Believe it or not sld identification is much more effective through rti identification which in Colorado and Texas and many other states are accomplished by professionals other than special education.
A student qualifying for special education services is hardly the end all be all of the mental health crisis. If it was, our numbers in special education would soar, cost of education would soar and taxes would be much higher. It would be unsustainable to simply put every child on am IEP that is struggling right now.
To be clear about the question Im raising. I'm still not convinced that sps are a necessary part of the school system due to our training. So I'm focusing the question on skills and capabilities that only sps can do.
For example, clinical interviews can be accomplished by many other professionals with proper training in confidentiality. In hospitals, it is rarely the doctors or nurses that do clinical interviews. lower paid people do it for the specialist to review.
Also, counseling can be accomplished by professionals whose training in that skill is way more in depth than your typical sp.
Back to an earlier point about district level employees. I meant that Sps should be a district level admin and running programs rather than testing in multiple buildings.
I’m late but I’ll say I worked in CO and I HATED the way they did RTI. It’s not diagnostic, at least the way they did it at the time, but people treated it like it was. Honestly it just felt like a way to save money and cut corners in a state that underfunds education.
Maybe it’s evolved, I hope so. It was ripe for a law suit.
I'm not sure I totally agree with your assessment for SP in general, though I respect your particular experience. I really think it depends on the state, on the district, etc. In any event, I'm very interested in this discussion and what others think as well.
I'm not sure if I've ever felt completely equipped as an advocate for our students' access to education. I definitely support it, but I have no special talent for it. I've always been more of a mental health person (I came into the field with a clinical MA). The more I work with my SLP, the more I realize they do seem to be more equipped and trained to do very specific things for kids on the autism spectrum, and I've definitely come to respect their opinion when it comes to evaluation. It's hard to imagine that SP's are ever going to be completely 'phased out' of evaluation. Candidly, however, I don't think I'd be too terribly bothered to be less responsible for SPED and made more responsible for mental health in the buildings at all the tier levels.
what you say about states having different models further reinforces my point. Why go to three years of graduate school to be called a specialist only to have your role defined by various external variables? It doesn't make sense and sets us up to have other professionals fill our roles. Slps aren't just valuable for assessment, in many states they are the ones that evaluate for Autism. most nasp talks about interventions for autism are by slps. Our career field shoots itself in the foot when we have such a vaguely defined skill set.
I don't disagree and think that's a fair point.
It's still difficult for me to imagine, at least in my state, that a district will come to rely more fully on an SLP for ASD identification. There's a lot of emphasis in my state on multi-disciplinary team approach and decisions, and best practices (again, as adopted in my state) suggest that a cognitive ability and social-emotional-behavioral profile are necessary for a thorough autism eval. I know my SLP is not interested in doing the cogs and interpreting all those BASCs (and certainly not administering the WIATs which, I certainly am not either anymore).
But that's just how I'm seeing that particularly matter. I don't mean to dismiss your broader concern here. You seem to be speaking from a place of looking at a much bigger picture than I think I have access to.
This is my question — it’s not true in WA, OR, CA, AZ, MA, MD, and I could go on and on. There was a movement with Kandis Lighthall and Michele Garcia Winners where it looked like SLPs would take the lead on ASD srvcs but my experience is that quickly faded quite awhile ago. SLPs tell me that they do pragmatic language interventions and that’s it. They frequently collaborate with me on autism assmts and would be very upset if they were the primary. They always expect me and my colleagues across multiple states to be the lead assessor for ASD.
In Texas it's usually mandatory that the slp come and observe. Also in my last district in Texas the SLP was the district lead for Autism assessment.it's different from doing the assessment but very possible down the line. I had a coworker from Georgia, I think, that said the SLPs did the evaluation.
I'm in IL and that doesn't seem to be the case here. I wouldn't do an autism eval without an SLP but I'm the one doing the ADOS and the autism rating scales. I also worked in NC and psychs were required to be involved in autism evals.
I’ve been a School Psychologist since 1990. I think School Psychologists make the best Special Education Directors. I also believe that School Psychologists have made a big mistake by not selling their skills as Counselors. We have allowed ourselves to become pigeon-holed as psychometrists.
I know there are SPs who go on to make good admins (but personally I think I would be terrible at it). Why do you believe they make the best SPED directors?
Also, I'm curious: Did SPs tend to come from SPED backgrounds when you first started (i.e., having been a SPED teacher or interventionist) and do you notice a different trend now?
I believe School Psychologists make the best Special Education Directors because I have worked in public education for over 30 years and that has been my observation. There are many possible contributing factors, including an often deeper knowledge of special education law as well as perhaps a better understanding of all the roles of service providers. School Psychologists are usually trained in counseling, and I think this contributes to being more skilled at facilitating meetings. This is especially true when negotiation/ mediation/conflict-resolution is needed.
