o d e t e r m i n e t h e r e l a t i v e I m p o r t a n c e o f t h e s e a c t i v i t i e s
in the I d e a l r o l e of t h e School P s y c h o l o g i s t i n M i c h i g a n as p e r c e i v e d
by b o t h S c h o o l P s y c h o ] o g l u t s a nd D i r e c t o r s o f S p e c i a l e d u c a t i o n .
T his survey has been p r e p a r e d w i t h t h e guidance and su p p o r t of Dr. John
B r a c e l e t , a n d I s b e i n g s u p p o r t e d a n d e n d o r s e d by t h e M i c h i g a n A s s o c i a t i o n
of School P s y c h o l o g i s t s .
Your p e r c e p t i o n s w i l l p r o v i d e I n s i g h t i n t o t h e new a n d d e v e l o p i n g r o l e
of the School P s y c h o l o g i s t .
The i n f o r m a t i o n g a i n e d w i l l be u s e ! t o
f u r t h e r d e v e l o p and d e f i n e t h e f u n c t i o n s of t h e School P s y c h o l o g i s t i n
M i c hi g an , d e v e l o p a p p r o p r i a t e I n s e r v i c e t r a i n i n g f o r School P s y c h o l o ­
g i s t s , and h e l p u n i v e r s i t i e s a s s e s s t h e n e e d s of t h e i r s c h o o l p s y c h o l o g y
tr a in i n g programs.
The q u e s t i o n n a i r e I s s e l f - e x p l a n a t o r y and w i l l t a k e a p p r o x i m a t e l y t h i r t y
minutes to complete.
All answers a r e c om plete ly c o n f i d e n t i a l so p l e a s e
f e e l f r e e t o e x p r e s s your f r a n k o p i n i o n s and t r u e f e e l i n g s .
Please f i ll
t i l l s o u t a s s o o n a s p o s s i b l e 1, a n d r e t u r n i t i n t h e e n c l o s e d e n v e l o p e by
F e b r u a r y 78.
T h e r e s u l t s o f t h i s s u r v e y w i l l b e ma d e a v a i l a b l e t o y o u
at a la t e r d a te .
Your c o o p e r a t i o n and s u p p o r t
in advance.

is

greatly

appreciated

a n d we t h a n k y o u

Cordially,

N i c h o l a s B. F r i d s m a
Graduate A ssistan t
Michigan S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y

Dr. C h a r l e s Henley, P r o f e s s o r
Department of Special Edu catio n
Michigan S t a t e U n iv e r s ity

K n c 1o a u r e s

162

APPENDIX D

FOLLOW-UP LETTER FOR HOH-REGPOHDENTS

APPENDIX D

FOLLOW-UP LETTER FOR NON-RESPONDENTS

MICHIGAN

S I A 1 I-

L S I VI-K M I Y

h m

i

• mi n u . i s

tit-

<01 pI <.p op line ^ i kin ■ni r*fi t mi m <>p h i mi n i a p i i amp <n <im i th < a i u «n ■i h k k h a pi m i
Ma r c h I , 19 7 3

Dear C o l l e a g u e :
I I 1 pi a p l e a s u r e t o r e p o r t t h a t t h e r e t u r n t o d a t e o f t h e
q u e s t i o n n a i r e "The Hole of t he School Psychol orI b I i n M i c h i g a n "
has been e n c o u r a g i n g .
H o w e v e r , we a r e t r y i n g t o o b t a i n a 1007.
r e t u r n In o r d e r t o g a i n t h e c o m p l e t e p i c t u r e o f t h e r o l e t h a t
Is n ecessary,
U o n ' t you t a k e a few m i n u t e s t o c o m p l e t e and r e t u r n t h e q u e s ­
t i o n n a i r e w h i ch you r e c e i v e d two we eks ago.
The i n f o r m a t i o n
you p r o v i d e In c r u c i a l t o t h e s t u d y , a nd y o u r c o o p e r a t i o n w i l l
be g r e a t l y a p p r e c i a t e d ,
I h o n k y o u v e r y mu c h .
S 1n c e r c 1y ,

N i c h o l a s II. I ' r i d s m a
('•raduatc A s s i s t a n t
NRK:kmk

1 f,3

ArPEHDTX E

C H I- S Q U A R E T E S T OF HOMOGENEITY FOR F I F T Y - F I V E
SPECIFIC

ACTIVITIES

APPENDIX E

CHI SQUARE T E S T OF HOMOGENEITY FOR F I F T Y - F I V E
S PE C IF IC A CTIVITIES

N ( S c h o o l P s y c h o l o g i s t s ) = 317
N ( D i r e c t o r s o f S p e c i a l E d u c a t i o n ) = 97
Numbers g i v e n a r e p e r c e n t a g e o f r e s p o n d e n t s

Must
Perform

Should
Perform

May
Perform

Should
Hot
Perform

Must
Hot
Perform

H elp to d e v e lo p r e c r e a t i o n a l a c t i v i t i e s f o r t h e h a n d ic a p p e d in t h e
com munity o u t s i d e o f t h e s c h o o l e n v i r o n m e n t
P sy cho lo g ists
D irecto rs

