Home | Clinical Café Archive | March 2007

Response To Intervention Includes Observation, Screening, AND Testing

Clinical Café By Pat Van Slyke, PhD, CCC, SLP

May 2007 Clinical Café
By Pat Van Slyke, PhD, CCC, SLP

The reauthorization of Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) in 2004 has radically changed the way we identify students struggling with academics. As professionals, we are no longer required to use the ‘discrepancy-model’ or the ‘wait to fail’ model before we provide intervention for those students spotted in classrooms that are having difficulty with the curriculum. The law has provided an excellent method to assist these children, before an academic crisis occurs, by availing the option of Response to Intervention (RTI) to the professionals working with these students. RTI, a problem-solving based approach, specifically was designed to provide research-based interventions, on an intense basis, to any student in the regular population, for a specified time period, in order to determine if this is a struggling student, or if this student has a learning disability.

The Expertise We Bring

From our rigorous training as speech-language pathologists (SLPs), we understand that many of these students who are having difficulties with academics are deficient in one or more areas of language and literacy. The foundations of language are the foundations of academic success. Understanding of oral language, reading, and written language development all require mastery for a student to excel in school academics. Therefore, who better to observe, screen, and assess these students than the SLP? The American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA) Position Paper “Roles and Responsibilities of Speech-Language Pathologists With Respect to Reading and Writing in Children and Adolescents” (2001) clearly states and supports the SLP’s role in prevention, identification, assessment, intervention and providing consultation for other educators and parents with regard to a student’s reading and writing development.

The SLP has an important role in each of the tiers of the RTI model, which should include screening and/or assessment, within each of the tiers. Although there may be those who have considered that assessment, formal or informal, may no longer be appropriate within the RTI model, this would not be considered best practice, nor would it benefit the student to start an intervention without knowing the student’s area(s) of weakness or attempt to document progress without the use of some type of research-based assessment.

Balancing Our Work in Each Tier

The typical RTI model involves a tiered approach in which Tier 1 involves intervention within the general education classroom; Tier 2 is either a problem – solving approach or intense intervention (specialized remediation); Tier 3 may include assessment to determine eligibility for placement within special education (Kovaleski, 2003). How does the SLP fit into each of these tiers?

Tier 1 could be considered a prevention step and there are many ways the SLP can contribute. First and foremost would be the careful observations of any and all struggling students. Observations need to include documentation of the student’s actual skill level in the areas of language and literacy, which also includes the five major areas identified by the National Reading Panel (NICHD, 2000) – phonemic awareness, alphabetic principle, vocabulary, [reading] fluency and comprehension. Screenings could include formal or informal speech or language screening tools, all of which should apply to evidence-based principles and strategies and meet rigorous standards for assessment. These screenings may be norm-referenced or curriculum-based (criterion-referenced). This level would also include consultation with the classroom teacher to provide whole classroom interventions and/or in-services regarding language and literacy skills.

Tier 2, an intervention step, would include further assessment utilizing any number of formal spoken or written language assessment tools that are widely accepted in the field of speech-language pathology. From these results, small groups would be formed to address the language/literacy issues for those struggling students through an intensive, research-based intervention plan, using pre-/during/post- assessment to provide evidence of change and learning.

Tier 3, the identification step, requires the SLP to identify those students who did not respond successfully to the intervention given in Tier 2. These students may be referred for a detailed and individualized language/literacy battery of formal, informal and curriculum based assessments. This may include assessment of receptive and expressive vocabulary and language, pragmatics, reading, written language, and speech components of voice, fluency, resonance and articulation/phonology. Interpretation of the results form the basis of the determination if the student has special education needs, and if indicated, the basis for the Individual Education Plan (IEP) goals.

In Summary

RTI is a model of prevention and intervention for students who may be suspected of having a language learning challenge in the area of language/literacy and who may be struggling to be successful in the academics of the classroom. At each tier, the SLP has important knowledge of screening and assessment that will benefit the student and ultimately identify those students who just need some scaffolding to learn and those that truly need in-depth assessment and on going intervention in a special education context. As in many cases, balance is the key.

References

American Speech – Language Hearing Association (2001). Roles and responsibilities of speech-language pathologists with respect to reading and writing in children and adolescents. ASHA Supplement 21, 17-28.

Kovaleski, J. (2003). The three tier model of identifying learning disabilities: Critical program features and system issues. Paper presented at the National Research Center on Learning Disabilities Responsiveness-to-intervention Symposium, Kansas City, MO.

National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (2000). Report of the National Reading Panel. Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction (NIH Publication No. 00-4769.) Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

SLP Discussion Center

As always, we'd like to thank you for your ongoing service to people with communication needs and to remind you that we are here to support you in that effort. If you'd like to discuss this topic further, please feel free to use the SLP Discussion Center as the vehicle for an ongoing discussion with your colleagues. Should you have questions regarding these or other Pearson Speech and Language products, we welcome your phone calls at 800-627-7271 or use our web site at http://ags.pearsonassessments.com.