So while I was typing up a risk assessment report I was called to do another risk assessment. The student I went to see was one that I had assessed twice last school year. It was a fairly easy evaluation because of my knowledge of the student. In the end, the student wasn't sent out. In fact, when I looked at how things were going this year in comparison to last year, things had improved greatly. Now if the student could learn not to run their mouth when angry.
At lunch time, I was talking with some of my coworkers. We have a position on our team that is currently vacant. Two months ago, we interviewed folks for the position but then nothing. I floated the theory at the lunch table that the position was not going to be filled. That since we were functioning fine without the position being filled that it was saving the district money. I think I'm write, considering we were just asked to consider plans that would allow us to bring back more out of district students.
I looked at my out of district caseload, all two of them, and chuckled.
Thursday, December 9, 2010
Wednesday, December 8, 2010
Initial or Re-eval?
The small stuff that I did today involved "inviting" general education teachers to a series of initial and re-evaluation planning meetings as well as doing paperwork for the meetings that I have coming in the next two weeks.
Then I attended a re-evaluation planning meeting at one of my out-of district placements. The meeting was so fast that it took me longer to travel to the location than the meeting itself. By way of explanation, I did get lost on the way there and the parent participated by phone.
In the afternoon I attended a coworkers meeting. This was actually the second meeting for this student since the first time around the parent didn't show. Here is the situation: the student had been eligible in another district under preschool disabled. Due to family problems, the family had to move. They moved in the middle of the re-evaluation that would have moved them from preschool to Part B (everything above preschool) in the previous district and moved around a lot. So the time line is completely thrown off and when the family moved into our district, the parent requested an evaluation as though it were an initial. So it was processed through our department as an initial. Following that logic, we need written consent before we can start testing. This makes the parent's absence from the initial referral conferences problematic.
So during this meeting, as we were awaiting the parent's arrival (they never showed) I brought up the idea that the kid is actually still in special education because they were previously eligible. The problem is that the family moved before the paperwork was completed and the time lines are thrown off. So by treating this as an initial we may be denying the student of a Free and Appropriate Public Education. In addition, we can start the evaluation because, since the student is still in special education, we have implied consent since we only need written parental consent in an initial. The assigned caseworker was going to speak with our director about this way of thinking and see if it holds water.
Then I attended a re-evaluation planning meeting at one of my out-of district placements. The meeting was so fast that it took me longer to travel to the location than the meeting itself. By way of explanation, I did get lost on the way there and the parent participated by phone.
In the afternoon I attended a coworkers meeting. This was actually the second meeting for this student since the first time around the parent didn't show. Here is the situation: the student had been eligible in another district under preschool disabled. Due to family problems, the family had to move. They moved in the middle of the re-evaluation that would have moved them from preschool to Part B (everything above preschool) in the previous district and moved around a lot. So the time line is completely thrown off and when the family moved into our district, the parent requested an evaluation as though it were an initial. So it was processed through our department as an initial. Following that logic, we need written consent before we can start testing. This makes the parent's absence from the initial referral conferences problematic.
So during this meeting, as we were awaiting the parent's arrival (they never showed) I brought up the idea that the kid is actually still in special education because they were previously eligible. The problem is that the family moved before the paperwork was completed and the time lines are thrown off. So by treating this as an initial we may be denying the student of a Free and Appropriate Public Education. In addition, we can start the evaluation because, since the student is still in special education, we have implied consent since we only need written parental consent in an initial. The assigned caseworker was going to speak with our director about this way of thinking and see if it holds water.
Tuesday, December 7, 2010
Eligibility Tuesdays
My day consisted of attending two eligibility conferences. One was an initial eligibility conference in which we did not find the student eligible. The parent was pleased that their child wasn't eligible. I wasn't sure how the parent was going to react considering they were the source of the referral.
The second one of the day was a re-evalaution. This one resulted in a change in classification. The student had been found eligible under the emotionally disturbed classification several years ago...for one incident...that, when taken in context, seemed understandable and not a reason to base that classification. Following our evaluations, we changed the classification to a more reasonable communication impairment.
The rest of my day was spend doing paperwork.
Tomorrow I get to go out of district for a planning meeting. A meeting for which I already know the outcome. All these meetings before the break are playing havoc with counseling.
The second one of the day was a re-evalaution. This one resulted in a change in classification. The student had been found eligible under the emotionally disturbed classification several years ago...for one incident...that, when taken in context, seemed understandable and not a reason to base that classification. Following our evaluations, we changed the classification to a more reasonable communication impairment.
