1/29/2016
Common Core State
Standards
Using the standards to
plan intervention
• As a school-based SLP, you are told that you
must start to address the Common Core State
Standards in your IEPs and interventions. With
your caseload and obligations you wonder, “just
HOW can I do one MORE thing?”
Lissa Power-deFur, Ph.D., CCC-SLP
Longwood University
2
Learner Outcomes
Agenda
1. Identify the language and communication
expectations of the Common Core State
Standards
Overview of Common Core State Standards
2. Use an analysis model to analyze the
standards and identify specific communication
skills a student must have to meet the
standards.
Analysis Model
Linguistic and Communication Expectations of
the Standards
Application to Students
3. Develop direct and collaborative interventions
to facilitate a student's mastery of standards
3
Common Core State Standards
(CCSS) – June 2010
Disclosures
Financial
4
1. Research and evidence-based
Nonfinancial
2. Aligned with college and work expectations
3. Rigorous
Lissa has a financial
arrangements with
WiSHA for this
presentation
Lissa the ASHA VP of
Standards and Ethics
in SLP 2014-16
Lissa published a book
on the CCSS and
SLPs with Plural
Publishing
Lissa thanks her
colleagues who
authored chapters in
the CCSS book,
sharing their expertise
4. Internationally benchmarked
– http://www.corestandards.org/
5
6
1
1/29/2016
Desire for literate globally
competitive persons
Source?
Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO)
• Need for Critical readers
National Governors
Association (NGA)
• Thoughtfully engaged with literary
and informational texts
• Cogent reasoning
• Use of evidence for deliberation
• Responsible citizens
With financial support from the Gates
Foundation
7
8
Sections of CCSS
Has your state adopted the standards?
• Cross-Disciplinary Standards K-5: English
Language Arts & Literacy in History/ Social
Studies, Science & Technical Subjects
• Standards for English Language Arts 6-12
• Standards for Literacy in History/Social Studies,
Science & Technical Subjects 6 – 12
• Mathematics
9
Criteria used in creation of
CCSS
10
CCSS Initiative, June 2, 2010
• Essential - for academic college
courses/workforce training
• Students who meet the Standards
develop the skills in reading, writing,
speaking and listening that are the
foundation for any creative and
purposeful expression in language.
• Rigorous – reasoning, justification, synthesis,
analysis, problem-solving
• Clear and specific – measurable
• Teachable and learnable – instructionally
manageable
• Grade-by-grade – limited repetitions across
grades
11
12
2
1/29/2016
Everything relates to language!!
What the standards are not
• Reading Literature
• Directing teaching methodology
• Reading Information Text
• “Dumbing-down” the standards
• Reading Foundation Skills
• Creating more tests
• Federally-run
• Writing
• The precursor to a national curriculum
• Language
• Speaking and Listening
• Mathematics
13
14
What does the CCSS say about special
populations?
CCSS defers to educators for
student success
• “Students with disabilities …
must be challenged to excel
within the general curriculum”
• Professional development for special educators
and related personnel is critical.
• Collaboration among education partners.
• Placement of ELL students in literacy-rich school
environments
• English language learners can
excel by tapping skills they
bring to the classroom
15
16
“High-quality, evidence-based, individualized
instruction and support services.”
Students with more severe disabilities
supports, accommodations, and
related services to meet the unique
needs of students with disabilities
• Dynamic Learning Maps Designed to build
a bridge from the CCSS to the academic
expectations for these students
IEP goals will be aligned with and
chosen to facilitate student attainment
of standards
17
– Developed by experts in content areas
and persons with expertise in instruction
for students with significant cognitive
disabilities.
(dynamiclearningmaps.org)
18
3
1/29/2016
SLPs are critical for student success!!
Our Language Expertise
• Address linguistic and metalinguistic
foundations of the curriculum
• Language expectations of CCSS
• Language challenges in standards and
curriculum for children with language
impairments, children who are at risk
• Incorporate prevention, assessment,
intervention
• Appropriate interventions, accommodations,
modifications for children with speech-language
impairment
• Collaborate with fellow educators
• Integrate intervention with language
expectations of the general curriculum
19
But we can’t do it alone!
