1

Running head: APPLIED FOCUS

Applied Focus:
Proposal for a school-based therapeutic intervention program manual for use with students with
social, emotional, and behavioural challenges
Molly Hayes
University of Lethbridge
Instructor: Dr. Noella Piquette
December 13, 2014

APPLIED FOCUS

Introduction
Its easy to remember what its like to be a grade school student. Making friends, pleasing
teachers and parents, getting good grades and gaining a sense of self-efficacy are elements of
student life that virtually anyone can comment on. Most students may struggle with one or two
of these unchanging features of being a student throughout their educational careers but some
students experience significant challenges with most these components. Imagine not being able
to relate to others because of uncontrollable anger, attention deficits, basic social skill and
communication deficits, or other isolating behaviours. Think about the challenges to academic
success that students with debilitating learning difficulties experience and how mental health
issues such as anxiety, depressive, and obsessive-compulsive disorders contribute to school
feeling unsafe or even impossible. This is what school is like for students with social, emotional,
and behavioural (SEB) challenges.
The current applied focus will provide rationale for the importance of school-based
therapeutic interventions for students with SEB challenges and will propose the creation of a
manual to guide professionals, students and their families through the objectives and facilitations
of an ideal program model. This paper consists of a few main sections complete with several
subsections. Under respective headings below a comprehensive literature review provides a
context for the proposed manual, a suggested methodology for the creation of the manual is
offered, a summary of the current work is outlined and a personal statement is described to link
and conclude all three parts of the course assignments.
Literature Review
Students with SEB challenges experience significant personal, social, and academic
challenges in school settings. Without behavioural interventions, therapeutic treatment and

APPLIED FOCUS

educational modifications students with SEB concerns are unlikely to have positive personal,
social, and educational learning experiences in school and will continue to suffer from their
emotional and behavioural symptoms. In the following subsections a comprehensive literature
review of the current issues relating to school-based therapeutic interventions designed for
students with SEB concerns is provided. Topics related to school settings and SEB students, the
competent facilitation of interventions in schools, and studies on specific intervention models
will be discussed. Within the school-based therapeutic intervention model subsection, several
additional categories are offered to provide a context for the proposed new work including
objectives and facilitation of two key intervention models. To conclude the literature review, a
review of the prominent themes and recommendations will be used to specify the gaps in
program implementation and set the foundation for the proposed manual for school-based
therapeutic interventions for SEB students.
School Settings for Students with Social, Emotional, and Behavioural Concerns
SEB challenges are often comorbid with various debilitating conditions such as attention
deficient disorder, learning disabilities, a deficit in social skills and other mental health issues
such as anxiety, depression, obsession-compulsive, and bipolar disorders (Wagner, Kutash,
Duchnowski, Epstein, & Sumi, 2005; Norwich, 2008, as cited in Hayes, 2014a). Children with
SEB concerns therefore face complex learning, relational, and intrapersonal difficulties in school
environments (Hayes, 2014a). Traditional school-settings tend offer students rigid instructional
styles, educational content, and learning structures (Kutash, & Duchnowski, 2004; Wagner et al.,
2005; Simmons & Bayliss, 2007). For students with SEB concerns who are likely to also
experience learning difficulties and mental health issues, the rigidity of traditional schoolsettings create an environment that fosters disruptive behaviours that influence the teachers

APPLIED FOCUS

ability to instruct and consequently the students ability to learn (Kam, Greenberg, & Kusche,
2004), negative self-image (Cooney, Jahoda, Gumley, & Knott, 2006; Lauchlan & Boyle, 2007),
and poor peer relationships (Kam et al., 2004). Therefore, despite the contemporary push for
inclusive education that encourages the integration of all learning styles, behavioural displays,
and emotional needs into regular educational classrooms, the needs of students with SEB
concerns are often not met in traditional schools.
In response to the negative experiences of SEB students, their peers, and their teachers in
regular school settings, alternative school programs exist with the intention to better meet the
needs to students who struggle in regular school settings (Markussen, 2004). Alternative schools
present students with a learning environment that can differ from traditional settings in many
ways including location, classroom size, teaching styles, programming, and additional support
(Gable, Bullock, & Evans, 2006, as cited in Hayes, 2014a). Gable et al. (2006, as cited in Hayes,
2014a) also explained that alternative schools feature assessments of academic and nonacademic
behaviours, flexible curriculums that emphasize academic, social, and life skills. Alternative
programs also offer effective instructional strategies, transitional procedures that link alternative
programming to regular programming, comprehensive in-school and out-of-school opportunities
and services, and appropriate staff to serve students with unique challenges (Gable et al., 2006,
as cited in Hayes, 2014a). Alternative schooling can provide appropriate emotional, behavioural
and educational support, treatment for mental illnesses, and effective structural accommodations
to assist students with SEB challenges and provide them with opportunities for personal and
educational success (Wagner et al., 2005, as cited in Hayes, 2014a).
Students with SEB conditions in regular school settings pose a learning risk for their
peers, will often struggle to maintain positive relationships with others, will not succeed

