HIGH-LEVERAGE PRACTICES IN Life Skills and Transition Programs

Seeing the Entire Student:
Building Full Student Profiles with Comprehensive Data Perspectives

Episode Description

In this episode, Heather talks with Pat about High Leverage Practice #4: using multiple sources of information to gain a complete understanding of a student’s strengths and needs. Pat shares insights from their experience navigating complex, multi-provider settings, emphasizing the importance of listening, asking questions, and approaching collaboration with humility. They explore how different perspectives—from parents, schools, and other service providers—can both complement and conflict, and how to address collective blind spots in decision-making. The conversation highlights strategies for integrating diverse data while remaining flexible, open-minded, and student-centered. Pat reflects on the soft skills required to foster trust and alignment across teams, showing that effective collaboration is as much about relationships as it is about data. Listeners will gain practical guidance on balancing professional expertise with empathy to support meaningful outcomes for students.

Key Points and Takeaways

  • Using multiple sources of information is essential to develop a comprehensive understanding of a student’s strengths, needs, and priorities across home, school, and community settings.
  • Effective collaboration relies on listening first, asking thoughtful questions, and approaching discussions with humility rather than asserting expertise immediately.
  • Different perspectives from parents, schools, and other service providers can sometimes conflict, requiring careful negotiation and compromise to align on goals and interventions.
  • Even when unfamiliar with certain tools, assessments, or strategies, taking the time to understand and validate others’ approaches helps ensure all relevant data is considered.
  • Balancing professional expertise with empathy and relationship-building is crucial for achieving meaningful, socially significant outcomes while fostering trust across teams.
Podcast Guest

Pat Adkins,
MEd, BCBA

Pat Adkins is the Director of Community Therapy Services for Logan Community Resources, specializing in autism, social-skills interventions, and community-based services for children and adults with developmental disabilities. He has been a behavior technician, program manager, assistant clinical director, and adjunct professor in the nonprofit, clinic, and education sectors. Outside of his professional work, he enjoys spending time with his family, running, reading, and staying involved in his local community. Pat is a Board Certified Behavior Analyst and a Licensed Behavior Analyst with a Master of Education in Applied Behavior Analysis and Autism and a bachelor’s degree in psychology.
Looking for CEUs? Click "01 | Listen" below!

Project Bace

Build an effective, individualized functional skills program for your low-incidence students.
Join the next cohort to develop your instructional environment, responses to behaviors, functional academics, and more!
High-Leverage Practice #4:
Use multiple sources of information to develop a comprehensive understanding of a student’s strengths and needs.
To develop a deep understanding of a student’s learning needs, special educators compile a comprehensive learner profile through the use of a variety of assessment measures and other sources (e.g., information from parents, general educators, other stakeholders) that are sensitive to language and culture, to (a) analyze and describe students’ strengths and needs and (b) analyze the school-based learning environments to determine potential supports and barriers to students’ academic progress. Teachers should collect, aggregate, and interpret data from multiple sources (e.g., informal and formal observations, work samples, curriculum-based measures, functional behavior assessment [FBA], school files, analysis of curriculum, information from families, and other data sources). This information is used to create an individualized profile of the student’s strengths and needs.
Empty space, drag to resize
The bottom line is that regardless of what hats you're wearing in these professional meetings, at the end of the day, we're all there for the same reason.

Pat Adkins

Empty space, drag to resize


Host: Heather Volchko

Guest: Pat Adkins

This week, we're talking about High-Leverage Practice #4, using multiple sources of information to develop a comprehensive understanding of a student's strengths and needs. And I know, Pat, you're living in the middle of a bunch of different sectors, constantly trying to pool everybody's information and make sure that everybody receives all that information so that all of the best decisions can be made and the best services can be provided. So, for you, what does this practice look like?

Yeah, this is another one where it depends on the specific partnership that we're talking about. But I just think in general, my department, specifically, is just attempting to be so community-forward and community-facing. So, not only are we interacting with school personnel and all the providers that the school provides, Speech/Language Pathologists, Occupational Therapists, but then even in other settings, like maybe our Boys and Girls Club location or some of our other locations, we're also working alongside outside providers that they also bring in as well. And so, we are always at a table with just so many different providers' perspectives in general.

And something that comes to the forefront of my mind in this last year has just been with the amount of different perspectives and agendas you hear brought to the table, I've just really learned to listen first and foremost. And I mean, it goes without saying that there's going to be a number of people and ideas that maybe you, whether it be personally or professionally, don't agree with. And I think that sometimes in behavior analysis, we have a bad rap for being the ones who say, ‘No, we're experts in behavior, so listen to our ideas.’ And I hate that.

