Abstract
The astute reader, after some study of the previous two articles, will note a fundamental difference: We (Witt, Gresham, & Noell, this issue) propose that data supporting the efficacy of behavioral consultation (BC) is such that we would categorize BC as 'Not Proven Effective' and Erchul and Schulte (this issue), with some qualification, argue that BC should be categorized as 'Proven Effective.' The differences between the two articles derive from important epistemological, logical, and philosophical differences about the accrual of data into a systematic body of knowledge. In this article, we highlight the areas of difference with the goal of improving our knowledge base about BC, which we hope continues to evolve as a practice and a science. We address three topics: (a) epistemology, (b) functional analysis versus problem analysis, and (c) efficiency versus effectiveness.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
