School Psychology Review

ISSN: (Print) 2372-966x (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/uspr20

The Present and Future Status of School

Psychology in the United States

Daniel J. Reschly

To cite this article: Daniel J. Reschly (2000) The Present and Future Status of School Psychology
in the United States, School Psychology Review, 29:4, 507-522

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/02796015.2000.12086035

Published online: 22 Dec 2019.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 7

View related articles

Citing articles: 14 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=uspr20
SchoolPsychology Review
2000, Vol. 29, No. 4, pp. 507-522

The Present and Future Status

of School Psychology in the United States

Daniel J. Reschly
Vanderbilt University

Abstract: Evidence concerning school psychology practitioners, graduate students,program

graduates, degree levels, roles, and supply-demand relationships was reviewed. Historical
trends and current directions were identified with tentative projections to the future. School
psychology in 2000 can be characterized as practiced primarily by specialist-level
professionals, most of whom are female, and devoted largely to traditional roles with
alternative roles emerging and gaining prominence. Strong demand exists for school
psychologists in the public schools and legal requirements exert enormous influences on
demand and priorities for services. Tentative projections of future trends are provided.

The past, present, and future of school
psychology in the U.S. are discussedin this article
with particular attention to patterns of stability
and change. The demographics of school
psychology students, faculty, and practitioners
will be discussed with patterns of school
psychology practice and roles and employment
conditions (e.g., ratios of students to
psychologists, salary and contract length, work
settings, job satisfaction). The infrastructure of
school psychology will be discussed including
the knowledge base, scientific and professional
publications, credentialing patterns, and legal
requirements regarding practice. Needs for
additional research will be described along with
the limitations in the current database.
Speculation about the future is nearly
irresistible. So, future projections about school
psychologists and their practice will be made-
cautiously and with a special effort to explain the
limitations of the data from which the projections
are made. The databasefor determining past and
current patterns consists mostly of imperfect
survey studies of school psychologists. The
potential flaws in the survey literature include
such factors as poor participation rates,
ambiguously worded items, and limited access
to the population of interest.
The participation rates in most school
psychology surveys have been less than 50% of
those invited to participate (e.g., Farling & Hoedt,
1971; Hutton, Dubes, & Muir, 1992). Participa-
tion rates can be improved to about 75% to 80%
through using a well-defined sample and
implementing follow-up procedures with sample
members who do not return surveys after the first
mailing (Curtis, Hunley, Walker, & Baker, 1999;
Reschly, 1998; Reschly, Genshaft, & Binder,
1987; Reschly &Wilson, 1995). The latter studies
with higher participation rates still have
approximately 20% to 25% nonparticipation, a
rate that could change results if nonparticipants
differed significantly from participants. A further
problem is that accessto the entire population of
school psychologists is limited. Most studies use
association membership lists. The National
Association of School Psychologists (NASP)
membership list is by far the largest and most
inclusive of the kinds of school psychologists;
however, a reasonable estimate of the number of
school psychologists who arenot NASP members
is one-quarter to one-third.
School Psychology Demographics:
Students, Practitioners, and Faculty
School psychology demographics have
changed in significant ways during the past 30

Address all correspondence concerning this article to Daniel J. Reschly, Box 328 Peabody College, Vanderbilt
University, Nashville, TN 37203-5701. E-mail: danreschly @vanderbilt.edu.

Copyright 2000 by the National Association of School Psychologists, ISSN 0279-6015

507
508 School Psychology Review, 2000, Vol. 29, No. 4

years. These changes continue today and are
likely to continue during the next 10 years. Some
of the trends are rather dramatic while others are
subtle.
Gender. The clearest changes in school
psychology during the past two decades have
occurred in gender. There hasbeen a strong trend
toward increasing proportions of women as
students, practitioners, primary program faculty,
and graduate program directors. Data from the
past 30 years are summarized in Figure 1. During
the past three decades the representation of
women in school psychology has been highest
among graduate students, followed by prac-
titioners, faculty, and program directors.
The gender composition of studentsin school
psychology was relatively even in the early 197Os,
although there were slightly more men in doctoral
programs and slightly more women in master’s
and specialist programs (Bardon & Walker,
1972). Gender compositions of students changed
gradually and consistently from 1970 to the mid
199Os,with the proportion of women growing
by about 10% per decade(Brown & Minke, 1984;
McMaster, Reschly, & Peters, 1989; Smith,
1995). According to the last comprehensive
survey of graduate programs, women now
constitute 80% of all students in graduate
programs, including 78.5% of all doctoral
students (Thomas, 1998).
As might be expected from the gender trends
among students, the practitioner gender
composition also has become increasingly
female. The trend in the growth of women in the
practitioner population closely parallels the
student trend, lagging the student proportions by
about 10% throughout this period. The
composition of the school psychology
practitioner population changed from slightly

90 1 I
I 80% I
80

70
Percent 60
of
Women
m YStudents
50
+ Practitioners
40
+ aFaculty
30 l - -X-Directors
I --
/ YF
18%
20 * 28%
r-
# = 24%

1960s 1970s 1980s 1990s

Survey Dates

Figure 1. Representation of women in different school psychology careers.

