Engaging in the Debate: A Critique of Blueprint III

Abstract

The purpose of this article is to engage in the debate about Blueprint III regarding practice and graduate education in school psychology. We use school-based consultation as a lens to uncover meaning and context in the Blueprint and give particular attention to the Blueprint authors' foregrounding of prevention as a basis for school psychological services, a comprehensive consultation model for school psychological services, integration of concepts derived from positive psychology and public health in school psychology, and culture in school-based consultation. We offer suggestions to address barriers that may impede implementation of some of the worthwhile initiatives delineated in the Blueprint and develop approaches to strengthen graduate education. We conclude with a proposed agenda for research that may ground, justify, and enhance the preservice and inservice implications of Blueprint III, resulting in a substantial and well-founded impact on the field. As the authors of Blueprint III intended, we invite you to engage in the debate.

Notes

The authors report that to the best of their knowledge neither they nor their affiliated institutions have financial or personal relationships or affiliations that could influence or bias the opinions, decisions, or work presented in this manuscript.