contributions of jack bardon to professional school psychology

Pergamon

Journal of School Psychology, Vol. 35, No. 3, pp. 315-328, 1997 Copyright © 1997 Socie~ for the Study of School Psychology

Printed in the USA 0022-4405/97 $17.00 + .00

PII S0022-4405(97)00011-3

Contributions of Jack Bardon to Professional School Psychology

Kirsten Eidle The University at Albany, State University of New York

Irwin Hyman Temple University

Joel Meyers Georgia State University

This paper is an examination of the influence Jack Bardon had on school psychology throughout his career from 1952 to 1993. A summary of this influence is presented that is based on a review of his publications and a survey of three groups of school psychologists (certificate-level Nationally Certified School Psychologists, doctoral-level Nationally Certified School Psychologists, and fellows of the Ameri- can Psychological Association, Division 16). Those areas in which Jack Bardon has made a substantial impact are as follows: role and definition of school psychology; professional organization issues; debate over level of training; and consultation. These are discussed along with a comparison of how Jack Bardon's influence differs across the three groups represented in the sample. © 1997 Society for the Study of School Psychology. Published by Elsevier Science Ltd

M a n y o f t h e r e a d e r s o f t h e Journal of School Psychology k n o w tha t Dr. J a c k

B a r d o n d i e d o n N o v e m b e r 9, 1993. I n h o n o r o f his m a n y c o n t r i b u t i o n s to

t h e f i e ld o f s c h o o l p s y c h o l o g y a n d to this j o u r n a l , t h e s e c o n d issue o f

V o l u m e 32 of JSP was d e d i c a t e d to h i m . F o l l o w i n g his d e a t h , m a n y p e o p l e

c o m m e n t e d o n t h e i m p o r t a n t i m p a c t t h e y b e l i e v e h e has h a d o n t h e f ield.

S o m e o f t h e s e c o n t r i b u t i o n s w e r e d i s c u s s e d b r i e f ly in V o l u m e 32, Issue 2,

a n d t h e s e i n c l u d e t h e f o l l o w i n g areas: p s y c h o l o g y a n d e d u c a t i o n as ap-

p r o a c h e s to i m p r o v e socia l c o n d i t i o n s , t h e d e f i n i t i o n a n d i d e n t i t y o f s c h o o l

p s y c h o l o g y a n d r e l a t e d p r o f e s s i o n a l o r g a n i z a t i o n s , t r a i n i n g in s c h o o l psy-

Received January 15, 1997; accepted April 16, 1997. The authors wish to thank Joanna Krupp for her assistance in analyzing the data presented

in this manuscript. Address correspondence and reprint requests to .Joel Meyers, Georgia State University.,

Department of Counselling and Psychological Services, University Plaza, Atlanta, GA 3030~ 3083.

© 1997 Society for the Study of School Psychology. Published by Elsevier Science Ltd

315

316 Journal of School Psychology

chology, consultation as an approach to service delivery, and the importance of personal characteristics of the psychologist. The purpose of this paper is to explore the influence that Jack Bardon has had on the field of school psychology by gathering information about his publications and by surveying school psychologists to determine perceptions of his scholarly and personal contributions to the field.

A review of the literature reveals numerous publications in a range of areas, including those noted above. Some of the more notable contributions of this literature can be conceptualized as falling within the following areas: development of the identity and role of the school psychologist, influence of professional organizations, consultation as an approach to service delivery, and training in school psychology. These are discussed below.

DEVELOPMENT OF THE IDENTITY AND ROLE OF THE SCHOOL PSYCHOLOGIST

When Jack Bardon entered the field in 1952, School Psychology lacked a clear definition or conceptual frame of reference. This lack of clarity may have contr ibuted to the important role played by state and federal laws and regulations in shaping training and practice. In this context, there was confusion among the lay public, educators, and school psychologists concerning the role of the school psychologist that Bardon sought to correct by developing a conceptual framework for the practice of psychology in the schools (Bardon, 1976a, 1981a, 1982b, 1983a).