 Present and Future Status of School Psychology
greater proportions of males to females (60:40)
in the early 1970s (Farling & Hoedt, 1971) to
approximately equal proportions from about 1975
to 1980 (Wilson & Reschly, 1995) and then to
increasing domination by women since the mid
1980s. In the 1990s the male-female practitioner
proportions changed from approximately 35:65
males to females (Graden & Curtis, 1991;
Reschly & Wilson, 1995) to the current ratio of
about 30:70 males to females (Curtis et al., 1999).
In view of the current composition of graduate
students in school psychology, the prediction of
continued gender domination by women in the
practitioner population for at least another decade
is safe.
The gender composition of faculty has
lagged consistently behind the patterns among
students and practitioners, but the overall change
since 1970 has been in the same direction and of
the samemagnitude. Survey studies reported the
following faculty gender compositions during the
past three decades: 82% male to 18% female
(Farling & Hoedt, 1971), 76% male to 24%
female (Brown & Lindstrom, 1977), 66% male
to 33% female (McMaster et al., 1989), and 54%
male to 46% female (Thomas, 1998). During the
quarter-century that data were collected on faculty
gender composition, the proportions have
changed by about 28% such that nearly equal
proportions of males and females serve as
graduate program role models for students today.
The gender composition of program directors,
however, still is lower today than the overall
faculty proportions despite an increase of women
program directors from 11% to 35%.
The data trends for practitioners, graduate
students, and faculty are remarkably consistent
during the past 30 years. At all data points, the
proportion of women among students exceeded
the proportion of women among practitioners by
a difference of 10%. Similarly, the differences in
the proportions of women faculty and women
graduate students and women faculty and women
practitioners were about 35% and 25%,
respectively, at all data points. The program
director trend in relation to other trends was less
consistent, although there is a clear pattern of
increasing representation of women that is likely
to continue in the next decade.
An intriguing question is why the proportion
of women in faculty roles trails the proportions
of women students and practitioners. No
systematic, definitive study hasbeen reported on
this phenomenon. Reschly (1991) studied the
509
applicant pool for advertised faculty vacancies
in university graduate programs for one year.
Although women constituted about 64% of the
doctoral graduates in the 1986-1987 year
(McMaster et al., 1989), only 40% of the
applicant pool was female. This finding supports
the anecdotal observation that women doctoral
graduates are somewhat less likely to apply for
academic positions, which often necessitates
relocating geographically (see also discussion by
Wilson & Reschly, 1995). The clear trend,
however, is greater representation of women in
faculty roles. That trend also is highly likely to
persist through the next decade.
Age. Age trends among school psychology
practitioners and faculty are difficult to establish
with confidence becausefew surveys of faculty
have included age, and the surveys of
practitioners sometimes reported means and
standarddeviations and at other times proportions
in age range categories, (e.g., percentage > 50).
With theselimitations in mind, it appearsthat the
median age of practitioners has increased
significantly during the past 15 years. Reschly
and his colleagues reported the median ages of
38,41, and 47, respectively for surveys conducted
in 1986,1992, and 1997 (Reschly, 1998; Reschly
et al., 1987; Reschly & Wilson, 1995).
Categorical age data were reported by Curtis and
colleagues for surveys conducted in 1990 and
1995. The proportions of practitioner school
psychologists older than 50 years of age in
surveys conducted in 1990 and 1995 were 20.2%
and 23.4%, respectively (Curtis et al., 1999;
Graden & Curtis, 1991). Clearly, the Reschly data
suggest significantly increasing average ages of
school psychologists in the 1990swhile the Curtis
et al. results indicate a moderate trend. Both
suggest increasing age. These age trends,
however, may not be substantially different from
historical average ages.For example Farling and
Hoedt (1971) reported that 21% of school
psychologists were older than 50 years of age.
Less is known about age trends among
faculty and graduate students. In 1992-1993 the
average age for school psychology faculty was
46.3 years, a six-year increase from the 1986
findings (Reschly & Wilson, 1995). It is expected
that a substantial proportion of public school
teachers and postsecondary professors will retire
in the next five to 10 years, and there is good
reason to believe that the samephenomenon will
occur with school psychology practitioners and
510 School Psychology Review, 2000, Vol. 29, No. 4
faculty. The age and retirement trends are likely
to further complicate the personnel shortages in
school psychology.
Race and Ethnicity. Persons of color have
been substantially underrepresented throughout
the history of school psychology. Many of the
surveys even neglected to seekrespondents’ race/
ethnic@ characteristics. Recent data from Curtis
et al. (1999) revealed that approximately 5.5%
of practitioners reported being in a non-Caucasian
group; however, only 1% reported being African
American and 1.7% were self-identified as
Hispanic. Minority representation in graduate
programs and faculty has increased during the
past decade.McMaster et al. (1989) reported that
10.7% of the faculty and 12.8% of the graduate
students were minority. Ten years later graduate
program directors reported that 15% of the faculty
and 17% of graduate studentshave minority status
(Thomas, 1998). Neither report indicated the
percentage of students or faculty by specific
minority groups making it impossible to
determine if the most underrepresented groups
are better represented today. Despite the highly
desirable increase in the diversity of school
psychology graduate students, the composition
of school psychology will remain
overwhelmingly Caucasian for the next decade.
Degree level. A markedly incorrect
prediction of school psychology’s future occurred
about 15 years ago when Brown and colleagues
predicted a rapid change to the doctoral level
among school psychology practitioners including
the assertionsthat in the near future a majority of
graduates would be doctoral (Brown, 1989).
Others erroneously acceptedBrown’s prediction
including Fagan (1986) who suggestedthat one-
half of all practitioners by 2010 would be at the
doctoral level. In contrast to these predictions,
the specialist level of training dominates school
psychology graduate education and practice
today, and it is likely to continue to do so due to
the composition of the current graduate student
population and the fact that most school
psychology training programs are not authorized
to award doctoral degrees (Thomas, 1998).
Personnel Needs
The number of school psychologists in the
U.S. hasgrown substantially during the past three
decades(Fagan, 1988; Fagan &Wise, 2000). The
highest rate of increase occurred in the 198Os,
but the total number has increased consistently
during the 1990s. Two sources exist for
estimating the number of school-based school
psychologists: surveys of the school psychology
leadership in the states(Lund, Reschly, & Martin,
1998) and state reports to the U.S. Department
of Education (USDE; 1996). The results for the
states from these two sources were highly
correlated (r = .98), but the overall USDE
estimates were approximately 8% lower than the
Lund et al. survey information. It is important to
note that neither source is infallible; therefore,
results from both should be regarded with caution.
The USDE data may undercount the actual
number of school psychologists because their
focus is upon psychologists who are reported by
school districts to statesas working with students
with disabilities. School district reports are
compiled by states and submitted to the Office
for Special Education Programs (OSEP) as part
of the mandatory state reporting under federal
education disability law. School psychologists
who are not assigned primarily to students with
disabilities may not be counted in the district
reports. The USDE reports on personnel are two
years out-of-date when reported. For example,
the USDE (1999) annual report provided data on
personnel working with students with disabilities
for the 1996-1997 school year.
The number of school psychologists
employed in public school positions grew from
approximately 9,950 in 1977-1978 to 23,806 in
1996-1997 (USDE, 1980-1991,1992-1999) (see
Figure 2). The number of vacant positions
according to the USDE reports varied from 1,402
in 1988-1989 to 325 in 1993-1994. In 1996-1997
there were 495 positions that were vacant
bringing the total number of full-time school
psychology positions in the public schools to
24,301 for that year (USDE, 1999). The 1999
report also indicated that 1,224 (5.1%) of the
23,806 school psychologists employed in the
public schools were not fully certified. An
unknown additional number of school
psychologists work in universities as faculty, in
clinics, mental health facilities, hospitals, or state
departments of education, and in other capacities
in public schools such as special education
administrator or building principal. It is
impossible to estimate the numbers of such
persons with precision, but an estimate of
approximately 5,000 appears to be realistic.
Weighing all the evidence, I believe that the total
 Present and Future Status of School Psychology
Figure 2. Growth of school psychology 1977-1978 to 19964997.
number of personstrained as school psychologists
and employed today in some professional
capacity is approximately 30,000.
Estimating the demand for school
psychologists has been hazardous. Bardon &
Wenger (1976) presented a gloomy prediction
just as the employment of school psychologists
was to increase at the fastest rate in history.
Shortages of school psychologists existed in
nearly every year since 1976. Lund et al. (1998)
reported shortages in nearly every region (data
collected for the 1992-1993 academic year).
Theseshortagesmay be aggravated by the effects
of the retirements of school psychologists who
entered the field in the 1960s and 1970s.
Professional employees in public schools
generally retire at a younger age than other
professionals due, at least in part, to plans that
permit early retirement when a criterion is met
that combines age and years of experience, e.g.,
90 years. For example, a 60-year-old school
psychologist who has worked for 30 years is
eligible in many statesfor full retirement benefits.
The shortages of appropriately prepared school
511
