1997 Interview with the GSPN Research Team

The following 1997 interview is reprinted with the permission of the Massachusetts School Psychologists Association newsletter editors. The project has evolved since this interview. It now focuses more on the development of an on-line community among school psychologists, and no longer includes consultation between school psychologists and teachers.

An innovative research project is currently being conducted by the Research Committee of the Massachusetts School Psychologists Association (MSPA). It is a computer network composed of school psychologists and teachers who can communicate at any time of the day or night to problem solve about children. The project was conceptualized by Dr. Louis Kruger of Northeastern University and the MSPA Board.

Gayle Macklem, past president of MSPA and member of the research team recently discussed the project with Louis Kruger, Psy.D., Co-Chair of the Research Committee, Regina Watts, Ph.D., Co-Chair of the Research Committee and the Brookline Public Schools, Joan Struzziero, doctoral candidate at Northeastern University, Barbara Poggio, Ph.D., of the Brookline Public Schools and Virginia Harvey, Ph.D., Co-Chair of the Ethics Committee and UMass/Boston. The interview was conducted with e-mail during November.

Gayle Macklem: Lou Kruger, how did you conceive of electronic neighborhoods, it sounds like something from 2001?

Lou Kruger: It occurred to me in an airport as I was returning from a National Association of School Psychologists convention. I was with Joan Struzziero. It was the convergence of three different ideas. The first was a growing realization that e-mail was just another communication medium that has its own set of strengths and weaknesses, and we should put as much thought into planning how to structure communications in this medium as we put into face-to-face meetings.

A second idea was from sociology, Ferdinand Toonies' notion that society had moved from small, intimate communities to large impersonal, metropolises. As a result, people don't have a sense that they belong to a close-knit community of kindred souls. This is problematic because people need to feel that they belong. Thus, it was important to me to design a computer network that would provide people with a feeling that they were part of a supportive community. It is the glue that holds the project together. In practical terms, this means that no matter how many people join the project, people will share and learn in a small, stable group of fellow educators, their neighborhood, and not with all the participants of the project.

The third idea that drove the development of small electronic neighborhoods was the belief that people learn more and do better problem-solving in small groups rather than large ones.

Gayle Macklem: School-based consultation services seem to be growing by leaps and bounds. Do you think that this is the road to the future in school psychology?

Lou Kruger: Consultation has taken on increased significance in school psychology. There is a recognition that teachers are important consumers of school psychology services, and that the direct service delivery model has important limitations. However, the continued growth of the consultation role has run into a formidable barrier: time. Educators have trouble scheduling mutually convenient meetings, as well as just finding any time during the hectic school day. Therefore the continued growth and acceptance of consultation as an alternative approach to direct service is in jeopardy.

We believe that computer-mediated communication can be part of the solution; a time efficient complement to face-to-face meetings. At present, we are proponents of "groupware"; software that is designed to facilitate text-based group discussion. However, in the future, other types of computer-mediated communication, such as video will be widely available.

Gayle Macklem: What would an exchange look like and feel like between a school psychologist and a teacher via computer?

Lou Kruger: A tough question. As might be expected, there is considerable variability among the exchanges of the participants. One common type of exchange is when a teacher provides the school psychologist an update on the progress of a student and requests advice, and the school psychologist responds to the request. It might go something like this:

Teacher: I tried your idea of breaking up tasks into smaller chunks and increasing the frequency of the verbal praise for completing the "baby steps". However, his motivation still waxes and wanes. He puts himself down a lot, saying things like "I'm stupid."
School Psychologist: Given what you said about his self put-downs, I wonder if we need to help him with his confidence. You might consider helping him put together an "I can do book", a scrapbook that documents his accomplishments. When he is feeling low, you can ask him to review these accomplishments and ask him to think about how he can build on his successes. I have an example of this type of book that I can put in your mailbox. Don't get discouraged with this guy! I think we can help him.
Teacher: I am really intrigued by your idea of a scrapbook. If I have questions about setting it up, I'll let you know. Now, I have to shift gears and plan for a visit from my in-laws. The hectic pace never ends.

Gayle Macklem: How is electronic consultation different from face-to-face consultation, that is,what are the core differences?

Lou Kruger: One difference that you (Gayle) have noted is the absence of nonverbal communication. You can't soften or emphasize part of the message by using eye contact, gestures or tone of voice. Thus, it is easier to misinterpret what someone is saying. Because of this possibility, people need to be very clear in their messages and need to compensate for lack of nonverbal content by adding a phrase or two that communicates what they are feeling.