Bardon argued that school psychology developed in a series of stages (Bardon, 1968; 1982b; Bardon & Bennett , 1974). These stages include: (a) psychometrician, (b) clinician, and (c) organizat ional /educat ional psychologist. According to Bardon's view, the "psychometrician" would ad- minister and interpret test results to assist with the identification and classification of students with disabilities. The "clinician" was viewed as a professional who would diagnose a range of mental health problems, make recommendat ions to teachers about such problems, and give attention to the whole child, including the classroom, home, and community environ- ments. Finally, he suggested that the last stage in the development of the field is the professional who is able to apply h i s /he r knowledge in broad and diverse ways to the school setting. At this stage of development the psychologist would not be limited to providing direct services to children, parents, and teachers, as there would also be involvement with school policies, procedures, and programs through education, consultation, and the evaluation of such programs. This is congruent with an organizational model of psychology (Bardon, 1968, 1982b).

Eidle, Hyman, and Meyers 31 7

THE INFLUENCE OF PROFESSIONAL ORGANIZATIONS

A theme that runs through Bardon's writing relates to the influence of professional organizations on the field, an important issue since he practiced during an era when the field developed its status as a profession. This theme was connected in particular with the diverse influences of the American Psychological Association (APA), its Division of School Psychol- ogy and the National Association of School Psychologists (NASP) on the developing identity of this profession (Bardon, 1974, 1979a, 1981b, 1982a, 1982b, 1983a). One aspect of this work was his discussion of the entry level for training school psychologists (e.g., certificate level vs. doctoral level) and the views of these professional organizations on this issue. For example, at one point he proposed that NASP continue to represent those with the title school psychologist while maintaining a nondoctoral entry level. This proposal suggested that APA develop a new title for the doctoral school psychologist that would describe the role of the school psychologist as the application of psychology to education (Bardon, 1982a, 1983a, 1989a). His description of psychologists with this title is consistent with the third stage described above, which viewed the school psychologist as an organization- a l /educat ional psychologist.

TRAINING IN SCHOOL PSYCHOLOGY

Another area of focus for Bardon's scholarship was training. This occurred, in part, because his career spanned a period in which school psychology training programs emerged. He was among those who helped develop a focus for the preparation of school psychologists and he helped to achieve accreditation status for doctoral school psychology programs by the APA. Bardon wrote articles presenting the results of surveys and a description of training practices (Bardon, 1972; Bardon & Bennett, 1967; Bardon & Wenger, 1976); he also wrote position statements concerning training in school psychology (Bardon, 1976a, 1981a; Bardon & Bennett, 1967, 1974). He focused on doctoral training in school psychology, and, consistent with his work on the school psychologist's role, he emphasized training for a broad role that included assessment, direct intervention, consultation, prevention, and the application of research skills in practice (Bardon, 1987a).

CONSULTATION AS AN APPROACH TO SERVICE DELIVERY

Consultation is one of the key approaches to the delivery of school psychological services and Bardon contr ibuted to the development of this approach th roughout his career. He practiced using a consultation model when he worked in schools, he provided training concerning consultation to school psychology graduate students and to practicing school psychol-


ogists through professional development activities, and he influenced the consultation literature through his scholarly writings (e.g., Bardon, 1963, 1977, 1979, 1985, 1992; Bardon & Bennett, 1974; Conti & Bardon, 1973). In addition to promot ing the consultation role (Bardon, 1985; Bardon & Bennett , 1974), some of the important themes in his writing on consultation include evaluating the impact of consultation (Bardon, 1985; Conti & Bardon, 1973), considering both educational and mental health outcomes by school psychological consultants (Bardon, 1992), proposing its application to higher education (Bardon, 1979b), and emphasizing the role of the consultee in consultation (Bardon, 1977, 1985).

This paper seeks to examine Bardon's contributions in the above areas systematically, by determining school psychologists' perceptions of these contributions. This paper presents the results of this investigation. The purpose of presenting these results is two-fold: (a) to illustrate the many important contributions that Jack Bardon made to the field of school psychology; and (b) to underscore some of the issues that he considered which are still highly relevant to the field.

METHOD

Participants

Seven hundred and nine subjects were chosen from two different populations. The first consisted of Fellows from Division 16 of the APA and the second included Nationally Certified School Psychologists (NCSP) living in New Jersey, North Carolina, New York, Delaware, Maryland, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, and Virginia (states bordering, New Jersey and North Carolina, the two states where Jack Bardon worked as a school psychologist). These two groups (Fellows from APA, Division 16; NCSP school psychologists from the state noted above) were chosen to provide a sufficient sample with an informed perspective on his scholarly, professional and personal contributions.