0
0

3-79
Jt.12

6 U .67

58.76

23.03
26.00

P sy ch o lo g ists:
Mean - 2 . 6 U:
S tandard D ev iatio n D irecto rs:
Mean - 2 . 5 7 ;
S tandard D ev iatio n C hi-S quare:
l.lM
d.f.: 3
Not s i g n i f i c a n t

O bserve th e c h i l d in t h e c la ss ro o m o r r e a l
t h e means o f d i a g n o s i s and e v a l u a t i o n
P sy ch o lo g ists
D irectors

h 5 - *43
57-73

P s y c h o l o g i s t s : Mean D irecto rs:
Mean C hi-S quare:
Not

)j 0 . 5 8
3 0 . 1 Ji

life

5.99
It. 1 2

8.52
10.31

.69

.73

situ a tio n

as one o f

0
0

0
0

h .39 *
S tandard D e v iatio n ^.5^1
S tandard D ev iatio n l*,5^9
d.f.: 2
sig n ifican t

.60
.58

165

Must
Perform

3.

Should
Perform

May
Perform

Should
Hot
Perform

P r e s e n t and i n t e r p r e t t h e n u m e ric a l s c o r e s o f t e s t s
personnel
P sy ch o lo g ists
D irecto rs

50.68
71.13

25-2)*
19.59

13.25
8.25

to

W rite p o l i t i c a l
le g isla tio n
P sy ch o lo g ists
D irectors

ed u catio n al

2*52
1.03

P sy ch o lo g ists:
Mean - 1**39;
S tandard D ev iatio n
D irecto rs:
Mean - l*. 6 l ;
S tandard D ev iatio n
C hi-Square:
5.1*69
d . f . : I*
Not S i g n i f i c a n t

h.

Must
Hot
Perform

.32
0

- .03
- .69

r e p r e s e n ta tiv e s concerning needed e d u c a tio n a l

9-70
1.03

1*0.69
16.1*9

1*6.69
7 !* . 2 3

2.21
5.15

.63

3.09

P sychologists:
Mean - 3 . 5 7 ;
S ta n d a rd D e v ia tio n - .72
D irecto rs:
Mean - 3 . 0 7 ; S t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n - . 6 2
C hi-S quare:
36.321*
d.f.:
1*
S i g n i f i c a n t a t .05

Hecommcnd n e e d e d c h a n g e s
program s
P sy ch o lo g ists
D irecto rs

U. 7 3
2.06

in

th e teach er s ta f f in g

36.20
25.77

1*3-05
1*2.27

of educatio n al

11.99
22.60

3.15
7.22

P sy ch o lo g ists:
Mean - 3 . 2 7 ;
S ta n d a r d D e v i a t i o n - .05
D irecto rs:
Mean - 2 . 9 3 ;
S ta n d a rd D e v ia tio n - .93
C hi-Square:
12.600
d.f.:
1*
S i g n i f i c a n t a t .05
He l p t o d e v e l o p com munity m e n t a l h e a l t h
P sy cho lo g ists
D irectors

5.29

3.09

33.12
36.00

program s
56.15
55-67

*4.10
3.09

P sychologists:
Mean - 3.1*0;
S ta n d a rd D e v ia tio n - .69
D irecto rs:
Mean - 3 . 3 5 ;
S ta n d a rd D e v ia tio n - .69
C hi-S quare:
3.ll*l
d.f.:
1*
Not s i g n i f i c a n t

.63
2.06

166

Must
Perform

7.

Should
Perform

Perform re s e a rc h by d esig n in g
stu d i es
P sy ch o lo g ists
D irecto rs

5-36
3.09

May
Perform

and c a rry in g

27-76
29-90

Should
Hot
Perform

out experim ental

62-78
61.86

k.10
I t . 12

P s y c h o ] o g i s t s : Mean - 3 - 3 ^ 1
S tandard D ev iatio n
D irecto rs:
Mean - 3 - 3 0 ;
S tandard D e v ia tio n
C hi-S q uare:
lt.190
d.f.:
It
N ot s i g n i f i c a n t

8.

D i a g n o s e and e v a l u a t e t h e a f f e c t i v e
ch ild ren
P sy ch o lo g ists
D irectors

>i9. 8 h
56.70

-

ll.O lt
]ltJt3

Improve t h e e d u c a t i o n a l o p p o r t u n i t i e s
w ith in th e school program
P sy ch o lo g ists
D irecto rs

l.lt. 20
6.19

36.28
23.71

C o o rd in ate a group achievem ent t e s t i n g
e d u c a tio n a l program
P sy ch o lo gists
D irecto rs

2.21
3.09

11.99
9 .28

.65

of

.95
0

- .83
- . Bl

of e th n ic m in o rity groups

)tl.61t
56.70

6 .9^
12.37

P sy ch o lo gists:
Mean 3.5 6 ;
S tandard D ev iatio n
D irecto rs:
Mean - 3 . 2 2 ;
S tandard D ev iatio n
C hi-S quare:
13.790
d.f.:
>t
S i g n i f i c a n t a t .05
10.