20
Language and
communication
expectations of the CCSS
• Participate in teams
– CCSS implementation teams
– Student support teams
• Joint planning for intervention
• Classroom-based co-teaching
– Whole-class lesson
– Small groups for targeted students
21
CCSS expects students to have these
language skills
The standards build on one another,
increasing in complexity each year
• Comprehend and evaluate texts
• Construct arguments and convey intricate
information
• Adapt communication to varying demands of
audience, task, purpose, discipline
• Understand other perspectives and cultures
23
24
4
1/29/2016
Kindergarten
Speaking and Listening Expectations
• Students gain, evaluate and present
increasingly complex information, ideas
and evidence through listening, speaking
and the media
Grade 1
Additional
expectations
• Focus is on academic discussion in 1:1,
small-group and whole-class settings
Grade 2
Additional
expectations
• Formal presentation and informal
discussion
25
Grade 3 Having discussions with diverse partners, building on
Additional
others’ ideas and expressing their own clearly.
expectations
a) prepared and draw preparation to explore ideas
c) Ask questions to check understanding, stay on
topic, and link their comments to others.
d) Explain own ideas and understanding
Grade 4
b) carry out assigned roles in discussions
Additional
c) Pose and respond to specific questions to clarify or
expectations
follow up on information
d) Review the key ideas
Grade 5
d) Draw conclusions in light of information and
Additional
knowledge gained from the discussions.
expectations
a) Follow agreed-upon rules for discussions (e.g.,
listening to others and taking turns speaking
about the topics and texts under discussion
b) Continue a conversation through multiple
exchanges
b) Build on others’ talk in conversations by
responding to the comments of others through
multiple exchanges.
c) Ask questions to clear up any confusion about
the topics and texts under discussion.
a) Gaining the floor in respectful ways,
b) Linking their comments to the remark of
others.
c) Ask for clarification and further explanation as
needed
26
Language expectations
• Students grow their vocabularies through
conversations, direction instruction, and
readings
• Students determine word meanings,
appreciate nuances
• Students use formal English in writing and
speaking
• Students choose among the many ways to
express themselves
27
Conventions of Standard English
Nouns Grade level expectation
Expectation
G1 Common, proper and possessive
nouns
Match singular/plural nouns with
verbs
G2 Collective nouns
Irregular plural nouns
G3 Regular and irregular plural nouns
Abstract nouns
Explain function of nouns
28
Verbs
G1
Convey past, present, and future tense
G2
Create past tense for frequently occurring irregular verbs
G3
Use simple verbs tenses (e.g., walks, walked, will walk)
G4
Use progressive, modal auxiliaries (e.g., can, may, must)
G5
Use perfect tense (e.g., had walked, have walked, will have
walked)
Explains functions of verbals (gerunds, participles,
infinitives)
Uses passive voice
Uses verbs for mood (indicative, imperative, interrogative,
conditional and subjective)
G8
29
30
5
1/29/2016
Pronouns
G1
G2
G4
G6
Conjunctions and Adverbs
Personal, possessive, indefinite
Reflexive
Explain function of pronouns
Relative (e.g., who, whose, whom, which,
that)
Corrects inappropriate shifts in pronoun
number and person
Corrects ambiguous pronouns
1
3
4
5
Uses frequently occurring conjunctions (e.g.,
and, so, but, or, because)
Uses coordinating & subordinating
conjunctions
Uses relative adverbs (e.g., where, when, why)
Uses correlative conjunctions (e.g., either/or)
Explain function of conjunctions
31
32
Inflections and roots
Vocabulary: Determine & clarify meaning
Inflections and root words
Identifying meaning
K
Use the most frequently occurring inflections and
affixes (-ed, -s, re-, un-, pre-, -ful, -less) as a clue to
meaning
Identify frequently occurring root words and
inflectional forms (e.g., look, looks, looked, looking)
Determine meaning of new word formed when known
prefix/affix is added (e.g., happy/unhappy)
K
Identify new meanings for familiar words (duck)
G 1,
2, 3
G4
Use sentence-level context as clue to meaning
G1
Use context (e.g., definitions, examples, or
restatements within text) as a clue to meaning
G5