psychologists experienced throughout the 1990s
are likely to continue well into the next century
barring significant changesin one or more of the
factors that affect the supply and demand for
school psychologists.
One complication of estimating personnel
trends is attrition, that is, the number of school
psychologists who leave public school positions
for other settings or for professional careers in
other fields or who discontinue employment
temporarily or permanently. To my knowledge
no systematic study of attrition has been
published. Moreover, there is less known about
the careerpatterns of doctoral program graduates.
It is clear that not all doctoral graduatesrepresent
additional personnel for public school positions
becausesome already have such positions, some
join university faculties, and others secure
employment in other settings or in other careers.
Studies of the career patterns of school
psychology graduates are needed to understand
the supply-demand characteristics better.
The number of school psychologists
employed in public school settings is influenced
512 School Psychology Review, 2000, Vol. 29, No. 4
by several factors; economic conditions, legal
requirements concerning provision of services to
groups of students such as students with
disabilities, and the roles of various personnel
such as educational diagnosticians (Lund et al.,
1998). Another influence on demand is the roles
of other personnel, particularly in the provision
of preplacement evaluations and related services
to students with disabilities. For example,
educational diagnosticians and counselors in at
least three states provide most of those services
(Texas, New Mexico, and Missouri). These states
also have student-to-school psychologist ratios
well above the national and regional averages.
School psychology supply and demand
phenomena are not understood completely. More
information is needed about school psychology
career choices, attrition, and retirement as well
as demand characteristics such as the impact of
state and federal legal requirements, expansion
of services to new populations, and alternative
delivery systems (Fagan, 1995). The current
situation suggests strong demand for school
psychologists through the next decade. Factors
that might change this picture are significant
changes in economic conditions that produce
more stringent school budgets or substantial
changes in legal requirements.
Employment Conditions and Satisfaction
The principal employers of school
psychologists are the public schools; however,
school psychologists also work in a wide variety
of settings (universities, hospitals, clinics, private
practice, state departments of education, etc.) and
in other professional roles such as special
education administer or coordinator, school
principal or superintendent, and director of
community- or hospital-based mental health
services.Despite this variety, about 85% of school
psychologists are employed by the public schools.
Considerable evidence exists about the
nature of employment conditions in public
schools. The median number of days specified
in public school contracts is 192 (Reschly, 1998);
however, the range for full-time employment is
from 178 to 250 days. The median salary for
someone with a 192-day contract in 1997-1998
was approximately $48,000. It is likely that the
median salary for school psychologists on typical
full-time contracts today is approximately
$50,000.
School psychology job satisfaction, overall,
was high and stable during the past 15 years
(Reschly, 1998; Reschly et al., 1987; Reschly &
Wilson, 1995). Job satisfaction is positive in terms
of overall satisfaction with school psychology as
a career and intent to continue in school
psychology. On Like&scale items overall job
satisfaction is well above the middle point on the
scale. Analysis of job satisfaction by domain
yields a consistent pattern of very high
satisfaction with the areasof work and colleagues,
high satisfaction with supervision, and moderate
satisfaction with pay and benefits (especially the
latter). The only area of real concern in the job
satisfaction pattern is the perception that there
are few opportunities for school-based
practitioners for promotion or career advance-
ment. The latter perception appearsto be slightly
more prominent among specialist- than doctoral-
level school-basedpractitioners. No data exist on
the job satisfaction of school psychologists in
nonschool settings.
Roles of School Psychologists
Despite nearly 50 years of exhortations in
the professional literature that school
psychologists could and should assumea broader
role than psychoeducational assessment, the
balance of the evidence suggests that school
psychologists continue to spend approximately
50% to 55% of their time in psychoeducational
assessmentactivities (Cut&, 1955; Fagan &Wise,
2000; Reschly, 1998; Reschly & Wilson, 1995).
The remainder of the time is devoted to the roles
of direct intervention (20%), problem-solving
consultation (17%), systems/organizational
consultation (6%), and applied research/program
evaluation (2%). Results from school
psychologists’ ideal role preferences also are
relatively stable and in the direction of reduced
time in psychoeducational assessment(to 32%)
and increased time in the other roles (direct
intervention to 29%; problem-solving con-
sultation to 22%; systems/organizational con-
sultation to 11%; and applied research/program
evaluation to 6%) (Reschly, 1998).
The stable pattern of roles just described is
somewhat deceiving. First, the amount of time
spent in special education eligibility evaluations
decreased from approximately 68% in 1986 to
approximately 60% in 1997 (Reschly, 1998).
Curtis et al. (1999) also reported a smaller number
of special education evaluations in 1995
compared to a similar survey conducted in 1990
 Present and Future Status of School Psychology
(Graden & Curtis, 1991). There is no question
that school psychologists employed in public
schools continue to spend the majority of their
time with children and youth who are suspected
of or who are diagnosed with disabilities.
There are slight changes apparent in what is
done in the context of students with disabilities.
Assessment activities appear to be changing in
the direction of less emphasis on assessmentof
general cognitive or intellectual functioning
accompanied by more emphasis on functional
assessment for the purposes of intervention
design, implementation, and evaluation. That is,
more emphasis is placed upon behaviorally
defining target behaviors, determining current
status on relevant behaviors, using data to assess
intervention progress, and evaluating program
effectiveness and appropriateness of program
placements (Reschly, 1998). Recent changes in
legal requirements also foster the trend toward
more intervention-oriented assessmentactivities.
Reschly’s (1988) prediction of a rapid
change in the roles of school psychologists due
to special education reform is a third example of
an incorrect prediction. This prediction was
predicated on special education reform toward a
noncategorical classification system and much
greater emphasis on functional assessment,
effective interventions, and an outcomescriterion.
Although these changes have not occurred
broadly, there are specific places in which the
changeshave occurred and a revolution in school
psychology roles has resulted (Ikeda, Tilly,
Stumme, Volmer, & Allison, 1996; Reschly et
al., 2000; Tilly, Reschly, & Grimes, 1999).
Determinants of school psychology roles are
understood imperfectly (Fagan & Wise, 2000).
Legal requirements and funding mechanisms
exert enormous influences on school psychology
employment, working conditions, and roles. The
model of service adopted by the agency or school
district within the context of legul requirements
is a significant determinant as well. For example,
changes in state legal requirements toward
adoption of a noncategorical, functional assess-
ment system led the school psychologists in one
large intermediate unit to eliminate from their
practice testsof general cognitive functioning and
general intelligence (Ikeda et al., 1996; Reschly
& Tilly, 1999; Reschly & Ysseldyke, 1995; Tilly
et al., 1999). Service delivery models that use
alternative special education eligibility criteria
and place more emphasis upon intervention
outcomes can produce rather dramatic changes
513
in the roles of school psychologists.
Ratios of students to psychologists influence
school psychology roles. Region also is a
significant influence on roles, most directly
through the mechanism of student-to-
psychologist ratios. The current national mean
and median ratios of students to psychologists in
the public schools are approximately 1,930: 1 and
1,750: 1, respectively (Reschly, 1998). The
differences in the mean and median estimates
suggest that some outliers involving especially
high ratios are inflating the mean. The national
averages, however, mask enormous regional and
state-to-state differences. The most desirable
regional averages occur in New England
(1,205: 1) and the Mid Atlantic (1,239: 1); the least
desirable in the West South Central (4,692: 1) and
the East South Central (3,351: 1) (Lund et al.,
1998). The best and worst state ratios occur in
Connecticut (610: 1) and Texas (7,071: l),
respectively. Ratios also vary significantly
between districts within many states (Fagan &
Wise, 2000). The opportunity to provide services
beyond state-mandated special education
evaluations is severely constricted in situations
with excessively high ratios. Survey data indicate
that psychologists in statesand regions with better
ratios do, indeed, contribute a broader range of
services (Reschly, 1998; Smith, 1984).
In addition to roles, the ratio of students to
psychologists influences or is correlated with job
satisfaction, assessmentpractices, amount of time
devoted to special education eligibility
determination, and useof assessmentinstruments.
Ratio is one of the most robust of the influences
on school psychology practice in the public
schools.
Region exerts an influence on roles apart
from and in addition to the influence from
student-to-psychologist ratios (Smith, 1984).
Data from the 1997 survey currently being
analyzed (Reschly, 1998) indicates that the use
of projective assessment,behavioral assessment,
and testsof general intellectual functioning varied
significantly by region. In findings comparable
to those published by Smith and colleagues,
school psychologists in east coast statescontinue
to useprojective assessmentproceduresto a much
higher extent than psychologists elsewhere who
are more likely to make greater use of behavioral
assessmenttechniques. The regional influences
on assessment should not be exaggerated,
however, because the use of individually
administered standardized achievement and
514 School Psychology Review, 2000, Vol. 29, No. 4