.65

2.21
2.06

P sy ch o lo g ists:
Mean - 1*.32:
S tandard D ev iatio n
D irecto rs :
Mean - I t. 3 8 ;
S tandard D ev iatio n
C hi-S quare:
I4 . I 6 8
d . f . : It
H ot s i g n i f i c a n t

9.

0
1.03

and e m o t i o n a l d i s o r d e r s

35-96
26.80

Must
Hot
Perform

program

5>*.26
1i 8 J i 5

.95
1-03

- .85
- .78

for the general

2 7 . hh

36.08

P sychologists:
Mean - 2 . 8 l ;
S tandard D e v ia tio n
D irecto rs:
Mean - 2 . 7 3 ;
S tandard D e v ia tio n
C hi-S quare:
3.270
d.f.:
It
H ot s i g n i f i c a n t

- .78
- .80

It. 10
3.09

167

Must
Perform

11.

Should
Perform

D eterm ine th e e l i g i b i l i t y o f c h i l d r e n
a v a i l a b l e s p e c ia l e d u c a tio n program s
P sy cho lo g ists
D irectors

B 3.91
72.16

13.25
19*59

May
Perform

Should
Not
Perform

f o r one o f th e

2.21
6.19

12.

Improve t h e
handicapped

le v e l of p u b lic

P sy ch o lo g ists
D irectors

19.2k

lk.k3

aw areness o f th e

kk. kfl
1*5.36

3k. 70
38.1k

D iagnose and e v a l u a t e t h e
P sych o lo g ists
D irectors

20.19
lk.k3

- .51
- .7k

1.26
2.0 6

.32

0

- .76
- .73

s o c i a l and f a m ily p ro b lem s o f c h i l d r e n
3 8 . k9
27.8k

31.86
37.31

7.2 6
20.62

P sy ch o lo g ists:
Mean - 3 . 6 7 ;
S tandard D ev iation
D irecto rs :
Mean - 3 . 3 6 ; S t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n
C hi-S quare:
19.178
d.f.:
k
S i g n i f i c a n t a t .05

Ik.

.32
1.03

needs o f th e

P sy ch o lo gists:
Mean
- 3.8 1 ; S tandard D ev iatio n
D irecto rs:
Mean
- 3 .7 2 ; S tandard D ev iatio n
C hi-S quare:
l.S k k
d.f. : k
Hot s i g n i f i c a n t

13.

types of

.32
1.03

P sych o lo g ists:
Mean - k . 8 0 ;
S tandard D ev iatio n
D irecto rs:
Mean - k . 6 l ;
S tandard D ev iatio n
C hi-Square : 8 .6 0 k
d.f.:
k
Hot s i g n i f i c a n t

Must
Hot
Perform

-

2.21
0
.95
.97

Include p a re n ts in school p sy c h o -e d u c a tio n a l p la n n in g t o d is c u s s
t h e p s y c h o lo g ic a l and e d u c a t i o n a l needs o f t h e i r c h i l d
P sy ch o lo g ists
D irecto rs

62.78
69.07

30.28
22.68

6 ,9 k

7.22

0
1.03

P sy ch o lo gists:
Mean
- k .56 ; S tandard D ev iatio n
D irecto rs:
Mean
- k. 60; S tandard D ev iatio n
C hi-S quare:
5 .2 k l
d.f.:
3
Not S i g n i f i c a n t

- .62
- .67

0
0

168

Must
Perform

15.

Should
Perform

D ia g n o s e and e v a l u a t e t h e l e a r n i n g
P sy ch o lo g ists
D irecto rs

7 f* . 1 3
59-79

21-77
28.87

Should
Not
Perform

May
Perform

d isab ilities

Must
Not
Perform

of ch ild ren

3.79
10.31

-32
1.0 3

0
0

P sy ch o lo g ists:
D irecto rs:

Mean - 14.70;
S t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n - .55
Mean - U. UT ;
S ta n d a rd D e v ia tio n - .72
C hi-S quare:
10,1*91
d.f.:
3
S i g n i f i c a n t a t .05

16.

D i s s e m i n a t e i n f o r m a t i o n r e g a r d i n g how s o c i o l o g i c a l a n d e c o n o m i c
c o n d i t i o n s can a f f e c t c h i l d r e n ' s l e a r n i n g
P sy ch o lo gists
D irecto rs

15.1*6
10.31

3l*-38
28,87

M4 .I 48
55-67

1*.73
1*.12

P sy ch o lo g ists:
Mean - 3 * 5 9 ; S t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n
D irecto rs:
Mean - 3.1*3; S t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n
C hi-S quare:
1*. 1 0 5
d.f.:
1*
Not s i g n i f i c a n t

17-

P r e s e n t and i n t e r p r e t t h e
to ed u catio n al p erso n n el

P sy ch o lo g ists
D irectors

8 5 . 1*9
80.1*1

P sy ch o lo g ists:
Mean D irecto rs:
Mean C hi-S quare:
Not

18.