Use context (e.g., cause/effect relations,
comparisons) as a clue to meaning
G 2,
3
G 4, Use common, grade-appropriate Greek and Latin
affixes and roots as clues to meaning (e.g., telegraph,
5
photograph, autograph)
33
34
Explore word relationships
Nuances of meaning
Distinguish Shades of Meaning
K
Categories and attributes
K,
G1
K
Sort common objects into categories
Among verbs describing the same general action
(e.g., walk, march, strut, prance)
G 2 Among closely related verbs (e.g., toss, throw) and
closely related adjectives (e.g., thin, slender, skinny)
Understand frequently occurring verbs
and adjectives by relating them to their
antonyms
G 1 Define words by category and one or
more key attributes (e.g., a duck is a
bird that swims)
G 3 Among related words that describe states of mind or
degree of certainty (e.g., knew, believed, wondered)
35
36
6
1/29/2016
Vocabulary incorporates Tier 1, 2, and
3 words
Nuances of meaning
Nuances of meaning
G3
Distinguish literal and nonliteral meanings of words
and phrases (e.g., take steps)
G4
Explain meaning of simple similes and metaphors
(e.g., pretty as a picture)
G 4, 5 Explain meaning of common idioms, adages, and
proverbs
G5
Use relationship between words (synonyms,
antonyms, homographs) to understand words
K
G1
G2
Tier 1, 2, and 3 words
Use words and phrases acquired through
conversation, being read to, and reading
Use words and phrases acquired through
conversation, being read to, and reading,
including frequent conjunctions
Use words and phrases acquired through
conversation, being read to, and reading,
including using adjectives and adverbs
37
38
Standards Analysis and Intervention
A Step-wise approach
can facilitate
integration of the
standards with
speech-language
services
Use grade-appropriate conversation,
general academic and domain-specific
words and phrases
G3
G4
G5
… including those for spatial and temporal
relationships (e.g., after dinner …)
… including those that signal precise actions,
emotions, or states of being (e.g., quizzed), and
are basic to a particular topic (e.g., wildlife)
… including those that signal contrast, addition,
and other logical relationships (e.g., however,
similarly)
39
40
Step 1: What are the Relevant
Standards?
Standard Analysis and Intervention
Standards
Current Grade Level
Step 1
Identify
the
Standards
Review current
grade level &
prior grade
levels for
prerequisite
skills
Step 2
Identify
necessary
language
skills
Analyze
standards to
identify language
skills needed for
success
Step 3
Analyze
the child’s
current
skills and
needs
PLOFP
IEP Goals
Step 4
Identify
classroom
challenges
Review
classroom
activities,
texts,
materials
Step 5
Design
intervention
Direct with
SLP &
Classroombased
collaborative
activities
Preceding Grade Levels
Upcoming Grade Levels
41
42
7
1/29/2016
Step 3: What are the Child’s Current
Strengths and Needs?
Step 2: What are the Necessary Language
Skills?
Strengths
and Needs
Data sources
Language Skills
Semantic
• IEP (PLOAFP, Goals,
Accommodations/Modifications)
Strengths:
• Speech-language
Syntax
Morphological
– standardized assessments
– skill-specific probes
• Curriculum-based assessments
Pragmatic
• Teacher/specialists observations
Needs
• District/state assessments
Metalinguistic
43
44
Step 4: What Are The Classroom
Activities That May Be Challenging?
Individualize your analysis
• Vocabulary probes
• Linguistic
complexity
• Receptive and
expressive
communication
expectations
• Metalinguistic
expectations
• Auditory and visual
environments
– Compare and contrast
– Root word/affix analysis
– Homonyms, synonyms, antonyms
• Story re-tells
• Group discussions
• Pragmatic checklists
• 1:1 Oral presentations
Linguistic complexity and
expectations in the
classroom
Teacher observation/checklists:
SLP observation:
Classroom materials:
45
Step 5: What Interventions Will Promote
This Child’s Success?
46
Design and Implement Intervention
• The final step  integration of
speech-language intervention with the
academic curriculum.
Interventions
Direct Services
• Intervention may be appropriate in a
pull-out setting to teach specific skills.
Classroom Collaboration
47
48
8
1/29/2016
APPLICATION: Child with SLI
• Joe is a fourth grader who has received speechlanguage services since preschool years and
has made great progress, yet continues to have
a vocabulary deficit.