So, that's always in the back of my mind, going into some of these meetings, that we already have a bad reputation. So I'm definitely not going to be that BCBA that people are already annoyed with to say, ‘listen, this is what I think that we should do.’ I think that there is a time and place for that, but I'm really hesitant to lead with that if ever. I always listen first, and then if I feel really strongly about something, I feel really passionately about the approach. And I think that you can have your ideas and you can convey your concerns, but if you come off really aggressively, it's just never going to come across the right way. And there have been a number of ideas where I'm just like, ‘man, I really don't think this is a good idea.’ There are some that are like, ‘Okay, we can test it out.’ And there are some. You're like, ‘I know this won't work.’ But even if I know or I feel strongly that this won't work or this isn't a good idea, I may at least say, ‘hey, this is where I see where you're coming from, and I want to at least validate that. I think that makes sense. And I think that we're all here for the same reason. We're here because we want to see this outcome. My concerns are maybe this and this. But maybe you can help me understand your pros and cons, where we can meet in the middle, and where we can compromise. Maybe there are parts of this that I don't understand. So let's just talk about it. Because I'm not saying that I don't think that we should do it at all or that we should attempt it. I just want to bring to the table here my thoughts and concerns. How can we all come together and see what kind of compromise there is? Or maybe there's not. And maybe sometimes it comes down to whether it is to make parents happy or to make other providers happy. What we, as behavior analysts, should do: we'll take the data. Let's try it out. Let's see if it works. And you know what? Maybe it does, and that's great. And we have the data to show that, like, you were right. And I'll be the first to admit that I didn't think that it was going to work, but data shows that it was effective.’

So I at least want to be able to say that I gave it a shot, and we let the data speak for itself. But, in all that, I think I, in a long-winded answer, I've just really learned to listen and make sure that I'm not coming in so strong. Because I think people already think poorly of us. And unfortunately, because of some of the past that we have, I'm just really cognizant of that and want to try to avoid that. And I feel like so far, listening first and really coming in with an approach of like, ‘how can I help?’ Instead of ‘how can I tell you what to do?’ Or how can I just give suggestions when you come in, saying like, I'm just like, ‘how can I best help you? You seem to know what to do, and we're on the same page about what we want. So how do we come together and make this work?’ And that seems to help a lot.

So you're talking about, in my words, kind of like the soft skills that it takes for multiple sources to even be considered. Like, I need to show up with an open mind. I need to show up with a potential worldview that someone else might have an answer that I either don't know right now, I'm not aware of, or are unfamiliar with. And, this is one of the reasons that I have so appreciated our conversations, is that you naturally have that kind of unknown as part of what you're okay with.

But I'm also curious, as someone who is sitting at the table, typically interfacing with providers from other fields, domains, sectors, and agencies, my assumption is that you come across tools or information that is brought forward as either proof or directive that is unfamiliar to you. So how do you walk through that? How do you either grow in competency or grow in familiarity or make sense of information that you yourself are not directly aware of, but would potentially impact the decision that you're there to help make?

Before I even voice my concerns, I'm gonna look into it. Just because I'm not familiar with it doesn't mean that it's not effective or evidence-based. And maybe from a different field or even maybe within our own field that I'm unfamiliar with, but I guess that's reflective of me. I just want to learn more about it, and maybe it's something that I should know more about. And maybe it's something that even, after I look into it, ‘Oh, you know what, that's maybe not something that we align with, but it's still helpful for me to know.’ And again, maybe it's something that ultimately I think, ‘You know what? Yeah, I think that this is something that we could really come together on.’ Or maybe it's not something that I can, but I at least kind of know what your perspective is. And maybe your data and your assessment aren't something that I find helpful or useful, but it's helpful for you. And there are things that I may bring to the table that you're like, ‘That doesn't make any sense,’ or ‘I don't really quite care about that.’ And so I have to understand that as well. So again, I'm going to try to understand what you're bringing to the table. And if there are parts that don't align, are there other assessments that we can find that overlap or that come together, and maybe that’s something that we can find, and maybe not.

So I think it's sounding like most of the tables that you're at just sort of naturally have multiple sources because there are so many different types of people from so many different backgrounds all present in those conversations. But that's leading me to wonder if you've ever been in any conversation where maybe people are thinking they've got a lot of different types of information, but maybe like there's gaps, or there's pieces that maybe collectively the team is overlooking, and you've had to be kind of like, ‘Hey, but what about..?’ Or ‘Is there something else?’ I'm thinking like collective blind spots. Where we think we've got all the bases covered, but maybe we're missing something.