APPLIED FOCUS

academically, and may not receive sufficient treatment for their mental health issues or
appropriate emotional support. Although students with SEB conditions may receive additional
academic and non-academic support for their unique needs, they still face adversities to positive
peer relationships outside of school and depending on the objectives of the alternative school
program, they may not receive adequate treatment for the personal challenges that influence their
learning, self-image, social life, and overall educational experiences. With this dichotomy in
mind, it is clear that there is a need for intensive therapeutic interventions in alternative
education settings with specific learning, mental well-being, and social skill objectives geared
towards mainstreaming students back to inclusive educational settings.
School-Based Therapeutic Interventions
School-based therapeutic interventions are programs for students developed within a
psychology or counselling framework that is geared towards to improvement of mental and
emotional well-being, social skill development and behaviour modification that can be
implemented in a school-setting (Heathfield & Clark, 2004, as cited in Hayes, 2014b). Due to the
consistent role that educational settings play in a childs life, schools provide an ideal
environment for specialized professionals to address the needs of children with SEB challenges
(Aviles, Anderson, & Davila, 2006 as cited in Hayes, 2014b). Aviles et al. (2006, as cited in
Hayes, 2014b) also noted that when facilitated in an alternative school setting that provides
modified scheduling and learning environments, and specialized staff, therapeutic interventions
can contribute to increased positive school and personal experiences for students with SEB
concerns, an improvement in academic grades, social skill development and can lead to a
successful transition into mainstream inclusive education programs. The below subsections will
discuss the recommendations for school-based therapeutic interventions as provided by several

APPLIED FOCUS

key studies. An overview of the objectives, facilitation methods, successes, and downfalls of two
school-based therapeutic intervention programs for SEB students as described by the quantitative
research of Kam et al. (2004) and Vernberg et al. (2004) will also be provided.
Competent facilitation of school-based therapeutic interventions. School-based
therapeutic interventions require specialized professionals such as psychologists, social workers,
and specially training teachers and educational support staff for competent facilitation
(Heathfield & Clark, 2004, as cited in Hayes, 2014a). Intervention facilitators therefore must
have specialized training and ongoing professional mentorship in order to ethically and
effectively engage in school-based therapeutic interventions. Because facilitators maintain dual
roles as educators and therapists in school settings ongoing supervision, regular, adequate
professional development, and systematic organization are necessary (Reid, Gonzalez, Nordess,
Trout, & Epstein, 2004; Nelson, Summers, & Turnbull, 2004; Idol, 2006; Murray, Low, Hollis,
Cross, & Davis, 2007; Hoover & Patton, 2008.). Similarly, Heathfield and Clark (2004, as cited
in Hayes, 2014a) and Brownell, Ross, Coln, and McCallum (2005, as cited in Hayes, 2014a)
explained that in order to effectively meet the needs of SEB students and eventually transition
them from therapeutic educational programs into mainstream education, collaboration among all
therapeutic educators, mainstream educators, parents, and students must be maintained.
Competent practice of school-based therapeutic interventions is therefore multifaceted,
specialized, and collaborative in nature.
Recommended approaches. Researchers have offered several recommendations for
therapeutic interventions intended for in-school use with students who have SEB challenges.
These recommendations fall into three main categories: theoretical structure, intervention
objectives and facilitation methods, and miscellaneous suggestions. To review the ways in which

APPLIED FOCUS

current researchers and professionals propose is best to meet the needs of students with SEB
challenges, the categories will be discussed in respective subsections below.
Theoretical structure. Six main theoretical perspectives emerged from the school-based
therapeutic intervention research: developmental psychopathology, psychosocial, cognitivebehavioural therapy (CBT), affective-behavioural-cognitive-dynamic (ABCD), solution-focused,
person-centred counselling, and biomedical. Aviles et al. (2006) explained that the
developmental psychopathology framework views youth as being in dynamic relationships
between the developing individual and their internal/external contexts (p. 32). The
developmental psychopathology perspective therefore encourages practitioners to view their
clients as having the potential to influence their environments and also as being influenced by
their environments. Aviles et al. (2006) asserted that the developmental psychopathology
approach allows practitioners to effectively acknowledge the many factors influencing a childs
psychosocial and emotional development.
Similar to Aviles et al. (2006) perspective, Heathfield et al. (2004) and Kutash et al.
(2004) supported psychosocial approaches for use of school-based therapeutic interventions with
SEB students. Heathfield et al. (2004) explained that psychosocial approaches recognize the
dependency that a childs psychological wellbeing has on their social environments. Therefore to
be well, a childs social needs must be met. Heathfield et al. (2004) noted that psychosocial
development largely impacts the mental health of children and consequently contributes to
students ability to learn. Likewise, Kutash et al. (2004) explained that the learning struggles
instigate poor classroom behaviours and discourage psychosocial development. Therefore,
according to Kutash et al. (2004) in order to change a childs behaviour, improve their wellbeing,
and increase their academic success, a childs social environment must be altered.