Caryschmidt.com (via google images)
May 2015
49
50
Step 1:
Review the Standards
Step 1: Review preceding grade levels
• Language Standards – Vocabulary Acquisition &
Use
Context:
– L.4.4 Determine or clarify the meaning of
unknown and multiple-meaning words and
phrases based on grade 4 reading and content
• a. Use context as a clue to meaning (e.g.,
definitions, examples or restatements in the
text)
• b. Use common, grade-appropriate Greek and
Latin affixes and roots as clues to the meaning
• G4: definitions, examples, or
restatements in text
• G3, G2, G1: sentence-level context
51
Preceding grade levels: affixes & roots
• G4: Common Greek and Latin affixes
– e.g., telegraph, photograph, autograph
• G3: Determine meaning when known affix is added
– e.g., agreeable/disagreeable, care/careless
• G2: Determine the meaning when a known prefix is added
– e.g., happy/unhappy, tell/retell
• G1: Use frequently occurring affix/root word as clue to
meaning
– e.g., looks, looked, looking
• K: Use most frequently occurring inflections and affixes as
clue to meaning
– e.g., -ed, -s, re-, un-, pre-, -ful, -less
53
52
Step 2: Analyze needed language skills
CCSS Expectation
Needed Language Skill
Use of Context
Comprehension of definition vs. example vs.
description
Knowledge of syntax to identify part of speech
Use of affixes and
roots
Morphological awareness skills:
- Recognize affixes
- Isolate the affix from the root
- Identify morphological constraints (what
affixes can be joined to what roots; which
affixes are prefixes and which are suffixes)
- Synthesize affix and root
- Phonological skills to adjust phoneme and
stress as new word is produced
54
9
1/29/2016
STEP 3: Analyze child’s current skills
• Teacher report:
• PLOAFP:
– Attentive, yet seldom asks questions
– Frequently slow in completing language arts tasks
– Masters vocabulary if taught in the classroom
– Difficulty with vocabulary generally understood by
other students.
• Written narrative analysis:
– Oral and Written Language Scales –II reveal
that Joe’s language skills are scattered with
significant weaknesses in understanding and
use of abstract vocabulary and figurative
language.
– Heavy use of simple, concrete vocabulary
– Misunderstanding of terminology
– Misapplication of new vocabulary.
55
56
Step 3: Information from the IEP
• SLP probe of morphological awareness skills
(from Larsen & Nippold, 2007) revealed
weaknesses in understanding meaning of
words with affixes
• IEP goal: Joe will demonstrate mastery of 80%
vocabulary words from the grade 4 reading,
social studies, science and math content by
June 15, 2015.
• Difficulty identifying and explaining affixes
and roots in selected vocabulary from G4 and
G3 textbooks
• Accommodations:
– use an on-line dictionary program on his
classroom computer
– additional time on in-class writing
assignments
57
Step 4: Analyze Classroom challenges
58
Step 5: Design Intervention
• Collaborate with Teachers
– Task:
• pre-teach meaning of common prefixes
– Location:
• individual session
• small group in the classroom
– Target vocabulary:
• The teacher identifies the vocabulary he will be
teaching the entire class
• The speech-language pathologist focuses on
vocabulary that may be difficult for Joe, but would
not be the focus of the class instruction.
• Language Arts, Social Studies, Science and Math
texts vocabulary words that may be difficult.
– Mixture of vocabulary that would be mastered at
an earlier age and that presented in grade 4.
– His use of words with affixes
59
60
10
1/29/2016
Step 5 – Direct Intervention
STEP 5–Small group in the classroom
• Lead students in
creating an “antonym
scale”
• Students complete with
various terms that
describe geographic
groupings of people
(e.g., settlement,
neighborhood, territory,
precinct, city,
subdivision, state).
• Focus on morphological analysis skills to master
new vocabulary
– The SLP identifies the word “absorption” in the text as
an opportunity to teach the meaning and use of the
suffix “tion.”
• frequently used suffix that means “act or process.”
– Review the various meaning of “tion” and apply it to
the verb “absorb.”
– Joe completes a word web with “tion” in the middle
and identifies 6 other words that include the suffix
“tion” with a comparable meaning.
– (from Diamond, L. & Gutlohn, L. ,
2009)
Antonym Scale
Country
Neighborhood
61
62
Step 1: Analyze the Standards
• CCSS.ELA-Literacy.SL.9-10.4: “Present
information, findings, and supporting evidence
clearly, concisely, and logically such that
listeners can follow the line of reasoning and
the organization, development, substance,
and style are appropriate to purpose,
audience, and task”.