The rest of my day was spend doing paperwork.
Tomorrow I get to go out of district for a planning meeting. A meeting for which I already know the outcome. All these meetings before the break are playing havoc with counseling.
Monday, December 6, 2010
A Case of the Mondays
So now that my counseling is limited to the afternoons due to the students' schedules, I stayed in the office until after lunch. I spent my time by doing some work for my PLC and completing a psych report. I also contacted a parent and arrange an early initial planning meeting. Usually I have to give 15 days notice before a meeting unless you get consent from the parent before hand. This parent gave his consent although my initial date needed to be changed to accommodate their schedule.
In the afternoon I was able to counsel two kids. Only two because when I tried to get a third, every kid I attempted to get was getting tutoring from one of their in-class support teachers. Ah well.
The session that I did have with these students were much better than my previous ones. I finally got a chance to use the Aquarius
card game. It was amazing how much their defenses dropped during the game. Or the opportunity to relate their behaviors in game to their behaviors out of game.
Following the counseling, I fielded a few more phone calls from parents and went home for the day.
In the afternoon I was able to counsel two kids. Only two because when I tried to get a third, every kid I attempted to get was getting tutoring from one of their in-class support teachers. Ah well.
The session that I did have with these students were much better than my previous ones. I finally got a chance to use the Aquarius
card game. It was amazing how much their defenses dropped during the game. Or the opportunity to relate their behaviors in game to their behaviors out of game.Following the counseling, I fielded a few more phone calls from parents and went home for the day.
Friday, December 3, 2010
The Winter NJASP Conference
Well today was the day. Not only didn't I win any of the raffles (none of my tickets even came close) but I didn't even get a good pen. The one pen I got was stolen by someone.
Beyond that, it was a good day. I got to see a couple of good friends and former coworkers (both of which are the same people). One was the director of my school psych program, who was running a workshop on supervising school psych interns. The other was actually someone that I met working for psychiatric emergency services. Last year, he was nominated for NJ School Psychologist of the Year. Both of these people have been big influences on my professional development and it was great to see them again.
My morning workshop was on executive functioning. The presenter was the creator of the Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Functioning. I thought it was a very good presentation. He was entertaining and informative. Some of the people that I shared a lunch table with felt that he was a bit condescending. While I think he may have been flippant, I didn't think him mean-spirited. Just that he didn't know much about New Jersey certification and license requirements. The presentation did make me want to get several instruments, not just the BRIEF.
I attended the workshop on supervising school psychology interns in the afternoon. You really need to think about being ready to be an intern supervisor because, while it may look like you get to foist work off on someone else, you are ultimately responsible for the work that the supervisee turns in. Still, I am curious about the experience.
All in all, it was a good day. I'm dreading what may be awaiting me at work on Monday but I'll deal with that then.
Beyond that, it was a good day. I got to see a couple of good friends and former coworkers (both of which are the same people). One was the director of my school psych program, who was running a workshop on supervising school psych interns. The other was actually someone that I met working for psychiatric emergency services. Last year, he was nominated for NJ School Psychologist of the Year. Both of these people have been big influences on my professional development and it was great to see them again.
My morning workshop was on executive functioning. The presenter was the creator of the Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Functioning. I thought it was a very good presentation. He was entertaining and informative. Some of the people that I shared a lunch table with felt that he was a bit condescending. While I think he may have been flippant, I didn't think him mean-spirited. Just that he didn't know much about New Jersey certification and license requirements. The presentation did make me want to get several instruments, not just the BRIEF.
I attended the workshop on supervising school psychology interns in the afternoon. You really need to think about being ready to be an intern supervisor because, while it may look like you get to foist work off on someone else, you are ultimately responsible for the work that the supervisee turns in. Still, I am curious about the experience.
All in all, it was a good day. I'm dreading what may be awaiting me at work on Monday but I'll deal with that then.
Thursday, December 2, 2010
NJASP Conference Eve
Today was my last day of work for the week. So I managed to get some stuff done that needed to get done before I left for the week. I made arrangements for a student schedule change, harassed a teacher to get a behavior inventory back; called the parent from Monday's meeting. It is funny how long ago Monday feels now. It feels really far away.
But for everything I accomplished, more work came my way. I assigned to several new initial referrals. Most of them had me signed on as the school psych but one of them is for a student in my grade so I'm the case manager of record for that one. So, before I left, I also had to get my other coworkers to commit to a date for the initial referral conference. So I can sleep tonight without that hanging over my head.