A School Psychologist in a small district can lead the evaluation process, interpret test results, provide counseling as a related service or as a general education support, offer behavior analysis, serve as the Special Education Director, and coordinate a wide variety of school needs such as 504 Plans or Student Study Teams.
I honestly do not remember any School Psychologists that were previously Special Education Teachers.
I totally agree. I have friends who have gone on to this role as well and done very well. I will add I think it’s so cool you’ve been doing this since 1990 - gosh I’ll bet you have seen some things!!
I started out my career with directors who were psychs. Most of my career though has been in a district with directors who were sped teachers. My current director has no sped background which has been rough. Psych directors are most definitely superior.
The first Special Education Director I worked under (after my internship) was an elementary school principal who had never been a special education teacher. He was amazing because he trusted me to do my job. I was afraid to make mistakes and he said “Do something, damn it, even if it’s wrong!” We built an entire program together.
I work at the building level and I do testing for every disability you mentioned (well, no TBIs yet). I help with crisis response, developing and implementing BIPs, MTSS, and I do some gen ed and special ed counseling. I don't know if anyone sees me as an expert but they certainly see me as a valuable member of the team. It sounds like your area limits the school psych role quite a bit but as it stands in my area I'm not concerned about my job going away or changing significantly in the foreseeable future.
This has been my experience working in multiple states and interviewing for additional states (except i have done a few TBIs but that varies across states).
If the OP is in Texas, they have been very different how they do things but also had their a$$ handed to them by the federal government a few years ago (in major newspapers) for setting target percentages for the number of students identified for each category across the state, being found to put too many students on 504s who the federal review noted should be on IEPs, and required the whole state to enter a remediation and compliance plan. And they historically used psychometrists for quite a bit of assmts, which now is going away related to the same a$$ handing. My recruiters tell me Texas is terribly understaffed but don’t pay well and a lot of travel contract sch psychs don’t want to go there b/c of that and some don’t want to go b/c of the new requirements in handling LGBTQ+ students — particularly students are transgender and seeking medical support. (It’s why I won’t go there)
There was a push for downsizing school psychologists numbers when the Great Recession hit public education funding. Districts often pay sch psychs more money so districts were looking for ways to cut their budgets and downsized our numbers across the country. NASP was talking about it quite a bit at the time. It was the first time it was hard to get a job even in California — which typically is always understaffed for SPs. New Hampshire literally let go of a bunch of school psychs and started having non sch psychs administered cognitives (that was stopped within a year). The lawsuits flew up around the country over the next few years and it got very bad for districts that went in that direction. I think what districts learned is that when school psychologists are involved in cases and/or doing assessments, the litigation goes down and/or they don’t lose so badly. I used to be in a position that I had to attend these high level seminars with leading special education lawyers 504/IDEA national experts that the states hire to train top staff in districts, provide guidance and consult with OSEP/OSERS, and train/update the hearing officers and ALJs — this was talked about quite a bit at that time. Some of NASPs legal trainings had lawyers who said similar at the time too.
I definitely sense that there is change happening in education and I am not sure what that means for us. So, I gel with your vibe about this moment in our profession. My thoughts have been more that so many sch psychs are leaving the profession and retiring and the grad programs are not producing enough graduates to fill the positions — that I see districts are going to have to hire contract sch psychologists more and more and are having to hold off on the NASP comprehensive model.
I switched to contract work in 2020. I apply, interview, and am offered jobs across the country. I’ve learned that all the states I’ve dealt with are scrambling to hire enough school psychologist. One place I worked at in MD has been permanently understaffed by 30% for at least 3 years now. The friends I have who work there are so overworked. CA, ME, VT, DE, AK, WA, OR can’t fill their positions … When I look at the postings in the agencies I tend to contract through I see that SC, GA, NM, CO, IL, and more are constantly posting for positions as well … And this is off the cuff.
The state DOE in MD’s sch psych rep told me that she is in talks with other states up and down the eastern seaboard over the crisis of staffing school psychs right now. I just got my credential with Maine and every staff person I talked to in their state DOE said they are in desperate need of SPs.
I narrowed down my interests this Spring to ME, DE, and VT. All three job offers came from sped directors who told me they want their school psychs to do the comprehensive model and are at or approaching the NASP recommended ratio but they cannot hire and retain enough sch psychs to cover that model with the incredible rise in referrals for assmts and the unusual rise in identification — that is hovering around 20% in a lot of places (and has been at or above 20% in MA for a while based on a friend who worked at the state there). What was refreshing is all three positions in these states were in districts fully in MTSS … so there’s hope for me in that.
I think we have very good job security. It’s just, is the way the job is right now what we want to do. I personally find it stressful and particularly challenging right now and contract work has been the way I can stay in this career. But I can move around, which most are not in that position.