Secondary Students
From the work of Perry Flynn, MS, CCC-SLP
NC Dept of Public Instruction and
University of North Carolina Greensboro
63
Consider Alternate Standards for
Students with Severe Disabilities
64
Dynamic Learning Map Standard
• EE. SL. 6.1 Engage in collaborative discussions
• Dynamic
Learning Maps
http://dynamicle
arningmaps.org/
– With guidance and support from adults … follow
simple, agreed[upon rules for discussions and
contribute information
– Ask and answer questions specific to the topic, text,
or issue under discussion
• National Center
and State
Collaborative
http://www.ncscpar
tners.org/resources
65
66
11
1/29/2016
Step 2: Identify Necessary Language
Skills
Step 3: Analyze Student Current Needs
First – let’s recall
the ideal IEP
Process
• Taking turns
• Maintaining topic for an appropriate period of
time
Consider all
the data,
standard and
non-standard
on a student
• Greeting and departing behaviors
As a TEAM write
the PLAAFP and
standards based
goals for this IEP
period.
Determine the
LRE and
service
delivery
providers.
67
Collaborative Partners
Continuum of Services
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Consultative
Services on behalf of the student
Homebound
Public Separate School
Residential
RtI
Student Assistance Team
Self-Contained
least restrictive
Classroom
68
more restrictive
Speech “Closet”
Job setting
leisure activities/ clubs
home economics setting
“burst/ blast”
Vocational Rehabilitation
Job coaches
Occupational Therapists
Physical Therapists
Supervisors
Teachers (vocational, art, physical education…)
Teacher assistants
Child nutrition workers
Parents
69
Jay, age 20, ASD and mild ID is in an
internship as a bagger at a local
grocery store. He is very social, yet
he needs specific skills in following
directions and interacting with
customers.
70
Step 4: Identify “Classroom”
Challenges
• Enjoys greeting and carrying on very appropriate
brief conversations
• However …. Jay assumed everyone enjoyed his
greetings and small talk.
• He would leave his duties to pursue customers
until they engaged in what he believed was an
appropriate social interaction.
• He was scaring and annoying customers and
abandoning his duties.
72
12
1/29/2016
Step 5: Design and Implement
Intervention: with Jay
Step 5: Plan Intervention with
Collaborative Partners
• Counseling
• SLP worked with the teacher and job coach to
help Jay move past his NEED for reciprocal
greeting
• Collaborating with job coaches and employers
• Scripting responses
• SLP and job coach role-played various grocery
store interactions
• Practicing in a variety of environments with a
variety of conversational partners
• SLP worked with the grocery store manager/
cashiers to support Jay
73
74
Students with Hearing Loss
Profound
Loss
Severe Hearing
Loss
Students who are Deaf and Hard
of Hearing
Moderate Hearing Loss
From the work of Brenda Seal, Ph.D., CCC-SLP
Gallaudet University
Mild Hearing Loss
76
Case Study: Olivia
Step 1: Identify the Standards
• Olivia: 6 years old K, recessive genetic
(connexin) deafness
English Language Arts Standards: Speaking and Listening,
Comprehension and Collaboration:
• Participate in collaborative conversations with diverse
partners about kindergarten topics and texts with peers and
adults in small and larger groups.
–
–
–
–
–
Early intervention in total communication
Bilateral hearing aids until 12 months
Bilateral cochlear implants at 12 months
Fully integrated in school
Not inclined to talk in class
• Ask and answer questions in order to seek help, get
information, or clarify something that is not understood.
• Speak audibly and express thoughts, feelings, and ideas
clearly.
77
78
13
1/29/2016
Step 2: What language and communication
skills are required for to meet these standards?
• intelligible spoken language represented by
(near) age-appropriate vocabulary, syntax,
morphology, phonology, and pragmatics.
• conversational competence in asking and
answering questions, and taking conversational
turns about different topics with different
partners.
• ever-growing vocabulary, and an awareness
of conversational breakdowns and willingness
to ask for repairs when she is not
understanding or is not understood.
Step 3: Analyze Student Needs
Speech intelligibility averaged a 4.75 (of 5) judged by
unfamiliar adult listeners
GFTA-2 standard score of 105.
Preschool Language Scales-4: Total Score: 90; Expressive
Communication: 92; Auditory Comp: 88
Expressive Vocabulary Test-2: SS at 87
Mixed scores on the Preschool Screening Instrument for
Targeting Educational Risk (Preschool SIFTER):
Expressive Communication: 14 (“at risk” is 13)
Socially Appropriate Behaviors: 11 (At Risk)
79
IEP Goals:
80
Step 4: Classroom Challenges,
• Olivia will use intelligible spoken language to
interact with peers and teachers in at least 70
percent of documented interactions.
