A National Survey of Speech-Language Pathologists' Engagement in Interprofessional Collaborative Practice in Schools: Identifying Predictive Factors and Barriers to Implementation

2019 ◽  
Vol 50 (4) ◽  
pp. 639-655 ◽  
Author(s):  
Danika L. Pfeiffer ◽  
Stacey L. Pavelko ◽  
Debbie L. Hahs-Vaughn ◽  
Carol C. Dudding

Purpose This study examined the models of collaboration used by school-based speech-language pathologists (SLPs) during the provision of special education services including factors predicting use of the interprofessional collaborative practice (IPP) model and barriers to collaboration. Method School-based SLPs responded to a survey on models of collaboration within their work setting. Anchored vignettes were created to determine their engagement in 3 different models (i.e., multidisciplinary, interdisciplinary, and interprofessional) used in the provision of special education services during evaluation and intervention. Predictive factors supporting and/or hindering the use of IPP were identified. Results Results demonstrated low percentages of school-based SLPs engaging in IPP during initial evaluations (8%), eligibility meetings (43%), and intervention sessions (14%). Three factors predicted use of IPP in schools: prior training in collaboration, years of experience, and educational setting. The most frequently cited barriers to SLPs' engagement in collaboration included time constraints/scheduling (48%), resistance from other professionals (23%), and lack of support from employers/administration (11%). Conclusions The results of the current study indicated that systemic change is needed at both the university and public school levels. At the university level, preprofessional students need collaborative learning opportunities that are integrated across programs and colleges. School-based SLPs and other education professionals could benefit from job-embedded learning focused on IPP to increase their knowledge and engagement in IPP and improve student outcomes. Supplemental Material https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.9340760

2002 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 124-138 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sean M. Redmond

Several reports suggest that socio-emotional disorders and language impairments frequently co-occur in children receiving special education services. One explanation for the high levels of co-occurrence is that limitations inherent to linguistic deficiencies are frequently misinterpreted as symptomatic of underlying socioemotional pathology. In this report, five commonly used behavioral rating scales are examined in light of language bias. Results of the review indicated that children with language impairments are likely to be overidentified as having socioemotional disorders. An implication of these findings is that speech-language pathologists need to increase their involvement in socioemotional evaluations to ensure that children with language impairments as a group are not unduly penalized for their language limitations. Specific guidelines for using ratings with children with language impairments are provided.


2011 ◽  
Vol 36 (3) ◽  
pp. 172-184 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gary N. Siperstein ◽  
Andrew L. Wiley ◽  
Steven R. Forness

Lack of progress of children with emotional disturbance (ED) has begun to be documented in longitudinal school-based studies. Variability in these studies may be due to several factors, including widespread differences in academic, behavioral, and social functioning of these children, their special education status, and school contextual factors. In this study, 86 children were followed over a two-year period: children were drawn from three subgroups—children with ED receiving special education in low-income schools, children with ED receiving special education services in high-income schools, and children not receiving special education services but who were considered high risk for ED. Outcome measures included reading and math achievement along with ratings of behavioral progress. Despite initial differences in overall functioning, there was, almost without exception, no significant progress in any of the three subgroups over the course of a full academic year. This lack of progress was not related to the type of special education and related services that students received in self-contained or full inclusion programs. Results and implications are discussed regarding lack of response of children with or at risk for ED to intervention in both general and special education.


MedEdPORTAL ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. 11108
Author(s):  
Demvihin Ihyembe ◽  
Kelli Stager ◽  
Alexis Deavenport-Saman ◽  
Jeffrey Yang ◽  
Karen Kay Imagawa ◽  
...  

2014 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 107-114
Author(s):  
Virginia Kelly

In a time of limited resources and increased accountability, speech-language pathologists (SLPs) are asked to broaden their roles resulting in efforts to continually redefine and refine service delivery options. SLPs in schools have to be creative as we manage and shift toward a more formidable role in prevention, while still providing educationally relevant services to students who receive special education services. This article shares benefits for one SLP who embraces supervision of SLP assistants as one method for increasing service delivery options.


1991 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 3-9
Author(s):  
Clive Dimmock ◽  
Alan Bain

The purpose of this paper is to examine the implications of decentralisation for Australian special education service delivery. Initiatives to decentralise educational service have become afocus of education policy both in Australia and overseas in recent years, although there has been little discussion of its effect on special education. This trend is examined from an Australian perspective. Problems associated with the provision of special education services are discussed in conjunction with an overview of the school based management of special education services.


2017 ◽  
Vol 50 (4) ◽  
pp. 197-214 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul L. Morgan ◽  
Michelle L. Frisco ◽  
George Farkas2 ◽  
Jacob Hibel

Editor’s Note Since the landmark enactment of Education of the Handicapped Act in 1975, special education supports and services have been provided to children with disabilities. Although costly, the intentionality of these specialized services has been to advance the educational and societal opportunities of children with disabilities as they progress to adulthood. For our republished article in this issue of JSE’s 50th anniversary volume, we have selected an article by Paul Morgan, Michelle Frisco, George Farkas, and Jacob Hibel. In this research, Morgan and his colleagues quantified the effectiveness of special education services on children’s learning and behavioral outcomes using large-scale longitudinal data. Their results challenge all education professionals to explore ways to increase the effectiveness of special education and to document research efforts that provide clear evidence that the services and supports provided to individuals with disabilities are improving the extent to which they fully experience the benefits of education and participate fully in society.


1987 ◽  
Vol 53 (4) ◽  
pp. 325-326 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Stephen Lilly

The lack of focus on special education in the Sizer, Boyer, and Goodlad reports, as well as Nation at Risk, is analyzed. It is posited that mere neglect might not account for this lack of attention and that current shortcomings of special education services might lead the authors of the reports to focus on improvement of general education opportunities for all students rather than increased compensatory education. In its current state, special education for the “mildly handicapped” might well be seen by these authors as part of the problem, rather than part of the solution. To remedy this situation, special educators must increasingly see themselves as members of the general education community and work toward more effective integration of special and general education.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document