APPLIED FOCUS

Kam et al. (2004) discussed the importance of the ABCD in their study on the PATHS
program. Rather than drawing attention the dynamics of a childs environment, the ABCD theory
attempts to address the interactions between a childs feelings, behaviours, and thoughts. Kam et
al. (2004) explained that labeling emotions and highlighting how they influence thoughts and
behaviours would improve a childs ability to control their behaviour and therefore engage in
healthy intrapersonal and interpersonal behaviours. Similar to the ABCD approach is the use of
CBT techniques in school-based intervention programs. CBT theorizes that in order to positive
influence behaviours, ones cognitions must be positively changed (Corey, 2009). Vernberg et al.
(2004) and Pugh (2010) described the use of CBT techniques as being therapeutically
appropriate for students with SEB challenges.
In addition to supporting CBT techniques for behaviour modification and recognizing the
importance of a childs social environment on their emotional and social development, Vernberg
et al. (2004) also backed the biomedical model. The biomedical approach supports the use of
pharmaceutical interventions to improve the efficiency of behavioural modification and
counselling techniques. Other researchers (Connor & Ferri, 2007; Hoagwood et al., 2007; Sugai
& Horner, 2006) mentioned the common use of pharmaceutical interventions to treat the
symptoms of students with SEB challenges but did not necessarily account for the theory in their
studies.
Pugh (2010) explained that in addition to CBT techniques, school-based therapeutic
interventions also tend to build their approaches on the theoretical basis of solution-focused
therapy and person-centred counselling. Solution-focused therapy aims to improve decisionmaking and self-efficacy by providing brief goal-oriented therapy sessions, whereas the personcentred approach is non-directive and emphasizes the practitioners ability to create an

APPLIED FOCUS

appropriate therapeutic environment for client change (Pugh, 2010). Solution-focused tends to
produce fast results for willing participants and therefore is cost-effective for organizations
(Pugh, 2010). Although the client-centred approach doesnt tend to produce quick observable
changes, the theory is often built into the core of many other theoretical approaches and is
therefore adaptable (Pugh, 2010).
Researchers and program designers often adopt various theoretical elements into their
intervention curriculum and provide empirical support for their therapeutic recipe. It is clear that
each approach provides benefits for the facilitation of intervention programs but Pugh (2010)
posits that therapeutic professions tend to become too rigid in their theoretical practices and
suggests that school-based therapeutic interventions allow for more individualization of
therapeutic goals and facilitation methods. Support for individualization of therapeutic
interventions in school-based programming will be reviewed in more detail with Vernberg et
al.s (2004) study on the Intensive Mental Health Program (IMHP) in subsequent sections.
Recommendations for intervention objectives and facilitation methods. Regardless of
the specific therapeutic recipe of the program, all SEB programs reviewed in the literature were
implemented in alternative program styles, whether that is in a therapeutic classroom in a regular
education building or in an entirely separate building. Most of the school-based therapeutic
intervention literature reflects an emphasis on social-emotional development, behavioural
modification, or social skill development and supports an early intervention mission. Aviles et al.
(2006), Heathfield et al. (2004), Kutash et al. (2004), and Kam et al. (2004) studied interventions
that aimed to improve the psychosocial and social-emotional wellbeing of SEB students through
the facilitation of psycho-educational lessons and individual modifications to address additional
concerns. Some studies focused less on social-skill development and more on the treatment of

APPLIED FOCUS

10

mental health concerns to improve the experiences and symptoms in SEB students. Vernberg et
al. (2004), and Pugh (2010) recommended a highly individualized therapeutic program that
focuses on the specific emotional, psychological, behavioural, and learning needs of the students.
The approaches that aimed mostly at psychosocial, social-emotional, and social skill
development tended to utilized fixed curriculum models, feature less individualization, were
shorter in length and cater to younger age groups, and larger numbers of students (Heathfield et
al., 2004; Kutash et al., 2004; Kam et al., 2004; Aviles et al. 2006). The approaches that aimed
more specifically at unique and individual needs was longer in length, catered to smaller student
groups but a larger age range, and was more intensive (Vernberg et al., 2004). Linked to Pughs
(2010) push for individualization, Vernberg et al.s (2004) model aimed to transition students
from their intensive therapeutic work into a more academic focused program when their overall
functioning was sufficient and stable enough to handle program changes.
Miscellaneous recommendations. Despite the high number of fixed length and content
therapeutic curriculums present in the literature, some researchers such as Aviles et al. (2006)
and Vernberg et al. (2004) insisted on individualization for therapeutic and behavioural success.
Individualized therapeutic attention requires the utilization and collaboration of educational and
counselling professionals in addition to social workers (Nelson, Summers, & Turnbull, 2004;
Idol, 2006; Powell, 2006; Quinn, Poirier, Faller, Gable, & Tonelson, 2006; Murray, Low, Hollis,
Cross, & Davis, 2007; Lane, Barton-Arwood, Nelson, & Wehby, 2007; Hoover & Patton, 2008).
There is also an emphasis on holistic approaches that incorporate all major stakeholders and
intervene not only at the student level but also with their families (Vernberg et al., 2004; Reddy,
Newman, De Thomas, & Chun, 2009). To examine the implementation of some of these
recommendations and to highlight gaps in program facilitation addressed in the proposed work