The interesting bit of conversation that I had today was with my coworker and office mate. We were discussing risk assessments. The part of this conversation that I wanted to talk about was how to make the assignment of risk assessments seem fair.
In any organization, there may be perceptions that some people get all the work while others don't. The people that feel "dumped on" may have this perception. Sometimes all it is is a perception. At other times, there is a bias at the level of distribution for whatever reason. At that level, it may be a perception of whose job it should be or of competence or capriciousness. And sometimes it is just a matter of being in the wrong place at the right time. Or the right place at the wrong time. Or...well you get my meaning and that is also a matter of perception. Some people, like me, love risk assessment (love is too strong of a word, but as I noted yesterday I have been finding them intellectually stimulating recently). Or at least just take it in stride as part of the job. Some folk are uncomfortable with them either because of lack of training or experience or both. Let's face it, being comfortable talking with a complete stranger about whether they have plans to kill themselves or someone else may not necessarily be "normal." And some people may just find the emergent nature of risk assessments disruptive to their daily routine. I'm sure that if you drew a ven diagram of these "factions" there would be a lot of overlap.
So back to the question of making the distribution of risk assessments fair. My first thought was to have a list of all the staff responsible for risk assessments and each time a person completes a risk assessment, they get a check next to their name with the goal of trying to make the check marks even out. Upon further examination of this idea, it has its flaws, such as actually relying on a person to keep such a list. It may also increase the feeling of being dumped on or the feeling that "I do more than you and I have the check marks to prove it."
My coworker brought up a better idea, hearkening back to our days in non-profit behavioral healthcare: the rotating on-call system. Assigning one person to be the primary and one person to be the back-up on-call for the week. I think it is a really good idea because it would free people from having to worry about having their week disrupted because people would know when they are on-call (thanks to a schedule) and could plan accordingly. It also takes the feeling of being dumped on away because everyone gets their time in the barrel and it becomes luck of the draw. On one rotation, you may have none while on another rotation, you may have one every day. Another benefit is response time: there is no wait to assign a staff member to the risk assessment because it is already decided.
This method might not work in all districts. The districts that I can see this being difficult for are the ones where staff is assigned and located in a particular school. This isn't an issue in my district because we all work out of a central office.
Well that is it for today. Tomorrow is conference day. I'll have to remember to bring my camera and take a few pictures. I also have to remember to bring some cash for the raffle. There are several interesting test kits up for raffle. Also I have to get some new pens...hopefully they have ones with black ink...can't stand blue ink...
But for everything I accomplished, more work came my way. I assigned to several new initial referrals. Most of them had me signed on as the school psych but one of them is for a student in my grade so I'm the case manager of record for that one. So, before I left, I also had to get my other coworkers to commit to a date for the initial referral conference. So I can sleep tonight without that hanging over my head.
The interesting bit of conversation that I had today was with my coworker and office mate. We were discussing risk assessments. The part of this conversation that I wanted to talk about was how to make the assignment of risk assessments seem fair.
In any organization, there may be perceptions that some people get all the work while others don't. The people that feel "dumped on" may have this perception. Sometimes all it is is a perception. At other times, there is a bias at the level of distribution for whatever reason. At that level, it may be a perception of whose job it should be or of competence or capriciousness. And sometimes it is just a matter of being in the wrong place at the right time. Or the right place at the wrong time. Or...well you get my meaning and that is also a matter of perception. Some people, like me, love risk assessment (love is too strong of a word, but as I noted yesterday I have been finding them intellectually stimulating recently). Or at least just take it in stride as part of the job. Some folk are uncomfortable with them either because of lack of training or experience or both. Let's face it, being comfortable talking with a complete stranger about whether they have plans to kill themselves or someone else may not necessarily be "normal." And some people may just find the emergent nature of risk assessments disruptive to their daily routine. I'm sure that if you drew a ven diagram of these "factions" there would be a lot of overlap.
So back to the question of making the distribution of risk assessments fair. My first thought was to have a list of all the staff responsible for risk assessments and each time a person completes a risk assessment, they get a check next to their name with the goal of trying to make the check marks even out. Upon further examination of this idea, it has its flaws, such as actually relying on a person to keep such a list. It may also increase the feeling of being dumped on or the feeling that "I do more than you and I have the check marks to prove it."