The 1993 APA directory listed 169 Fellows in Division 16. All 169 were mailed questionnaires. The 1993 directory of NCSP listed 3531 school psychologists who lived in the above listed states. The sample size was de te rmined using the standard formula developed by McCall (1982) using an estimated .50 response rate. This resulted in a sample size of 540. Participants were chosen randomly from this NCSP populat ion and were stratified based on state to provide a representative number from each state. Fellows who were also on the NCSP list were omitted from the NCSP mailing. With the two populations combined, a total of 709 individuals were mailed questionnaires.

A total of 215 (30%) surveys was returned. One hundred and twenty- eight (59%) of the respondents indicated they were Nationally Certified

Eidle, Hyman, and Meyers 319

School Psychologists (NCSP return rate -- 24%) and 82 (38%) of the respondents indicated they were Fellows of APA, Division 16 (Fellow return rate = 48%). Five respondents (2%) did not indicate whether they were NCSPs or APA fellows. In addition, 141 (65%) were doctorate-level school psychologists (80 Fellows in APA and 61 doctoral-level school psychologists from the NCSP list), and 66 (31%) were certificate-level school psychologists from the NCSP list. Eight respondents (4%) did not indicate their level of training. Based on the number of doctoral-level school psychologists enrolled in NASP (24%), doctoral-level school psychologists are overrepresented in this study.

The data analyses repor ted in this manuscript compared the responses from three groups of respondents. The first group included those NCSP school psychologists who had non-doctoral training (N = 65), the second group included those NCSP school psychologists who were trained at the doctoral level and who had not attained status as a Fellow ofAPA (N= 61), and the third group included those school psychologists who were Fellows ofAPA (N= 80).

One hundred and four (48%) respondents were male, while 109 (51%) were female. Two respondents (1%) did not provide their gender. Years of experience in the field of School Psychology ranged from 3 to 59 years (M = 19.73, SD = 9.82). Mean years of experience was 15.6 years for certificate- level NCSP members, 15.7 years for doctoral level NCSP members, and 26.6 years for fellows. Only those questionnaires (N = 206; 96%) that contained complete information were included in the analysis.

Materials

A 7-item questionnaire was developed that consisted of questions on de- mographics, as well as questions pertaining to the professional and personal influence that Jack Bardon had through his publications, professional presentations, and personal contacts. Demographic questions included information about gender, years of experience, and highest degree earned. Questions addressing specific information on Jack Bar- don's influence included the following: (a) "list those publications by Jack Bardon that have influenced your professional work in school psychology," (b) "o f those items selected above, please choose the most important (no more than 3) and specify how they have made an impact," and "indicate any other ways in which Jack Bardon has influenced you."

A bibliography of Jack Bardon's writings (29 publications) was developed based on those articles that had eight or more citations in the Social Sciences

Citation Index and those articles that would demonstrate the breadth of Jack Bardon's writings (see Table 1).


Table I Frequencies and Percentages of the Three Groups Choosing Articles as Being Influential

CAS ~ PhD b Fellow' Total d

f % f % f % f %

Bardon & Bennet t (1974). Schoolpsychology 8 12.3 15 24.6 28 35.0 51 24.6 Bardon (1983a). Psychology applied to educa- 1 01.5 07 11.5 33 41.2 41 20.0

tion: A specialty in search . . .

Bardon (1982b). The psychology of school 7 10.8 13 21.3 15 18.8 35 17.1 psychology. The Handbook of School Psychology

Bardon (1979a). Debate: Will the real school 3 04.6 10 16.4 16 20.0 29 14.2 psychologist please s tand up? Part 1: How best to ...

Bardon (1976a). The state of the art (and 2 03.1 01 01.6 21 26.6 24 11.8 science) of school psychology.

Bardon (1982a). School psychology's di lemma: 1 01.5 06 09.8 15 18.8 22 10.7 A proposal for its resolution.

Bardon (1987a). The translation of research 2 03.1 07 11.5 08 10.0 17 08.3 into practice in school psychology.

