Content area
Full Text
Team-based problem solving (i.e., multidisciplinary groups meeting to use data to identify and address school-based concerns) is an integral part of general education, special education, and school psychology (Boudett, City, & Murnane, 2013; Coffey & Horner, 2012; Tilly, 2008). The expectation that teams of teachers, administrators, and related services professionals will meet regularly to use data to identify and solve academic and behavior problems is a foundation of ongoing efforts to meet the needs of and improve outcomes for all students (Coburn & Turner, 2012; Coffey & Horner, 2012; Newton et al., 2014; Spillane, 2012; Tilly, 2008).
A repeated area of interest related to school-based problem solving has been the need to give teams the right information at the right time and in the right format to bring about functional change (Bahr, Whitten, Dieker, Kocarek, & Manson, 1999; Burns & Symington, 2002; Chafouleas, Volpe, Gresham, & Cook, 2010; Nellis, 2012). There has also been a focus on defining “problem-solving rubrics” that teams can and should use to be effective (Crone et al., 2015; Newton, Horner, Algozzine, Todd, & Algozzine, 2009, 2012; Newton et al., 2014) and on documenting the extent to which teams use these rubrics in authentic settings to plan, implement, and evaluate interventions (Burns, Peters, & Noell, 2008). As we enter a point in history where educators have more information available (Coburn & Turner, 2012; Little, 2012) and are expected to teach more diverse groups of students than ever before (Cruz, 2015; Ellerbrock & Cruz, 2014), it is incumbent on the field to support not only their data-related needs, but also the ways that that information is used to improve school, classroom, and individual student supports.
A variety of problem-solving models have been proposed (cf. Boudett, City, & Murnane, 2005, 2013; Bransford & Stein, 1984; Tilly, 2008). Common across them is a set of steps that, despite being represented with varying terminology or being partitioned into slightly different phases, reflect a consistent, iterative process (e.g., problem identification, problem analysis, and action plan/intervention development, implementation, and evaluation). The promise is that adherence to the process will lead to better outcomes. Yet, researchers (Burns et al., 2008; Burns & Symington, 2002; Burns, Vanderwood, & Ruby, 2005; Newton, Horner, et al., 2009) provide a less than...