Engage

in

ed u catio n al

P s y c h o l o g y 43t n
D irecto rs

7 .89
h.12

sp ec ific

d iag n o ses

12.62

1.58

15-1*6

2.06

I*.8 3 ;

S tan d ard
S tan d ard
3.909
d.f.:
sig n ifican t
I *. ? !* ;

an d /o r

v o ca tio n a l

30.60
17.53

*95
1.03

- . 8 I4
- .78

of c h ild re n 's

.32
2.0 6
D ev iatio n
D e v ia tio n

0

0

- .1*1*
- .60

3

co u n selin g

1*8.90
5 3 .6l

problem s

w ith

stu d en ts

9-15
22.68

P sy ch o lo g ists:
Mean - 3 . 3 0 ;
S tan d ard D ev ia tio n
D irecto rs:
Mean - 2 . 9 9 ;
S tan d ard D e v ia tio n
C hi-S quar6:
17-951
d.f.:
1*
S i g n i f i c a n t a t .05

- .87
- .81

3.1*7
2.06

169

Must
Perform

19.

Should
Perform

May
Perform

Should
Not
Perform

Must
Not
Perform

(l i v e a w r i t t e n p s y c h o l o g i c a l r e p o r t t o t h e p a r e n t s c o n c e r n i n g t h e
p s y c h o l o g i c a l and e d u c a t i o n a l n e e d s o f t h e i r c h i l d
rsy ch o lo g ists
D irecto rs

6,31
18.56

lh .8 3
19-59

52.68

36.08

17.35
1 5 . >*6

8 .83
10.31

P sych o lo gists:
Mean - 2 . 9 2 ;
S ta n d a rd D e v i a t i o n - .96
D irecto rs:
Mean - 3 . 2 1 ; S t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n - 1 . 2 2
C hi-S quare:
17.721
d.f.:
It
S i g n i f i c a n t a t .05

20.

Engage d i r e c t l y w i t h
P sy ch o lo g ists
D irecto rs

ch ild ren

.32
0

in r e c r e a tio n a l th erap y

5-05
2.06

60.88
5 3.6 l

29.65
38.1^4

P sy ch o lo g ists:
Moan - 2 . 6 8 ;
S tandard D ev iatio n
D irecto rs:
Mean - 2 . 5 2 ;
S tandard D e v ia tio n
C h i - S q u a r e : 1»,889
d.f.:
>t
Not s i g n i f i c a n t

21.

S upervise

*4.10
6,19
- .65
- .65

sp ecial ed u catio n p ersonnel

P sy ch o lo g ists
D irecto rs

1.58
0

10.73
3.09

>4 2 . 2 7
31.96

3>+ - 7 0
lt l.2>t

10.73
23.71

P sy ch o lo gists:
Mean
- 2 . 5 8 ; S tan d a rd D e v ia tio n - .88
D irecto rs:
Mean
- 2, l i t ; S t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n - .82
C hi"S quare:
18.326
d . f . : It
S i g n i f i c a n t a t .05

Conduct in d iv id u a l o r group s e s s i o n s w ith c h i l d r e n in a t h e r a p e u t i c
e f f o r t to b rin g about em otional, a t t i t u d i n a l , an d /o r behavior
change
P sy ch o lo g ists
D irecto rs

6.62
3.09

32,>t9
23.71

>4 8 . 2 6
1*6.39

P sy ch o lo gists:
Mean
- 3 .31; S tandard
D irecto rs:
Mean
- 2 ,9 6 ; S tandard
C hi-S quare:
13.1*82
d.f.:
S i g n i f i c a n t a t .05

10.09
19.59
D e v i a t i o n - .Bit
D e v i a t i o n - .92
It

2.52
7.2 2

170

Must
Perform

23-

Should
Perform

May
Perform

H elp t o d e v e lo p s h e l t e r e d w orkshop p ro g ram s in t h e
P sy ch o lo g ists
D irectors

1.89
0

10.09
9-28

6 9 . h0
70.10

P sy ch o lo g ists:
Mean - 2 . 9 1 ;
S tandard
D irecto rs:
Mean - 2 . 8 6 ; S t a n d a r d
C hi-S quare:
2.758
d.f.:
Not s i g n i f i c a n t

2h.

Make p r e s e n t a t i o n s t o c i v i c
c l u b s , and c h u r c h g r o u p s
P sy ch o lo g ists
D irecto rs

5 .05
6.19

P sych o lo g ists:
Mean D irecto rs:
Mean C hi-S quare:
Hot

25.

