Populations
Skip Navigation Links

Interview with Interventions for Achievement and Behavior Problems in a Three-Tier Model Including RTI Editors Hill Walker and Mark Shinn

Download the MP3

Dan Florell:  Welcome to NASP Dialogues, the dialogue podcast focused on events and issues in school psychology. I'm Dan Florell the NASP webmaster and moderator of our current dialogue. Today, we are discussing the book, "Interventions 3," with Hill Walker and Mark Shinn. Mark, why don't you tell us a little bit about yourself?

Mark Shinn:  Well, let's see. I am a school psychologist that works in higher education for most of my career. I'm currently a professor and coordinator of the school psychology program at National Louis University. This is beginning my seventh year here. Prior to that, my career in most of my academic life was focused around the University of Oregon.

I graduated from the University of Minnesota school psychology program, I'm proud to say, in 1981.

I worked in schools, particularly big city schools, and have consulted with school districts around the United States on a variety of things related to database decision making, curriculum based measurement, frequent progress monitoring, and what has become a multi‑tier model of early intervening services.

Dan:  Good. Hill?

Hill Walker:  I'm Hill Walker. I've been a Professor of Special Education at the University of Oregon since the late '60s. I did all of my graduate work at the University of Oregon, and stayed on here. My professional attributes are in the areas of behavioral assessments, social skills, training and curricular development, anti‑social behavior in children and youths, prevention to early intervention within the context of schools, and longitudinal studies of aggressive, disruptive behavior disorders in children and youths over time.

I'm the founder and co‑director along with Jeff Sprague of the Institute on Violence and Destructive Behavior at the UO, and I've also served as the Director of the Center of Human Development since 1982.

Dan:  OK. Well, as I was mentioning before, we're going to be looking at "Interventions 3," and one of the first questions that springs to mind is how did the both of you come to edit this first book in the early '90s?

Mark:  Yeah, I thought I could tackle that one. It was a competitive process. NASP put out an announcement that they were seeking proposals. I felt at the time that I could work and identify a team of people, notably Hill Walker and Gary Stoner, who could help me put that together. Taking advantage of Hill's reputation with outstanding scientists around the country and Gary Stoner, in my interest in putting something together as beginning people in higher education, we could put together something that really would be excellent, contemporary, evidence based, and make a difference.

We were lucky; we got the proposal accepted.

Dan:  I know as books come out, and especially when you're talking almost a 20‑year time period, the book has probably evolved. How has it evolved over time as far as maybe the difference between the original and what you have now in "Interventions 3," or even between "Interventions 2" and "Interventions 3."

Mark:  Well, I'll kick out this one just a little bit, then I'd like to turn it over to Hill, because Hill has been the soul or the voice of these books, in my opinion. Every time we have attempted to think about revising the book, we have gone to our sage, Hill, and sat down and tried to tap into his vision as to what was happening. Hill is one of these people who sees ten years ahead. Just as one illustration, the difference between the first book and the second book, the first book was a collection of evidence‑based practices, but in the second book, you start to see themes about prevention in promotion in some of the chapters.

And then I'll let Hill take it from there, because I'd like to hear his perspective.

Hill:  Thanks, Mark. I think you give me too much credit. But one of the most profound changes that I've seen in my career has been the emergence of RTI and the three‑tiered model, and the remarkable impact that's had on professional practices related to education. All the way from what takes place in classrooms and the individual schools, to universities, state departments of education, and even public agencies have adopted this theory to organize themselves to allocate resources to engage in quality decision making.

I think it's had just a huge, positive impact on the kind of programs, services, supports and practices that professionals engage in and deliver to children, teachers, school specialists and families. So I would say between "Interventions 2" and "3," that's been the most significant difference that emergence, that development.

Building "Interventions 3" around that model, that conceptual and delivery process, I think has added great strength to its content and appeal.

Mark:  Where the title of the first book was really around interventions for academic and behavior problems, or achievement and behavior problems, by the time we had moved to "Interventions 3," it's around evidence‑based interventions and the importance of, in a multi‑tier model, including RTI. So it's not as remedial, although there are elements of that. It is certainly more preventative and it is more a cohesive plan.

Hill:  Well said.

Dan:  I was going to say, in other NASP publications we've seen some of that trend with even the "Best Practices" series having the RTI focus in almost all of the chapters, but this one, of course, a much more integrated and focused versus something as broad as "Best Practices." So what makes this book unique compared to the other books that are out there?

