UNIT III

PROBLEM SOLVING
APPROACH
PROBLEM SOLVING APPROACH

CONTENTS

OVERVIEW AND RATIONALE

ASSESSMENT AS A PROBLEM SOLVING PROCESS

PREVENTION AND INTERVENTION AS PART OF PROBLEM

SOLVING PROCESS

2
RESPONSE TO INTERVENTION AND POSITIVE BEHAVIOUR
SUPPORT
PROBLEM SOLVING APPROACH

TERMS TO REMEMBER

The Evidence-based Practice (EBP)

Response To Intervention (RTI)
Multi-tiered Systems Of Support

3
(MTSS)
 PROBLEM SOLVING APPROACH

Reschly (2008), as well as Ysseldyke and Reschly (2014), posit that a problem-
solving approach to school psychology entails a self-correcting process, which
emerges from the evaluation and progress monitoring that informs decision
making surrounding the implementation of prevention and intervention strategies.

Continuing to evolve as a self-correcting profession that seeks the best interests of

the youth, families, and schools it serves.

4
 WHY?
(1) evidence that traditional approaches to service delivery have many
problems, despite notable improvements in theory and methods;

(2) information suggesting the urgency of the need for a change toward a new
approach; and

(3) continued evidence supporting the usefulness of the problem-solving

approach for guiding the professional practice of school psychology

5
 COMPONENTS OF PROBLEM
SOLVING APPROACH
EBP, RTI, and MTSS help actualize a problem-solving approach to school psychology. These
movements are closely related, yet each has distinct characteristics:

• EBP emphasizes the general processes of identifying, disseminating, promoting, and adopting
empirically supported practices.

• RTI refers to the process of providing an EBP that is matched to student needs and then using
student response data to make decisions about the effectiveness of that specific EBP when applied
in a particular, local situation.

6 • MTSS is a service delivery heuristic for integrating EBP and RTI within a multilevel approach
that addresses the learning and social–behavioral needs of all students.
 PROBLEM SOLVING APPROACH
Gutkin (2012) calls an ecological approach to school psychology, which
emphasizes prevention work at the systemic level.

School psychology is therefore increasingly moving to providing services

within a tiered fashion that addresses the needs of all students within a school
setting.

Within MTSS, scholars generally identify three tiers of service delivery (e.g.,
Herman, Reinke, & Thompson, 2019; Kilgus & von der Embse, 2019; Stoiber,

7 2014):
 MTSS
Tier 1, also known as universal supports or primary prevention,
refers to low intensity services that are provided to all students
within a school population, without regard of risk status.

The aim of this level of service delivery is to promote overall

population wellness, which prevents the onset of new problems and
buffers against existing problems.
8
 MTSS

Tier 2, also known as targeted supports or selective prevention,

refers to moderate-intensity services that are provided to some
students, based on identified risk factors or early indicators of the
presence of problems.

The aim of this level of service delivery is to support students “at

risk” early and efficiently, preventing the possibility of worsening
9

risk factors or the development of more severe problems over time.

 MTSS
Tier 3, also known as intensive supports or indicated prevention, refers to high
intensity services that are provided to few students, based on indicators showing
significant risk factors or severe problems.

The aim of this level of service delivery is to support students “in risk”
immediately and effectively, preventing further development of chronic and
costly problems throughout the lifespan.

10
 The MTSS model can be thought of
as a vehicle for efficiently providing
cumulative or aggregated supports
that grow and expand according to
student need.
Two key factors to be considered :
(1)the scope of students receiving
services and
(2)the intensity of services provided
11

to those students
 OVERVIEW
At a universal or schoolwide level, the problem-solving process begins with determining the
discrepancy between (1) how students are functioning in various developmental domains when
they enter school and (2) how we would like them to be functioning when they graduate.

Teachers must employ a problem-solving process and adapt instruction to address the varying
instructional needs of all students within a particular instructional domain (e.g., reading).
Similarly, at the individual student level, teachers need to address varying student needs across
domains.