Should
Not
Perform

o rg an izatio n s,

3>* - 0T
39* 18

P sy ch o lo gists
D irectors

h.10
h.12

com munity

l h .20
17-53

18.30
2h.7h

3.15
0

P articip ate

in re c ru itm e n t of s t a f f

70.35
6 8 . Oh

P sy ch o lo g ists
D irectors

h .10
0

1 0 .87
9-28

for

0

0
- .6h
- ,6l

surveys
6 .9 h
2 .0 6

P sychologists:
Mean - 3 - 1 9 ;
S tandard D eviation
D irecto rs :
Mean - 3 . 2 9 ;
S tandard D ev iatio n
C hi-S quare:
5*h51
d.f.: h
Not s i g n i f i c a n t
26,

.70
.61

com munity s e r v i c e

57-73
5h.6h

and u s in g

h .h 2
3.09

D eviation D eviation h

3.hi;
S tandard D ev iatio n
3 .5 2 ; S tandard D ev iatio n
3.9 lh
d.f.:
3
sig n ifican t

P e r f o r m r e s e a r c h by d e s i g n i n g

Must
Not
Perform

.32
1.0 3

- .63
- .63

s p e c ia l e d u c a tio n program s

55.21
5h.6h

I 6 J 1O
26 .8 0

rsy ch o lo g ists:
Mean - 3 . 0 3 ;
S tan d ard D eviation
D irecto rs:
Mean - 2 . 6 h ;
S tandard D ev iatio n
C hi-S quare:
16.201
d.f. : h
S i g n i f i c a n t a t .05

- .8h
- .78

h.h2
0.2 8

171

T-Iust
Perform

27-

Should
Perform

Hay
Perform

Should
Hot
Perform

Make home v i s i t a t i o n s t o c o n s u l t w i t h p a r e n t s r e g a r d i n g t h e p s y ­
c h o l o g i c a l and e d u c a t i o n a l n e e d s o f t h e i r c h i l d
P sych o lo g ists
Pi r e c t o r s

23.3^
25.77

l a . 6*4
.33

31*55
3-71

3.W
6.19

0
0

P s y c h o l o g i s t s : Me an - 3 . 8 5 ;
S tandard D ev iation D irectors:
Mean 3-90; S tan d ard D ev iatio n C h i- S q u a r e : 3.179
d.f. : 3
N ot s i g n i f i c a n t

8.

Must
Hot
Perform

.82
.86

C o o p e r a t e w i t h s e v e r a l s c h o o l d i s t r i c t s t o s o l v e a l a r g e r commun­
i t y wide o r c o u n t y - w i d e e d u c a t i o n a l p r o b le m
P sy ch o lo g ists
D irectors

13.88
9-28

36.28
28.87

146. 69
50.52

2.52
9.28

.63
2,06

P sy ch o lo gists:
Mean 3 .6 0 ; S ta n d a r d D e v ia tio n - .78
D irecto rs:
Mean 3 . 3 *4 ; S t a n d n r d D e v i a t i o n - . 8 5
C hi-S quare:
1 2 .*465
d.f.:
•)
S i g n i f i c a n t a t .05

29.

S e r v e on c o m m u n i t y b o a r d s w h i c h a r e c o n c e r n e d w i t h t h e n e e d o o f
th e handicapped
P sych o lo g ists
D irectors

6.31
0

>42 . 2 7

35.05

>4 9 . 8)1
63.92

1.58
1.03

P sy ch o lo g ists:
Mean
- 3.53; S tan d ard D eviation
D irectors:
Mean
- 3 . 3 *4 ; S t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n
C hi-S quare:
9-996
d.f.:
3
S i g n i f i c a n t a t .05

30.

0
0

- . 6)4
- .50

P r e s c r i b e th e u s e o f te c h n iq u e s t o r e m e d ia te problem s o f v i s u a l m otor c o o r d in a tio n in c h i ld r e n
P sy ch o lo gists
D irecto rs

31.23
21.65

I4 7 .OO
><6.39

19.87
26.80

1.89

5.15

F s y c h o l o g i s t s : Mean - >4 . 0 8 ;
S tan dard D eviation
D irecto rs:
Mean - 3 . 8 5 ;
S tandard D eviation
C hi-S quare:
6.992
d.f.:
3
Hot s i g n i f i c a n t

- .76
- ,82

0
0

172

Must
Perform

31.

Make t r a n s p o r t a t i o n
P sy ch o lo g ists
D irectors

Should
Perform

arrangem ents

.32

57• 1
)j 8 J * 5

16.72
18.56

o f the

3 !<. 38
3 ^.02

ch ild

7.89
1^J4 3

- .77
- .73

.32
1.03

0
2.06
- .65
- .89

P e r f o r m r e s e a r c h by u s i n g i n f o r m a l i n f o r m a t i o n g a t h e r i n g t e c h n i q u e s
such as d is c u s s io n s o r in te r v ie w s w ith te a c h e r o , a d m i n i s t r a t o r s ,
a n d /o r parents
P sy ch o lo g ists
D irecto rs

9.^6
0.25

P s y c h o l o g i s t s : Mean
D irecto rs:
Mean
C hi-S quare

3Ji.

30.91
37-11

a s one o f t h e means o f

P s y c h o l o g i s t s : Mean ^.^9;
S tandard D eviation
D irectors:
Mean 14. 2 6 ; S t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n
C hi-S quare:
11.783
d.f.: U
S i g n i f i c a n t a t .05

33.