Hill:  Unique is a strong word. I'm not sure it's unique. I think one of its best features is that we've attempted to incorporate the best avenues, the best thinking, the best delivery models available in specific areas like assessment of academic performance and early intervention and so forth. For me it comes closest in form to something like a physician's desk reference. I see it as the parallel compendium for the school psychologist. It's like the school psychologist's desk reference.

When you look at the array of issues and topics and problems covered, it addresses a large amount of a school psychologist's role.

And when I make sure that school psychologists who are in practice or working in schools and so on receive a copy of new editions of the book, they always write me these thank you letters telling me how much they appreciate it in terms of their practice, their daily role.

Mark:  I would add, it's not trying to be disrespectful of some of the other things that we've seen in the field around interventions, and in particular by NASP. One of the things that we made a concerted effort to do in all of these books is go directly to people who are producing knowledge and producing results, and that means some of the chapters are written by school psychologists. I'm a school psychologist; Frank Gresham is a school psychologist.

But probably most of the chapters are written by people who are the real content area experts. They're producing the knowledge that is being translated into practice, or they are studying the effects of these evidence based practices and what happens with kids. We've been fortunate enough with each of the volumes to get some of the best people in the world.

I can write about my work, I could write about other people's work, but to me the volumes that we produce are strengthened by having the people who really know the work talk about their work.

Dan:  Right. So who's going to know the field best other than the experts who are on the leading edge of it, and then being able to pass that down to the practitioner. It sounds like you've really tried to cut down on the research to practice gap that seems to persist.

Mark:  Yeah. And one thing I think that probably some of the people will not see so obviously is some of the history that we're trying to pass on, too. In the course of 20 years, what we're seeing now is some of the chapters are being written by people who worked with some of our first chapter authors. So it's almost like a second generation of knowledge producers are working in this.

I can think of one instance where we had folks from the Oregon Social Learning Center, John Reed and Jerry Patterson, and now some of their people that have worked with them are assuming a much more leadership and visible role in "Interventions 3" such as Tom Dishion.

Hill:  Also, I've been impressed over the three editions with how willing the top people are in their respective topical areas or fields to contribute to these volumes. I can only recall being turned down very, very few times by potential authors. As you know, senior successful scholars and researchers tend to be very busy and they reject lots of invitations. So that's been quite impressive to me.

Mark:  Yeah. It should be noted that all of the chapter authors basically are donating their time. They write for free.

Dan:  And I think it does remark on the success and quality of the previous editions of the "Interventions" book to have in this third edition such a high quality, and like you said, have these researchers who really don't need to do it other than out of the goodness of their heart to contribute to this sort of book. Well, let's move on and talk a little bit about the first chapter of the book where the focus is on promoting and achieving positive student outcomes within an RTI model. And one of the things that is done is distinguishing between capitalized RTI and lowercase rti.

Could you explain the distinction and how it relates to the chapters in the book?

Mark:  Well for one, it's heartening to see that you noticed that was a major theme because in working in this area for a very long time around improved service delivery systems and outcomes for all kids, I've been actually a little concerned about the overuse of the term "response to intervention." It evolved out of language of course for special Ed entitlement for kids with specific learning disabilities, giving local education agencies a choice.

But without trying to sound too flip on this, if all we do is identify the same kids, and I'm thoroughly convinced the same kids will be identified, using a different mechanism of identification and provide them the same services, and that's all we focus on, to me that's not as good as we can do.

Not every problem learning is a sign of a learning problem. We all have problems learning some things. Too many kids are labeled. It's always the kid that's the problem. We get very focused on identifying the problem but not trying to provide solutions to it.

I'd be curious to see Hill's sentiments on this, but to me this is the largest organized ‑ and it may not feel like that to people ‑ but the largest organized and potentially cohesive school improvement effort that I've seen since working in schools in 1975.

We have some common themes, some common interest, the notion about early intervention with evidence based practices, accountability, database decision making. These apply to all kids. And when I use the words at least, rti, that's what I'm referring to.

Yeah, there's small letters but that doesn't make them as important. But capital letters to me are that SLD entitlement process where there's been an energy, I would argue misguided, a ton of energy directed at maintaining a status quo system that has let kids and families down.

Dan:  Right.

Hill:  Yeah, the notion that using interventions as a method of assessment and evaluation, diagnosis and even treatment if you will, I think is a central concept of that approach. It's been remarkable, the positive impact that it's had. I think Mark's right. I think perhaps the emergence of this way of thinking, this conceptualization and delivery process, is maybe the most important innovation in the public school arena in the past 30 years or so.

