SCHOOLS
FREQUENTLY
ASKED QUESTIONS
To submit a question, email Brenda Martien, VP for School Services at
bmartien@centurytel.net
Can speech/language therapy services be provided outside of special
education? Is parent permission required? What are the paperwork
requirements? Can an implementer provide these services?
Speech
therapy can be provided either as special education or as regular
education. However, if a disability is suspected, then IDEA
requirements kick in and must be followed, so it becomes a special
education issue unless the child is found ineligible. There is no
requirement for signed parent permission since it is a regular
education service; however, most schools feel more comfortable
obtaining a signed permission. There are no set paperwork
requirements. For many schools the signed parent permission is the
only required paperwork. Best practice would dictate, of course, that
the SLP keep data as s/he does with every student and that a system of
informing parents of progress be established, but this is up to the
school district.
An
implementer is practicing under a Special Education model, the
implementer model. Implementers cannot provide services that are not
special education.
Can speech/language therapy services which are part of regular
education be provided in the “speech” room?
Regular
education speech services can be provided anywhere other regular
education services are provided. Since speech can be either regular
or special education, DESE does not view the “speech” room as a
special education room. So, students receiving speech therapy as a
regular education service can be seen by the SLP in the “speech”
room. They can be seen individually, with other regular education
students, or with students who have IEPs. They cannot be seen in a
Special Education room because in this setting no regular education
services are provided.
Does a child have to demonstrate reduced grades or achievement test
scores in order to qualify as Sound System Disordered in Missouri
Public Schools in order to meet the "adverse educational impact"
requirement?
The
U.S. Department of Education has provided clear interpretation of the
phrase "adversely affects educational performance" as it applies to
children with speech-language impairments. This interpretation
clearly states that a child who has a disability cannot be denied
services because she or he does not demonstrate concurrent academic
problems (ASHA, 2005). Following is a quote from a letter from Edwin
Martin, Acting Assistant Secretary of Special Education and
Rehabilitation of the U.S. Department of Health, Education, and
Welfare (Office of Education in Washington, D.C.):
"The meaning of educational performance" cannot be limited to showing
of discrepancies in age/grade performance in academic subject-matter
areas. The extent of a child's mastery of the basic skill of
effective oral communication is clearly includable within the standard
of "'educational performance' set by the regulations. Therefore, a
speech/language impairment necessarily adversely affects educational
performance when the communication disorder is judged sufficiently
severe to require the provision of speech pathology services to the
child." "It is clear that, in establishing the existence of a
speech/language impairment that is 'handicapping' in Part B (IDEA), a
professional judgment is required. The basis for that judgment is the
child's performance on formal and/or informal measures of linguistic
competence and performance, rather than heavy reliance on the results
of academic achievement testing. The impact of the child's
communicative status on academic performance is not deemed the sole or
even the primary determinant of the child's need for special education
services. It is the communicative status - and professional judgments
made in regard to assessments of communicative abilities - which has
overriding significance.
In the event that the speech-language pathologist establishes through
appropriate appraisal procedures the existence of a speech/language
impairment, the determination of the child's status as a 'handicapped
child' cannot be conditioned on a requirement that there must be a
concurrent deficiency in academic performance."
Although the current Missouri Compliance Plan does not define the term
"educational performance," an excellent explanation was included in
previous state plans as follows: Educational performance shall be
interpreted as not only classroom applications of academic skills and
concepts, but also as generalization of skills and behaviors such as
social interaction, functional communication, and prevocational and
vocational skills and behaviors in other environments.
Is it necessary to obtain written permission in order to do
speech/language screening?
The key question is, “Why
is the child being screened?” Each district must have a child find
system in place so routine screening done when no disability is
suspected does not require permission. Once a disability is
suspected, then IDEA is triggered and written notice and consent is
required. If you are screening to get information for regular
education services such as RtI, EIS, tutoring, etc. permission is not
required. If you screen all transfer-in students then no permission
would be required. If a child is on a “watch” list, probably do not
need permission. As soon as a disability is suspected, then you need
to proceed to a Review of Existing Data and, if evaluation is
required, obtain written consent.