Must
Not
Perform

>49 - SU
M .3 3

1.91 \
S tandard D eviation
1 .8 l;
S tandard D eviation
3.9^1
d . f . : I*
sig n ifican t

S tudy the s o c i a l case h i s t o r y
d i a g n o s i s a nd e v a l u a t i o n
P sy ch o lo g ists
D irectors

Should
Not
Perform

for ex cep tio n al ch ild re n

2.21
0

0

P sych o lo g ists:
Mean D irecto rs:
Mean C hi-S quare:
Not

32.

May
Perform

17.35
20.62

6U .35
55.67

6.31
1 3 . J*0

-

3.25;
S tandard D ev iation
3*20; S ta n d a rd D e v ia tio n
: 6.210
d.f.: U
Not s i g n i f i c a n t

D esign a l t e r n a t i v e program s f o r e x c e p tio n a l c h i ld r e n
r e s o u r c e rooms a n d / o r d i a g n o s t i c l e a r n i n g c e n t e r s
P sy ch o lo g ists
D irectors

22.71
7.22

38.80
30.93

35-33
>4B . >45

- .81
- .85

such as

3.15
8.25

P s y c h o l o g i s t s : Mean - 3 . 8 1 ;
S tandard D eviation
D irecto rs:
Mean - 3 . 2 7 ; S t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n
C hi-S quare:
3^ . 69 ^
d . f . : 1*
S i g n i f i c a n t a t .05

2.52
2.06

- .82
- .91

0
5*1 5

173

Must
Perform

35*

Should
Perform

May
Perform

Ghould
Not
Perform

Recommend n e e d e d c h a n g e s i n t h e p h y s i c a l s t r u c t u r e
o f th e school p la n t or playground
P sy ch o lo g ists
D irectors

I t . 73
2 .0 6

SO. 5 0
1 1 . 3 1*

53.9>t
57*73

Must
Hot
Perform

and equipm ent

15*77
20.62

5*05
8.25

P sy ch o lo g ists:
Mean - 3*0)4;
S t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n - .87
D irecto rs:
Mean - 2 . 7 8 ;
S tandard D ev iatio n - .83
C hi-S quare:
7*225
d . f . : It
H ot s i g n i f i c a n t

36.

R em ediate l e a r n i n g
P sy ch o lo g ists
D irecto rs

problem s by d i r e c t l y
.67
1.03

ItJtS
2.06

tu to rin g

2 1 . lit
l i t . It 3

ch ild ren
1*7*95
52*58

P sy ch o lo g ists:
Mean - 2 . 0 6 ;
S tandard D eviation
D irecto rs:
Mean - 1 * 9 2 ;
S tandard D ev iatio n
C hi-S quare:
3*709
d.f.: h
Not s i g n i f i c a n t

37.

Recommend n e e d e d c h a n g e s i n t h e
P sy ch o lo g ists
D irecto rs

15*1*6
5* 1 5

curriculum

It 1 . 3 2
36.08

25*87
29*90

- . 8)4
- .79

o f e d u c a tio n program s

3 8 .I 49
h6.39

l». 7 3
10.31

0
2.06

P sy ch o lo g ists:
Mean - 3 . 6 8 ;
S ta n d a r d D e v i a t i o n - .79
D irecto rs:
Mean - 3 . 3 2 ;
S t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n - .81
C hi-S quare:
18.066
d . f . : It
S i g n i f i c a n t a t .05

30.

D ia g n o s e and e v a l u a t e t h e
of ch ild ren
P sy ch o lo g ists
D irectors

Q)t ,06
70.35

in tellectu a l

13*56
20.62

and c o g n itiv e

1.58

1 .0 3

d iffieu ltie:

0
0

P sy ch o lo gists:
Mean - I t . 8 3 ;
S tandard D ev iatio n - J t l
D irecto rs:
Mean - I t . 7 7 ;
S t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n - . It 1*
C hi-S quare:
2.959
d.f.: 2
N ot s i g n i f i c a n t

0
0

17'*

M ust
P erform

39-

G h ould
P orfom

M ay
P erform

Should
Hot
P erform

Must
Not
P erform

A d m i n i s t e r and s c o r e i n d i v i d u a l p r o j e c t i v e o r n o n - s t a n d a r d i z e d
t e s t s a s one o f t h e means o f d i a g n o s i s and e v a l u a t i o n
P sy ch o lo g ists
Pi r e c t o r s

55.79
37.11

3P . 5o

30.93

Pl.lt
P5-77

.95
5. IP

.63
P .06

P sy ch o lo g ists:
Moan - 5 . ,90;
G t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n - .85
D irecto rs:
Mean - 3 - 0 7 ;
G tandard D e v ia tio n - .99
C hi-C quarc:
7-803
d.f.: 5
Not s i g n i f i c a n t

tO.