Mark:  We've gone from, I think, again this focus on almost obsessively focusing on what the kid has, to shifting the focus to what a kid needs.

Hill:  Right.

Mark:  That means we identify our interventions before we identify the kid that gets them. There's still going to be this shift. That means that we need to identify the kids, then figure out what we're going to do. But if that's how medicine is practiced preventatively, we would not be getting very far at all.

Dan:  Well, Mark, I know that you're active in the I‑ASPIRE Project in Illinois, and Hill, you're a much in demand consultant and presenter as you were mentioning earlier. How can the book "Interventions," help school psychologists struggling with implementing RTI in their districts?

Hill:  Mark, I think you have more experience of that than I do. If you want to start, I'll add comments later.

Mark:  Well, you hear this folklore being passed on Healthwatch, and whether it's true or not, to me it means something in my practice. What I hear people use is this gap between research and practice in education is estimated to be 30 to 35 years. OK? Now, whether that's true or not, I couldn't tell you, but it sure feels like it.

So when I see the notion of people going out and having teachers looking at every kid, systematically in terms of their social‑emotional needs, in order to identify those kids at risk for internalizers and externalizers; when I see that being done at the level of the classroom and at the school, I can go back to that body of knowledge which is probably 30‑something years old.

That was published in the "Systematic Screening for Behavior Disorders." OK? What? I think the publication date Hill could tell me ‑ 1985 or so?

Hill:  That's been working.

Mark:  Yeah, these are long standing practices. Let me see ‑ school‑wide behavior support. We can trace that back to the work in the mid 1960's at the University of Illinois with fellows like Wes Baker and the recently passed away Sydney Bijou. Now, these things are becoming more common practice. The gap between research and practice I think is what we're trying to work on. To be able to provide a text that can be used at the pre‑service level so people can come out of school; if not knowing how to do many of these things, they'll at least be aware that there are tools out there that can be used.

I find educators get really treated disrespectfully by people saying that they're not interested in things that work. The problem is many of us are not in environments that create awareness of what works, and that's really unfortunate.

Hill:  Also I think there's been a powerful impetus provided in the search for programs that work, assessment methods that allow you to predict problems down the line and so on.

Dan:  Yes.

Hill:  Biased by the tragic series of school safety shooting incidents in the nineties and abating somewhat beginning early 2000. But that prompted a broad based search for programs that could be identified, that would have an impact in making schools safer. With addressing, as Mark is saying, the needs of the broad based school student population, of getting supports and services to those vulnerable, at‑risk, students that emerge through systematic universal screening and so on.

I think the movement toward evidence‑based practices and intervention has been very much influenced by that demand. And when I make presentations and consult out in the field, I see an openness to early screening and identification.

It's early intervention that is qualitatively different from anything I've seen previously in my career going back 40+ years; so it's very encouraging.

Dan:  Mm‑hmm. And I was going to say, I think, that real impetus really has kicked in for all districts, mainly driven initially by the Federal government. But I think it's one of those things, once people see the light, then they really want to embrace it. They've seen themselves with the older system how children really did struggle for a period of time before they officially qualified and we could start intervening in earnest. Whereas now, with the screenings and stuff, we're hopefully catching kids who are starting to struggle much earlier.

Hill:  Yeah, I think so.

Mark:  Yeah, I think, this discussion about evidence based practices has really allowed schools to take a look and see what tools they have in the tool box. OK? One of the things that I see the interventions book doing is providing a guide. It's not about particular commercial programs. It's about the underlying premises that a lot of commercial programs are building into their interventions.

As we sit down and provide this book, I hope it becomes a way of people sorting through. "This tool I have to increase the quality of kids' writing, does it have the kinds of features in it that would be described in the chapter by Steven Graham, Karen Harris and their colleagues?"

So, we believe that will help reduce that gap between research and practice and help schools make some selections about better tools that they use to bring to bear on the problems.

Dan:  Well, you had mentioned there that obviously school psychologists aren't the only ones in the schools working with kids. It sounds like that with this "Interventions Three," book that there might be other children's service providers that might find this book very helpful.

Mark:  Well, we had a couple of ideas when we started the first edition and I think that they have played out in every edition. First is, we didn't want to limit our authors, as I said, because they had to be a school psychologist to contribute to this volume. We didn't want to do that. We wanted to say, "Regardless of your discipline, who is producing the best, most practical knowledge about tackling some of these topics?"