Yeah, I'm thinking from even parents perspective. Sometimes parents think that from their perspective, they have all the gaps filled, and maybe we're seeing things that they're not seeing. Or the speech pathologist. Sees what they see in their sessions, but maybe we're seeing things that are different. And so it does happen. Where our perspectives and our experiences collide, and maybe they're not the same. So that involves another conversation where we say again, ‘How can we come together and kind of like fuse our ideas and our perspectives in a way that works for everyone?’ But that definitely happens, for sure.

And I think especially when we're looking at things like evaluations or assessments, when we're having to either prove that services are needed or no longer needed, or a certain adjustment is needed, any of those things. Sometimes I find practitioners, we can really narrow in a bit more because we've got this specific target in mind, or this specific outcome in mind. But we're then sort of, what is it like losing the tree in the forest? Like that kind of thing where we've overlooked or missed the comprehensive nature of how this one specific thing is really fitting into this much bigger picture.

I think sometimes that's another thing that a lot of BCBAs have a bad reputation for are taking skill sets or goals inside of assessments and then really honing in on that and really missing out on the bigger picture. Or like, okay, is this something that is technically a skill deficit according to this assessment? Sure. Is it something that we should prioritize right here and right now? Maybe we think so, but parents don't. Or maybe the school does, and maybe that's more of a long-term goal. And so that's another thing where we just again have to kind of bring to the table.

I even had this recently with a family where the school has its short-term and long-term goals. And then the parents have theirs, and then we have ours. But they didn't all quite align. And so we are adjusting to make sure that we're addressing what's socially significant, and what parents find are really important, and what the school finds important as well. And so we may have to pivot. What we thought was maybe something that we should prioritize may not be something that the parents thought. And maybe we base that on assessments or things that we see. But parents may know differently based on what happens at home or what their plans are for the future that we may not be privy to. So I definitely can see sometimes where we're guilty of that, where we kind of sometimes lose sight, I think of the big picture for sure.

So, as someone who is constantly at the table with so many different service providers and sectors, what have you found to be some of the most successful strategies or ways of engaging with folks that have different understandings or different perspectives to make sure that you, as a service provider, also have the most comprehensive picture of that student or client that you're serving.

I probably sound like a broken record, but for sure, I just try to listen so much, like really listen, ask a lot of good questions. I'm a big question asker, but I just want to lead first with a listening ear and really go from there. Which sounds so silly, but honestly, whether that be just meeting with one specific person or like one party, like the parents and us, or us and the school and the parents and other service providers, I like to just ask, what is it that you want to bring to the table? What are your ideas? What are your thoughts and your concerns?

And then, if ideas or concerns are conflicting, how can we fuse them together? You can't do that if you're coming in and trying to give ideas, tell people what to do, without listening and hearing them out first. I get how silly that sounds, but you'd be surprised at how many people, and I'm sure you've encountered them as well, that maybe come in and start to maybe bark orders or toss out ideas without just saying, ‘Okay, but what do you think?’ Or ‘What are your thoughts on this?’

Yeah, I think sometimes the simplest things are also the most difficult to happen. So something that seems like common sense or basic practices, those types of things, they're just not. And so it is totally okay to drive home the fact that, yes, we can talk about there are all these implementation checklists, and all these different domains we need to make sure are covered to hit all these things. But that's the technical side.

I so appreciate just like that genuine humility that you are bringing into this conversation because it's not just going through the checklist and making sure that everybody did their evaluations and all the data is present and all of it's been discussed, and okay, now we're all just going to go do what we do. It's so much deeper than that. Like, yes, we need to all make sure that we're showing up with what we have and we've done what we need to do so that we can collaborate, team well, and really drive toward anything that we're providing within that comprehensive picture of the student.

But none of us can do that effectively if we aren't coming in with a heavy dose of humility, which you are driving home so hard in this conversation. So, no, I don't think there's any problem with that at all. I think simplicity is beautiful and also almost impossible sometimes to achieve.

It's a good lesson for me too. The bottom line is that, regardless of what hats you're wearing in these professional meetings, at the end of the day, we're all there for the same reason. And we're all human beings. And so I want to validate your concerns. And even if I strongly disagree clinically or professionally with you, I want you to know that I see you, right? And the goal is not to walk away saying that ‘I want’ or ‘I got my way,’ or even that ‘we're doing what I think is best.’ Sometimes I walk away from meetings where we're not doing what I think is best. But I hope that everyone at least feels seen and heard because, aside from that, you're a human being, and we should be there to advocate for the client first and foremost. That's what we're here to do. You're not going to get anywhere coming into this attitude of ‘I know what's best. And I think that this is what we should do.’