Bardon (1989a). The school psychologist as an 1 01.5 06 09.8 08 10.0 15 07.3 applied educat ion psychologist.

Bardon (1989b). NASP as perceived by the 2 03.1 04 06.6 09 11.2 15 07.3 Division of School Psychology, Amer ican Psychological Association: Past and ...

Bardon (1981a). A personalized account o f the 2 03.1 03 05.0 09 11.2 14 06.9 deve lopment and status of school psychology

Bardon (1972). Characteristics of graduate 2 03.1 05 08.2 06 07.5 13 06.3 training programs in school psychology

Bardon (1979b). Educational deve lopment 0 00.0 03 04.9 10 12.5 13 06.3 as school psychology.

Bardon (1983b). Viewpoints on multidisci- 7 10.8 04 06.6 02 02.5 13 06.9 plinary teams in schools.

Bardon (1992). Solving educat ional problems: 0 00.0 03 04.9 08 10.0 11 05.4 Working across institutional, cultural and political differences.

Bardon (1964/5) . Problems and issues in 0 00.0 02 03.3 07 08.8 09 04.4 school psychology - - 1964; proceeding of a conference on "new directions in school psychology."

Bardon (1968). School psychology and school 1 01.5 02 03.3 06 07.5 09 04.4 psychologists: An approach to an old problem.

Benne t t & Bardon (1975). Law, professional 0 00.0 06 09.8 03 03.8 09 04.4 practice, and professional organizations: Where do we go from here?

Bardon & Bennet t (1967). Preparat ion for 0 00.0 02 03.3 05 06.2 07 03.4 professional psychology: An example f rom a school psychology training program.

Conti & Bardon (1973). A proposal for evalu- 0 00.0 04 06.6 03 03.8 07 03.4 at ing the effectiveness of psychologists in the schools.

(Continued)


Table 1 Continued

CAS ~ PhD b Fellow ~ Total d

f % f % / % f %

Bardon (1987b). Past tense, present subjunc- 2 03.1 04 06.6 01 01.2 07 03.4 rive, future imperfect: Reaction to Fagan's article.

Bardon & Wenger (1976). School psychology 0 00.0 01 01.6 05 06.2 06 02.9 training trends in the early 1970s.

Bardon (1981b). Small group synthesis, group 1 01.5 02 03.3 03 03.8 06 02.9 C (Spring Hill Symposium)

Bardon, Bennett, Bruchez, & Sanderson 0 00.0 03 04.9 02 02.5 05 02.4 (1976). Psychosituational classroom intervention: Rational and description.

Bardon (1977). The consultee in consultation. 0 00.0 04 06.6 01 01.2 05 02.4 Bardon (1963). Mental health education: A 1 01.5 00 00.0 02 02.5 03 01.5

framework for psychological services in the schools.

Bardon (1976b). School psychology in New 0 00.0 00 00.0 01 01.2 01 0.05 Zealand.

Bennett & Bardon (1977). The effects of a 0 00.0 01 01.6 00 00.0 01 0.05 school program on teenage mothers and their children.

Bardon, Vacc, & Vallecorsa (1984). Research 0 00.0 01 01.6 00 00.0 01 0.05 as practice: A conceptual model of training in special education.

Bardon (1985). On the verge of a break- 0 00.0 01 01.6 00 00.0 01 0.05 throngh.

~Total CAS = 65. bTotal PhD - 61 ':Total Fellow = 80. dTotal N = 206.

Procedure

The quest ionnaire was sent to potential respondents along with the bibliography and a cover letter that described the purpose o f the study. Six weeks later a second mailing was sent to those individuals who had not responded to the first mailing, as suggested by Dillman (1978).

