Additional Resources 427state affiliations and advocacy programs much as they are.
Though many in the field would like to see a united force for
school psychology achieved by a merger of the NASP and the
Division of School Psychology-APA, this is a very remote
possibility.
The literary growth of the field will level off, at least in
quantity. There are enough journals and newsletters to main-
tain the field for many years, and additional journals specific
to school psychology are unnecessary. Books will continue to
be produced as training program needs dictate, and additional
books will be written along lines of expanding specialties,
subspecialties, proficiencies, and practitioners’ personal in-
terests. The Internet and electronic media will offer new, and
unfortunately less regulated and refereed, outlets for practi-
tioner information. The Internet as a source of information
for practitioners and trainers will be vast but will force the
consumer to be better educated about methodologies and dis-
tinguishing personal opinion and testimonials from authorita-
tive opinion and data-based outcomes. At least as far as
school psychology Web sites and listservs are concerned, the
field should develop guidelines to regulate the quality of
information available.
The number of training programs will not increase in any
appreciable way. Master’s-degree-only programs will fade out
of existence as specialist-level programs become the norm.
The NASP/NCATE will continue as the dominant accreditor
of these programs. Doctoral programs will grow in number to
about 100 in the United States. Although both the NASP/
NCATE and the APA will continue to accredit doctoral pro-
grams, the APA will continue its dominant position. All levels
of programs should increase recruitment efforts to graduate
more students to meet the current and future shortage of prac-
titioners. A strong effort should be made to increase the num-
ber of doctoral graduates interested in academic careers.
Changes in credentialing will be more qualitative than
quantitative. The two systems of credentialing (SDE and
SBEP) will continue with occasional struggles for practice
privileges. Recognition credentials (NCSP, ABSP) will in-
crease in popularity and may be extended to specialized
groups such as the supervisor credential being considered by
NASP. More states will recognize the NCSP in granting prac-
tice credentials. Efforts should continue to alleviate tensions
between state education and state psychology credentialing
boards by broader recognition of the legitimate role of non-
doctoral psychology practitioners.
Contemporary tests of ability, achievement, adaptive be-
havior, social skills, and personality will retain their market
share. Technical adequacy of tests will continue to improve,
and the significance of cognitive and neuropsychological the-
ories will continue to develop. Nevertheless, nontraditional
assessment methodologies will maintain a strong appeal as
school systems are increasingly held accountable for the pro-
cedures of assessment and intervention and the instructional
outcomes of students.
The basic roles of school psychologists will remain.
Practice will continue to focus on individual child study with
interventions delivered one-on-one or in groups. Pharmaco-
logical and genetic test developments will increase in impor-
tance, necessitating additional training and team efforts in
service delivery. Contemporary interventions of remediation
and therapy will be supplemented by these developments.
Consultation will continue at its present level, failing to ex-
pand in priority because of personnel shortages and the prior-
ity of assessment and other intervention services. Role and
function changes should ensure that school districts continue
to have sufficient diagnostic and intervention services avail-
able to the entire school population.
Finally, the field should conduct a futures conference to
better define its goals and directions. The conference should
be sponsored by several major organizational constituencies
and seek to alleviate policy differences among them. Addi-
tional discussions of the future of school psychology appear
in Fagan and Sheridan (2000), Fagan and Wise (2000), Oakland
and Cunningham (1999), a special issue ofPsychology in
the Schools(2000, volume 37, number 1), and Ysseldyke,
Dawson, Lehr, Reschly, Reynolds, and Telzrow (1997).ADDITIONAL RESOURCESThere are several sources of information for studying the his-
tory and contemporary development of school psychology.
An overview of the sources, including associations, archival
collections, literature, and nonprint media, is available in
Fagan (1990). Association records for the Division of School
Psychology are available from the American Psychological
Association in Washington, D.C., and the Archives of the
History of American Psychology maintained at Akron Uni-
versity in Ohio. Those for the National Association of School
Psychologists are maintained in the Special Collections of the
University of Memphis Libraries in Memphis, Tennessee.
Trends in the field’s development as judged from its literature
are available in Fagan (1986), Fagan, Delugach, Mellon,
and Schlitt (1985), French (1986), Frisby (1998), Kraus and
Mcloughlin (1997), and Whelan and Carlson (1986). An ac-
count of the field’s general history is available inSchool Psy-
chology: Past, Present, and Future(Fagan & Wise, 2000),
including Canadian and international accounts and an edition
in French (1984, 1990). Rhodes (2000) describes the status of
school psychology in Mexico. Historical events, persons, and