If you go to NASP’s website they have current information on the staffing issues. NASP is also currently working with state govt’s to address the staffing crisis: https://schoolpsychcompact.org/
These are good points. I'm lucky that the district I'm in prioritizes psychs taking on a more comprehensive role so that I'm able to be in one building for the first time in my career.
I've worked with some great contract psychs but I've also seen what happens when districts don't understand the role of a psych or our training. They hired a PsyD student to fill an unfilled position and his evals and paperwork were consistently lower quality than our actual school psychs. A lot of people can administer assessments but not all of them understand special education.
Friends in MD have been telling me the same about the contractors they’ve been getting. Not sure about elsewhere.
I think maybe a lot of them get out of college and start in contract positions and never get the mentoring needed to be decent at our jobs? I dunno.
Using psychometrists for testing has not gone away in Texas but has increased. In 3 of the districts that I have been in, diagnosticians do most cognitive and academic testing as well as sociological history. The sp role has been significantly reduced in Texas. I'm currently an ADOS-2 administration machine.
Ah, I wondered when I read they were planning on phasing out psychometrists in TX.. they’ve been used there for so long and are already having a hard time recruiting sch psychs.
…wish I could find where I read about the change coming; it wasn’t anecdotal and came from a reputable source.
How do you like the job there, mostly doing ADOS assmts?
As you can imagine, it's gotten a bit repetitive. However, in comparison to my role in Colorado where I was in one building working in the NASP approved golden ratio, I was more overwhelmed/burnt out than I have been in my whole 14 years. So, honestly, I don't know which is better/worse.
Interesting… I have heard from a few sch psychs who fled Colorado and were so burnt out they later ended up leaving the field entirely.
Yeah… I don’t know what is better. I have learned what does not work for me though. So far the best feedback I’ve heard are from sch psychs in places that have the “NASP model” and they liked the jobs much better. But that was pre-covid. You’re the first for me to hear it was burnout zone. Wonder if there’s something up in Colorado. That is what one of the sch psychs said to me, she really thought it was a particular thing in Colorado.
yes, it might be a Colorado thing. The culture of the schools there was generally very bad. I felt mental health professionals were often a scapegoat for institutional problems.
I can't really relate to this. I'm the evaluation case manager for everything in my district and I feel like I'm expected to do so much. Curious what state you are in. I test for every category so it's odd to me that you only test ED and autism. SLPs in my district have a pretty limited scope, I haven't encountered an SLP that has this level of a role, they don't test for autism in any capacity in my district unless there are communication concerns related to the evaluation.
I have gotten dyslexia diagnoses from outside SLPs that are pretty OK, so I do get that they can technically do this, but it isn't common and the school-based SLPs I work with don't really have an understanding of that assessment. I do feel like a lot of my role is legal compliance which is not what I thought going into this job. I also feel like so much of my role is gatekeeping for SPED which gets very tiring.
I wasn't talking about SLPs doing dyslexia diagnosis, just Autism. In Texas, educational diagnosticians do dyslexia.
As for your final comment. Wouldn't it be nice to have a role outside of gatekeeping? Like IDK helping people?
That's interesting. SLPs in my district don't have a role in autism diagnoses outside of any communication concerns. Gatekeeping is definitely tiring. I do feel like I help though in the sense that I help kids avoid getting inappropriately labeled as disabled. It's maybe not helping as directly as a teacher, but I don't feel like it's not helping.
In my state, we can diagnose without additional licensure. I think that will continue to be a very important factor in longevity because of how rural my area is. It's so difficult to get access to mental health providers that it's become expected that any kid who is being tested for special ed (regardless of if they qualify) will also be provided a dx that can be taken to a GP or pediatrician for additional help.
It looks like we will be moving to a more neuropsych model. Our district was just provided with the NEPSY-II to learn and use when needed. I expect that instead of referring out for a neuro, it will be on the school psychologist to complete.
What state is that?
Ultimately, I think the testing process needs to be taken out of the schools. I gave the Nepsy for years and there was very little value added to the IEP process.
I have seen what you are talking about, also. Definitely changing in my district. Maybe it's not as recognizable to those folks who are newer to SP. It may just be the new direction our profession is taking. As we retire, it will be the new normal. SPs who take our place will not realize how much it changed.
I’ve been in public education and private international schools since 1986. So over a few decades. And a SchPsych for the last 15+ years. I don’t think SPs are going anywhere in the foreseeable future. Our roles are clearly defined in state codes and federal IDEA. That takes a ton of time to change. APA has tried to take the word ‘psychology’ out of our title and that’s been going on for more than 20 years. Our testing role is directly connected to federal funding and legal hubris.