And I genuinely am so appreciative that you have that professional perspective because as someone who is naturally situated in the middle of all the different sources of information and really being on the front of needing to guide, direct, almost like, facilitate some of those conversations to do so in such a way where you can receive information that you may not be familiar with, validate that, yes, we don't have any glaring gaps in this massive comprehensive picture of all of the different needs that this student or client, this population just naturally brings with themselves.

I'm so thankful for the way this conversation panned out. And of course, the back half of this episode is full of all the technical things as well. So thank you so much for just bringing humility to be so front and center in even being able to interpret all the information pieces.

Thanks.

Empty space, drag to resize
Probably sounded like a broken record, but for sure, just like I just try to listen so much, like really listen, ask a lot of good questions.

Pat Adkins

Empty space, drag to resize

Imagine stepping into the world of a student with disabilities, where each individual carries a unique blend of strengths and challenges. Their needs span across academics, social skills, emotional regulation, and communication, shaped by underlying issues such as attention deficits, memory challenges, and emotional struggles. These factors can significantly impact their ability to succeed, and understanding them is crucial for crafting instruction that truly meets their needs.

Research highlights that students struggling with specific language and cognitive aspects—like phonological awareness and rapid letter naming—often require intensive, ongoing support. The effectiveness of instruction in reading and math is a strong predictor of future success, and it's essential to consider how environmental factors like culture, language, and family poverty influence learning and behavior. A well-organized instructional environment that supports students' needs can greatly enhance their learning and behavior.


Given this complexity, special education teachers must develop comprehensive learner profiles. These profiles are not static; they evolve with ongoing instructional and behavioral data, offering a nuanced view of each student's strengths, needs, cultural influences, and responses to instruction. Creating these profiles involves gathering information from a variety of sources: detailed assessments, family discussions, curriculum-based measurements, student surveys, and direct classroom observations.


By analyzing patterns in this data, teachers can build a robust understanding of each student's academic and non-academic needs. This comprehensive view helps in designing, implementing, and refining instruction, and fosters a collaborative approach with professionals and parents. Ultimately, the goal is to use this information continuously to support and guide students towards their full potential.


When we talk about assessment, it’s essential to view it as an ongoing process rather than a one-time event. This approach is vital for professionals working together and engaging with families of students with disabilities. They need access to a wide array of information to truly grasp each student's unique needs and develop a tailored support plan.


No single assessment—regardless of its type—can give us the complete picture of a student's strengths and needs. That’s why collaborative efforts among professionals and families are so crucial. By integrating insights from multiple sources, teams can work together more effectively to understand students fully and create individualized plans that genuinely address their needs. This ongoing, collaborative process ensures that the support provided is both comprehensive and responsive to each student's evolving needs.


Effective teachers excel in building a deep understanding of their students by integrating various sources of information. They use both formal and informal assessments to uncover academic strengths and areas for improvement. Beyond standardized tests, they actively seek students' own perspectives—asking about their preferences, strengths, needs, and long-term goals. They also engage with family members to gain valuable insights into the students' interests, motivations, health, language, and cultural backgrounds, both within the school environment and at home.


By weaving together data from these diverse sources—whether it's assessments, student feedback, or family input—teachers create a rich, comprehensive learner profile. This holistic understanding not only shapes instructional strategies but also guides critical decisions related to Individualized Education Programs (IEPs), ensuring that the support provided is both personalized and effective.

For school leaders aiming to support teachers effectively, it's crucial to focus on several key areas. First, ensure that every educator is well-informed about the assessments available to them, making sure these tools are appropriate and minimally biased for the students' age and cognitive levels. Equally important is providing clear instructions on how to interpret data from various sources. Teachers need to understand how these different types of data come together to create a complete picture of each student's strengths, needs, and current performance.


In addition, offering constructive feedback on how teachers administer and interpret these assessments can greatly enhance their skills. This ongoing support not only helps teachers refine their assessment practices but also ensures they are equipped to make informed decisions that benefit their students.


Both general and special education teachers play crucial roles in understanding and assessing students' strengths, needs, and interests. However, special education teachers are uniquely positioned to craft detailed, comprehensive learner profiles for each student. This is because they typically have the most direct and frequent interactions with students who have disabilities, their families, and the various professionals involved in their assessment.


These teachers often work closely with students in small-group settings, providing intensive support that allows them to gain a deeper understanding of each student's unique needs. This close interaction not only helps them gather richer insights but also allows them to tailor instruction more precisely.


To create these comprehensive profiles, effective special education teachers must be well-versed in various assessment tools and understand how to leverage the data they provide. This knowledge enables them to collaborate with the educational team to design, implement, evaluate, and continually refine instructional programs. The ultimate goal is to ensure that students with disabilities receive the support they need to fully engage with and benefit from the general education curriculum.

Empty space, drag to resize