Then the second one was, we didn't set out with the goal of writing this book or editing this book targeted solely to school psychologists. Now, that said, to me, one of the most important audiences for disseminating information, is a school psychologist.

It's one of the reasons I really like my profession because we typically see more adults in the course of the day, than probably anybody. We see a variety of different professionals; we can be great information disseminators.

But there's nothing in this book that wouldn't say this would not be something good for a speech and language therapist. They'll find something really useful in it. I mean, you've got reading, writing. You've got a ton of different things in there that would be very relevant for them.

Hill:  Another, following up on Mark's point, positive behavioral intervention supports that model that systemic approach using the three tiers, has now been adopted by, I believe, over 8000 schools in the U.S. What it's done is cause school districts, and even schools, to identify a role of the PBIS Coordinator. Those individuals come from the ranks of social workers, behavioral specialists, early interventionists, special educators, school psychologists, and so on.

They are charged with decision‑making and also implementation around levels two and 3. That's Level two and three interventions, which are much more intensive, much more complicated, difficult to implement and so on; expensive also.

So, I would think that the content of the book would have a great deal of relevance to those tasks that that new role is charged with executing.

How to implement it well, Level two and three interventions and how to know when to move from one to the other, the book has an awful lot to say about that.

Mark:  This is echoed in Arne Duncan, the Secretary of Education, promoting a national effort on school‑wide positive behavior support.

Dan:  So a very timely book for all the issues that seem to be going on in a lot of schools and ones that are transitioning it sounds like. So a lot of the different professionals out there are probably going to find some value in at least a few of the chapters if not the whole book.

Mark:  Yeah, I sure would like to hope so. You know, again, we've pulled from a wide variety of disciplines writing the chapters.

Dan:  Well, the other issue that we see, not only with the different professionals but when you buy a book there are various levels of expertise that the reader brings into it. So there are those who have been practicing in the field for quite awhile, and then there are others who are just starting out in their graduate school or interns.

So, what things can this book offer to both types of audiences or unique things that both groups could really find useful?

Hill:  One thing that a new person to the field or person in graduate school probably experiences, "What is the state of practice? What is the state of thinking, about all these issues that they're seeking to become proficient with?" And I think that what the book does is present a very high standard of quality and comprehensiveness about the state of the practice currently of the field that they're about to enter.

In terms of people out there, I think they'll bring a different perspective to it. Such as, for example, "How do I integrate this new information, some of which I've known about, into my own knowledge base and transform it in a way that will allow me to use it?" So I don't know Mark, you can comment on that.

Mark:  I think that part of this is to try to provide some notion about, just all of us can benefit from learning what is out there. If you're new, you may not know about positive behavior support. If you're experienced and been working awhile, you may have heard of it, but you don't know enough about it or where to gain additional pieces of information. So I think in that this notion about increasing awareness is one of those implicit themes in the book, and we all need to be aware of some evidence‑based practices.

Now, the differences for the experienced person who's reading this. I think that they're going to have a lot fewer issues with things like vocabulary and trying to make a compelling argument that I think your novice may need more of.

To me it's a matter of cutting... we have the capacity to cut to the chase in each of the different chapters.

We really tried to make it so people could get additional information if they're interested in the topic. Our reference list in our chapters, some people may complain perhaps that they're too long, but that's there to provide both groups the opportunity to get more information on these topics.

Dan:  Yes.

Hill:  I think also, that a person new to the field, a graduate, let's say in training, would bring more of an efficacy perspective to the material in the book, that is what works. A person out in the field who's been in practice for 10 or 15 or 20 years, would more likely bring an effectiveness perspective in terms of, "OK, what works in my situation?" Or, "What do I have to do with this information? To form it in a way that will make it accessible for me in my daily work." I think that's a critical difference between the two.

Dan:  Right, because as we know, the further we get out from our graduate training, the cutting edge knowledge tends to fade a bit but the practical experience of just dealing with kids on a day to day basis and working in the school system. I think when you go back and read something like, "Interventions Three," you get a better appreciation for "How's that going to work in my situation?" And seeing how that knowledge can be applied...

Hill:  Right.

Dan:  ... much more immediately than somebody just starting in the field who maybe has a more limited clinical experience, I would imagine.

Hill:  Exactly.

Mark:  Yeah, no doubt.

Dan:  So we talked a lot about RTI, today, but, are there other recent trends or changes in the field that are addressed by "Interventions Three"?