Also, you can't have a rapid-fire exchange of ideas which sometimes facilitates decision-making. For these reasons, we don't view e-mail as replacing face-to-face meetings, and we encourage participants to reserve important decisions for face-to-face meetings. Despite these limitations, people's e-mail messages seem to be more thoughtful and reflective. In addition, we preserve all the e-mail messages on the network for the participants in an easily searchable format. Thus, they have access to an archive of their discussions about their case; an oral history of their thoughts and observations. This can be very valuable in tracking the progress of a case.

Gayle Macklem: In general, consultation seems to produce positive results in the studies conducted to date? Do you have any data as yet to lead you to think that electronic consultation will be as effective?

Lou Kruger: The participants have been very positive about what they have learned and the assistance they have received. We don't have any hypotheses about whether e-mail is better than face-to-face meetings. However, we do want to investigate if the combination of e-mail and face-to-face meeting is more effective than either alone. Also, we are working on a coding system for the dual purpose of analyzing the content of the messages and relating the content to outcomes.

Gayle Macklem: Why did the research team chose to use the FirstClass computer program for the project?

Lou Kruger: FirstClass is "groupware", that is, a program specifically designed to facilitate group discussions on a computer network. During the first year of the project, however, we didn't use FirstClass. We used another groupware program that was difficult to install on people's computers and needed very powerful machines with a lot of memory. Many people in education don't have access to the latest computers and we don't have the technical support to get many people through a complicated installation process. Therefore, if we were going to expand the project we had to switch to a program would run on old and new machines, Macintosh and IBM compatibles, and was easy to install. FirstClass fit the bill to a T. In addition, FirstClass has powerful features and is intuitive to use.

Gayle Macklem: Dr. Watts, what is your involvement with the project?

Regina Watts: As co-chair of the research committee and a practicing school psychologist, I supported Lou's innovative ideas regarding helping school psychologist's do their jobs more efficiently and effectively by using electronic technology. I believe electronic consultation is quickly becoming an important means for teachers to obtain ongoing support and regular communication with a school psychologist, this is necessary in order to work successfully with students who have more diverse and complicated special educational needs.

Gayle Macklem: How did the Brookline Public Schools become involved in the project?

Regina Watts: I am a staff member in the Brookline Public Schools and knew the district has a strong commitment to technology. For example, Brookline Public Schools has had an extensive electronic mail system which connects 800 staff members. When I approached Jane Manzelli, Technology Curriculum Coordinator and Henry Bolter, Grants Coordinator, they were enthusiastic and willing to support the project on the Brookline system.

Gayle Macklem: Who else is supporting the project?

Regina Watts: The Massachusetts School Psychologists Association is a major supporter of the project financially and of course all of the researchers are members of the association. In addition, Northeastern University is providing support by allowing us to use the University's Internet connection and a company called SoftArc, Inc. has given us software and been of tremendous help.

Gayle Macklem: The consultation research suggests that consultation is more effective when a clear model is used. Are you using a consultation model in your work?

Regina Watts: We began the project using a behavioral consultation model. However, despite their investment in the success of the project, several participants had difficulty following through on all aspects of the behavioral consultation model. We understood that and helped participants. I also believe that electronic communication is an excellent medium for school psychologists to do "case management" which is frequently part of our job responsibility, and this could be a future study for our research team.

Gayle Macklem: Dr. Poggio, you are working in the Brookline Public Schools. How did you get involved with the project?

Barbara Poggio: Back in the spring of 1995, Regina Watts and Lou Kruger contacted me, to ask me if I would want to get involved in a project entitled "Collaborative Electronic Community". I wrote a letter to strongly recommend the project. I immediately became very enthusiastic about the idea of having a tool to communicate ongoing with teachers. I looked at it as a magnificent way to perform consultation and to study the process of consultation.

I saw it's usefulness for pre-referral, and for ongoing feedback on the implementation of recommendations. In general, I saw in it a great potential for communication in the school system. Personally, it gave me access to work while at home. This can be a good feature for psychologists who work part time.

In the winter of 1996, I went to a training session to become a participant in the project, from which the present form is evolving. I enjoy being in a dyad corresponding with a learning center teacher at the Health School in Brookline, where I work part time as a psychologist. In addition to being a participant, I was invited to become a supervising school psychologist in the project.

Gayle Macklem: I also participated one year as a supervising school psychologist and I enjoyed it very much. Barbara, can you explain what peer supervision is all about? Can you describe that role? What does it feel like to take a supervisory role with your peers from your point of view?

Barbara Poggio: My role as a supervising psychologist in the group is to communicate with the other psychologists in the project via the Psychologist-to-Psychologist folder. Actually, I look at it very much as a consultative model with encouragement and problem solving in mind. I would send messages of encouragement and problem solving to peers. I would make suggestions to be passed on to the other participants and generally, I would try to motivate and pull together the group.

