Measuring the Behavioral Indicators of Instructional Consultation: A Preliminary Validity Study by ProQuest


More Info
									School Psychology Review,
2009, Volume 38, No. 4, pp. 496 –509

     Measuring the Behavioral Indicators of Instructional
        Consultation: A Preliminary Validity Study

           Sonja A. McKenna, Sylvia Rosenfield, and Todd A. Gravois
                      University of Maryland, College Park

            Abstract. Instructional Consultation is a school-based consultation model de-
            signed to enhance student and staff performance. An interview-based, self-report
            instrument, the Level of Implementation Scale was developed to measure the
            presence of behavioral indicators of the seven critical dimensions of Instructional
            Consultation. The current article evaluates the accuracy of measuring these
            behavioral indicators, comparing the Level of Implementation Scale interview
            responses from consultants and teachers to analyses of the actual recorded
            consultation sessions, to verify whether the interview responses captured the
            consultation behaviors. Participants were 20 newly trained consultants and their
            teacher consultees. Audiotape recordings of the consultation sessions were rated
            to determine the presence of the behavioral indicators, and resulting scores
            compared to those reported in the Level of Implementation Scale interviews. The
            current study found that self-report Level of Implementation Scale interview
            results were significantly related to actual consultation behaviors. No significant
            discrepancies were found on any of the seven critical dimensions.

      As schools attempt reforms to provide            and enhancing staff competence as a route to
effective instruction to students who have dif-        both systems improvement and positive indi-
ficulties learning, consultation and problem-           vidual student outcomes. Within the team
solving processes have been implemented                model, the IC process, a consultee-centered
with increased frequency (Erchul & Sheridan,           approach to problem solving (Knotek, Ka-
2008). Research evidence has accumulated               niuka, & Ellingsen, 2008; Knotek, Rosenfield,
that such services provide benefits to students         Gravois, & Babinski, 2003), is used to support
and staff alike (see, e.g., Erchul & Sheridan,         teachers in addressing concerns about students
2008). One example of a consultation prob-             who have challenges meeting academic or be-
lem-solving model is Instructional Consulta-           havioral expectations in school.
tion (IC; Rosenfield, 1987, 2008), delivered                  A challenge confronting the use of any
school-wide through IC Teams (Rosenfield &              problem-solving or consultation model is evi-
Gravois, 1996). IC Teams, a school-level               dence of treatment integrity or fidelity of the
model of problem solving, focus on improving           process itself. Although some evidence exists

This article is based on a portion of the doctoral dissertation completed by the first author. The authors
thank the staff of the Lab for IC Teams at the University of Maryland for their support. Sonja A. McKenna
is now at Andover Regional Schools, New Jersey; Todd A. Gravois is now at ICAT Resources, Inc.
Correspondence regarding this article should be addressed to Sylvia Rosenfield, 3214 Benjamin Building,
University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742; E-mail:
Copyright 2009 by the National Association of School Psychologists, ISSN 0279-6015

                                                                         Measurement of IC Indicators

for the effect of IC Teams on teacher and           Rotto, & Salmon, 1991). But little research
student outcomes (see, e.g., Rosenfield, Silva,      has been done on implementation of models of
& Gravois, 2008; Vu et al., 2009), a program        consultation other than behavioral. The focus
cannot be judged as successful in achieving         of this study is examining the procedure for
outcomes unless there is assurance that the         assessing the CPI of the IC process.
components of the program are being imple-
mented as intended (Fullan, 1983; Hall &                     Components of IC Teams
Hord, 2006). Measures of treatment integrity
To top