APPLIED FOCUS

11

of this assignment, two school-based therapeutic interventions will be reviewed in the below
sections.
Objectives and facilitation of the two key models. Hayes (2014b) reviewed and compared
two different intervention models designed for students with SEB challenges: Sustained Effects
of the PATHS Curriculum on the Social and Psychological Adjustment of Children in Special
Education (Kam et al., 2004), and Innovative Treatment for Children With Serious Emotional
Disturbance: Preliminary Outcomes for a School-Based Intensive Mental Health Program
(Vernberg et al., 2004). The Promoting Alternative THinking Strategies (PATHS) program (Kam
et al., 2004) addresses cognitive processes associated with psychological symptoms, behavioural
displays, and social skill deficits in children with SEB challenges, whereas the Intensive Mental
Health Program (IMHP) (Vernberg et al., 2004) takes a broad therapeutic approach to the
environmental and relational factors in a childs life in order to improve their overall functioning
in home, school, and community. Additional information regarding the objectives and
facilitations of each model are found in the respective subcategories below.
The PATHS program. The PATHS program attempts to improve adjustment, problem
behaviours, depression, and social skills through the facilitation of the PATHS in-school
curriculum (Kam et al., 2004, as cited in Hayes 2014b). The theoretical approach of the PATHS
program is based on the concepts of the ABCD model, which postulates that emotional
understanding, and regulation is central to social functioning and a childs ability to cope socially
and psychologically is reflected in their behaviour (Kam et al., 2004, as cited by Hayes, 2014b).
The ABCD model emphasizes the internal regulation as a function of emotional awareness,
affective-cognitive control, behavioural skills, and social-cognitive understanding (Kam et al.,
2004, as cited in Hayes, 2014b).

APPLIED FOCUS

12

The PATHS curriculum is a set of therapeutic and psycho-educational lessons designed to

improve the social and psychological adjustment of students with special needs (Kam et al.,
2004, as cited in Hayes, 2014b). The PATHS program features 60 lesson on self-control,
emotions, and problem-solving, that include developmentally appropriate stories, physical
actions, and applied activities the focus on practicing of emotional labeling, verbal processing of
thoughts, and social skill applications (Kam et al., 2004). The PATHS program is intended to be
facilitated within a self-contained classroom to small groups of students (Kam et al., 2004, as
cited in Hayes, 2014b). Lessons in the Kam et al. (2004) study were thirty minutes in length and
occurred three times per week. PATHS lessons in the Kam et al. (2004) study were facilitated by
special education teachers who were supported by teaching assistants and guided by specialized
counsellors.
The IMHP. The IMHP aims to improve the ability for students with severe emotional
disturbances to function within home, school, and community environments through the
consistent and intensive therapeutic intervening in a school-setting (Vernberg et al., 2004, as
cited in Hayes, 2014b). The Vernberg et al. (2004, as cited in Hayes, 2014b) study hypothesized
that children who received the program would demonstrate an improvement in overall
functioning from the time they were started the program to their discharge date as measured on
the Child and Adolescent Functional Assessment Scale (CAFAS). The CAFAS assess eight
domains of functioning including (1) role performance (in school, home, and community), (2)
behaviour towards others, (3) moods/emotions, (4) self-harm, (5) substance use, (6) thinking, (7)
material needs, (8) family/social support (Vernberg et al., 2004, as cited in Hayes, 2014b).
The IMHP model based upon nine main principles: (1) maintain the placement of the child in
their home and school, (2) emphasize evidence-based practices to guide interventions, (3) focus