12
 OVERVIEW
The problem-solving model is therefore outcome focused and context specific.

Emphasis is placed on measuring discrepancies between current and expected

performance on important domains of functioning, and problem-solving
activities focus on understanding the nature of this discrepancy and then
developing, implementing, and evaluating interventions to reduce this
discrepancy (and improve outcomes).

All of these steps—assessment of the discrepancy, intervention development

13
and implementation, and evaluation—occur within the context (i.e., setting and
 PHASES IN PROBLEM SOLVING
APPROACH

14
 PHASE 1: WHAT IS THE
PROBLEM?—PROBLEM
IDENTIFICATION
Discrepancies between “what is” (i.e., current performance/outcome) and “what should be” (i.e.,
expected/desired performance).

Selecting standards for comparison - selected assessment tools and measurement techniques help to
clearly define the problem in objective, observable, and measurable terms.

The goals of this first step or phase are to

(1) get consensus about the right problem to solve and then

(2) develop an operational definition of the problem that is good enough to help everybody “get on
15
the same page” of understanding about the presentation of the problem (Pluymert, 2014).
 PHASE 2: WHY IS IT OCCURRING?—
PROBLEM ANALYSIS
“Why is this problem occurring?”

The overarching goal of this phase is to develop testable hypotheses about why
the problem is happening (Pluymert, 2014).

Instead of measuring student performance to find disabilities, our purpose is to

diagnose the conditions under which students’ learning is enabled” (Tilly, 2002)

Can’t do(skill deficit) /won’t do(motivational deficit) assessment method

16
 PHASE 2: WHY IS IT OCCURRING?—
PROBLEM ANALYSIS
During the problem analysis phase, information may be gathered from a variety of
sources (e.g., student, teacher, parent, peers, administrator) via a variety of assessment
tools (e.g., formal and informal direct observational methods, semi structured and
unstructured interviews, anecdotal reports, rating scales, review of records, curriculum
based measures) to answer the preceding questions.

The purpose is to understand why (or under what conditions) problems are more
pronounced and to identify patterns and factors that contribute to the problem.
17

Preference should be given to the most plausible and alterable hypotheses

 PHASE 3: WHAT SHOULD BE DONE ABOUT
IT?—INTERVENTION PLAN DEVELOPMENT

Within the intervention plan development phase, an intervention strategy is selected and based on
its functional relevance to the problem, contextual fit, and likelihood of success.

We also need to figure out how often, for how long, and in what location the intervention will be
delivered.

In addition, it is important to determine the adequacy of existing resources and the need for
additional resources involved in implementing the intervention.

Furthermore, timelines for implementing objectives and achieving desired short-term or long-term
goals should be specified.
18

And, finally, planning should be made to ensure support for and proper monitoring of
 PHASE 4: DID IT WORK?—
INTERVENTION PLAN
EVALUATION
Collecting ongoing information regarding the discrepancy between desired and actual performance is the
best way to determine whether or not the intervention plan is effective.

At this stage, objective evidence should be gathered to determine whether the implemented intervention
plan is effective (i.e., behavior change in the direction of the goal), practical (i.e., relatively easy to
implement with integrity), and acceptable (i.e., perceived positively by those implementing and receiving
the services).

Single-subject evaluation methods are the most useful and rigorous methods for determining the effects
(or lack thereof) of intervention plans on student outcomes (see Kazdin, 2019).
19
 PHASE 4: DID IT WORK?—
INTERVENTION PLAN
EVALUATION
If the plan is unsuccessful:

(1) identify what about the plan is not working,

(2) analyze why that part of the plan is not working,

(3) redevelop the plan based on this analysis, and then

(4) reevaluate the effectiveness and integrity of this updated plan.

20
 ASSESSMENT AS A PROBLEM
SOLVING PROCESS
The goal of an evaluation should not simply be to provide numerical values regarding the child’s
functioning and to choose a category that best fits the child.