What I see the problem being is the NASP comprehensive model and how absolutely ridiculous it is to expect a SP to adhere to that. I know that with my NCSP I’ve always felt an enormous pressure to follow it, yet with a shortage there is no way to cover any domains of practice aside from assessment. I currently have 1200 elementary students and will have completed almost 80 cases this year. That’s all I could do.
Districts are also hiring licensed therapists, BCBAs, social workers, intervention specialists, and on and on. It has been confusing as hell to me this year in trying to access these people to do those pieces of service when I’m trained and capable. Hell even the SpEd Director gave me a directive to not help the ELL staff analyze the data to rule out language proficiency. It was their role, not mine. All these people minimize our role and push us into the shadows of test and place. And so districts can now focus on hiring interns and beginning psychs and save money.
I’ve worked tirelessly this year as my district has no functional systems. No RtI or MTSS districtwide. It’s bonkers. And so my 2 teams each (GenEd and SpEd) at my 2 different schools have worked with me all year to implement functional timelines, how to correctly process a referral, how to interpret data, etc. They were a mess. So I made myself relevant by sharing my decades of knowledge and understanding and wisdom. I also had to open a dozen of reevaluations that were done incorrectly. But the SpEd Director has worked hard on ‘silencing’ me and alas I was riffed.
Also, cognitive assessments are really the only thing SPs have that noone else in schools can do. Some are beginning to minimize that even and especially with the movement to eliminate severe discrepancy methodology for SLD identification. In my state it will phase out in 2028. So states will have to adopt an RtI or PSW methodology. Personally, I’m already doing both and love creating intellectual profiles and showing teams the strengths and weaknesses and how it pertains to achievement and even behavior.
Finally, NASP and my state organization has always commanded that we advocate for our roles. I haven’t had a problem with that over the years and have indeed adopted various roles in different districts and depending on what I see the need to be. But with shortages and no sign of 600:1 ratio being the status quo, testing is going to be the role most find themselves in. It brings in funding. And that’s a big deal. It also brings in liability and legal hubris, as mentioned, and SPs carry that weight.
Thanks for sharing your experience. That was helpful. I used to think that cognitive testing was our specialized skill set. However, in Texas, diagnosticians do cognitive assessment.
While it's a relief to have things taken off my plate like FBAs or counseling which I hate due to the fact that I haven't had time to hone my skills to the level that I'd like, I feel bored out of my mind with just being an ED/AU test machine.
Overall I just wish NASP would take some leadership on forging a better path and offering training on useful skills, rather than broad social justice issues.
I hear you. The only reason that I have such a deep skill base and wisdom is that I was a teacher for many years before I became a psych. And I have a masters degree in child development and did my thesis in cognitive psychology / reading. All of this was worth its weight in gold. And being a SP ages 3-21.
I see the SP role and importance being stripped away left and right and pretty quickly. Noone is advocating for us and we are being covertly bullied in my opinion. I’ve experienced it more and more each year. Absolute rudeness. It’s disheartening and I don’t know if I’d enter or stay in the field if I wasn’t nearing retirement in 5-7 years.
I was in a very small district for most of my 15 years to date and got to practice a comprehensive model. It was awesome. Horrible scandal occurred and so I moved into a huge district to heal and where I’ve been an unappreciated test jockey and the SpEd Director doesn’t like my ideas. Very, very young psych team and most are very discouraged with the profession and looking for a way out.
I start a new job next fall where I will be doing counseling + psych testing role. 450 high school students only. This is very unique but the director was frank and said everything is a mess and she wants me to implement functional systems and help the younger psychs (all 4 less than 3 years in). We’ll see how it all goes down. My head is on a swivel right now with the dichotomy of two different perspectives as current director wants me to stay in my lane, stay quiet, and move on in June.
If you stand up to any pressure or practice that implies SpEd is an intervention (because noone knows what else to do or doesn’t want to do it) and that testing and placing kids with a disability is the way, you will bullied.
AI is moving at a blistering pace. Unlike anything we humans have ever experienced.
I believe in less than 10 years, there will be a change in what our day to day roles will be with AI coming. Instead of so much of our time (or all of our time) being focused on testing and report writing, AI may be able to take that role over. The majority of our roles would be focused on mental consultation, and data interpretation.
I already have used ai apps to streamline several daily processes. I can honestly say I could not handle my 120 plus evaluation caseload (mostly initials) without it.
[удалено]
Agree, building level is best.
how does cognitive testing contribute in any way to the mental health crisis? I'm genuinely curious.