Hill:  Well, for me, one of the most powerful features of the book, revolves around being able to make assessments of a student today, and make accurate, reliable predictions about the status of that student down the line ‑ a year, two years, three years, four years, and so on. I think that the advances that have been made in early academic assessments around reading, educators are desperate to know, who's going to be a struggling or failing reader at the end of grade three when you begin to use reading as a tool.

Knowing that in kindergarten or first grade is just an incredible advantage. And the same thing applies less dramatically to children in the kindergarten through grade four or five range.

It is possible to conduct sensitive assessments in kindergarten and grade one that will tell you who is on a likely path to develop serious problems with disruptive behaviors ‑ aggression and bullying ‑ that will ultimately lead to school failure and often drop out if adequately addressed.

So those are tremendous advantages. They have economic and social implications of great importance.

Mark:  And I'd like to add a couple of things, one being around the role of community prevention efforts. When we think about building a multi‑tier model, we tend to think that this is something that's done solely within the school. And for some people, when they think of RTIs, they think only about if there will be an entitlement, and who is and who isn't. But as you look at some of these trends or changes, we are all in this together. It's a little less of what your license is and more on what your skill sets are.

It is less on what the kid has versus more on what the kid needs. It's more around building a high quality delivery system rather than having teams meet one at a time, and invent the solution to each individual kid.

A concept that we're seeing much more of is the notion of "triage". If they need more, they get more. We don't have to build another "wait to fail" system in this field.

So if you have chronic, long‑standing problems, you should have interventions that are specially designed for students who have chronic, long‑standing problems. Let's not waste time failing at Tier two to prove that we don't have enough powerful tools to meet your needs.

These are changes that are not just about education, and they're not just about what's in Interventions 3. These are just changes in how people are doing a lot of different things ‑ prevention being one of those overarching themes ‑ and evidence‑based practices.

Personally, in large part, because of Hill's influence, I'm trying to move away from the word "scientifically‑based".

The larger organizer is actually evidence‑based, and that's the term that's being used in medicine. If we had infinite resources, I guess we could do a scan or a search of every chapter where the word "scientifically" is used, and we could replace it with "evidence‑based". But I doubt we're going to be able to get that far.

Hill:  A third feature that I'd like to mention is if you look back in the literature, you can find references to manualized interventions probably as early as the early 1980's. But you've really heard a tremendous amount around that topic in the last 10 years or so. And even the ABA, in the beginning and the end, mentions it. It has been a strong promoter of manualized, standardized interventions that are designed to address any particular problem. It should be applied constantly, and the ABA implementer has the materials and the information to apply the intervention with integrity.

And again, I think that's been a tremendous advance in the field, and it's an approach that all three different editions of the book have strongly promoted.

Dan:  I think both of you have hit on some really key themes there that obviously will assist the RTI system. In broadening an intervention mindset and prevention mindset to the community ‑ we know that all the interventions work ‑ the better, the more consistent a child proceeds. So if you can get it out into the community, you're going to see better changes. I think a lot of these trends here are ones that tie right into RTI, but also are distinctive from an RTI approach too.

Mark:  Just one brief illustration, if we can generalize from some of the powerful studies done at the University of Kansas on language development by Todd Risley and Betty Hart. If indeed, we know that the gap between a low income kid and a high income kid walking in the door at school is at least 32 million words of language experience, ‑ our schools, if we're thinking community, if we're thinking prevention ‑ we should be doing everything we can for that youngster to try to reduce that gap.

And if we can't do that, or while we're trying to do that, we should be prepared with interventions for fairly large numbers of kids as they walk in the door. They don't have to fail. That's part of the implicit, if not explicit themes of intervention, and it is part of the things that are going on outside of this book, and outside of the process of RTI.

Dan:  Here in Kentucky, one of the big movements that would underlie that is trying to get more preschool for a wider swath of children than just Head Start. In the very point that you were illustrating there, they need more exposure to that school environment, and more vocabulary, and interaction that maybe they're lacking.

Mark:  Yes. And the notion is we can deal with the structural changes. That's what we're really good at, more preschool. But what we really want to be talking about is if we do have more structure, what do we do with that structure? Schools are really great at structure: Large high schools; small high schools; large class size; small class size; class within a class; not within a class. But most of those things don't change pedagogy or adult behavior. Changes in intervention will be changes in what we adults do differently, not how we just structure things.