intelligence tests was prominent in all regions. professional associations; (c) improved graduate
Degree level, doctoral vs. specialist, has a program quality; (d) improved continuing
modest influence on roles in the public school education opportunities for faculty and
setting (Brown, Swigart, Bolen, Hall, & Webster, practitioners; (e) more elaborate legal require-
1998). Doctoral- and specialist-level practitioners ments regarding psychological services for
practice in very similar ways in the schools, students with disabilities; (f) development and
however, doctoral-level practitioners report implementation of program approval and
slightly less time devoted to psychoeducational credentialing processes, especially at the
assessmentand slightly more time to the other specialist level; (g) advancement of the typical
roles (direct intervention, problem-solving practitioner graduate education level from
consultation, systems/organizational con- master’s to specialist; (h) greater availability of
sultation, and applied research/program successful alternative models for school
evaluation) (Reschly & Wilson, 1997). Doctoral- psychology practice including the noncategorical,
level school psychologists in public school functional assessment, and comprehensive
settings also rate their competencies as higher in health-services models; and (i) more effective
the nonassessmentroles. cooperation at the national level between the
Other influences on roles are less clear. American Psychological Association
Attitudes and beliefs are likely influences, but the (particularly Division 16, School Psychology)
strength of those influences is uncertain. A well- and NASP. Each of these advancements could
known phenomenon in psychology is the be discussed at great length in this article;
discrepancy that often exists in attitudes and however, other articles in this issue address
beliefs. School psychologist’s attitudes toward several of the improvements and other readily
system reform themes are slightly positive available articles in the literature address other
overall, but the discrepancies are not large. It is changes (Fagan & Wells, 2000).
unlikely that the current complex of attitudes and
beliefs will produce very much impetus for Legal Influences on Employment and Roles
change in roles (Reschly, 1998; Reschly &
Wilson, 1995). School psychology is markedly influenced
Although little systematic study of setting as by legal requirements, especially the legislation
a variable has occurred, school psychologists and litigation guaranteeing children and youth
practicing in nonschool settings appear to have a with disabilities accessto appropriate educational
different role pattern. Reschly and Wilson (1997) services that meet key legal standards. This
identified significant differences in roles across legislation establishes the strong tie between
school and nonschool settings. School school psychology and special education, a long,
psychologists in nonschool settings generally are fruitful, and sometimescontroversial relationship.
involved to a much higher degree with direct The relationship of legal requirements and school
interventions, problem-solving consultation, and psychology is discussedin more detail elsewhere
systems/organizational consultation than their (Prasse, 1995; Reschly & Bersoff, 1999). The
colleagues in school settings. The setting variable discussion in this section will be devoted to the
is contaminated to some extent by degree level: influence of legal requirements on school
school psychologists in nonschool settings are psychology employment and roles, and to recent
more likely to have doctoral degrees. Further changesin legal requirements.
study of setting influences is needed to clarify
the relative influence of this variable. Employment and roles. The ties between
school psychology, learning and behavior
School Psychology Infrastructure problems among school-agechildren, and special
education are nearly 100 years old in the U.S.
Vast improvements occurred during the past (Fagan, 1992, 1995). The first psychological
three decades in the school psychology clinic at the University of Pennsylvania developed
infrastructure. Among the most important of these by Lightner Witmer focused upon learning
advances are (a) increased number and problems and other disorders. The fast person to
sophistication of journals, texts, and continuing use the title, school psychologist, Arnold Gesell,
educati on material s; (b) markedly increased used that title in 1915 to describe his role in
activity by state and national school psychology evaluating children for mental retardation in the
 Present and Future Status of School Psychology
Connecticut public schools. Clearly, theseties are
longstanding, deep, and fundamental to what
school psychology hasbeen, is today, and is likely
to be in the future.
The tie to special education continues to
influence markedly the number of school
psychologists and their roles. It might be seenas
a two-edged sword. A close tie to special
education in the form of a pivotal role in special
education eligibility determination is the
foundation of financial support for school
psychology in nearly every state. States without
that close tie have the poorest student-to-
psychologist ratios in the U.S. (e.g., Texas and
New Mexico). States with the close tie do not
necessarily have desirable ratios in the range of
< 1,500: 1 or < 1,000: 1, but the ratios clearly are
better.
The other edge of the two-edged sword,
however, is that eligibility determination is the
contribution most valued by state and local
educational agencies. Other roles are secondary
to that role for the vast majority of school
psychologists in the U.S. today. The amounts of
time devoted to other roles (e.g., direct
intervention or consultation) varies as a function
of other factors, especially the student-to-
psychologist ratio. It also is important to note that
the amount of time devoted to administering,
scoring, and interpreting standardizedtests aspart
of the eligibility determination role varies by how
disabilities are conceptualized and
operationalized and the model of school
psychology services (Reschly et al., 2000). The
alternative models show that Sarason’s (1975)
famous assertion that school psychology was born
in the prison of the test should be modified to
school psychology has been functioning in a
prison imposed by disability conceptions that
focus primarily upon IQ (Reschly, 1988; Reschly
& Tilly, 1999; Reschly & Ysseldyke, 1995; Tilly
et al., 1999).
Special education legislation and funding are
the keys to school psychology employment today
and in the past. Prior to the enactment of
mandatory special education legislation at the
national and state levels between the late 1960s
and mid 197Os, the employment of school
psychologists was extremely uneven across the
states (Kicklighter, 1976). States with more
progressive special education legislation
generally had a relatively small (in comparison
to current employment levels) and slowly
growing school psychology profession. States
515
with little direct state support for special
education had few school psychologists and little
or no growth.
The enormous, continuing growth of school
psychologists since 1975 is correlated highly with
and, I am willing to say, causedby the mandatory
special education legislation that was established
about 25 to 30 years ago with the Education of
All Handicapped Children Act (EHA; 1975,
1977) and reauthorized periodically since then
as the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act
(IDEA; 1997, 1999). The enormous increase in
the growth of NASP membership during the past
30 years clearly reflects the legislative trend, and
the continued growth in the 1990s reflects the
continuing effects of the original EHA legislation
and the effects of legislative refinements and
applications to a broader population (e.g.,
preschoolers) (IDEA, 1997, 1999).
Recent Changes in Legal Requirements
All school psychologists should be intimately
familiar with the basic legal requirements
regarding the educational rights of children and
youth with disabilities. The mandatory ages
during which these rights are guaranteed has
expanded to 3 to 21 years and, in many states,
from birth to 21 years. The fundamental legal
principles have not changed significantly in the
past 25 years; however, the understanding of these
principles has deepened and, in some cases,
broadened as they have been interpreted by the
courts and further refined in legislation (Reschly
& Bersoff, 1999; Telzrow & Tankersley, 2000)
(see Table 1).
The most recent federal legislation (IDEA,
1997, 1999) with which the states must comply
to receive federal support for special education
continued the basic principles described in Table
1 with important additions and refinements.
Psychological services continues to be defined
as a related service involving assessment,test
interpretation, consultation, service planning and
management, and intervention (i.e., positive
behavioral intervention strategies).
Noncategorical special education and
questions about the SLD criteria. One of the
changes with potentially vast implications for
school psychology practice appeared in the
legislation and regulations. First, official authority
for establishing noncategorical special education
eligibility determination appeared at 34 CFR
516 School Psychology Review, 2000, Vol. 29, No. 4

