Conceptual and Empirical Bases of Conjoint Behavioral Consultation

This article describes “conjoint behavioral consultation,” a model of service delivery that addresses the shared responsibility among school personnel, families, and other important systems in educational problem solving. The conceptual background (incorporating ecological-systems and behavioral theories) and important features of the model are reviewed briefly. Findings from a number of empirical studies, including outcome studies, case studies, process research, and acceptability research, are reviewed. Directions for future research are also explored. The literature has convincingly assured us over the last decade of the strong, positive relationship between parental involvement/home-school partnerships and a child’s success. Even before the influx of attention given this topic, I believed in the importance of such collaborations. I worked for some time as a school psychologist in a small, blue-collar community. Throughout the course of psychoeducational evaluations, I met with many parents and began seeing firsthand the relationship between a child’s family life and his or her achievement at school. Some parents with whom I worked were truly committed to working with school personnel to enhance their child’s school success. Others showed no interest at all, and it was often questioned whether they even knew where the school was located. Sadly, many students with whom I worked came to school unfed, dirty, and tired. Some complained of being kept up by their parents’ late parties, and others reported that they had completed their homework by candlelight in the lounge at the local bowling alley. One boy, whom I still think about today, was sexually abused by an older 120 SuSan M. Sheridan in School PSychology Quarterly, 12 (1997) brother with a knife held at his throat. It’s no wonder these children were preoccupied with thoughts unrelated to learning while at school. Being in a role that required a great deal of assessment, I often felt frustrated that I could not do more for students like these who could be considered “at risk.” I began perceiving the assessment role as extremely limiting, and did not feel as though there was a relationship between standardized test results and meaningful interventions. IQ scores and achievement levels led to educational classifications, which led to placement into a resource classroom (which seemed to happen automatically, although that was not the intent of the special education law). Special education (especially in part-time resource programs) seemed to be simply a, place where students could go for a specified period of time; in most cases, it was not individualized intervention. When students did not qualify, teachers usually expressed varying degrees of dissatisfaction but rarely wanted to do anything differently themselves, in their own classrooms. Yet the importance of a child’s home life in his or her educational success kept gnawing at me. My frustrations with assessment and placement could have been addressed if only I had known more about consultation. Consultation-based services are in some ways philosophically different than those based on standardized tests that yield standard scores, percentiles, and grade equivalents. Rather than asking about a student’s IQ or ranking in comparison to others of the same age, consultation services are based on questions regarding what a student can and cannot do (i.e., his/ her functional skills) in a certain domain, what events in the environment may be contributing to a student’s difficulties, and what environmental factors can be altered to enhance a student’s skill development. Rather than seeking to identify a pathological condition within a child, behavioral consultants seek to understand what function certain behaviors are serving. Conditions surrounding the behavior can then be altered so that needs are met appropriately and effectively. Although it is important to know that a child has a diagnostic condition such as depression, it is at least equally important to know how the depression manifests itself and what events trigger or maintain depressive episodes. These behavioral manifestations and environmental events can then be targeted for intervention. Behavioral consultation research and practice has focused almost solely on students’ problems as they are manifested in school settings, with little recognition of the other settings and systems within which children function. The research on home-school collaboration has clearly demonstrated that parental involvement in education has positive and unequivocal effects for students, families, teachers, and schools (Christenson, 1995). Clearly, there is a need to engage parents constructively and meaningfully in educational planning. Simultaneous consultation with parents and teachers is one way to facilitate collaborative partnerships among significant individuals in a child’s life. Conjoint behavioral consultation represents an effective marriage between the empirically-validated structured approach of behavioral consultation, and the important conceptual advances in the area of home-school partnerships. ConCeptual and eMpiriCal BaSeS of Conjoint Behavioral ConSultation 121 CONJOINT BEHAVIORAL CONSULTATION Conjoint behavioral consultation (CBC) is a conceptual and practical extension of a traditional approach to behavioral consultation. In CBC, a consultant works with a teacher or parent simultaneously and interdependently rather than in a parallel manner. Conjoint behavioral consultation is defined as a structured, indirect form of service-delivery, in which parents and teachers are joined to work together to address the academic, social, or behavioral needs of an individual for whom both parties bear some responsibility (Sheridan & Kratochwill, 1992; Sheridan, Kratochwill, & Bergan, 1996). It is designed to engage significant consultees from various systems in a collaborative problem-solving process.