© 2016, National Association of School Psychologists S L T Crisis Preparation and Response The Final Report of the Sandy Hook Advisory Commission: Summary of Parts I and II By Franci Crepeau-Hobson, Amanda Nickerson, & Erin Cook Professional Practice Carving Pathways to Lead- ership: An Introduction to the NASP Leadership hortly after the vi- cious attack on Sandy Hook El- ementary School that killed 20 children and six school staff members on December 14, 2012, Con- necticut Governor Dan- nel P. Malloy established the Sandy Hook Advisory Commission to review laws, policies, and prac- tices in place at the time to make recommenda- tions to reduce the prob- ability of another attack. TheCommissionincluded16 subjectmatterexpertsin thefieldsofmentalhealthandmentalwellness, secure facility design and operations, law enforcement train- ing and response, and public policy implementation. The CŰŮŮŪŴŴŪŰů’Ŵ work focused on three areas: (a) Safe School Design and Operations; (b) Law Enforce- ment,Public Safety; and(c)Emergency Response,and Mental Health and Mental Wellness. The current ar- ticle will focus on the first two areas, with a second ar- ticle in the March/April issue of Communiqué address- ing Emergency Response, and Mental Health and Wellness (Sandy Hook Advisory Commission, 2015). The Sandy Hook Commission submit- ted an initial report on March 18, 2013, with 15 specific recommenda- tions, focused largely on gun-related issues, in time for consideration by the Connecticut General Assembly. In contrast to the U.S. Congress, which didnotpassanymeaningfulgunlegislationpost-Sandy Hook, the Connecticut General Assembly adopted many of the recommendations regarding gun control and safe school design operations and standards in Public Act 13.3 An Act Concerning Gun Violence Pre- vention and CũŪŭťųŦů’Ŵ Safety. Over the two years after the initial report, the Commission held 23 more hear- ings, with input from 100 other experts in addition to considering reports supplied by the State Police and AŵŵŰųůŦź’Ŵ offices about the [ continued on page 24 ] Development Committee By Celeste Malone, Chase McCullum, & Hiral Bhatt eadership is an essential competency for school psychologists. Whether formally (i.e., by virtue of appointment or title) or infor- mally, school psychologists serve as leaders in school communitiesbyadvocatingfortheneedsofstudents and their families. Although there are opportunities for professional advocacy through NASP and state and local associations, members may be unaware of how to access these leadership opportunities or may feel like they lack the skills and experience to make a meaningful contribution. Too often, it can feel like these opportunities are based on who you know as opposed to who is capable, with opportunities to build leadership capacity being few and far between. Whether real or not, these perceptions are a deter- rent to potential leaders and weaken the leadership pipeline. This, in turn, affects the capacity of NASP and our state and local associations to effectively advocate for the profession. Our associations are only as strong as their memberships. Furthermore, the future success of our professional associations is dependent on both their [ continued on page 22 ] Research-Based Practice Effect of Cognitive Processing Assessments and Interventions on Academic Outcomes: Can 200 Studies Be Wrong? By Matthew K. Burns of correlational versus experimental scientific psychology, in which the former relied on relating individual differences to performance and the latter on care- fully finding interventions that changed performance (Ysselyke & Reschly, 2014). The correlational versus experimental debate has played out in research, train- ing, and practice, and has renewed the conversation about what types of data are most useful to the intervention process (Batsche, Kavale, & Kovaleski, 2006). The current national implementation of response-to-intervention frame- works has intensified the debate regarding underlying causes of student deficits and how to best assess and intervene for them. Several scholars have advocated for using measures of cognitive processing to analyze academic difficulties and he goal of school psychology is to improve outcomes for students and to enhance the capacity of schools to meet the needs of students (Ysseldyke et al., 2006), but how to best accomplish these is a matter of consider- able debate. School psychologists in the dawn of the field debated whether it was preferable to understand human behavior by discovering laws derived from groups or to investigate the unique history and properties of the individual person (Fagan & Wise, 2007). The debate evolved into the Cronbach (1957) delineation design individualized interventions (e.g., Feifer, 2008; Fiorello, Hale, & Snyder, 2006; Floyd, Evans, & McGrew, 2003; Hale, Fiorello, Bertin, & Sherman, 2003; Hale, Fiorello, Kavanagh, Hoeppner, & Gaither, 2001). Feifer (2008) proposed using measures of underlying cognitive abilities for the purpose of selecting inter- ventions and recommended several contemporary tests of intelligence, memory, and executive functioning to do so. There are also multiple resources available to school psychologists that describe interventions based [ continued on page 26 ] 00) 323-8819 o Photo by JUStIN LANE/EPA/ALAmy