Data Analysis

The two questions requiring an open-ended response style (b and c) were coded by developing a categorization system reflecting these data. First, an advanced doctoral student read all the answers and generated tentative response categories. The graduate student then met with a faculty member in school psychology to refine these categories. This process was followed for each open-ended question. These categories can be found in Tables 2


Table 2 Frequencies and Percentages of Individuals Indicating Each Type of Publication Influence

CAS ~ PhD b Fellow c Total d

f % f % f % f %

Definition of role 6 9.1 10 16.4 18 22.5 33 16,1 Psychology in education 0 0.0 6 09.8 24 30.0 30 14.6 Resource in professional work 9 13.8 8 13.1 12 15.0 29 14.2 Professional organizations 1 1.5 0 00.0 11 13.8 12 05.8 Decision to enterf ie ld 1 1.5 2 03,3 06 07,5 09 04.4 Development of training programs 2 3.1 3 04.9 04 05.0 09 04,4 Bringing research into practice 2 3.1 0 00.0 06 07.5 08 03,7 Emphasized historicalinfluence 1 1.5 2 03.3 02 02.5 05 02,4 Multidisciplinaryteams 3 4.6 0 00.0 00 00.0 03 01.5 Helped understand Spring Hill 1 1.5 0 00,0 01 01.2 02 01.0 Consultation 0 0.0 1 01.6 01 01.2 02 01.0 Legal issues 0 0.0 1 01.6 01 01.2 02 01.0 School psychology in higher education 0 0.0 0 00.0 01 01.2 01 00.5 Work in New Zealand 0 0.0 0 00,0 01 01.2 01 00,5 Systemic issues-service deliv. 0 0.0 0 00.0 01 01.2 01 00.5 Accountability 0 0.0 0 00.0 01 01.2 01 00.5 Reform/restructur ing special education 0 0.0 0 00.0 01 01.2 01 00.5

aTotal CAS = 65. bTotal PhD = 61. CTotal Fellow = 80. aTotal N = 206.

and 3. After ag reemen t was reached about which categories best described these data, each part ic ipant 's response to the two open-ended questions was coded independent ly by the doctoral s tudent and the university faculty m e m b e r in school psychology. In ter ra ter ag reemen t was 86% for question b and 91% for question c. Agreement was reached between the two raters for each instance that there was d isagreement about the correct code.

RESULTS

Influential Publications

Table 1 illustrates the frequencies with which each of the publications were chosen by certificate-level NCSPs, doctoral- level NCSPs, and doctoral-level school psychologists who were also fellows of APA, Division 16. The number of psychologists selecting each publicat ion ranged f rom 1 to 51. Six of the 29 publications were selected by 10% or more of the populat ion as being influential, one of which was School Psychology, written by Bardon and Bennet t (1974), which covers a variety of topics related to School Psychol- ogy. The o ther publications covered issues per ta ining to the role and


Table 3 Frequencies and Percentages of Individuals Indicating Each Type of Personal Influence

CAS ~ PhD ~' Fellow': Total d

f % f % f % ,f %

Personal (meeting, manner) 5 07.7 5 08.2

As a role model 5 07.7 5 08.2

Professional organizations 7 10.7 3 04.9

Vision of the field (futuristic) 2 03.1 8 13.1

Consultant to organization 2 03.1 1 01.6

His teaching (directly/indirectly) 5 07.7 4 04.9

Development of Rutgers Psy. D. 0 00.0 4 06.6

School psychology across all disciplines 1 01.5 1 01.6

Commit to professional development 2 03.1 0 00.0

School psycholgy in higher education 0 00.0 0 00.0

38 47.5 48 23.4

29 36.2 38 18.5

16 20.0 26 12.7

10 12.5 20 09.8

10 12.5 13 06.3

08 10.0 12 05.8

04 05.0 08 03.9

01 01.2 03 01.5

01 01.2 03 01.5

02 02.5 02 01.0

~'Total CAS = 65 "Total PhD = 61. 'Total Fellow 80. dTotal N = 2(16.

identity of school psychology. An additional eight publications were chosen by at least 5% of the population. The topics discussed in these papers included involvement in APA and NASP, application of research to practice, multidisciplinary teams, training, and role and identity.

A trend was evident in those publications that were chosen by at least 5% (N = 14) of the population when comparing certificate NCSP, doctoral NCSP, and doctoral fellow groups. The fellows generally had the highest percentage of responses, Doctoral NCSP respondents often provided the second highest percentage of responses and certificate NCSP respondents typically had the lowest percentage of responses, indicating that a publication had been influential. Exceptions to this trend included cases in which the doctoral NCSP respondents were equivalent to certificate NCSP respondents or when they were more equivalent with the fellows. However, fellows almost always had a higher number of respondents who indicated that publications had been influential when compared to certificate-level NCSP respondents.