O r g a n i z e a nd s u p e r v i s e o n e o f t h e s p e c i f i c e d u c a t i o n a l p r o g r a m s
w i t h i n th e t o t a l s p e c ia l e d u c a tio n program
P sy ch o lo g ists
D irecto rs

P.PI
1.0 3

8.83
P .06

53.63
38.lt

07-76
t0 .P l

P sy ch o ]o g ists:
Mean - P . 7 0 ;
G tandard D e v ia tio n
D irecto rs :
Mean - P . P 7 ;
G tandard D ev iatio n
C hi-G quare:
P I .379
d.f.:
t
S i g n i f i c a n t a t .05

t] .

- .82
- ,82

Make s u g g e s t i o n s t o e d u c a t i o n a l p e r s o n n e l f o r b e h a v i o r m a n a g e m e n t
a n d /o r b e h a v io r Mo d i f i c a t i o n o f c h i l d r e n wi t h a d ju s tm e n t problem s
P sy ch o lo g ists
D irecto rs

38.80
P i . 71

'1 7 . 6 3
tp.tp

13.P5
.03.71

.3*0
t . 1P

P sych o lo g ists:
Mean - t , P 5 ;
G tandard D e v ia tio n
D irectors:
Mean - -j, 8 o ;
G tandard D ev iatio n
C h i- G q u a r e : PP.161
d.f.:
t
Gi g n i l’i c a n t a t . 0 5

tp .

7.57
10.56

C o n su lt with a d m in is tr a t o r s
program s
P sych o lo g ists
D irecto rs

P O . i ’i
17-53

r e g a r d i n g ways, t o

5 6 .37
5 8 . V;

P 3.03
09.90

0

1.03

- ,09
- .85

im prove e d u c a t i o n a l

.95
3.09

P sy ch o lo gists:
Mean - 5 . 0 3 ;
S t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n - .77
D irecto rs:
Mean - 3 . 7 8 ;
S tandard D eviation - . 8]
(’h i - S q u a r e :
8.530
d. l M: 5
Ho t s i g n i f i c a n t

.30
1.03

175

Must
Perform

May
Perform

C o o p e ra te w ith and u t i l i z e t h e s e r v i c e s o f t h e v a r i o u s p s y c h o ­
l o g i c a l and e d u c a t i o n a l a g e n c i e s a v a i l a b l e in t h e com m unity
P sy ch o lo gists
D irecto rs

60.88
Mi. 33

33.75
1*5.36

5.05
9.86

.30
1.03

P s y c h o l o g i s t s : Kean
- 1*.55; G t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n
D irecto rs:
Mean
- 1*.33; G t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n
C hi-G quare:
9*300
d.f.: 3
S i g n i f i c a n t a t .05

111*.

D e s ig n , s u b m it , and e v a l u a t e p r o p o s a l s
fu n d ed by f e d e r a l and s t a t e a g e n c ie s
P sy ch o lo g ists
D irecto rs

5*68
1.03

15.1*6
9.88

61.51
59.79

A d m in i s t e r and s c o r e i n d i v i d u a l s t a n d a r d i z e d
means o f d i a g n o s i s and e v a l u a t i o n
P sy ch o lo g ists
D irecto rs

76.0 3
63.98

I 6 J 1O
17.53

P sy ch o lo g ists:
Mean - I t . 6 7 ;
D irecto rs:
Mean - It . 35 ;
C hi-G quare:
G8 J 1I 5
Gignifieant

>t6.

D ia g n o s e and e v a l u a t e
P sychologists
D irecto rs

6iJtl
1*5.36

0
0

- .61
- .69

f o r e d u c a tio n a l program s

10.93
85.77

P s y c h o l o g i s t s : Mean
- 3.05;
G tandard D e v ia tio n
D irectors :
Mean
- 8.77;
G tandard D e v ia tio n
C hi-G quare:
13.850
d . f . : It
G i g n i f i e a n t a t .05

1*5.

Must
Not
Perform

6.68
0.88

tests

1*. 1*
]» . l

- .83
- .71

a s one o f t h e

0
8.85

.05
1.03

G tandard D ev iatio n - .69
G tandard D e v ia tio n - 1. 08
d . f . : It
a t .05

th e p e r c e p tu a l- m o to r problem s o f c h i l d r e n
88.08

Itl ,8lt

8,80
38.37

ro rj

U3*

Should
Perform

Should
Not
Perform

.3 8
1.03

P sych o lo g ists:
Mean
- It.55; S ta n d a rd D e v ia tio n - .66
D irecto rs:
Mean . 31; G ta n d a rd D e v i a t i o n - .73
C hi-G quare:
lO .ltlO
d.f,: 3
S i g n i f i c a n t a t .05

0
0

176

Must
Perform

1*7-

Should
Perform

May
Perform

Must
Not
Perform

Should
Not
Perform

Make p r e s e n t a t i o n s t o P . T . A . g r o u p s c o n c e r n i n g t h e g e n e r a l
p s y c h o l o g i c a l and e d u c a t i o n a l n eed s o f c h i l d r e n
P sy ch o lo g ists
D irecto rs

12.93
7.22

1*2.90
50.52

1*3.85
1*2.27

.3 2

0
0

0

P sy ch o lo g ists:
Mean - 3 . 6 8 ;
S t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n - .69
D irecto rs:
Mean - 3 . 6 5 ;
S t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n - .61
C hi-S quare:
3.1*06
d.f. : 3
Not s i g n i f i c a n t

1*8.

