Solution-Driven State Leadership

for Schools: Top 5 Issues of 2015

Panelists: Shannon Hall-Mills, Perry Flynn, Marie Ireland, LaShawn Thomas-Brdiges, & Sheryl

Thormann

Members of the State Education Agencies Communication Disabilities Council (SEACDC)

ASHA Convention 2015, Denver, Colorado

Disclaimer Slide

The presenters have no relevant financial relationship(s) within the

products or services described, reviewed, evaluated or compared in

this presentation.

The presenters have one nonfinancial relationship to disclose as

members of the SEACDC. Perry Flynn serves on the ASHA BOD.

Purpose of this presentation

• Using a problem-solution formula, state education leaders from multiple states present a summary of five major issues facing school-based services and share how they are tackling these key issues on behalf of professionals in the schools.

• Members of the State Education Agencies Communication Disabilities Council (SEACDC) will facilitate the presentation.

Objectives:

Participants will be able to:

1. Explain current practice issues facing personnel in school settings

2. Describe solutions for key practice issues that involve stakeholders at multiple levels (school, district, and state level personnel).

3. Network and problem-solve with other professionals.

SEACDC – Who we are

• Consultants working to support speech-language and hearing

professionals in schools since ~1939

• Members from across the USA

• Share information and network to improve services

• Collaborate with ASHA to address needs in school settings• Website provides links to regulations and guidance

http://www.seacdc.org/

Today’s Focus: 5 Key Issues

1• Role of School SLPS in RTI/MTSS

2

• EBP for Assessment, Identification & Disproportionate Representation

3• Title II of ADA guidance vs. IDEA & the IEP process

4

• Mismatch of models: workload/caseload, educational vs. medical

5• Compliance topics

Key Issue #1: Role of School SLPS in MTSS

Role of School SLPS in MTSS

• There is a growing trend nationally for SLPs working within the public education system to be involved in activities related to a Multi-Tiered System of Support (MTSS).

• The SLP’s role in RTI is noted within ASHA’s Professional Issues Statement regarding the Roles and Responsibilities of SLPs in Schools (ASHA, 2010).

• ASHA members have reported their RTI involvement to include screenings, consultation, direct services within general education, and provision of strategies to classroom teachers (ASHA, 2014a).

Role of School SLPS in MTSS - Challenges

Variance in guidance for SLPs, workload and workload funding concerns (Dixon, 2013; Rudebusch & Wiechmann, 2011)

Scheduling difficulties (Rudebusch & Wiechmann, 2013)

Use of IDEA’s 15% funding for Coordinated Early Intervening Services (CEIS) to support various aspects of RTI

Recognizing the value of the SLP as an integral part of the whole in the school context

Role of School SLPS in MTSS – A View Across States

Key Issue #2: Evidence-Based Practices in Assessment &

Identification, Disproportionate Representation

EBP & Disproportionate Representation

• Nationally, there continues to be under or over identification of children from cultural and/or linguistic minorities in groups of children identified with disabilities.

• State education agencies must gather and examine such data (per IDEA 20 U.S.C. 1418(d) and 34 CFR §300.646) and work with the local education agencies that have been identified as struggling with disproportionality.

EBP & Disproportionate Representation

• In fact, IDEA requires states and local education systems to take steps to address disproportionality (USDOE, 2015; IDEA reference 20 U.S.C. 1416(a)(3)(C); 34 CFR §300.600(d)(3).).

• Many disability categories (e.g., ASD, IND, EBD, SLD, SLI) have been subject to over/under identification of children from aggregate groups.

EBP & Disproportionate Representation

• When we pair the national trends in disproportionate representation with the most frequently reported areas of assessment and intervention provided by SLPs (ASHA, 2014c), clearer patterns of need emerge for professional development and technical assistance.

• ASD

• Speech sound disorders (articulation & phonological)

• Nonverbal & functional communication, AAC

• Language disorders: • Pragmatics & social communication

• Semantics

• Morphology

• Syntax

EBP & Disproportionate Representation

Guidance is offered in multiple states to provide suggestions for what SLPs can do to help address this issue, including:

• Dialectal and linguistic variation considerations in assessment, instruction, and treatment

• Low SES & poverty factors in assessing risk for LI and related disabilities

• Informing evidence based decision making processes in your school/school system

The diagnostic accuracy of distinguishing a

language difference from language impairment is

substantially increased when LSA is used in

conjunction with standardized testing (Horton-

Ikard, 2010).

Diagnostic Accuracy

Dynamic AssessmentExamine Learning Potential and Outcomes

Student Performance

Stu

den

t E

ffort

Resources

• www.omnie.ocali.org

• www.doe.Virginia.gov

• www.Leadersproject.org

• www.seacdc.org/resources (choose NC)

www.Leadersproject.org

• Dynamic assessment • Videos

• Sample reports

• School age language cards

• Grammar Fundamentals

• Assessment for ELLs

Key Issue #3: Title II of ADA guidance in contrast with IDEA’s IEP

process

Title II of ADA guidance in contrast with IDEA’s IEP process• In November, 2014, the US Departments of Education and Justice

issued a Dear Colleague Letter (DCL) with an associated FAQ document to “explain the responsibility of public schools to ensure that communication with students with hearing, vision, or speech disabilities is as effective as communication with all other students” (USDOJ & USDOE, 2014, p.1), addressing the relationship of two different federal regulations (IDEA and Title II of ADA).

• In general terms, the nature of the guidance in the DCL has raised concerns due to conflicts in how Title II is interpreted in contrast to the IEP team process that is delineated in IDEA.