Hill:  Also, people are really starting to get it about prevention and early intervention in way that they haven't before. When I testified before legislatures around these issues, I get a different sense of their understanding, and commitment, and acceptance of it. Searching for dollars, of course, is always the top of the agenda. But key gatekeepers and decision‑makers in our society ‑ such as schools, legislators, and state bureaucrats ‑ are really changing their perspectives. They no longer have the skepticism that they had in the past about whether early intervention is a good idea or not.

Typically, it's been given lip service, but without a lot of substantive commitment. And I think we'll see more and more changed in that area as the federal government, in particular, steps up and assumes a more aggressive policy in that regard.

Dan:  Well, my next question is one that probably is going to be difficult for you to do, and that is, of all the chapters in the book, is there any particular chapter or chapters that was your favorite or stood out in some way?

Hill:  Other than the ones that we wrote. [laughter]

Dan:  Yes. That goes without saying. [laughter]

Hill:  I particularly like the chapter by George DuPaul on ADHD. I mean, they're all terrific contributions, but if I had to mention a pet chapter, I think it would be that one, for me.

Mark:  And for me, it's going to reflect ‑ I think whoever reads the preface, but I'll go back. I asked a person who still remains the smartest practitioner I've ever met, named Gary Germann. Gary was the first person, in about 1977, 1978, to say, "While these changes in special‑ed law have a lot of really good things in them, they have plenty of room for improvement." And he began building a service‑delivery system that we would see talked about today in places that are beginning.

We had him trace the journey. Being as clever as he is, he described the historical events as the journey along the yellow‑brick road with Dorothy and the tin man and the cowardly lion, et cetera.

I don't know how he comes up with these structures to write, but it's really well‑done. And I think the notion about the overarching principles about what people are trying to do are expressed strongly, passionately, and I think I would say with wisdom. And I hope you'll spend some time and read that one.

Dan:  Well, thanks. The last question I have is one of those "peering into the future." And if you didn't really have to worry about deadlines and money and resources and things like that, and you just had all your time to work on this perfect manuscript, are there any areas that you would have liked to address but you couldn't, because of, say, page or time limitations, that you're seeing coming up here?

Hill:  Well, I think that the interest in autism and the activity ramp‑up around it, from federal legislation to parent advocacy to the development, in particular, of early intervention programs administered by schools to address the early signs of autism, is an area that we'll see tremendous additional growth in the next five years. That's certainly something that a fourth edition of the "Interventions" book can and should address.

What form it will take, the extent to which evidence‑based interventions and assessment practices will emerge that can be implemented feasibly by school psychologists and other school‑degreed staffers are questions that remain vague at the moment.

But I think there will be a fair amount of clarity around that over the next...

Dan:  Right.

Mark:  There's plenty. If we had unlimited space and time, we would actually want even more on language development, language development, what we can do to actively promote it. I mean something that would specifically target reducing the gap, strategies to reduce the gap.

From a larger, organizing perspective, we all know about the Matthew effect, and the rich get richer and the poor get poorer, but to actually have an independent chapter that would flesh that out to folks. Schooling tends to make the gaps bigger, not smaller, in what we can do.

And my sense is any book would profit by having a more explicit treatment about what we know about the change process and the lens through which we look when people engage in something different.

Most people will respond from the lens of "How does this affect me?" When, in fact, though it is not plausible, we'd like people to respond, "How does this affect kids and families?"

So, notions about change and supporting change, I think, would be great. Some things on the gaps, particularly, clearly and explicitly, the gap and the relation to life success.

They're less about interventions than about context and the things that need to be in place to support some of the evidence‑based interventions. But if you offered me unlimited time and space, and had the ability to get leaders in the field to do that, I think that we would all be well‑served by their inclusion.

Hill:  Just to reinforce what Mark is saying, I think finding ways to infuse the research results and outcomes of the work of Hart and Risley on the quality of preschool language environments to which children are exposed, depending on their socioeconomic status levels, is so important. And I think it may even take federal and/or state action to make that widening fuse, because it has to happen in the first five years of life. That's where you will get your greatest impact. So I hope to see, as Mark is saying, much greater investment by schools and others in that arena.

And then, finally, Kimberly Hoagwood has been the most articulate voice, over the last 10 years or so, around the issue of the transportability of interventions and their adoption or lack of adoption by schools.

And she's very insightful about that process and has pointed out a number of barriers that have prevented us from taking advantage well of what's known and what works, and I think her work needs to be highlighted in all that schools do.

Dan:  Well, I'd like to thank Hill Walker and Mark Shinn for participating today. And that's going to conclude this Dialogues podcast. Please tune in again for future Dialogue podcasts, available on the NASP website.