Can professional judgment be used in making a determination of
eligibility for Sound System Disorder?
Because of the nature of
communication disorders, it is not possible to remove the element of
professional judgment from eligibility decisions. The old phrase
“tests don’t diagnose, people diagnose” is absolutely true and we
should probably say that “test SCORES don’t diagnose”. Although
critical in our work, very seldom are formal test results a true and
complete picture of an area as complex as communication. Nearly every
eligibility criteria includes a requirement for information which
either supports or does not support test scores. The information
gathered during the Review of Existing Data, screening, observations,
interviews, work samples, etc. should be used in conjunction with
standardized test results to make the best eligibility decisions
possible.
Is it okay for a Special Education teacher to provide the services to
a student with a language disorder, instead of the SLP?
It depends
on what the IEP team determines is needed for the child. If the IEP
says that the child needs speech/language therapy, then the only
acceptable models in MO to provide this therapy are from an SLP or
through the approved implementer model. If the IEP has goals and
objectives addressing language skills and the team determines that
those needs can be addressed in the regular education program or
through specialized instruction, then the IEP would not indicate
speech/language therapy and those identified needs could be addressed
by someone other than the SLP. In this case, the IEP team would
determine who would implement that portion of the IEP.
I would like some different views on the roles and responsibilities
for SLP's and dysphagia in the school setting. Is the school
responsible for the nutrition of the student or is it a medical issue?
Who pays for the swallowing evaluation? Are there any official
guidelines through DESE?
Often
tongue-thrust and swallowing issues are viewed as medical issues and
typically are not considered applicable to educational outcomes.
However, if an IEP team determines that the child needs speech therapy
designed to address either of these issues in order to receive FAPE,
the district would be required to provide the therapy or to see that
it is provided. Eligibility in the category of Speech Impairment
based on either of these conditions alone would likely not meet the
definition in the Missouri State Plan for Special Education. If the
child demonstrates other communication difficulties as outlined in the
State Plan and has accompanying tongue thrust or swallowing problems,
the team should consider how these conditions impact the child’s
overall communication skills and if intervention is necessary to
provide FAPE. A good resource is the ASHA guidelines for SLPs
providing swallowing and feeling services in schools at
http://www.asha.org/docs/html/GL2007-00276.html
.
If it is determined that swallowing needs to be addressed, would the
school district be required to pay for a modified barium swallow at a
hospital or would informal assessment of swallowing be sufficient to
diagnose the problem?
Part of the
decision-making process would be a review of existing information
available to the team from the medical doctor’s assessment of the
child. It is doubtful that a school-based team would be the first to
determine that the problem exists. However, a school team may have to
respond to the condition and the need for services as they write the
IEP. Some children have disabilities that impact swallowing and
interventions for this may be included in the IEP when the team
determines they are necessary for the child to receive FAPE. An
example may be a child with excessive drooling stemming from cerebral
palsy and a determination that oral-motor interventions would reduce
or eliminate the problem and improve communication. In those cases
the team may decide that the therapy is necessary and the need
directly related to the long term goals for the child in
communication. If a team determines that an assessment of the child’s
swallowing function is necessary in order to appropriately program for
the child, then yes, the district could pay for the testing or access
other funding sources.
Can SLPs use Substitute Teachers?
The only individual that can substitute for an SLP is another
appropriately credentialed SLP. DESE has never approved the use of
nonqualified substitutes which includes all but a few rare individuals
from the regular substitute teacher list. In the past DESE instructed
districts that any missed therapy sessions were to be made up. On
3/8/07, the federal Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP)
responded to a request by ASHA for interpretation of the need for
substitutes for SLPs based on the IDEA Amendments of 2004.