My coworker brought up a better idea, hearkening back to our days in non-profit behavioral healthcare: the rotating on-call system. Assigning one person to be the primary and one person to be the back-up on-call for the week. I think it is a really good idea because it would free people from having to worry about having their week disrupted because people would know when they are on-call (thanks to a schedule) and could plan accordingly. It also takes the feeling of being dumped on away because everyone gets their time in the barrel and it becomes luck of the draw. On one rotation, you may have none while on another rotation, you may have one every day. Another benefit is response time: there is no wait to assign a staff member to the risk assessment because it is already decided.
This method might not work in all districts. The districts that I can see this being difficult for are the ones where staff is assigned and located in a particular school. This isn't an issue in my district because we all work out of a central office.
Well that is it for today. Tomorrow is conference day. I'll have to remember to bring my camera and take a few pictures. I also have to remember to bring some cash for the raffle. There are several interesting test kits up for raffle. Also I have to get some new pens...hopefully they have ones with black ink...can't stand blue ink...
Wednesday, December 1, 2010
Tis the Season
With the return from the Thanksgiving weekend, we already seen an increase in the number of risk assessments. Four of them in three days. I wonder if the trend is going to continue.
So with this as a preface, I had a risk assessment, the fourth of the week so far. A middle school student with reports of suicidal ideation. I spent quite a long time on this one and didn't really come to a conclusion until I obtained collateral information from family members. In the end, it was what the student didn't tell me and their family did that led to my decision.
So I was thinking about the role of a school psychologists and how it relates to the risk assessment. During the assessment the thought crossed my mind, "I should just send the student out and be done with it." Within the confines of the school, it seems to me that the general feeling is that we are to decide whether another mental health professional needs to assess the student rather actual determining whether the student is at risk.
Part of this feeling may come from the fact that we don't actually have any power outside the school. We are only able to say that the student can't return to the school until they have been cleared by someone with the authority and license to do so. So does that absolve us from investigating further? Does it mean that we should just CYA (or COA)?
I don't think so. In my district, we have a relationship with the local screening center where we complete a report (a much briefer report than my actual in-district write up) and fax it to the center, as well as giving them a heads up call. So by digging deeper and asking more questions and seeking further information, we may end up getting information that won't be given to the professionals at the hospital. Either because the student/family may change their story on the way there or just refuse to discuss certain issues that may have been discussed in the school.
I'll also reiterate another piece of advice that I have picked up from the people that really trained me in risk assessment. Some excellent people indeed. That advice is: take your time. Don't let anyone rush you. Not the student; not the guidance counselor; not the principal. If you have questions, make sure you ask them. Don't feel like you have to fill the silence. You can take your time and think of your next question. And don't feel silly for asking the same question again, particularly if you something is bothering you about the first answer.
Like I said, it was what the student didn't tell me and their evasiveness that led me to ask further questions and seek out other sources of information that ultimately led to my decision.
So with this as a preface, I had a risk assessment, the fourth of the week so far. A middle school student with reports of suicidal ideation. I spent quite a long time on this one and didn't really come to a conclusion until I obtained collateral information from family members. In the end, it was what the student didn't tell me and their family did that led to my decision.
So I was thinking about the role of a school psychologists and how it relates to the risk assessment. During the assessment the thought crossed my mind, "I should just send the student out and be done with it." Within the confines of the school, it seems to me that the general feeling is that we are to decide whether another mental health professional needs to assess the student rather actual determining whether the student is at risk.
Part of this feeling may come from the fact that we don't actually have any power outside the school. We are only able to say that the student can't return to the school until they have been cleared by someone with the authority and license to do so. So does that absolve us from investigating further? Does it mean that we should just CYA (or COA)?
I don't think so. In my district, we have a relationship with the local screening center where we complete a report (a much briefer report than my actual in-district write up) and fax it to the center, as well as giving them a heads up call. So by digging deeper and asking more questions and seeking further information, we may end up getting information that won't be given to the professionals at the hospital. Either because the student/family may change their story on the way there or just refuse to discuss certain issues that may have been discussed in the school.
I'll also reiterate another piece of advice that I have picked up from the people that really trained me in risk assessment. Some excellent people indeed. That advice is: take your time. Don't let anyone rush you. Not the student; not the guidance counselor; not the principal. If you have questions, make sure you ask them. Don't feel like you have to fill the silence. You can take your time and think of your next question. And don't feel silly for asking the same question again, particularly if you something is bothering you about the first answer.
Like I said, it was what the student didn't tell me and their evasiveness that led me to ask further questions and seek out other sources of information that ultimately led to my decision.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)