Table 1
El&I/IDEA Principles: 1975-2000 Effects on Schools and Impact on School Psychology

1. Right to a Free Appropriate Education at Public Expense

Effects: All students with disabilities guaranteed educational rights leading to (a) more students in the
existing population of students classified as having mild disabilities such as specific learning disabilities and
(b) students with complex multiple disabilities and severe disabilities gain accessto public schools.

Impact: More psychologists needed to conduct evaluations and provide other services to students with
disabilities; Some psychologists needed with highly specialized skills in working with students with low
incidence and severe disabilities such as autism.

2. Least Restrictive Environment

Effects: More students with disabilities served in general education environments or in part-time resource
teaching programs. Special education is increasingly becoming a range of services brought to children and
youth in natural environments rather a place where educational services are provided.

Impact: More emphasis on psychologists conducting assessmentslin natural environments and on developing
interventions and support services that assist students in general education environments.

3. Individualized Educational Program (IEP)

Effects: Development of detailed plans to guide the provision of special education and related services,
including general goals and specific objectives, assessmentof progress, and annual review of the IEP.

Impact: More emphasis identifying specific educational needs during evaluations and on monitoring
progress toward goals.

4. Procedural Safeguards
Effects: Formal procedures to protect rights and to involve parents in decision-making through requirements
of informed consent, rights to appeal decisions, impartial hearings, etc.
Impact: Greater scrutiny of psychologists’ work as well as more emphasis on communicating with parents.
Increased likelihood of psychologists testifying under oath in administrative hearings in which decisions are
challenged.

5. Protection in Evaluation and Eligibility Determination

Efkcts: Nondiscrimination in evaluation and decision-making, multifactored assessmentand decision-making
by a team that includes various professionals and parents, valid assessmentthat focuses on educational need,
primary language, and triennial re-evaluation.

Impact: Some traditional prerogatives of school psychologists were curtailed through placing less emphasis
on IQ and greater emphasis on achievement and adaptive behavior, consideration of language differences
and sociocultural status, determining educational need and team decision-making.

6. Confidentiality of Records and Parental Access to Records

Effects: Access to records controlled by client/parent. School officials with a need to know have accessto
records. Parents or youth of legal age are guaranteed accessto records.