Rather, the goal of evaluation is to identify conditions that will enable a child to learn most effectively
(Reinke, Sims, Cohen, & Herman, 2018; Tilly, 2008).

Traditional assessment requires a higher degree of inference to generate intervention strategies than
does assessment under the problem-solving method, which obtains a direct measure of a student’s
skills in the context in which they occur.
21
 PREVENTION AND INTERVENTION
AS PART OF PROBLEM-SOLVING
PROCESS
The problem-solving process does not provide us with a crystal ball so that we can predict in an absolute
manner how successful various prevention and intervention efforts will be for different students, but it
can help to facilitate the selection of strategies with a higher probability of being successful.

Who to target and in what important domains of functioning.

When we need to intervene (i.e., critical periods of development), and informing how we should
intervene (i.e., what intervention strategies are likely to work for particular problems, contexts, or
populations).

22
 PREVENTION AND
INTERVENTION AS PART OF
PROBLEM-SOLVING PROCESS
Effective problem solvers integrate knowledge of the factors that influence
important developmental outcomes, knowledge of empirically supported
treatments, and the information they collect about the problem and its context.

23
 RESPONSE –TO- INTERVENTION
The individuals with Disabilities Education Act and No Child Left Behind emphasize
the use of scientifically based research to improve outcomes for students.

Initial purpose – screening and intervention to students of LD

Present focus – a general approach for improving instructional and intervention

decision making for all students.

It offers excellent umbrella of guiding principles for improved assessment and

intervention decision making.
24
 RTI ORIGINS

RTI has been described as an alternative approach to the traditional

IQ-discrepancy approach for identifying students with LD.

As an alternative, this approach has been characterized as a multi-

step or tiered approach in which student progress is closely
monitored to make good instructional and intervention decisions.

25
 RTI
RTI has six core defining features that are applicable across curriculum areas:

 Interventions that are supported by scientifically based research.

 Interventions that are organized along a tiered continuum that increases in

intensity.

 Standardized problem-solving protocol for assessment and instructional decision

making.

26
 RTI
• Explicit data-based decision rules for assessing student progress and
making instructional and intervention adjustments.

• Emphasis on assessing and ensuring implementation integrity.

• Regular and systematic screening for early identification of students

whose performance is not responsive to instruction.

27
 RTI – APPROACHES

Problem Solving Standard Protocol

Approaches Approaches

28
 PRACTICES AND
STRATEGIES – RTI
1. Pre-referral Interventions and Teacher Assistance Teaming

School structures and procedures used to organise resources for the early
identification and remediation of instructional deficits before more formal and
specialised interventions are considered.

Teachers requesting assistance for students who are not benefitting from the
existing curriculum work in teams with other school staff to remediate the
problem.
29
 PRACTICES AND STRATEGIES –
RTI
2. Diagnostic/Perspective Teaching

Rather than focusing attention on the learner as the source of at-risk

academic performance, the emphasis is on the analysis of the
appropriateness of the curriculum, integrity of the presentation of the
curriculum, and nature of the student’s responsiveness to the
curriculum and its presentation.
30
 PRACTICES AND STRATEGIES –
RTI
3. Curriculum based Measurement

Brief, regular and frequent, direct assessment of student

performance on local curriculum is standardized to inform decisions
related to screening, diagnosis and instructional planning and
adaptations.

31
 PRACTICES AND STRATEGIES -
RTI
4. Precision Teaching

Standardized and systematic methods are used to formatively

evaluate the effectiveness of instruction and curriculum. Emphasis
on directly observable behaviour, frequency as a measure of student
performance.

32
 PRACTICES AND STRATEGIES -
RTI
5. Applied Behaviour Analysis

Emphasis on behaviour and the analytic examination of the

functional relation with environmental stimuli.