Types of Publication Influence

Table 2 provides information on the ways in which Bardon's publications were perceived to have made an impact and the frequencies with which each of these types of influence was chosen. These are also divided according to the different levels of psychologists in the population (certificate NCSP, doctoral NCSP, and fellows).

The frequencies with which these types of influence were cited ranged from 1 to 33. There were three ways in which Bardon's publications were


perceived to have an impact that were repor ted by at least 10% of the population. Sixteen percent (N = 33) indicated that Bardon provided a definition of the general role; 14.6% (N= 30) were influenced by Bardon's emphasis on psychology in education; and 14.2% (N = 29) indicated that Bardon's works were influential as a resource in their professional work (e.g., they cited his works in publications, presentations or teaching.)

No consistent trend was evident in the percentages of each group citing these influences. However, the two cited by the highest number of respondents, "definition of role" (16.1%, N = 33) and "psychology in education" (14.6%, N = 30), followed the same pattern mentioned above, in which the highest percentage of respondents citing these influences were fellows, the second highest percentage were doctoral-level NCSP respondents, and the lowest percentage was from the certificate-level NCSP group. The influence cited by the third highest percentage of respondents, "resource in professional work" (14.2%, N= 29), was divided equally across these three groups.

Types of Personal Influence

Respondents also indicated that Bardon made an impact beyond his publications in a variety of ways. Analysis of these responses resulted in 11 categories, which can be found in Table 3, along with how frequently they were cited. The same comparisons across the three groups were made.

The frequencies with which these types of influence were cited ranged from 2 to 48. The three most frequently cited personal influences were cited by more than 10% of the populat ion and include the following: meeting Bardon personally/his manne r and interest in others (23.4%, N= 48); as a role model through his leadership abilities and as a spokesperson for the field (18.5%, N= 38); and through his involvement in professional organizations (12.7%, N= 26). There is a t rend in which a higher percentage of fellows repor ted personal influences than ei ther of the certificate- or doctoral-level NCSP groups.

DISCUSSION

This survey is unique in its at tempt to study the impact, importance and meaning of the publications and contributions of an early leader in the field of school psychology. It helps to document Jack Bardon's continuous efforts to conceptualize and facilitate the growth of the field of school psychology within the broader context of professional psychology, schools, and the community.

The results of this survey reveal several factors that reflect the state of our profession and some of our endur ing problems. The differences in perceptions of doctoral and nondoctora l psychologists is an important and ironic finding given that distinctions between doctoral and nondoctora l


school psychology absorbed Jack 's energies th roughout his career. Since the Fellows in this research were more exper ienced and more likely to have been active in the early years of school psychology, it might be expected that their perspectives regarding role identity would be different than those of the others. This may reflect more contact with Jack and his ideas over the years, and it may also reflect the shared values of active APA members . The differences between the percept ions of APA fellows and o ther groups is suppor ted by much of the data on Tables 1 and 2. For instance, Table 1 indicates that almost half of the Fellows rated the 1983 article "Psychology Applied to Education . . ." as influential. This was clearly greater than the n u m b e r of NCSP respondents rating this article as influential. Table 2 reveals a similar t rend for several responses, including the one suggesting that Bardon made an impor tan t influence by "br inging research into practice."

An interesting reversal is noted in the responses concerning the influence of the 1983 article, "Viewpoints on Multidisciplinary Teams." The NCSP respondents were more likely than APA Fellows to rate this article as influential, with the highest percentage of responses coming from certificate-level school psychologists. This finding receives some support from the data in Table 2 concerning his influence regarding multidisciplinary teams, where only certificate-level school psychologists pointed to this as an area where Jack Bardon had made an impact through his publications.

These groups differ based on the degree of experience with fellows having the greatest amount of prior experience. It may also be true that APA fellows are less likely than NCSP respondents to be working full-time as a school psychologist. The findings discussed above may be explained, in part, by these differences between the samples. It may be that less experienced professionals who were more likely to practice in the schools, as school psychologists were more likely to select articles and issues, such as multidisciplinary teams, which directly affected their practice. In contrast, the more experienced APA fellows who were less likely to work in schools and more likely to engage in research might have been less inclined to select articles and issues that would be viewed as being connected to practice (e.g., applications of psychology to education and to psychological practice).