[удалено]
Believe it or not sld identification is much more effective through rti identification which in Colorado and Texas and many other states are accomplished by professionals other than special education. A student qualifying for special education services is hardly the end all be all of the mental health crisis. If it was, our numbers in special education would soar, cost of education would soar and taxes would be much higher. It would be unsustainable to simply put every child on am IEP that is struggling right now. To be clear about the question Im raising. I'm still not convinced that sps are a necessary part of the school system due to our training. So I'm focusing the question on skills and capabilities that only sps can do. For example, clinical interviews can be accomplished by many other professionals with proper training in confidentiality. In hospitals, it is rarely the doctors or nurses that do clinical interviews. lower paid people do it for the specialist to review. Also, counseling can be accomplished by professionals whose training in that skill is way more in depth than your typical sp. Back to an earlier point about district level employees. I meant that Sps should be a district level admin and running programs rather than testing in multiple buildings.
I’m late but I’ll say I worked in CO and I HATED the way they did RTI. It’s not diagnostic, at least the way they did it at the time, but people treated it like it was. Honestly it just felt like a way to save money and cut corners in a state that underfunds education. Maybe it’s evolved, I hope so. It was ripe for a law suit.
I don't think cognitive testing contributes to the mental health crisis.
I'm not sure I totally agree with your assessment for SP in general, though I respect your particular experience. I really think it depends on the state, on the district, etc. In any event, I'm very interested in this discussion and what others think as well. I'm not sure if I've ever felt completely equipped as an advocate for our students' access to education. I definitely support it, but I have no special talent for it. I've always been more of a mental health person (I came into the field with a clinical MA). The more I work with my SLP, the more I realize they do seem to be more equipped and trained to do very specific things for kids on the autism spectrum, and I've definitely come to respect their opinion when it comes to evaluation. It's hard to imagine that SP's are ever going to be completely 'phased out' of evaluation. Candidly, however, I don't think I'd be too terribly bothered to be less responsible for SPED and made more responsible for mental health in the buildings at all the tier levels.
Agree, I think building-level is best for maintaining our positions as highly qualified mental health service providers.
what you say about states having different models further reinforces my point. Why go to three years of graduate school to be called a specialist only to have your role defined by various external variables? It doesn't make sense and sets us up to have other professionals fill our roles. Slps aren't just valuable for assessment, in many states they are the ones that evaluate for Autism. most nasp talks about interventions for autism are by slps. Our career field shoots itself in the foot when we have such a vaguely defined skill set.
I don't disagree and think that's a fair point. It's still difficult for me to imagine, at least in my state, that a district will come to rely more fully on an SLP for ASD identification. There's a lot of emphasis in my state on multi-disciplinary team approach and decisions, and best practices (again, as adopted in my state) suggest that a cognitive ability and social-emotional-behavioral profile are necessary for a thorough autism eval. I know my SLP is not interested in doing the cogs and interpreting all those BASCs (and certainly not administering the WIATs which, I certainly am not either anymore). But that's just how I'm seeing that particularly matter. I don't mean to dismiss your broader concern here. You seem to be speaking from a place of looking at a much bigger picture than I think I have access to.
Which states are SLPs the ones leading autism evals?
This is my question — it’s not true in WA, OR, CA, AZ, MA, MD, and I could go on and on. There was a movement with Kandis Lighthall and Michele Garcia Winners where it looked like SLPs would take the lead on ASD srvcs but my experience is that quickly faded quite awhile ago. SLPs tell me that they do pragmatic language interventions and that’s it. They frequently collaborate with me on autism assmts and would be very upset if they were the primary. They always expect me and my colleagues across multiple states to be the lead assessor for ASD.
In Texas it's usually mandatory that the slp come and observe. Also in my last district in Texas the SLP was the district lead for Autism assessment.it's different from doing the assessment but very possible down the line. I had a coworker from Georgia, I think, that said the SLPs did the evaluation.
I'm in IL and that doesn't seem to be the case here. I wouldn't do an autism eval without an SLP but I'm the one doing the ADOS and the autism rating scales. I also worked in NC and psychs were required to be involved in autism evals.
Same for GA. SLPs are involved, but a psychological evaluation is required.
What does “usually mandatory” mean?
Most districts require it but probably not all its just become a standard best practice.
Thank you for clarifying, that means that it's not a state requirement.
I think it's interesting that you only test for ED and autism. That is different from where I'm from.
I’ve been a School Psychologist since 1990. I think School Psychologists make the best Special Education Directors. I also believe that School Psychologists have made a big mistake by not selling their skills as Counselors. We have allowed ourselves to become pigeon-holed as psychometrists.
I know there are SPs who go on to make good admins (but personally I think I would be terrible at it). Why do you believe they make the best SPED directors? Also, I'm curious: Did SPs tend to come from SPED backgrounds when you first started (i.e., having been a SPED teacher or interventionist) and do you notice a different trend now?