• Olivia needs to have functioning amplification in
the best auditory environment
• Olivia will ask and answer questions appropriately
and maintain conversations with peers and adults
in at least 80% of documented interactions.
• Olivia will indicate a need for/attempt to repair when
she fails to understand others or is not understood
by others in at least 80% of prompted opportunities.
–
–
–
–
Routine Ling 6 Checks
Teacher-worn mic for FM boot
Mic transfer for speech, library, PE, art
Classrooms are not acoustically treated, with much
reverberation in the gym and excess noise in classes
• Olivia is not a self-advocate
81
82
Step 5: Design Intervention: Collaborative
Practices
1. Address all children by name and encourage Olivia (and
others) to “ask ____”, or “tell ___ he dropped his hat; it’s time for
calendar; you need help with clean-up”
2. Make transition announcements and directions (e.g., “It’s
story time, please put away your ….”) from a consistent spot in the
classroom and ensure Olivia’s attention before making announcements
or giving directions.
3. Follow spoken directions and transition
announcements with written details (e.g., Wash up and Line
up, Page 2 in ____)
4. Use “raise your hand if you hear me” prompts to gain
Olivia’s (and others’) attention.
83
5. Instruct all children about hearing, listening,
and noise; reinforce their learning with numbers 2,
3, and 4, and incidentally when appropriate.
6. Use pause time (e.g., an intentional self-count to
5) to encourage Olivia (and others) to respond to a
topic, to ask and answer questions, to encourage
conversation turns.
7. Collaborate—plan, instruct, assess, discuss,
document, and work together for Olivia’s
(and others’) best learning.
84
14
1/29/2016
Meet Sarah, age 10
• Diagnosed with Asperger Syndrome (DSM-IV) at
age 5
• Currently meets the criteria for ASD (DSM-5),
moderate severity who is a voracious reader, has
difficulty with peer interactions.
Students with Autism
From the work of Peggy Agee, SLPD, CCC-SLP
Longwood University
86
Step 1: Review the Standards
Review Prior Standards
• CCSS.ELA.LITERACY.SL.4.1
Backing through the strand, Sarah does not meet:
• 2.1.B standard: builds on others’ talk in
conversations by linking one’s own comments to
the remarks of others.
• 3.1 standard. She does not consistently ask and
answer questions to demonstrate understanding
of a text, referring explicitly to the text as
support.
THESE becomes the language and learning
targets for Sarah.
– Engages effectively in a range of collaborative
discussions with diverse partners on Grade 4
topics and texts, building on others’ ideas and
expressing one’s own clearly.
• CCSS.ELA.LITERACY.RL.4.1
– Refers to details and examples in a text when
explaining what the text says explicitly and when
drawing inferences from the text.
87
88
Step 2: Identify Needed Language Skills
Step 3: Analyze Student Needs
• Identify others’ perspectives
• Sarah earns acceptable grades in math
• Low average grades in reading and writing
• Is a voracious reader with excellent decoding skills
but reduced comprehension
• Has significant difficulty with peer interactions
• Identify topic of conversation and ideas to
contribute to the topic
• Listen to others
– (most often assumes the role of “director”)
• Use polite conversation
• Initiates conversations
• Identify main idea(s) of text
– has difficulty following and contributing to the
conversations of others
• Create questions to probe for additional
information
• Has significant difficulty with transitions both within
and between activities
89
90
15
1/29/2016
Step 5: Design Intervention –
Collaborative Practices
Step 4: Identify Classroom Challenges
A classroom observation:
Sarah stands behind the fish tank in her fourth-grade
classroom watching the children in her collaborative
group as they complete their assignment nearby. She
twists her long hair into a tight knot and begins to sway
from side to side. Periodically, she calls out to the group,
“No, not like that!” but does not offer suggestions or
comments. Sarah frequently interjects evaluative
statements (“That’s not right.” “That’s stupid”). Her group
does not respond to her verbally but eye-rolls, audible
sighs, and head shakes suggest they have heard her.
The group continues with their in-group discussion.