A ttend

school board m eetings

P sy ch o lo g ists
D irecto rs

1*.1*2
1.03

t o p r e s e n t new i d e a s t o b o a r d m e m b e r s
27-76
19.59

62.78
69.07

1*.10
5*15

.95
5.15

P sychologists:
Mean - 3 . 3 1 ;
S ta n d a r d D e v ia t io n - .66
D irectors :
Mean - 3 . 0 6 ;
S t a n d a r d D e v i a t io n - .70
C hi-S quare:
11.721*
d . f . : 1*
S i g n i f i c a n t a t .05

1*9.

P rovide

in s e rv ic e m eetings

P sy ch o lo g ists
D irectors

15.1*6
13.1*0

P sy ch o lo g ists:
Mean D irecto rs:
Mean C hi-S q uare:
Not

50.

fo r teachers
1*6.37
1*1.2l*

86.75
65.98

1*1*. 33

.95
1.03

.32
0

3 .7 6 ;
S t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n - .73
3 .6 ?;
S t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n - .72
2.013
d . f . : I*
sig n ifican t

D iscuss th e c h i l d ' s problem w ith th e
o f d i a g n o s i s and e v a l u a t i o n
P sy ch o lo g ists
D irecto rs

36.91

12 .9 3
31.96

t e a c h e r a s o n e o f t h e meanB

.32
2.06

0
0

0
0

P sy ch o lo g ists:
Mean - 1*.86;
S tandard D ev iatio n D irecto rs:
Mean - 1*,61*; S t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n C hi-S q uare:
22.1*97
d.f. : 2
S i g n i f i c a n t a t .05

.35
.52

ITT

Must
Perform

51.

Should
Perform

May
Perform

Should
Not
Perform

Work a s a me m b er o f a c o m m i t t e e t h a t I s e x p l o r i n g a p a r t i c u l a r
e d u c a t i o n a l problem in t h e s c h o o l d i s t r i c t
P sy ch o lo g ists
D irecto rs

13.25
12.37

35-02
35-05

50.79
51-55

.95
1.03

P s y c h o l o g i s t s : Mean - 3 . 6 l ;
S tand ard D ev iatio n
D irectors:
Mean - 3 - 5 9 ;
S tandard D eviation
C hi-S quare:
.058
d.f.: 3
Not s i g n i f i c a n t

52.

9.1*6
7-22

26.81
20.62

60.88
67-01

- -72
- -72

2.52
3.09

P s y c h o l o g i s t s : Mean - 3.1*3;
S tandard D ev iatio n
D irecto rs:
Mean - 3 . 2 8 ;
S tandard D ev iatio n
C hi-G quare:
5.208
d.f.: U
Not s i g n i f i c a n t

H elp t o

form ulate

P sy ch o lo g ists
D irecto rs

1 1 . oh

1.03

3 ** - 38
19-59

1*1.61*
60.82

P re sc rib e s p e c ific curriculum m a te ria ls to
t i o n a l an d l e a r n i n g p r o b l e m s o f c h i l d r e n
P sy ch o lo g ists
D irectors

.32
2.06

- .71
- .73

s p e c ia l ed u catio n a d m in is tra tiv e p o lic y
9***6
11.3**

Psycho] ogi s t s :
Mean - 3-1*0;
S tandard D ev iatio n
D irecto rs:
Mean - 2 . 9 6 ;
S tandard D ev iatio n
C hi-S quare:
22.1*05
d . f . : 1*
S i g n i f i c a n t a t .05

5**.

0
0

Perform r e s e a r c h by re v ie w in g end sum m arizing p e r t i n e n t p r o f e s ­
sio n al lite r a tu r e
Psychologi s t s
D irecto rs

53.

Must
Not
Perform

32.81
2h.7h

****.79
1*2.27

3.**7
7-22

- .93
- .80

rem ediate th e educa­

21.1*5
27-81*

-95
5.15

P s y c h o l o g i s t s : Mean - **.09;
S tandard D ev iatio n
D irecto rs:
Mean - 3 . 8 7 ;
S tandard D ev iatio n
C hi-S quare:
9-796
d.f.: 3
S i g n i f i c a n t a t .05

- .76
- .85

0
0

1TB

Must
Perfom

5 5-

Should
Perform

May
Perform

H elp t o d e v e l o p em ployment o p p o r t u n i t i e s
t h e com munity
P s y c h o l o g i r.tr.
D irecto rs

l . BR
7.06

1 3 . BR
7.22

Should
Not
Perform

T4ust
Not
Perform

f o r th e han d icap p ed in

60.PS
62.89

P s y c h o l o g i f i t s : Mean 2.8B ; S tan d ard
D irecto rs:
Mean 7. 77; S tandard
C hi-Square:
3-336
d.f.:
Not s i g n i f i c a n t

19-56
21.65
D e v ia tio n - .76
D e v ia tio n - .76
li

^.73
6 . IQ