APPLIED FOCUS

13

on cognitive and behavioural skill development, (4) promote cross-environment consistency, (5)
emphasize generalization and maintenance of treatment by focusing on teaching children how to
function, (6) collaborate with all providers in the childs life, (7) maintain ongoing assessment,
(8) maintain ongoing adjustments for developmental changes, and (9) cultivate an authoritative
parenting style for all adults in the childs life (p. 360, Vernberg et al., 2004, as cited in Hayes,
2014b). The IMHP curriculum involves individualized academic education, regular group
therapy, regular and individualized therapy sessions, and an individualize behaviour support plan
(Vernberg et al., 2004, as cited in Hayes, 2014b). The IMHP was facilitated in the Vernberg et
al. (2004) study within a therapeutic classroom and sessions were provided by a teacher, a
paraprofessional, and/or a therapist depending on the individual needs.
Summary and Conclusion of the Literature Review
A review of the current literature on school-based therapeutic interventions for students
with SEB concerns produces several prominent themes. The works of Wagner et al. (2005),
Sumi (2005), Norwich (2008), Kam et al. (2004), Cooney et al. (2006), and Gable et al. (2006)
highlight the importance of alternative school settings as a venue for therapeutic and academic
learning for students with SEB challenges. Offering programs that address therapeutic and
academic learning requires specialized professionals, consistent and effective professional
collaboration, ongoing professional development, supervision, and support and systematic
organization (Heathfield & Clark, 2008; Hoover & Patton, 2008; Idol, 2006; Nelson et al., 2004;
Sutherland et al., 2008). The research also offers several recommendations for the
implementation of school-based therapeutic interventions including organization,
individualization, consideration of environmental factors, social skills, psychological well-being,
and behaviours.

APPLIED FOCUS

14

In considering the recommendations suggested in the previous sections on school-based

therapeutic interventions, the Kam et al. (2004) and Vernberg et al. (2004) studies reflect several
successes that defend the usage of interventions in schools. Both the Kam et al. (2004) and the
Vernberg et al. (2004) studies provided support for the usage of therapeutic interventions in
modified or alternative school settings. Because the program approaches resulted in the
improvement of emotional development, self-regulation, and social problem-solving skills in the
Kam et al. (2004) study and overall functioning in the community, home, and school in the
Vernberg et al. (2004) study, it can be concluded that programs are therapeutically successful.
Additionally, both the PATHS program and the IMHP model offer hope for children with SEB
concerns and their families by providing proof that children have the potential to make lasting
changes when placed in a supportive and intentional environment for personal learning. Both
approaches also featured high levels of professional collaboration; the success of each program
provides support for collaborative endeavours in school-settings.
Although the Kam et al. (2004) and Vernberg et al. (2004) articles provided support for the
use of school-based therapeutic interventions with students who have SEB challenges,
comparing the two approaches draws attention to concerning gaps in the objectives and
facilitation methods. For example, the PATHS program focused specifically on adjustment
through social competence and emotional regulation whereas the IMHP model approached
overall functioning through consistent parenting styles across environments and cognitive
behavioural skill development (Hayes, 2014b). The PATHS program was psycho-educational,
preventative, and featured some individualization but lacked the transitional element that the
IMHP model offered; Kutash and Duchnowski (2004) Wagner et al. (2005) and Norwich (2008)

APPLIED FOCUS

15

recommended that a transition into mainstream education programs was important for
adjustment.
The IMHP model featured a high level of individualization as recommended by Pugh (2010)
but lacked a comprehensive preventative element as suggested by Sugai and Horner (2006).
Additionally, the IMHP model lacked a social skill development focus but involved parental
intervention. Involving all major stakeholders in the treatment process was noted as detrimental
to prolonged stability of personal learning (Vernberg et al., 2004). Although the PATHS program
reflects theoretical rigidity as warned against by Pugh (2010) it also reflects clear fixed outcomes
essential for parental buy-in as discussed by Vernberg et al. (2004).
The successes and downfalls of each of the models reviewed by Kam et al. (2004) and
Vernberg et al. (2004) and the recommendations for school-based therapeutic interventions
highlight areas of attention for school-based therapeutic intervention programs. There are two
main gaps in the existing program material. Firstly, existing programs address social skill and
social-emotional development, or psychological wellbeing and behaviours. Programs that
effectively combine all areas in which students with SEB challenges often experience deficits are
lacking. Secondly, although all programs are based on the foundation that wellbeing improves
learning, no programs seem to effectively suggest how to combine the two objectives. Therefore
this letter of intent proposes a project that specifically addresses the creation of a manual for
therapeutic programs in school settings for children with SEB concerns.
Methodology
By considering the literature review presenting above, it can be concluded that improving
the overall wellbeing of students with SEB challenges contributes to positive school experiences
in academic success, peer and adult relationships and overall functioning in other areas of life.