Impact: Psychologists’ work and records open to parental inspection including test protocols and treatment
notes (unless excluded under state law), raising legal issues about violation of copyright laws and professional
ethical issues regarding disclosure of sensitive information. In some instances schools are required to make
copies of copyrighted test protocols for parental inspection.
 Present and Future Status of School Psychology
300.125, which stated that “nothing in the Act
requires that children be classified by their
disability so long as each child who has a
disability. . . and who . . . needsspecial education
and related services is regarded as a child with a
disability.”
This regulation makesofficial OSEP’ s 1990s
interpretations that identification by disability
category was not a necessary prerequisite to the
provision of special education services. An
accompanying implication is that standard school
psychology assessmentpractices used now such
asindividually administered IQ and achievement
tests with specific learning disabilities (SLD) and
other categories no longer is required if an
alternative eligibility system is established. This
change removes one of the toughest barriers to
special education system reform and changes in
school psychology roles.
Determining an ability (IQ)-achievement
discrepancy is crucial in most states as part of
the SLD classification criteria and constitutes a
major part of the current role of most school
psychologists. The appropriateness of the
discrepancy method of determining SLD
eligibility is criticized with increasing stridency
by persons associated with the federally funded
reading disability research centers (Lyon, 1996).
The major criticisms are that IQ-achievement
discrepant and nondiscrepant poor readersdo not
differ in the instructional interventions needed
or in responsivenessto that instruction. Moreover,
the discrepancy criterion often delays treatment
to third or fourth grade when, in fact, the vast
majority of children that will be identified later
as SLD in the area of reading can be accurately
identified in kindergarten with relatively
straightforward measures of phonological
awareness. Delaying treatment allows reading
problems to worsen as well as causing enormous
frustration (Fletcher et al., 1998).
Changes in the SLD classification criteria
involving either the elimination of the
discrepancy requirement through
noncategorical scheme or other alternative
classification criteria will present enormous
challenges to school psychologists. SLD accounts
for more than one-half of the disabilities identified
in the public schools and, therefore, constitutes a
significant part of most school psychologists’
roles. Changes in SLD will almost inevitably
require acquisition of new skills and the
development of competencies more related to
early identification of specific skills and the
517
design of effective treatments. Models exist for
the successful transition of school psychologists
to these new roles (Ikeda et al., 1996; Reschly et
al., 2000; Tilly et al., 1999).
Positive behavior supports and functional
behavior assessment. A second major change
in the new legal requirements is the emphasis on
positive behavior interventions and functional
behavior assessment.These new requirements
appear at several places in the new IDEA (1999)
regulations. In the Protection in Evaluation and
Determination of Eligibility (PEDE) section (34
CFR 300.530 to 300.541) regarding eligibility
determination, the evaluation procedures must
involve, “A variety of assessment tools and
strategies (that) are used to gather functional and
developmental information about the child” (34
CFR 300.532). In the IEP development
regulations (34 CFR 300.346) teams are required
to consider, “In the caseof a child whosebehavior
impedes his or her learning or that of others,
consider, if appropriate, strategies, including
positive behavioral interventions, strategies, and
supports to address that behavior.” In discipline
cases involving students with disabilities,
functional behavior assessment and positive
behavioral interventions are required prior to
making further decisions about changes in
placement.
These requirements present demands and
establish opportunities for school psychologists
to contribute more to interventions and to use
alternative assessment approaches such as
behavior assessment and functional behavior
analysis. Many school psycho1
psychologists
.ogists do not have
adequate skills with positive behavioral supports,
behavioral assessment,and functional behavior
assessment. Some school psychologists have
quite erroneously interpreted these new
regulations within the context of how traditional
IQ tests might be used in a new way or as simply
a form that should be completed from existing
a data. The OSEP staff discussionof the regulations
left little doubt that the meaning of these terms
involved a focus upon situational, environmental
and behavioral events (IDEA, 1999, Comments
on sec. 300.520).
Some excellent continuing education
programs are emerging to assist school psychol-
ogists to acquire the behavioral intervention and
functional behavior assessmentcompetencies. In
selecting continuing education programs, it is
crucial to understand that thesenew requirements
518 School Psychology Review, 2000, Vol. 29, No. 4
mandate an analysis of behaviors in natural
settings; a focus upon antecedent, situational, and
consequent events; and careful implementation
of empirically supported behavioral interventions
with progress monitoring and evaluation of
outcomes. (O’Neill et al., 1997; Tilly et al., 1998;
Tilly & Flugum, 1995).
Educational need and general education
curriculum. IDEA (1997, 1999) represents the
beginning of what might become a major change
in how special education instruction and related
services will be evaluated. The shift is from
procedural compliance to an outcomes or results
orientation. Moreover, the primary perspective
for the evaluation of results is the general
education curriculum. The new IEP regulations
specify that the content of the IEP include
information on “meeting the child’s needs that
result from the child’s disability to enable the
child to be involved in and progress in the general
curriculum (i.e., the same curriculum as for
nondisabled children)” (34 CFR 300.347). Other
regulations require that students with disabilities
participate in the regular state and district
assessmentprograms with accommodations as
needed. There are exceptions to these
requirements for students with disabilities so
severe that participation in the general education
assessmentprogram would be meaningless, but
those exceptions are expected to be rare.
The emphasis on results and participation
also is applied in the PEDE regulations in which
there is unequivocal emphasis on (a) gathering
“information related to enabling the child to be
involved in and progress in the general education
curriculum,” (b) using “assessment tools and
strategies that provide relevant information that
directly assistspersons in determining the needs
of the child,” and (c) “consider information from
current classroom-based assessments and
observations and observations by teachers and
related services providers” (34 CFR 300 530-
541). These new regulations complement the
existing regulations regarding the use of valid
assessment procedures, determining specific
areas of educational need, and assessment in
multiple domains. The assessment procedures
most consistent with the goals implicit in these
regulations include curriculum-based measure-
ment and assessment,criterion-referenced skills
measures, and behavior assessment.The degree
to which these regulations are emphasized in
federal and state compliance monitoring efforts
will be one of the influences on the evolution of
school psychology services during the next
decade and beyond.
Non-English-speaking children and
minority disproportionality. A fourth trend in
IDEA (1997, 1999) is increasing concern about
the appropriateness of the services provided to
non-English speaking children and the
overrepresentation of minority children and youth
in special education programs. English language
learners (ELL) continue to representan enormous
challenge to the American schools and to school
psychology. Other sources document the
increasing numbers of ELL in our school
population and the necessity of enabling them to
achieve at high levels (August & Hakuta, 1998).
Evaluation of possible special education and
related services needs with ELL students is
complicated and likely to remain as such well
into the next century. The PEDE regulations
encourage school psychologists and others to
ensure that assessments with ELL children
actually measure the behaviors related to the
disability rather than merely reflecting the child’s
poor emerging English language skills.
Moreover, ELL children may not be determined
to be eligible for special education if the
“determinant factor is limited English
proficiency” (34 CFR 300.532). Clearly there is
a need for many more bilingual school
psychologists with the greatest need in bilingual
Spanish-English as well as a better knowledge
base and improved competencies with ELL.
Although the original EHA (1975, 1977)
legislation and regulations reflected concerns
about disproportionate minority representation in
special education (see especially the
nondiscrimination regulation, 34 CFR 300.530),
no further development of regulations in this area
occurred until IDEA (1997, 1999). A special
section on disproportionality hasbeen added that
requires statesto report to the federal government
disability and program placement by race/
ethnicity groups. If significant disproportionality
occurs, the state must review and, if appropriate,
revise policies and procedures related to the
special education identification or placement of
minority students (34 CFR 300.755). No criteria
are given to define what level of
disproportionality might be significant or what
policy and procedures changesmight be made to
ameliorate the problem-issues that are far from
settled (MacMillan & Reschly, 1998).
 Present and Future Status of School Psychology 519

Summary. The development and practice of or temporarily certify other professional

school psychology have been markedly psychologists for school psychology positions
influenced by legal requirements throughout the likely will increase. Nevertheless, there is every
20th Century. Enabling legislation and funding reason to believe that the demand will be strong
provisions create the employment context for the in view of the trends toward gradual expansion
vast majority of school psychologists in the U.S. of positions and the incipient retirement of many
today. The benefits of the legal influences come current practitioners.
at the cost of establishing special education The specialist level will dominate school
eligibility determination as the top priority for psychology practice in 2010. The proportion of
school psychologists in public school doctoral-level persons in practice may grow
employment. Recent changes in the legal slightly due to the influences just discussed, but
regulations create the potential for greater I think that it is safe to assumethat 70% or more
involvement with interventions that enhance the of the practitioners in 2010 will be nondoctoral.
results of special education programs. These Dominance of practice by doctoral-level
changeshave significant potential for broadening practitioners by 2010 would be an astonishing
the roles of school psychologists. development that assumesmany changesthat are
not likely to occur.
School Psychology and the Future School psychology and American institu-
tions will be challenged even more regarding the
Examination of past predictions about the changing racial-ethnic composition of school
future of school psychology engenders great enrollments and the general population. There is
caution about projecting the future. As previously reason to believe that school psychology is
discussed,predictions by Bardon, Brown, Fagan, becoming more ethnically diverse; however, the
and Reschly have been markedly incorrect. The pace of change is not sufficient to improve
predications provided here are offered with markedly the current imbalance in the
caution. characteristics of school psychologists and the
populations they serve. School psychology is not
Current trends in demographics. Several alone in this dilemma. The ethnic-racial
current trends are almost certain to continue composition of school teachers, college
during the next 10 years. The increasing professors, and many other professions also
dominance of women in all school psychology reflect this imbalance. School psychologists can
careers is likely to continue. By 2010 an expect to be challenged in the next decade and
additional 10% increase is likely in the female beyond by issues relating to disproportionate
proportions of students and practitioners bringing minority representation, valid and culturally
those proportions to 90% and 80%, respectively. sensitive assessment and interventions, and
The increases in those proportions are likely to improved outcomes for all children.
plateau in the 2010s at about 95% and 85%,
respectively. The proportions of women asfaculty Roles. Although traditional roles will
and graduate program directors are likely to continue to be prominent, wider variations in roles
increase at a faster rate with women constituting can be expected to emergeduring the next decade
perhaps 65% of the faculty and 50% of the asthe current alternative models are adopted more
program directors by 2010. These projections are widely. School psychologists will continue to
consistent with longstanding trends in general devote more than one-half of their time to students
psychology regarding undergraduate majors and with at-risk characteristicsor disabilities, but what
proportions of graduate students (Pion et al., is done will change toward less standardized
1996). testing and more intervention-oriented
Continued personnel shortages are more assessment, greater involvement with direct
difficult to project; however, if the good economic interventions, and problem-solving consultation.
times of the 1990s persist for most of the next The knowledge basefor greater involvement with
decade, it is likely that the demand for school effective, empirically supported intervention has
psychologists will continue to be strong. The improved dramatically in the 1990s (e.g., Daly,
supply is much more difficult to predict. If the Hintze, & Hamler, 2000; Gresham, 1999; Kern
supply of clinical and counseling psychologists & Dunlap, 1999; Stoner, Shinn, & Walker, 1991).
continues to exceed demand, pressure to retrain School psychologists will continue to use
520 School Psychology Review, 2000, Vol. 29, No. 4

