Reflections on the Future of Council for Children with Behavioral Disorders: A Response to Colvin, Forness, and Nelson

Abstract

* In issue 37(1) of Behavioral Disorders, we published the findings of three studies addressing the status of Council for Children with Behavioral Disorders (CCBD) as an organization and of the field of special education for students with emotional and behavioral disorders (E/BD). In order to continue discussion of the status of CCBD, the editors of Behavioral Disorders invited three distinguished scholars from the field - Geoff Colvin, Steve Forness, and Mike Nelson - to comment on the article.We are pleased to continue this dialogue. We are grateful for the comments by Colvin, Forness, and Nelson. Their compliments about our studies and their endorsement of our general ideas as well as their instantiation of specific recommendations are all appreciated. We urge readers to carefully review each of their perspectives in issue 37(1 ).In this paper, we highlight three topics on which we agree and about which we believe the CCBD Executive Committee (EC) needs to act. We also discuss the few inconsistencies between our findings and some of the recommendations of our distinguished colleagues, recognizing that these topics require further study. We begin with a discussion of the consistencies between our findings and the insights presented by Coivin, Forness, and Nelson on three issues: (a) the need for an organizational name change, (b) professional development, and (c) increased role in advocacy.Need for Organizational Name ChangeIn our studies, we found that a change in the name of the organization to one that recognizes emotional disability in addition to behavioral disorders was highly desirable. From our interviews and our survey data, we found that members believe that the field currently fails to sufficiently attend to students who display internalizing disorders to the extent that it addresses externalizing behaviors. This is seen as an important shortcoming of current services for students with E/BD, and a name change would at least acknowledge that CCBD is aware of the issue and is being responsive to member concerns. While Forness (201 2, p. 44) generally agrees, he suggests an alternative name (Council for Children with Mental Health Disorders) to our suggestion (Council for Children with Emotional and Behavioral Disorders) that reflected the majority response to the survey. We knew from the interview study that there were lead members of CCBD, including some members of our research team, who desired a shift to more of a mental health focus for the organization. We did include several possible name changes with a mental health focus in the survey, but a majority of the members in the survey rejected those options. We recognize that Colvin (201 2, p. 50) was less enthusiastic about a name change, but we believe that some of the other issues that we discuss later (i.e., advocacy, journal content, and conferences) will alleviate some of his concerns. Colvin also questions whether it is wise for CCBD to limit itself to students with E/ BD when students with other disabilities also experience behavioral challenges. We knew from the interview studies that some lead members of CCBD would welcome such a widening of purpose, but, once again, a majority of respondents desired a focus on the E/BD population.Professional DevelopmentOverall, our research found strong support for the organization to focus on the education component of services for children and youths with E/BD. Highlighting educational services (as opposed to addressing purely behavioral concerns) would give the organization a unique identity among professional organizations working on children's mental health. We note that Nelson (2012, pp. 47-48) agrees on the importance of the topic and that Colvin's comments regarding student learning (2012, p. 51) can be seen as additional support. Forness (2012, p. 44) also recommends that the organization conduct and disseminate periodic reviews of proactive practice. These recommendations are consistent with our findings that emphasize professional development opportunities to support practitioners in evidence-based teaching practices for students with E/BD, and we heartily endorse this and recommend it to the EC for action. …