Teacher resistance to school-based consultation with the school psychologist: An analysis according to school level and model of identification for special education services

Consultation is promoted throughout school psychology literature as a best practice in service delivery. This method has numerous benefits including being able to work with more students at one time, providing practitioners with preventative rather than strictly reactive strategies, and helping school professionals meet state and federal education mandates and initiatives. Despite the benefits of consultation, teachers are sometimes resistant to this process.This research studies variables hypothesized to lead to resistance (Gonzalez, Nelson, Gutkin, & Shwery, 2004) and attempts to distinguish differences between school level (elementary, middle and high school) with respect to the role played by these variables and to determine if the model used to identify students for special education services has an influence on resistance factors. Twenty-sixteachers in elementary and middle schools responded to a demographicquestionnaire and a survey developed by Gonzalez, et al. (2004). This survey measures eight variables related to resistance to consultation. No high school teachers responded to the request to participate. Results of analysis of variance indicated a significant difference in the teaching efficacy subscale with elementary teachers reporting more efficacy in teaching than middle school teachers. Results also indicate a significant difference in classroom managementefficacy with teachers who work in schools that identify students according to a Response to Intervention model reporting higher classroom management efficacy than teachers who work in schools that identify students according to a combined method of refer-test-place/RtI combination model. Implications, limitations and directions for future research are discussed.

Knuckling Under? School Superintendents and Accountability-Based Educational Reform

The goal of this article is to explore the various ways that superintendents have responded to accountability-based educational reform efforts such as No Child Left Behind, the factors that have influenced their responses, and the implications of these responses for current and future educational leaders. With respect to the first issue, empirical data from a number of nationai studies (T. E. Glass & Franceschini, 2007; Johnson, Arumi, & Ott, 2006; Johnstone, Dilkkers, & Luedeke, 2009; Stecher et al., 2008) make clear that while there have been a variety of responses from superintendents to accountability-based reform efforts, superintendents have mostly played a supportive role. Examining the situation more fully suggests that the driving factors behind superintendent support for accountability-based educational reform are complex and are often deeply embedded within the "DNA" of the role of superintendent. This article examines the structure of this DNA by looking at the factors that influence superintendents' views of accountability-based educational reform from historical, political, and institutional perspectives. This muitifaceted approach provides new insights into the complex relationship that exists between the structure of the role of superintendent and the agency of the individuals who inhabit that role.