33
 PRACTICES AND STRATEGIES -
RTI
6. Behavioural/Instructional Consultation and Problem Solving

Five steps

• Problem identification

• Problem clarification

• Intervention development

• Intervention implementation

• Evaluation

34
 PRINCIPLES OF RTI MODELS
Successful wide-scale implementation will take considerable:
Tim
e
Resource
s
Leadershi
p
Plannin
g
Evaluatio
n
Empirical
Evidence of
Preparation
35
Professionals
 SCHOOL WIDE POSITIVE
BEHAVIOUR SUPPORTS

Implementation of Primary Tier Intervention

SWPBS is described as a prevention framework or approach that highlights the

organization of teaching and learning environments for the effective, efficient,
and relevant adoption and sustained use of research based behavioural
interventions for all students, especially those with serious behaviour challenges.

36
 FEATURES OF SWPBS
Data collected,
Four element Outcomes and Objectives
integration Practices and Interventions
System and organizational supports

Evidence School wide

Classroom
based Non-classroom
behavioural Family
interventions Individual Students
The three tiers
Continuum of a) Primary tier for all students and staff and family members
behaviour b) Secondary tier for individuals whose behaviours are not successfully
responsive to primary tier
37
support c) Tertiary for individuals whose behaviours are not responsive to either the
above two
 SWPBS PRACTITIONER’S
GUIDELINES
RTI highlights a number of practices that can improve academic outcomes for students with
disabilities

a) Universal screening

b) Continuum of evidence-based instructional practices

c) Team-based, timely and data-driven decision making

d) Procedural guidelines for assessing intervention integrity

e) Formative and direct assessment of student performance on local curricula

38
 SWPBS OPERATING GUIDELINES
1. Use data to narrow identification of desired goals, expectations and outcomes.

2. Establish goals, objectives and outcomes that are based on local data, described in
measurable terms, and are realistically achievable with available resources. ‘

3. Consider and adapt interventions and practices that have empirically and applied evidence
of achieving expected goals, objectives and outcomes.

4. Organise resources and systems so that implementers have the opportunities, capacities and
resources to implement the practice with accuracy and fluency over time.

39
 List of possible social behaviors for schools to target for prevention/intervention:

40
 CASE STUDY – ACTIVITY
Your phone vibrates. On the other end are your friends. You can almost feel their fear and
frustration. You learn their teenage son is flipping out. The parents are perplexed because
their son has always had a gentle disposition.
They can rarely get him out of his room now. And when he does, he barely speaks to
anyone. Even then, it’s brief, cynical, and disrespectful. You learn that most of his habits are
changing. Everything seems to be falling apart in his life.
The reason for the phone call was that the parents saw wounds on the teen’s arms. He had
been cutting himself for a while but forgot to cover his arms. The parents tried to get
information out of him, but the boy was unyielding. The parents persisted, and after feeling
backed into a corner, he went into a verbal rant, pushed his parents out of the way, and ran
outside. The parents knew of cutting, but never thought it would be a problem in their
home.
41
Most unnerving was learning how this kind of behavior can lead to suicide. The parents are
terrified, and they are asking for your help.
 CASE STUDY – ACTIVITY

1.What would you initially say to your friends?

2.If the teenager refused to talk with you, how would you try to help him?

3.How do the parents figure into the boy’s struggles?

4.If the teen threatened suicide, what would you tell the parents to do?

5.What other questions do you think are relevant here?

42
 CASE STUDY – ACTIVITY
After discovering that one of her students tweeted foul language about her, a
school teacher confronted the teenager during a lesson on social media
etiquette. Inquiring why the student would post such hurtful messages that
could harm the teacher's reputation, the student replied that she was upset at the
time. The teacher responded that she was very upset by the student's actions.
The teacher demanded a public apology in front of the class, and the student
apologized. The teacher later stated that she would not allow young brats to call
43 her those names.
 Was the student behaviour wrong, and if yes, why?

What are the teacher's goals in this situation? How should the teacher have
addressed the misbehaviour?

Should the teacher have excused the student's action, or taken a different
approach?

If the teacher's actions are wrong, why is that?

How should teachers as a profession treat student misbehaviour like this?

Should teachers have a standard that they should follow, or should they be
44 allowed to exercise their discretion?