APPLIED FOCUS

16

Alternative school settings are appropriate environments for addressing the needs of SEB
students, and therefore there is a need for the effective balancing of academic goals, and
therapeutic endeavours in intervention programs. A manual that outlines recommended
approaches for meeting the diverse needs of SEB students will be created for use in school-based
therapeutic interventions programs. The proposed methods for production are as follows.
To develop a manual for in-school therapeutic interventions for students with SEB
concerns, an extensive review of literature will be conducted. To perform a review of relevant
research the fields of educational psychology and counselling psychology academic databases
such as Education Research Complete, ProQuest Education Journals, ERIC, PsycINFO,
PsycARTICLES, Taylor and Francis Online, Child Development and Adolescent Studies, and
Google Scholar will be utilized. To effectively address specific areas of interest in educational
and counselling psychologies, key phrases such as school-based interventions, school
counselling, intervention programs for youth, social skill programs, emotional
development programs, behavioural modification programs, and therapy for children will
be searched using the above databases. To build upon the literature reviews already completed
for this proposal, information will be reviewed with a focus on the strengths and weaknesses of
the program objectives and facilitation methods will be taken. In addition to reviewing research
on program models, therapeutic intervention materials will be sought out by contacting school
districts, child and youth counselling organizations, and alternative schools with a focus on
treating students with SEB concerns. Finally, all materials will be gathered, reviewed first
through an emancipatory lens that emphasizes the existence of multiple realities and contextual
factors, and then with a positivist lens in an attempt to select best practices for meeting the needs

APPLIED FOCUS

17

of SEB students. The manual will be created and then adjusted to produce three unique editions:
one for parents, one for students, and one for facilitators.
The manual will include recommended program objectives and facilitation models for
meeting the needs of students with SEB concerns in a school-based environment. These needs
will include learning, behavioural, emotional, cognitive, and social. The manual will recommend
a combination of group lessons and individualized sessions by educational and counselling
professionals as suggested by Vernberg et al. (2004) and Kam et al. (2004) and will attempt to
address the challenge of balancing academic goals and therapeutic endeavours. The manual
editions will take approximately one year to complete.
Knowledge Transfer
A concise and systematic review of program objectives and facilitation methods for schoolbased therapeutic interventions designed for use with students who have SEB challenges will
benefit students, their families and program staff. Additionally, because the field of educational
psychology is facing ongoing changes to the form of inclusive education and alternative
education systems (Norwich, 2008), the creation of the proposed manual has the potential to
benefit educational organizations and the field of child and youth counselling. An overview of
the potential implications of the outcomes of proposed manual will be offered in subsections
below.
Implications for Students and Families
The proposed manual will provide a comprehensive and clear overview of the intention
and implementation of school-based therapeutic interventions for use with SEB students. The
intention of the manual is to provide students and their families with a guide to what to expect
from school-based therapeutic interventions. The intended implication of such school-based

APPLIED FOCUS

18

therapeutic interventions is to appropriately meet the needs of SEB students in an alternative

school setting or program. The ideal outcome for the project would involve the emotional,
behavioural, learning, and psychological needs being met individually and their social
development being aided in a safe school placement. The professional collaboration
recommended by the proposed manual will streamline educational and therapeutic goals for easy
comprehension by students and parents and provide opportunities for parenting support, crosssetting application of therapeutic and learning goals, and support professional-parent alliance.
Implications for Staff and Organizations
The proposed manual will provide staff and organizations with a guideline for schoolbased therapeutic interventions for use with SEB students. Specifically, the proposed manual will
provide staff teams with a model for professional collaboration that postulates combined
educational and therapeutic goals to best support students with SEB challenges. The proposed
manual will be based upon this notion of professional collaboration that could enrich workplace
relationships and peer-support for staff working with students who have SEB needs. The
proposed manual will also provide organizations with a model for melding educational and
counselling psychology approaches; a notion central to the contemporary inclusive education
mandate.
Summary and Conclusion of Applied Focus
Students with SEB challenges face significant adversities in regular education settings
and therefore their needs are best met in alternative school settings. The supportive and
specialized nature of alternative school settings is ideal for the therapeutic treatment of students
with SEB need and therefore a school-based therapeutic intervention program that implements
academic and therapeutic endeavours is necessary. School-based therapeutic interventions

APPLIED FOCUS

19

require competent and specialized collaboration of counselling and educational professionals

with students and their families. Programs that effectively blend group goals with
individualization to meet the unique learning, social, emotional, behavioural, psychological, and
parenting needs of students with SEB challenges does not currently exist. The proposed manual
will attempt to insight into the recommended program objective and facilitation methods in
which organizations and staff teams can best meet the needs of SEB students.
Because I have frontline experience with students who have SEB challenges, their
families, and the professionals who work with them, projects, such as this proposed manual
speak to areas of counselling psychology and education that are often overlooked. The students
in the alternative school setting in which I work have struggled to have their needs met in most
environments that they have been a part of, educational or otherwise. Parents of SEB children
experience significant frustrations involving the educational and social deficits of their children
that impact many areas of their lives and the lives of their children. Recognizing the experiences
of SEB students and their parents through the use of school-based therapeutic interventions can
not only place students in a support environment but also allow parents to benefit from
professional understanding and care. Therapeutic staff in an alternative school setting, like
myself, personally benefit from being successful at providing this support; a manual can provide
them with a framework to do so.
Personal Statement
Completing the assignments for this course as a three part series was personally and
professionally rewarding. I began part one of the course assignments in hopes of comprehending
my recently accepted position as an in-class counsellor at an alternative school for students with
complex behavioural, emotional, social, and learning needs. I wanted to give a voice to the hard