Title II of ADA guidance in contrast with IDEA’s IEP process

• Constituent groups, including ASHA, have responded formally (NASB, March 5, 2015).

• ASHA met with representatives of USDOE, DOJ, etc. in October, 2015 to convey concerns.

• An ASHA survey revealed the guidance documents were not widely distributed/known to members.

Effective Communication FAQ

Federal Guidance from DOJ and DOE

• Released Nov. 2014

• Dept. of Justice and Dept. of Education

• FAQ (30 pgs.) covers multiple questions

• Parent Fact sheet also available

• Effective Communication is a civil right for those with hearing, vision, or speech disabilities

Dear Colleague Letter

When determining what is appropriate for that student,

the school must provide an opportunity for the person

with the disability (or an appropriate family member,

such as a parent or guardian) to request the aid or

service the student with a disability thinks is needed to

provide effective communication.

Effective Communication

• Read the Letter and FAQ

• Participate in ASHA’s upcoming webinar

• ASHA Schools Conference session (July 2016)

• Increase awareness for SLPs serving those with complex communication needs and strengthen assessment and report writing

Next Steps

• IDEA Process

• Funding

• Use of EBP

• Expectations, UDL, and current supports in schools

• Communication with key constituent groups

• Recommendations provided

ASHAs Response

• www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/letters/colleague-effective-communication-201411.pdf

• www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/dcl-faqs-effective-communication-201411.pdf

• www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/dcl-factsheet-parent-201411.pdf

Links

• http://www.researchgate.net/profile/Russell_Lang/publication/266618207_The_only_study_investigating_the_rapid_prompting_method_has_serious_methodological_flaws_but_data_suggest_the_most_likely_outcome_is_prompt_dependency/links/545a83540cf25c508c31951e.pdf

• http://blog.asha.org/2015/05/19/the-pseudoscientific-phenom-facilitated-communication-makes-a-comeback/

More to read

• http://www.thinkingautismguide.com/2010/06/questionable-autism-approaches.html

• http://www.science20.com/countering_tackling_woo/blog/why_rapid_prompting_method_still_doesn%E2%80%99t_pass_evidencebased_test-68146

More to read

Key Issue #4: Mismatch of Models: Workload/Caseload

Educational vs. Medical

Mismatch of Models• Based on the caseload characteristics trends report (ASHA, 2014a)

and confirmed through our work with SLPs in our states, it is clear that workload is a substantial challenge for many people in the field.

• ASHA supports a workload model in the schools, yet 80% of survey respondents indicated their school system continues to use a caseload approach to determine the number of students a clinician serves (ASHA, 2014c).

• There are grassroots efforts underway in many local school systems to pursue a workload approach, and some states have taken strides in providing guidance documents or position statements in support of the workload approach.

Mismatch of Models• In 2015, a few states began drafting legislative language for a

workload approach.

• Consistently using a caseload model for staff and resource allocation reflects remnants of traditional funding models that are based on the medical model (serving only those with identified speech/language impairment and only in direct IEP service time or therapy time).

• Ohio-In July 2014, ODE adopted language to ensure districts utilize a two-prong approach looking at workload first and then caseload. A guidance document is in development to support districts’ use of workload & caseload prongs. The Ohio licensing board is attempting to work with ODE.

Resources from States

• There are many challenges in moving a state education system from a caseload to a workload approach.

• States have engaged in collaborative problem-solving.

• Some states have existing guidance that addresses the differentiation between educational and medical models for assessment, diagnosis, eligibility, and treatment. • Ohio

• North Carolina

• Virginia

Medical vs. Educational Models

• Guidance from a few states

• LRE and where children are served tied to educational standards

• Ability to excel in general education curriculum

Key Issue #5: Compliance Topics

When you’ve seen one state ~ you’ve seen one state

Professionals must be aware of

differences and follow state and local

requirements to remain in compliance.

Compliance Topics

• In the school setting there are many federal, state, and local regulations that apply to our work.

• School administrators are concerned with their school or district compliance with the stated regulations.

• We know that compliance issues are probably at the top of most SEA SLP’s radars, but might be less so for the average school level clinician.

Compliance Topics

• However, compliance issues can cause headaches for the school level professional and his or her colleagues, so it is a good strategy to know where to go for key information when something pops up.

• With the range of issues facing school-based SLPs and AUDs, it is important for professionals to be aware of the current issues across the education system and to know the resources available via state education liaisons to address these concerns each year.

Compliance TopicsM

edic

aid

audi

ts

Make up

therapy

Documenting

Outcomes Scope Creep

LRE &

Service

Delivery

Checking Your Knowledge

42

References

• ASHA (2010). Roles and responsibilities of speech-language pathologists in schools [Professional Issues Statement]. Available from www.asha.org/policy.

• ASHA (2014a). 2014 Schools Survey, Caseload Characteristics Trends. Rockville: Author.

• ASHA (2014b). 2014 Schools Survey, Educational Audiologists. Rockville: Author.

• ASHA (2014c). 2014 Schools Survey, Speech-language Pathologists. Rockville: Author.

• Dixon, D. (December, 2013). School matters: Response to intervention; Turning a challenge into an opportunity. ASHA Leader, 18, 30-31.

References

• National School Boards Association (March 5, 2015). Letter of response to US Department of Education. Retrieved from www.nsba.org

• Rudebusch, J., & Wiechmann, J. (August, 2011). How to fit response to intervention into a heavy workload. ASHA Leader.

• Rudebusch, J., & Wiechmann, J. (August, 2013). Time block after time block. ASHA Leader, 18, 40-45.

• USDOE (2015). Building the legacy: IDEA 2004. Retrieved from idea.ed.gov