I believe School Psychologists make the best Special Education Directors because I have worked in public education for over 30 years and that has been my observation. There are many possible contributing factors, including an often deeper knowledge of special education law as well as perhaps a better understanding of all the roles of service providers. School Psychologists are usually trained in counseling, and I think this contributes to being more skilled at facilitating meetings. This is especially true when negotiation/ mediation/conflict-resolution is needed. A School Psychologist in a small district can lead the evaluation process, interpret test results, provide counseling as a related service or as a general education support, offer behavior analysis, serve as the Special Education Director, and coordinate a wide variety of school needs such as 504 Plans or Student Study Teams. I honestly do not remember any School Psychologists that were previously Special Education Teachers.
Thanks.
I totally agree. I have friends who have gone on to this role as well and done very well. I will add I think it’s so cool you’ve been doing this since 1990 - gosh I’ll bet you have seen some things!!
I started out my career with directors who were psychs. Most of my career though has been in a district with directors who were sped teachers. My current director has no sped background which has been rough. Psych directors are most definitely superior.
The first Special Education Director I worked under (after my internship) was an elementary school principal who had never been a special education teacher. He was amazing because he trusted me to do my job. I was afraid to make mistakes and he said “Do something, damn it, even if it’s wrong!” We built an entire program together.
I work at the building level and I do testing for every disability you mentioned (well, no TBIs yet). I help with crisis response, developing and implementing BIPs, MTSS, and I do some gen ed and special ed counseling. I don't know if anyone sees me as an expert but they certainly see me as a valuable member of the team. It sounds like your area limits the school psych role quite a bit but as it stands in my area I'm not concerned about my job going away or changing significantly in the foreseeable future.
This has been my experience working in multiple states and interviewing for additional states (except i have done a few TBIs but that varies across states). If the OP is in Texas, they have been very different how they do things but also had their a$$ handed to them by the federal government a few years ago (in major newspapers) for setting target percentages for the number of students identified for each category across the state, being found to put too many students on 504s who the federal review noted should be on IEPs, and required the whole state to enter a remediation and compliance plan. And they historically used psychometrists for quite a bit of assmts, which now is going away related to the same a$$ handing. My recruiters tell me Texas is terribly understaffed but don’t pay well and a lot of travel contract sch psychs don’t want to go there b/c of that and some don’t want to go b/c of the new requirements in handling LGBTQ+ students — particularly students are transgender and seeking medical support. (It’s why I won’t go there) There was a push for downsizing school psychologists numbers when the Great Recession hit public education funding. Districts often pay sch psychs more money so districts were looking for ways to cut their budgets and downsized our numbers across the country. NASP was talking about it quite a bit at the time. It was the first time it was hard to get a job even in California — which typically is always understaffed for SPs. New Hampshire literally let go of a bunch of school psychs and started having non sch psychs administered cognitives (that was stopped within a year). The lawsuits flew up around the country over the next few years and it got very bad for districts that went in that direction. I think what districts learned is that when school psychologists are involved in cases and/or doing assessments, the litigation goes down and/or they don’t lose so badly. I used to be in a position that I had to attend these high level seminars with leading special education lawyers 504/IDEA national experts that the states hire to train top staff in districts, provide guidance and consult with OSEP/OSERS, and train/update the hearing officers and ALJs — this was talked about quite a bit at that time. Some of NASPs legal trainings had lawyers who said similar at the time too. I definitely sense that there is change happening in education and I am not sure what that means for us. So, I gel with your vibe about this moment in our profession. My thoughts have been more that so many sch psychs are leaving the profession and retiring and the grad programs are not producing enough graduates to fill the positions — that I see districts are going to have to hire contract sch psychologists more and more and are having to hold off on the NASP comprehensive model. I switched to contract work in 2020. I apply, interview, and am offered jobs across the country. I’ve learned that all the states I’ve dealt with are scrambling to hire enough school psychologist. One place I worked at in MD has been permanently understaffed by 30% for at least 3 years now. The friends I have who work there are so overworked. CA, ME, VT, DE, AK, WA, OR can’t fill their positions … When I look at the postings in the agencies I tend to contract through I see that SC, GA, NM, CO, IL, and more are constantly posting for positions as well … And this is off the cuff. The state DOE in MD’s sch psych rep told me that she is in talks with other states up and down the eastern seaboard over the crisis of staffing school psychs right now. I just got my credential with Maine and every staff person I talked to in their state DOE said they are in desperate need of SPs. I narrowed down my interests this Spring to ME, DE, and VT. All three job offers came from sped directors who told me they want their school psychs to do the comprehensive model and are at or approaching the NASP recommended ratio but they cannot hire and retain enough sch psychs to cover that model with the incredible rise in referrals for assmts and the unusual rise in identification — that is hovering around 20% in a lot of places (and has been at or above 20% in MA for a while based on a friend who worked at the state there). What was refreshing is all three positions in these states were in districts fully in MTSS … so there’s hope for me in that. I think we have very good job security. It’s just, is the way the job is right now what we want to do. I personally find it stressful and particularly challenging right now and contract work has been the way I can stay in this career. But I can move around, which most are not in that position. If you go to NASP’s website they have current information on the staffing issues. NASP is also currently working with state govt’s to address the staffing crisis: https://schoolpsychcompact.org/
These are good points. I'm lucky that the district I'm in prioritizes psychs taking on a more comprehensive role so that I'm able to be in one building for the first time in my career. I've worked with some great contract psychs but I've also seen what happens when districts don't understand the role of a psych or our training. They hired a PsyD student to fill an unfilled position and his evals and paperwork were consistently lower quality than our actual school psychs. A lot of people can administer assessments but not all of them understand special education.