standardized tests of achievement and ability if A number of current trends provide optimism for
the current classification criteria remain the the future. This optimism must be tempered bY
same. The SLD classification criteria are the knowledge that trends can change and the
especially influential on current roles. If the school psychology leadership does not have a
intense advocacy in the research community for good historical ret ord of being su.ccessful in
changesin SLD classification practices succeeds, anticipating change or projecting future trends.
then dramatic changes in the use of traditional Despite this caution, there is every reason to
tests could occur. Changes in SLD accompanied believe that the best is yet to be for school
by the adoption of alternative delivery system psychologists and the constituencies they serve.
models could produce rapid changes and are
likely to do so in some places. My experience
with system reform, however, suggests that References
systemchangeswill occur slowly during the next Adelman, H. S., & Taylor, L. (2000). Shaping the future of
decade. mental health in the schools. Psychology in the Schools,
Comprehensive health services at school 37, 49-60.
sites are likely to expand during the next decade August, D., & Hakuta, K. (Eds.). (1998). Educating
language-minority children. Washington, DC: National
(Adelman & Taylor, 2000). As noted by Academy Press.
Adelman and Taylor, expansion of theseservices Bardon, J. I., & Walker, N. W. (1972). Characteristics of
will depend upon the adoption of empirically graduate training in school psychology. American
supported treatments and evaluation results Psychologist, 27, 652-656.
Bardon, J. I., & Wenger, R. D. (1976). School psychology
confirming benefits. Recent mental health training trends in the early 1970s. Professional
evaluations raise questions about whether more Psychology, 7, 3 l-36.
mental health services really lead to better Brown, D. T. (1989). The evolution of entry level in school
outcomes. Positive outcomes in all facets of psychology: Are we now approaching the doctoral level?
School Psychology Review, 18, 1l- 15.
school psychology practice will influence the Brown, D. T., & Lindstrom, J. P. (1977). Directory of school
development of the discipline. psychology training programs in the United States and
Canada. Stratford, CT: National Association of School
Legal requirements. Legal requirements Psychologists.
arguably have the greatest impact on current Brown, D. T. & Minke, K. M. (1984) Directory of school
psychology training programs in the United States.
school psychology roles. The intended and Stratford, CT: National Association of School
unintended consequences of changes in legal Psychologists.
requirements have been extremely difficult to Brown, M. B., Swigart, M. L., Bolen, L. M., Hall, C. W., &
anticipate. For example, no one saw the Webster, R. T. (1998). Doctoral and nondoctoral
practicing school psychologists: Are there differences?
enormousimpact of mandatory special education Psychology in the Schools, 35, 347-354.
legislation in the early to mid 1970s on the Curtis, M. J., Hunley, S. A., Walker, IS. J., & Baker, A. C.
demand for school psychologists. And no one (1999). Demographic characteristics and professional
can anticipate the changesin legal requirements practices in school psychology. School Psychology
that may occur during the next decade. Current Review, 28, 104-l 16.
Cutts, N. E. (1955). School psychology at mid century.
legal requirements appear to be well established Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
through various levels of state and federal statute Daly, E. J., Hintze, J. M., & Hamler, K. R. (2000). Improving
and litigation. Changes in this basic legislation practice by taking steps toward technological
are unlikely, although greater state variations in improvements in academic intervention in the new
millennium. Psychology in the Schools, 37, 61-72.
implementation are plausible. Moreover, there Education of All Handicapped Children Act of 1975,20 USC
may be further development of federal and state sec. 1400-1485 et seq. (statute); 34 CFR 300 (regulations
child and family legislation that could lead to published in 1977).
another dramatic expansion of psychological Fagan, T. K. (1986). School psychology’s dilemma:
services to children. Reappraising solutions and directing attention to the
future. American Psychologist, 41, 85 l-86 1.
Fagan, T. K. (1988). The historical improvement of the
Conclusions school psychology service ratio: Implications for future
employment. School Psychology Review, 17(3), 447-458.
On many dimensions school psychology has Fagan, T. K. (1992). Compulsory schooling, child study,
flourished in the 1990s.Ratios are better, demand clinical psychology, and special education: Origins of
school psychology. American Psychologist, 47,236-243.
is strong, and firmly established legal provisions Fagan, T. K. (1995). Trends in the history of school
ensure solid financial support in nearly all states. psychology in the United States. In A. Thomas and J.
 Present and Future Status of School Psychology
Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology III,
(pp. 59-67). Washington, DC: National Association of
School Psychologists.
Fagan, T. K., & Wells, P. D. (2000). History and status of
school psychology accreditation in the United States.
School Psychology Review, 29, 28-51.
Fagan, T. K., & Wise, P. S. (2000). School psychology: Past,
present, andfuture. Bethesda, MD: National Association
of School Psychologists.
Farling, W. H., & Hoedt, K. C. (1971). National survey of
school psychologists. Washington, DC: National
Association of School Psychologists. (ERIC Document
Reproduction Service No. 061 553)
Fletcher, J. M., Francis, D. J, Shaywitz, S. E., Lyon, G. R.,
Foorman, B. R., Stuebing, K. K. & Shaywitz, B. A.
(1998). Intelligent testing and the discrepancy model for
children with learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities
Research and Practice, 13, 186-203.
Graden, J. L. & Curtis, M. J. (1991). A demographic profile
of school psychology: A report to the NASP Delegate
Assembly. Silver Spring, MD: National Association of
School Psychologists.
Gresham, F. M. (1999). Noncategorical approaches to K-12
emotional and behavioral difficulties. In D. J. Reschly,
W. D. Tilly III, & J. P. Grimes, (Eds), Special education
in transition: Functional assessment and noncategorical
programming (pp. 107-138). Longmont, CO: Sopris
West.
Hutton, J. B., Dubes, R., & Muir, S. (1992). Assessment
practices of school psychologists: Ten years later. School
Psychology Review, 21,27 1-284.
Ikeda, M. J., Tilly, W. D. III, Stumme, J., Volmer, L., &
Allison, R. (1996). Agency-wide implementation of
problem-solving consultation: Foundations, current
implementation, and future directions. School
Psychology Quarterly, 1I, 228-243.
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, Amendments of
1997, 20 USC sec. 1400 et. seq. (statute); 34 CFR 300
(regulations published in 1999).
Kern, L., & Dunlap, G. (1999). Developing effective program
plans for students with disabilities. In D. J. Reschly, W.
D. Tilly I& & J. P. Grimes, (Eds.), Special education in
transition: Functional assessment and noncategorical
programming (pp. 213-232). Longmont, CO: Sopris
West.
Kicklighter, R. H. (1976). School psychology in the U.S.: A
quantitative survey. Journal of School Psychology, 14,
151-156.
Lund, A. R., Reschly, D. J., & Martin, L. M. (1998). School
psychology personnel needs: Correlates of current
patterns and historical trends. School Psychology Review,
27, 106-120.
Lyon, G. R. (1996). Learning disabilities. The Future of
Children: Special Education for Students with
Disabilities, 6, 56-76.
MacMillan, D. L., & Reschly, D. J. (1998). The
disproportionate representation of African-Americans in
special education: The case for greater specificity or
reconsideration of the variables examined. Journal of
Special Education, 32, 15-24.
McMaster, M. D., Reschly, D. J., & Peters, J. M. (1989).
Directory of school psychology graduate programs.
Washington, DC: National Association of School
Psychologists.
O’Neill, R. E., Homer, R. H., Albin, R. W., Sprague, J. R.,
Storey, K., & Newton, J. S. (1997). Functional
521
assessment and program development for problem
behavior. New York: Brooks/Cole.
Pion, G. M., Mednick, M. T., Astin, H. S., Hall, C. C. I.,
Kenkel, M. B., Keita, G. P., Kohout, J. L., & Kelleher, J.
C. (1996). The shifting gender composition of
psychology: Trends and implications for the discipline.
American Psychologist, 51, 509-528.
Prasse, D. P. (1995). School psychology and the law. In A.
Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school
psychology IZZ (3rd ed.; pp. 41-50). Washington, DC:
National Association of School Psychologists.
Reschly, D. J. (1988). Special education reform: School
psychology revolution. School Psychology Review, I7,
459-475.
Reschly, D. J. (1991, March). University faculty shortages:
A 1989- I991 study offilled and unfilled vacancies. Paper
presented at the annual convention of the National
Association of School Psychologists, Dallas.
Reschly, D. J. (1998, August). School psychology practice:
Is there change ? Paper presented at the annual
convention of the American Psychological Association,
San Francisco.
Reschly, D. J., & Bersoff, D. N. (1999). Law and school
psychology. In C. R. Reynolds 8z T. B. Gutkin (Eds.),
The handbook of school psychology (3rd ed.; pp. 1077-
1112). New York: Wiley.
Reschly, D. J., Genshaft, J., & Binder, M. S. (1987). The
1986 NASP survey: Comparison of practitioners, NASP
leadership, and university faculty on key issues.
Washington, DC: National Association of School
Psychologists. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service
No. ED 300 733)
Reschly, D. J., Ikeda, M. J., Tilly, W. D. III, Allison, R.,
Grimes, J. P., & Upah, K. .F. (2000, April). School
psychology without IQ: Roles, assessment, satisfaction,
supervision, and evaluation. Symposium presented at the
annual convention of the National Association of School
Psychologists, New Orleans.
Reschly, D. J., & Tilly, W. D. III. (1999). Reform trends and
system design alternatives. In D. J. Reschly, W. D. Tilly
III, & J. P. Grimes (I%.), Special education in transition:
Functional assessment and noncategorical programming
(pp. 19-48). Longmont, CO: Sopris West.
Reschly, D. J., & Wilson, M. S. (1995). School psychology
faculty and practitioners: 1986 to 1991 trends in
demographic characteristics, roles, satisfaction, and
system reform. School Psychology Review, 24, 62-80.
Reschly, D. J., & Wilson, M. S. (1997). Characteristics of
school psychology graduate education: Implications for
the entry level discussion and doctoral level specialty
definition. School Psychology Review, 26, (74-92).
Reschly, D. J., & Ysseldyke, J. E. (1995). School psychology
paradigm shift. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best
practices in school psychology III (3rd ed.; pp. 17-31).
Washington, DC: National Association of School
Psychologists.
Sarason, S. (1975). The unfortunate fate of Alfred Binet and
school psychology. Teachers College Record, 77, 579-
592.
Sm ith, D. K. (1984). Practicing school psychologists: Their
characteristics, activities, and populations served.
Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 15,
798-810.
Smith, D. K. (1995). Summary of NASP survey of school
psychology training programs: Data analysis to date.
Paper presented at the annual convention of the National
522 School Psychology Review, 2000, Vol. 29, No. 4