Table 3 reflects Jack 's influence on the more exper ienced professionals and on doctoral school psychologists who may have been aware of his contr ibutions to the deve lopment and survival of professional school psychology. However, it is noted that substantial numbers of certificate-level school psychologists also recognized his contributions through professional organizations, as a role model , through his teaching, and based on his personal style.

The impor tance of this study, in addit ion to being a testament to Jack Bardon as a person, scholar, and theoretician, relates to the paper ' s impli- cations concern ing our sense of history. School psychology, the fourth


specialty in professional psychology approved by the APA, has always been plagued by its identification with schools as the place where one works. During the first few decades of Jack Bardon's career, he and many other advocates for school psychology, struggled to establish a unique identity for school psychology as a specialty in professional psychology.

Efforts to develop the identity resulted in numerous articles presenting views on the " ro le" of school psychology and a great deal of effort working within APA serving on numerous committees and on the APA Counsel of Representatives to support efforts to recognize the unique role played by school psychologists. Jack and many others worked hard on this issue, resulting in recognition of school psychology as a specialty in APA, accreditation by APA of school psychology training programs, establishment of Diplomate status for school psychology, and the development of the Journal of School Psychology as the field's first scholarly journal . Unfortunately, many of our founders who toiled in the vineyards are little known or unrecog- nized for their early contributions to these important steps in developing this profession. Jack Bardon was one of the key persons involved in many of these efforts.

Most introductory books in school psychology do not adequately em- phasize the contexts of the struggles of early leaders in the field. Further, they do not present these leaders as personalities. There is almost no emphasis on the many internecine battles that occurred or how individual personalities influenced important debates. Jack was noted for his flexibil- ity, calmness, openness, and ability to carefully weigh and uniquely analyze all issues in a controversy. By way of example, when NASP was organized initially to represent the interests of nondoctora l school psychologists, Jack was one of the first p rominent APA members who made public his decision to join NASE Other leaders, especially those still struggling with issues of recognit ion in APA, were furious with him. Some accused him of helping a splinter group that they felt would hurt efforts to solidify the identity of school psychology within APA. One prominent member of APA stated to the Executive Committee APA's Division of School Psychology that if Jack and the rest of us would only " . . . ignore NASP it will go away." Jack responded patiently and calmly to all criticisms with his usual theory-driven responses, and subsequently NASP has grown into an important organization that has often s t rengthened Division 16's efforts to influence APA.

This article reinforces the need for a book of biographies about the important historical leaders in the field of school psychology. If such a book is not written soon, much of the oral history concerning the development of this field and the leadership that made this happen will disappear. The data from this survey demonstrate different perceptions about the range of important contributions made by one important and prolific school psychologist. There are many others who have also made important contributions to developing the field of school psychology who deserve our attention.


Many of the respondents to this survey recognized the impor tance of Jack 's early and cont inuing emphasis on training school psychologists to funct ion in the broadest possible context that might affect students ' lives. He believed that school psychologists should have a broad range of clinical, behavioral, organizational, and consultation skills. Yet, there is a contem- porary t rend in which the pr imary focus in training is on psychoeduca- tional assessment, classroom issues, and behavioral intervention. Jack 's bel ief that school psychologists need a b roader set of constructs and techniques is relevant to today's schools, where psychologists with varied clinical backgrounds a t tempt to compete with school psychologists to funct ion in the schools. The cur rent t rend of insurance, Medicaid, and o ther governmenta l funding for school-based clinical services to children has resulted in a t rend in which other psychologists and mental health professionals are moving into schools to function in the diverse roles that Jack p romo ted for school psychology. His endur ing legacy, as demon- strated in this study, was his unders tanding that if school psychologists specialize too much, we are d o o m e d to jo in those unfor tunate victims of evolution who did not have sufficient generalizable abilities to survive change. Hopeful ly the profession of school psychology will heed his advice.

REFERENCES

Bardon, J. (1963). Mental health education: A framework for psycho-psychological services in the schools. Journal of School Psychology, 1, 20-27.

Bardon,J. I. (1964/5). Problems and issues in school psychology-1964; proceedings of a conference on "new directions in school psychology" sponsored by the National Institute of Mental Health. Journal of School Psychology, 3, 1 44.