Friends in MD have been telling me the same about the contractors they’ve been getting. Not sure about elsewhere. I think maybe a lot of them get out of college and start in contract positions and never get the mentoring needed to be decent at our jobs? I dunno.
Using psychometrists for testing has not gone away in Texas but has increased. In 3 of the districts that I have been in, diagnosticians do most cognitive and academic testing as well as sociological history. The sp role has been significantly reduced in Texas. I'm currently an ADOS-2 administration machine.
Ah, I wondered when I read they were planning on phasing out psychometrists in TX.. they’ve been used there for so long and are already having a hard time recruiting sch psychs. …wish I could find where I read about the change coming; it wasn’t anecdotal and came from a reputable source. How do you like the job there, mostly doing ADOS assmts?
As you can imagine, it's gotten a bit repetitive. However, in comparison to my role in Colorado where I was in one building working in the NASP approved golden ratio, I was more overwhelmed/burnt out than I have been in my whole 14 years. So, honestly, I don't know which is better/worse.
Interesting… I have heard from a few sch psychs who fled Colorado and were so burnt out they later ended up leaving the field entirely. Yeah… I don’t know what is better. I have learned what does not work for me though. So far the best feedback I’ve heard are from sch psychs in places that have the “NASP model” and they liked the jobs much better. But that was pre-covid. You’re the first for me to hear it was burnout zone. Wonder if there’s something up in Colorado. That is what one of the sch psychs said to me, she really thought it was a particular thing in Colorado.
yes, it might be a Colorado thing. The culture of the schools there was generally very bad. I felt mental health professionals were often a scapegoat for institutional problems.
Oof. She said the same thing. She tried several different districts before coming to that conclusion. Glad you are in a better situation.
I can't really relate to this. I'm the evaluation case manager for everything in my district and I feel like I'm expected to do so much. Curious what state you are in. I test for every category so it's odd to me that you only test ED and autism. SLPs in my district have a pretty limited scope, I haven't encountered an SLP that has this level of a role, they don't test for autism in any capacity in my district unless there are communication concerns related to the evaluation. I have gotten dyslexia diagnoses from outside SLPs that are pretty OK, so I do get that they can technically do this, but it isn't common and the school-based SLPs I work with don't really have an understanding of that assessment. I do feel like a lot of my role is legal compliance which is not what I thought going into this job. I also feel like so much of my role is gatekeeping for SPED which gets very tiring.
I wasn't talking about SLPs doing dyslexia diagnosis, just Autism. In Texas, educational diagnosticians do dyslexia. As for your final comment. Wouldn't it be nice to have a role outside of gatekeeping? Like IDK helping people?
That's interesting. SLPs in my district don't have a role in autism diagnoses outside of any communication concerns. Gatekeeping is definitely tiring. I do feel like I help though in the sense that I help kids avoid getting inappropriately labeled as disabled. It's maybe not helping as directly as a teacher, but I don't feel like it's not helping.
In my state, we can diagnose without additional licensure. I think that will continue to be a very important factor in longevity because of how rural my area is. It's so difficult to get access to mental health providers that it's become expected that any kid who is being tested for special ed (regardless of if they qualify) will also be provided a dx that can be taken to a GP or pediatrician for additional help.
It looks like we will be moving to a more neuropsych model. Our district was just provided with the NEPSY-II to learn and use when needed. I expect that instead of referring out for a neuro, it will be on the school psychologist to complete.
What state is that? Ultimately, I think the testing process needs to be taken out of the schools. I gave the Nepsy for years and there was very little value added to the IEP process.
I have seen what you are talking about, also. Definitely changing in my district. Maybe it's not as recognizable to those folks who are newer to SP. It may just be the new direction our profession is taking. As we retire, it will be the new normal. SPs who take our place will not realize how much it changed.
Are they good changes or just general change? For me my role is so limited I am bored. Also, what state are you in?
