School Psychology: Recent Descriptions, Continued Expansion, and an Ongoing Paradox.

Abstract. This is an introduction to a series of four independently submitted articles that further describe the status, demography, philosophical, and role possibilities of school psychologists. The series is connected to published surveys and statements over the past several decades and to the consistency of certain findings. The consistency presents a challenge to those who seek to reform school psychology practice. ********** Similar to other professional groups. school psychology has acquired several symbols during its development. These symbols include identifiable practitioners, knowledge bases, unique roles and functions, ethics, training requirements, and credentials. Descriptive and demographic studies have described this development since the earliest survey of practitioners was published (Wallin, 1914). Wallin's survey was limited to certain cities, and it was several decades before more representative surveys were published. For example, surveys conducted for the Thayer Conference in 1954 helped to define the field at midcentury (Cutts, 1955). In 1960, the Division of School Psychology (then titled Psychologists) in the American Psychological Association (APA, Division 16) published survey data acquired from its members (Results of Questionnaire, 1960). Better Descriptions of Practice and Demographics The period between 1960 and 1970 was one of rapid growth in the demand for and the training of school psychologists. As the field struggled to establish a sense of identity through statements of philosophy and practice that would be spread by the growing number of training programs and professional associations, numerous books and journal articles appeared. School psychology's identity was facilitated by detailed surveys that provided descriptions of practitioner training and credentialing, roles and functions that were practiced and preferred, and other demographic characteristics. Newly founded journals (Journal of School Psychology Psychology in the Schools, and School Psychology Digest) provided, for the first time, a direct outlet for this information to school psychologists. Organizational development in the 1960s and 1970s, especially within APA's Division 16 and NASP, created more reliable databases from which to communicate with school psychologists and to gather data about association members. Some studies became benchmarks for future comparisons. These included Farling and Hoedt's (1971) federally funded survey, the most comprehensive study to that time, and surveys by Meacham and Peckham (1978) and Smith (1984). As organization memberships grew, they provided a broader database for surveying school psychologists. This is especially true of the NASP member database. It is common to observe researchers matching their study sample against NASP data in an attempt to demonstrate appropriate national representation (e.g., gender, age, ethnicity, and training). The surveys published in this issue by Curtis, Hunley, and Grier (2002) and Hosp and Reschly (2002) build upon earlier demographic studies using the NASP database that describe practitioners' typical age, gender, training, experience, and practice (e.g., Reschly, 2000). Both studies are limited to data acquired before the 1997 reauthorization of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). Nevertheless, the IDEA analyses by Telzrow (1999) and a study by Summers and SemrudClikeman (2000) suggest that the reauthorization has not diminished the importance of these data with respect to practice needs and activities. The results also compare well with more recent summaries by Thomas (2000a, 2000b) of NASP members; Kaplan and Wishner's (1999) discussion of job-related stressors; Guest's (2000) interviews on school psychologists' career developments; Brown, Swigart, Bolen, Hall, and Webster's (1998) comparison of doctoral and nondoctoral practitioners; Haney and Evans' (1999) survey of assessment practice s; and Gilman and Hankwerk's (2001) study of undergraduate students' perceptions of our field. …