Bardon,J. (1968). School psychology and school psychologists: An approach to an old problem. The American Psychologist, 23, 187.

Bardon, J. (1972). Characteristics of graduate training programs in school psychology. American Psychologist, 27, 652-656.

Bardon, J. I. (1976a). The state of the art (and science) of school psychology. American Psychologist, 31, 785-791.

Bardon,J. I. (1976b). School psychology in New Zealand. School Psychologist, 31, 1-2. Bardon, J. I. (1977). The consultee in consultation. Annual Meetings of the American

Psychological Association. Bardon,J. I. (1979a). Debate: Will the real school psychologist please stand up? Part 1:

How best to establish the identity of professional school psychology. School Psychology Digest, 8, 162-167.

Bardon, J. I. (1979b). Educational development as school psychology. Prof~sional Psychology, 10, 224-233.

Bardon,J. I. (1981a). A personalized account of the development and status of school psychology. Journal of School Psychology, 19, 199-210.

Bardon,J. I. (1981b). Small group synthesis, group C (Spring Hill Symposium). School Psychology Review, 10, 297-306.

Bardon, J. I. (1982a). School psychology's dilemma: A proposal for its resolution. Professional Psychology, 13, 955-968.


Bardon, J. I. (1982b). The psychology of school psychology. In C. R. Reynolds & T. B. Gutkin (Eds.), The handbook of school psychology (pp. 3-14). New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Bardon, J. I. (1983a). Psychology applied to education: A specialty in search of an identity. American Psychologist, 38, 185--196.

Bardon,J. I. (1983b). Viewpoints on multidisciplinary teams in schools. SchoolPsychology Review, 1Z 186-189.

Bardon, J. I. (1985). On the verge of a breakthrough (consultation). Counseling Psy- chologist, 13, 355-362.

Bardon, J. I. (1987a). The translation of research into practice in school psychology. School Psychology Review, 16, 317-328.

Bardon, J. I. (1987b). Past tense, present subjunctive, future imperfect: Reaction to Fagan's article. School Psychology Review, 16, 22-26.

Bardon, J. I. (1989a). The school psychologist as an applied educational psychologist. In R. C. D'Amato & R. S. Dean (Eds.), The schoolpsychologist in nontraditional settings: Integrating clients, services, and settings (pp. 2-32). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Bardon, J. I. (1989b). NASP as perceived by the Division of School Psychology, Amer- ican Psychological Association: Past and future interactions. School Psychology Review, 18, 209-214.

Bardon, J. I. (1992). Solving educational problems: Working across institutional, cultural and political differences. School Psychology Quarterly, 7, 137-147.

Bardon, J. I., & Bennett, V. C. (1967). Preparation for professional psychology: An example from a school psychology training program. American Psychologist, 22, 652.

Bardon, J. I., & Bennett, V. C. (1974). Schoolpsychology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice- Hall.

Bardon, J. I., Bennett, V. C., Bruchez, P. K., & Sanderson, R. A. (1976). Psychositu- ational classroom intervention: Rationale and description. Journal of School Psychol- ogy, 14, 97-104.

Bardon,J. I., Vacc. N. A~, & Vallecorsa, A. L. (1984). Research as practice: A conceptual model of training in special education. Teacher Education and Special Education, 7, 164-169.

Bardon, J. I., & Wenger, R. D. (1976). School psychology training trends in the early 1970's. Professional Psychology, 7, 31-37.

Bennett, V. C., & Bardon, J. I. (1975). Law, professional practice, and professional organizations: Where do we go from here? Journal of School Psychology, 13, 349-358.

Bennett, V. C., & Bardon, J. I. (1977). The effects of a school program on teenage mothers and their children. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 47, 671-678.

Conti, A., & Bardon, J. I. (1973). A proposal for evaluating the effectiveness of psychologists in the schools. Psychology in the Schools, 11, 32-39.

Dillman, D. A. (1978). Mail and telephone surveys: The total design method New York: John Wiley & Sons.

McCall, C. H. (1982). Sampling and statistics handbook for research. Iowa: Iowa State University Press.

contributions of jack bardon to professional school psychology

Documents