APPLIED FOCUS

20

working professionals that I am proud to work alongside of and therefore phenomenological

qualitative research on their experiences was appropriate and fitting for the assignment. I learned
qualitative research meets my desire to validate the experiences of other people, however it can
be complicated and stressful. I found myself struggling to narrow down elements of experiences
because I was invested in the process of interviewing and felt that I had become a part of the
stories my participants were telling me; talk about true application of the constructivist research
paradigm.
An element of the first assignment that stuck out for me was the impression that
balancing educational and therapeutic goals was challenging for school staff. I set out to conduct
research on how other program models had attempted to meet the various needs of SEB students
through school-based interventions. Because of the political pressure I experience in my
workplace to implement proven interventions, examining school-based therapeutic
intervention models from an empirically supported perspective was appropriate for the
quantitative exploration of assignment two. I learned that quantitative research can be used to
appropriately support my programming and intervention ideas and help me say this is
important! I gained some extra comfort in navigating empirical data and felt that my own
learning needs were met for this assignment.
From the second part of the course assignments, a figurative programming gap emerged
from the research. We, as a combined counselling and educational field, are meeting some of the
needs that SEB student have with some programs and some of their other needs with other
programs; we arent doing it all but we could be. After conducting the research for assignment
three and found myself saying, Theres got to be a way! in my mind. I attempted to build a
framework for a program manual that would attempt to meet all of the needs of students with

APPLIED FOCUS

21

SEB challenges. I had an applied learning experience with this assignment when I casually spoke
with my coworkers about how they thought we, as a school, were doing to meet the complex
needs of our students. It was evident from these brief conversations that we have the teamwork
and collaboration part down but perhaps could benefit from the information drawn from program
evaluations. As a long-time program facilitator who struggled with biased program evaluations
for years, I never thought Id say that!
The applied focus assignment posed a couple of distinct challenges for me. I found it
particularly challenging to address all of my areas of interest in working with students with SEB
needs. I wanted to be comprehensive and concise but I struggled to meet my own desire to
validate the experiences that emerged from the literature. Because I am figuratively walking in
untouched snow in researching school-based therapeutic interventions that attempt to meet all of
the needs of SEB students, I was excited but nervous about missing key elements in writing this
assignment. Overall, I gained insight into the areas of my job that are can be challenging and
areas that are highly rewarding through completing this assignment. I found it particularly
personally and professionally beneficial to work on conceptualizing the ideas I have.

APPLIED FOCUS

22

References
Aviles, A. M., Anderson, T. R., & Davila, E. R. (2006). Child and Adolescent SocialEmotional
Development Within the Context of School. Child and Adolescent Mental Health, 11(1),
32-39. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-3588.2005.00365.x
Brownell, M. T., Ross, D. D., Coln, E. P., & McCallum, C. L. (2005). Critical features of
special education teacher preparation a comparison with general teacher education. The
Journal of Special Education, 38(4), 242-252. doi: 10.1177/00224669050380040601
Cooney, G., Jahoda, A., Gumley, A., & Knott, F. (2006). Young people with intellectual
disabilities attending mainstream and segregated schooling: perceived stigma, social
comparison and future aspirations. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 50(6),
432-444. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2788.2006.00789.x
Connor, D. J., & Ferri, B. A. (2007). The conflict within: Resistance to inclusion and other
paradoxes in special education. Disability & Society, 22(1), 63-77. doi:
10.1080/09687590601056717
Corey, G. (2009). Theory and Practice of Counselling and Psychotherapy (8th Edition).
Belmont, CA: Thomson Brooks/ Cole
Gable, R. A., Bullock, L. M., & Evans, W. H. (2006). Changing perspectives on alternative
schooling for children and adolescents with challenging behavior. Preventing School
Failure: Alternative Education for Children and Youth, 51(1), 5-9. 10.3200/PSFL.51.1.59
Hayes, M. (2014a). Qualitative research focus. Unpublished manuscript, University of
Lethbridge.

APPLIED FOCUS

23

Hayes, M. (2014b). Quantitative research focus. Unpublished manuscript, University of