ASHA’s
question was about the need to use substitutes and to schedule make up
sessions when speech/language sessions are missed as a result of the
child’s absences, the SLP’s absences, or other causes such as school
activities. OSEP replied that these issues are not addressed in the
federal law or the federal regulations and it is up to each state to
ensure a Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE). Therefore, each
school entity needs to consider the effect of absences (child’s or
SLP’s) or other causes of missed sessions on the child’s progress
toward IEP goals. If the goals are not likely to be met, missed
sessions may be a denial of FAPE. In that case a qualified substitute
may be located or compensatory therapy could be provided. How that
will be done is the decision of the school district.
Where can I find the SLP caseload formula? Can I make my director of
special education use the formula instead of 40-60 students? Can SLPs
use the special education teacher formula?
Information about
caseloads can be found in the State Plan for Special Education on
pages 113-120 at
http://www.dese.mo.gov/schoollaw/rulesregs/Inc_By_Ref_Mat/Special%20Education/Part%20B-Final%20Regulation%20VII%20LEA%20Eligibility%20(4-07).pdf
. When the Foundation Formula was changed and Exceptional Pupil Aid
eliminated, mandatory caseloads for all special education including
Speech/Language were also eliminated. You will note that the Plan
indicates a number of factors to be considered when caseload is
determined. These include ages and grade levels of the students
served, severity of the disabilities of the students served, the
unique needs of the students as identified in their IEPs, the number
of IEPs case managed, assessment/evaluation responsibilities, and
other duties assigned to the teacher. The caseload formula page is
still included and can be used, but even then suggested guidelines for
caseloads are only recommendations. You will note the Plan gives
numbers which are “maximum” and “desirable”. Using a simple head
count, the “maximum” numbers are those which are considered to be what
the provider could serve. However, when the above factors (and
possibly others) are taken into consideration, the “maximum” may need
to be lowered for that caseload. For example, an SLP who is providing
some therapy in a regular education setting or providing some resource
services for language impaired students could obviously not handle the
“maximum” caseload. The “desirable” number is what is considered,
before the above conditions are factored in, to be the best estimate
of the most students for that caseload. It is up to the director to
approve the caseload, hopefully with the input of the SLP, since the
SLP will know specifics about other duties and student needs.
Can a speech implementer register and provide services as an SLP
assistant?
Yes -- if
they meet the SLP assistant requirements including training and
supervision, an implementer can register as an SLP assistant.
However, the education and supervision requirements for an SLP
assistant are substantially different from those for a speech
implementer. The SLP assistant must have a bachelor’s degree in
communication disorders and one of every three therapy sessions
provided by the assistant must be directly supervised by a licensed
SLP. The speech implementer may hold a bachelors degree in
communication disorders or hold a teaching certificate “preferably” in
special education or elementary education. Direct supervision may be
provided by either a licensed or DESE certificated SLP and the
supervision is “periodic” at the school’s discretion. It is advisable
for an implementer to check with their school district to see if the
level of supervision necessary for an SLP assistant can or will be
available. For the requirements to be registered as a Speech-Language
Pathology Assistant go to
Missouri Licensure Rules and Statutes .
When will schools know if speech implementers must be registered and
meet the requirements for SLP assistants or another registration?
The Missouri
Board of Healing Arts, Speech-Language Pathology and Audiology (SLP/A)
Commission has been reviewing information in an attempt to determine
if speech implementers should be registered and meet the requirements
for SLP assistants. As of January 2007, the Board and Commission
asked the Attorney General’s office for an official opinion on the
matter. Until that opinion is available, the issue remains
unresolved.
Is there a problem with speech implementers becoming a fully licensed
SLP?
Some speech
implementers with bachelor’s degrees in communication disorders have a
desire to become fully licensed SLPs. If it is determined that
implementers are practicing in violation of state licensure law, it
may be difficult for individuals who served as implementers to obtain
their SLP licensure. Until a decision is made by the Attorney
General, the Advisory Commission for SLPs has decided that
implementers will not be penalized for violating state licensure
laws.