Association of School Psychologists, Chicago.
Stoner, G., Shinn, M. R., & Walker, H. M. (1991).
Interventions for achievement and behavior problems.
Washington, DC: National Association of School
Psychologists.
Telzrow, C. F., & Tankersley, M. (Eds.). (2000). IDEA
amendments of 1997: Practice guidelines for school-
based teams. Bethesda, MD: National Association of
School Psychologists.
Thomas, A. (1998). Directory of schoolpsychology graduate
programs. Bethesda, MD: National Association of
School Psychologists.
Tilly, W. D. III, & Flugum, K. R. (1995). Ensuring quality
interventions. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best
practices in school psychology III (3rd ed.; pp. 485500).
Washington, DC: National Association of School
Psychologists.
Tilly, W. D. III, Kovaleski, J., Dunlap, G., Knoster, T.,
Bambara, L., & Kinkaid, D. (1998). Functional
behavioral assessment: Policy development in light of
emerging research and practice. Alexandria, VA:
National Association of State Directors of Special
Education.
Tilly, W. D. III, Reschly, D. J., & Grimes, J. P. (1999).
Disability determination in problem-solving systems:
Conceptual foundations and critical components. In D.
J. Reschly, W. D. Tilly III, & J. P. Grimes (Eds.), Special
education in transition: Functional assessment and
noncategorical programming (pp. 285321). Longmont,
CO: Sopris West.
U. S. Department of Education. (1980-1991). Annual reports
to Congress on the implementation of P.L 94-142, the
Education of All Handicapped Children Act.
Washington. DC: Office of Special Education Programs.
U. S. Department of Education. (1992-1999). Annual reports
to Congress on the implementation of the Individuals
with Disabilities Education Act. Washington. DC: Office
of Special Education Programs.
Wilson, M. S., & Reschly, D. J. (1995). Gender and school
psychology: Issues, questions, and answers. School
Psychology Review, 24,45-61.

DanielI J. Reschly is Professor of Education and Psychology and chair of the Department of Special
Education, Peabody College, Vanderbilt University. He conducts research on school psychology
professional practices, system reform, and disproportionate representation of minorities in educational
programs.