I like the role of supervisor because it connects me, in a collegial way, with peers. It is a form of peer supervision group in writing. I am faced with questions, successes, and struggles. I have to stop and think. I have to face the fact that my only tool is written language, although informal. The informality helps to convey understanding and support in a quite spontaneous way.

At times it is hard to overcome the feeling of being intrusive with people I have not personally met, but I like the overall challenge quite a bit.

Gayle Macklem: Joan Struzziero, you have been involved in the project for several years. What is your current role?

Joan Struzziero: I am a member of the research team and will be actively involved in analyzing the data (from last year) and in planning research questions for this year. I'm especially interested in new applications for our work. Lou and I have been trying to develop some new sites which would allow even greater expansion of service delivery. We have had some very promising meetings so far and are anxiously awaiting further developments! I think we are so lucky to be involved with computer-mediated consultation at its inception. School psychologists are uniquely trained to be good consultants!

Gayle Macklem: It seems that very few studies in consultation monitor the strategies used by consultants in their work. Is this something that you are interested in?

Joan Struzziero: I am very interested in exploring what makes consultation work most effectively and efficiently for the participants. I'm most interested in the kinds of relationships which work best. For example, some people may prefer more directive consultation while others may prefer more collaborative consultation. It's important to find out what works best in various situations. It may be that some situations call for a directive, "expert" role while others require a supportive, collaborative role. Fascinating stuff! Much of the consultation research has not been empirically based and/or well designed. For that reason, I think that MSPA's project is very timely and vital. We are leading the way!

Gayle Macklem: Dr. Harvey, you have recently become involved in the research study to address ethical questions. What formal guidelines exist to help school psychologists working as consultants, make ethically based decisions?

Ginny Harvey: There are a number of ethical guidelines relevant to consultation in both National Association of School Psychologists and American Psychological Association guidelines. Maintaining confidentiality, of the client and consultee, is essential. Information that could lead to the identification of any person with whom psychologists have a confidential relationship is forbidden unless they have obtained the prior consent of the person, or the disclosure cannot be avoided. Further, information can be shared only to the extent necessary to achieve the purposes of the consultation. The teacher and school psychologist must abide by these guidelines whether they are consulting in person or on e-mail.

This can be deceptively difficult with electronic communication. When individuals type on a computer in the privacy of their homes, it feels very private. Yet, even with a closed system, electronic communication should not be considered private because of the nature of computer communication (hackers are a reality, computers can be left on accidentally, items can be retrieved at a later date.). It has been said that any electronic mail communication should be considered "public and permanent." In this sense, consulting via computer can be considered similar to presenting a public lecture. The relevant ethical guidelines indicate that psychologists obtain written prior consent or remove identifying data when presenting public lectures. For this reason, it is critical that code names be used to refer to students and that personal information that could lead to identification be shared only in the face-to-face consultations.

Gayle Macklem: What rights do consultees have?

Ginny Harvey: The guidelines clearly indicate a right to confidentiality and the right to appropriate use of technology. I believe that consultees also have the right to what I would define as "responsible consultation", including the consultant's having observed or met with the client, and the consultant responding promptly and regularly to the consultee. Computer-mediated consultation can clearly be of great benefit in the latter.

Gayle Macklem: What concerns should school psychologists have when using technology to help students, and what safeguards should be employed to prevent misuse of technology?

Ginny Harvey: It is very important that computer-mediated consultation be used to augment, not replace, a face-to-face consultation relationship. Relevant ethical guidelines indicate that school psychologists (1) use technological devices to improve the quality of client services and resist applications of technology that ultimately reduce the quality of service and (2) do not make personal diagnoses or conduct therapy by means of public communications.

In addition, the guidelines indicate that when confidential information is entered into data bases or systems of records available to persons whose access had not been consented to by the recipient, coding is used to avoid the inclusion of personal identifiers. Again, that emphasizes the need for coding identifying informational.

Gayle Macklem: Dr. Kruger, do we hope someday to be able to define "best practices" in electronic consultation?

Lou Kruger: Yes, but we want to define best practices in a way that it encompasses both face-to-face contact and computer-mediated communication. We also want people to view computer-mediated consultation not as a glitzy frill, but as an integral part of how an efficient school psychologist's works.

Gayle Macklem: If there are school psychologists who read about the project and want to get involved, will there be opportunities to do so in the future?

Lou Kruger: Yes! We want more school psychologists. In fact we would like as many school psychologists as possible to get involved with the project. The viability of any profession depends on its practitioners staying abreast of new developments and continually upgrading their skills. This project presents an excellent opportunity to accomplish these aims. School psychology in Massachusetts has a golden opportunity to be at the forefront of an innovative development in consultation.

Gayle Macklem: Thank you .

Send comments and inquiries to: l.kruger@neu.edu