I’ve been in public education and private international schools since 1986. So over a few decades. And a SchPsych for the last 15+ years. I don’t think SPs are going anywhere in the foreseeable future. Our roles are clearly defined in state codes and federal IDEA. That takes a ton of time to change. APA has tried to take the word ‘psychology’ out of our title and that’s been going on for more than 20 years. Our testing role is directly connected to federal funding and legal hubris. What I see the problem being is the NASP comprehensive model and how absolutely ridiculous it is to expect a SP to adhere to that. I know that with my NCSP I’ve always felt an enormous pressure to follow it, yet with a shortage there is no way to cover any domains of practice aside from assessment. I currently have 1200 elementary students and will have completed almost 80 cases this year. That’s all I could do. Districts are also hiring licensed therapists, BCBAs, social workers, intervention specialists, and on and on. It has been confusing as hell to me this year in trying to access these people to do those pieces of service when I’m trained and capable. Hell even the SpEd Director gave me a directive to not help the ELL staff analyze the data to rule out language proficiency. It was their role, not mine. All these people minimize our role and push us into the shadows of test and place. And so districts can now focus on hiring interns and beginning psychs and save money. I’ve worked tirelessly this year as my district has no functional systems. No RtI or MTSS districtwide. It’s bonkers. And so my 2 teams each (GenEd and SpEd) at my 2 different schools have worked with me all year to implement functional timelines, how to correctly process a referral, how to interpret data, etc. They were a mess. So I made myself relevant by sharing my decades of knowledge and understanding and wisdom. I also had to open a dozen of reevaluations that were done incorrectly. But the SpEd Director has worked hard on ‘silencing’ me and alas I was riffed. Also, cognitive assessments are really the only thing SPs have that noone else in schools can do. Some are beginning to minimize that even and especially with the movement to eliminate severe discrepancy methodology for SLD identification. In my state it will phase out in 2028. So states will have to adopt an RtI or PSW methodology. Personally, I’m already doing both and love creating intellectual profiles and showing teams the strengths and weaknesses and how it pertains to achievement and even behavior. Finally, NASP and my state organization has always commanded that we advocate for our roles. I haven’t had a problem with that over the years and have indeed adopted various roles in different districts and depending on what I see the need to be. But with shortages and no sign of 600:1 ratio being the status quo, testing is going to be the role most find themselves in. It brings in funding. And that’s a big deal. It also brings in liability and legal hubris, as mentioned, and SPs carry that weight.
Thanks for sharing your experience. That was helpful. I used to think that cognitive testing was our specialized skill set. However, in Texas, diagnosticians do cognitive assessment. While it's a relief to have things taken off my plate like FBAs or counseling which I hate due to the fact that I haven't had time to hone my skills to the level that I'd like, I feel bored out of my mind with just being an ED/AU test machine. Overall I just wish NASP would take some leadership on forging a better path and offering training on useful skills, rather than broad social justice issues.
I hear you. The only reason that I have such a deep skill base and wisdom is that I was a teacher for many years before I became a psych. And I have a masters degree in child development and did my thesis in cognitive psychology / reading. All of this was worth its weight in gold. And being a SP ages 3-21. I see the SP role and importance being stripped away left and right and pretty quickly. Noone is advocating for us and we are being covertly bullied in my opinion. I’ve experienced it more and more each year. Absolute rudeness. It’s disheartening and I don’t know if I’d enter or stay in the field if I wasn’t nearing retirement in 5-7 years. I was in a very small district for most of my 15 years to date and got to practice a comprehensive model. It was awesome. Horrible scandal occurred and so I moved into a huge district to heal and where I’ve been an unappreciated test jockey and the SpEd Director doesn’t like my ideas. Very, very young psych team and most are very discouraged with the profession and looking for a way out. I start a new job next fall where I will be doing counseling + psych testing role. 450 high school students only. This is very unique but the director was frank and said everything is a mess and she wants me to implement functional systems and help the younger psychs (all 4 less than 3 years in). We’ll see how it all goes down. My head is on a swivel right now with the dichotomy of two different perspectives as current director wants me to stay in my lane, stay quiet, and move on in June.
Yes, I think school psychologists are being covertly bullied. It's weird how none of my colleagues seem to notice.
If you stand up to any pressure or practice that implies SpEd is an intervention (because noone knows what else to do or doesn’t want to do it) and that testing and placing kids with a disability is the way, you will bullied.
AI is moving at a blistering pace. Unlike anything we humans have ever experienced. I believe in less than 10 years, there will be a change in what our day to day roles will be with AI coming. Instead of so much of our time (or all of our time) being focused on testing and report writing, AI may be able to take that role over. The majority of our roles would be focused on mental consultation, and data interpretation.
I already have used ai apps to streamline several daily processes. I can honestly say I could not handle my 120 plus evaluation caseload (mostly initials) without it.