Lethbridge.
Heathfield, L. T., & Clark, E. (2004). Shifting from categories to services: Comprehensive
schoolbased mental health for children with emotional disturbance and social
maladjustment. Psychology in the Schools, 41(8), 911-920. doi: 10.1002/pits.20047
Hoagwood, K. E., Olin, S. S., Kerker, B. D., Kratochwill, T. R., Crowe, M., & Saka, N. (2007).
Empirically based school interventions targeted at academic and mental health
functioning. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 15(2), 66-92. doi:
10.1177/10634266070150020301
Hoover, J. J., & Patton, J. R. (2008). The role of special educators in a multitiered instructional
system. Intervention in School and Clinic, 43(4), 195-202. doi:
10.1177/1053451207310345
Idol, L. (2006). Toward inclusion of special education students in general education a program
evaluation of eight schools. Remedial and Special Education, 27(2), 77-94. doi:
10.1177/07419325060270020601
Kutash, K., & Duchnowski, A. J. (2004). The mental health needs of youth with emotional and
behavioral disabilities placed in special education programs in urban schools. Journal of
Child and Family Studies, 13(2), 235-248. doi: 10.1023/B:JCFS.0000015710.82421.
Kam, C. M., Greenberg, M. T., & Kusche, C. A. (2004). Sustained effects of the PATHS
curriculum on the social and psychological adjustment of children in special education.
Journal of emotional and behavioral disorders, 12(2), 66-78. doi:
10.1177/10634266040120020101

APPLIED FOCUS

24

Lane, K. L., Barton-Arwood, S. M., Nelson, J. R., & Wehby, J. (2008). Academic performance
of students with emotional and behavioral disorders served in a self-contained setting.
Journal of Behavioral Education, 17(1), 43-62. doi: 10.1007/s10864-007-9050-1
Lauchlan, F., & Boyle, C. (2007). Is the use of labels in special education helpful?. Support for
Learning, 22(1), 36-42. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9604.2007.00443.x
Markussen, E. (2004). Special education: Does it help? A study of special education in
Norwegian upper secondary schools. European Journal of Special Needs Education,
19(1), 33-48. doi: 10.1080/0885625032000167133
Murray, N. G., Low, B. J., Hollis, C., Cross, A. W., & Davis, S. M. (2007). Coordinated school
health programs and academic achievement: A systematic review of the literature.
Journal of School Health, 77(9), 589-600. doi: 10.1111/j.1746-1561.2007.00238.x

Nelson, L. G. L., Summers, J. A., & Turnbull, A. P. (2004). Boundaries in familyprofessional

relationships implications for special education. Remedial and Special Education, 25(3),
153-165. doi: 10.1177/07419325040250030301
Norwich, B. (2008). Special schools: What future for special schools and inclusion? Conceptual
and professional perspectives. British Journal of Special Education, 35(3), 136-143. doi:
10.1111/j.1467-8578.2008.00387.x
Powell, J. J. (2006). Special education and the risk of becoming less educated. European
Societies, 8(4), 577-599. doi: 10.1080/14616690601002673
Pugh, J. (2010). Cognitive behaviour therapy in schools: the role of educational psychology in
the dissemination of empirically supported interventions. Educational Psychology in
Practice, 26(4), 391-399. doi: 10.1080/02667363.2010.521312

APPLIED FOCUS

25

Quinn, M. M., Poirier, J. M., Faller, S. E., Gable, R. A., & Tonelson, S. W. (2006). An
examination of school climate in effective alternative programs. Preventing School
Failure: Alternative Education for Children and Youth, 51(1), 11-17. doi:
10.3200/PSFL.51.1.11-17
Reddy, L. A., Newman, E., De Thomas, C. A., & Chun, V. (2009). Effectiveness of school-based
prevention and intervention programs for children and adolescents with emotional
disturbance: A meta-analysis. Journal of School Psychology, 47(2), 77-99. doi:
10.1016/j.jsp.2008.11.001
Reid, R., Gonzalez, J. E., Nordness, P. D., Trout, A., & Epstein, M. H. (2004). A meta-analysis
of the academic status of students with emotional/behavioral disturbance. The Journal of
Special Education, 38(3), 130-143. doi: 10.1177/00224669040380030101
Simmons, B., & Bayliss, P. (2007). The role of special schools for children with profound and
multiple learning difficulties: is segregation always best?. British Journal of Special
Education, 34(1), 19-24.
Sugai, G., & Horner, R. R. (2006). A promising approach for expanding and sustaining schoolwide positive behavior support. School Psychology Review, 35(2), 245.
Sutherland, K. S., Lewis-Palmer, T., Stichter, J., & Morgan, P. L. (2008). Examining the
influence of teacher behavior and classroom context on the behavioral and academic
outcomes for students with emotional or behavioral disorders. The Journal of Special
Education, 41(4), 223-233. doi: 10.1177/0022466907310372
Vernberg, E. M., Jacobs, A. K., Nyre, J. E., Puddy, R. W., & Roberts, M. C. (2004). Innovative
treatment for children with serious emotional disturbance: Preliminary outcomes for a

APPLIED FOCUS

26

school-based intensive mental health program. Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent
Psychology, 33(2), 359-365. doi: 10.1207/s15374424jccp3302_17
Wagner, M., Kutash, K., Duchnowski, A. J., Epstein, M. H., & Sumi, W. C. (2005). The children
and youth we serve a national picture of the characteristics of students with emotional
disturbances receiving special education. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral
Disorders, 13(2), 79-96. doi: 10.1177/1063426605013002020