• Questioning techniques – highlighting particular
words in reading passage and use adult questions
to relate these words to the main idea
• Anaphoric cuing – underlining pronouns to have
Sarah identify the noun referent
• SLP & teacher supported thinking/talking about
– thinking and reading
– thinking and conversation
• Role playing peer interactions
• Social scripts and video modeling to focus on entry
into and maintenance of conversation
91
92
CCSS and ELPD
• ELPD standards aligned with language
demands of CCSS
• Use state’s ELPD standards alongside the
CCSS
Students who are English
Language Learners
From the work of Judy Rudebusch, Ed.D., CCC-SLP
Consultant
– Embed linguistic accommodations
– Provide scaffolding for English language acquisition in
content instruction
• Listening, Speaking, Reading, Writing
94
Language Acquisition ~
A Complex Issue
English Acquisition
(Reminders)
• Heterogeneous group
• Sequential language acquisition
• Six predictable stages of acquisition
• Normal aspects of learning L2
– Ethnic background, first language, SES, quality of prior
schooling, level of English proficiency
• Strong academic background?
• Limited formal schooling?
• Little literate language structures in either language?
• Long-term English learners ~ >5 years
• Risk factors for school success
– Poverty, mobility, trauma, language
95
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Interference or transfer of L1 to L2
Silent period
Code switching
Language loss in L1
Unusual prosody
Speech sound production influenced by L1 phonemes
Word-finding difficulties; limited vocabulary
96
16
1/29/2016
Social – Academic – Language & Literacy
Difference or Disability?
• Important SLP Role
• BICS
– Distinguish between communication disorder and
perception of a language disorder that is actually a
language difference
– Both over- and under-identification
• CALP
• Language Disorder
• Language & Literacy Issues
– Child’s language skills deviate significantly from
norms and expectations of child’s home community
– Child’s language skills considered defective by child’s
cultural community
– Must be present in the child’s native/home language
97
Challenging Standards for ELLs
98
Case Study: Maria
• Speaking and Listening
• 10 years old; fourth grade; bilingual class
– Engage in a range of collaborative discussions
– Present claims & findings, sequence ideas logically
– Use appropriate eye contact, adequate volume & clear
pronunciation
– Adapt speech to a variety of contexts
• Enrolled in bilingual education in same school
district since pre-k
• Home Language: Spanish
• Language (listening speaking reading writing)
– Command of conventions of Standard English grammar & usage
– Determine meaning of unknown & multiple-meaning words
– Figurative language, word relationships, nuances in word
meanings
– Grade appropriate conversational, academic and domainspecific words & phrases
• Provided reading and language interventions
through campus RTI services (non-responder)
99
Steps 1 & 2: Analyze the Standards
and Needed Language Skills
100
Step 3: Identify Student Needs
• Concerns: low achievement in reading, writing,
math, science
• Classroom teacher, ELL teacher and SLP
identify the need to focus on speaking and
listening and language standards from prior
grade level.
– Slow progress in English Acquisition
– Trouble expressing herself in writing (both English and
Spanish)
– Less developed academic language in Spanish
• Comprehensive special education evaluation in
English and Spanish by bilingual evaluation
• Eligibility: LD in oral expression; SLI with language
disorder in Spanish
– Adverse effect on educational performance in reading
comprehension, written expression, verbal skills for class
participation
101
102
17
1/29/2016
Step 5: Design Intervention:
Collaborative Practice
Step 4: Identify Classroom Challenges
• Difficulty expressing herself in writing in Spanish
and English
• Classroom teacher, ELL teacher, and SLP
scaffold language skills and use common
linguistic accommodations
• Difficulty with academic language in Spanish
• New IEP aligns with CCSS
• English language acquisition is slower than her
bilingual peers in conversation and reading
• ELL Language Action Plan is coordinated with
IEP
103
104
References
•
Agee, P.C. (2016). Students with autism spectrum disorder. In Power-deFur, L. Common
Core State Standards and the speech-language pathologist: Standards-based intervention
for special populations. San Diego: Plural Publishing.
•
Ainsworth, L. (2013). Prioritizing the common core: Identifying specific standards to
emphasize the most. Englewood, CO: The Leadership and Learning Center.
•
American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. (n.d.) Common Core State Standards: A
resource for SLPs. Retrieved December 21, 2014, from
http://www.asha.org/SLP/schools/Common-Core-State-Standards/.
•
American Psychiatric Association.(2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual, 5th edition. (DSM5). Autism spectrum disorder. Retrieved from http://www.dsm5.org
•
•
Cirrin, F. M., Schooling, T. L., Nelson, N. W., Diehl, S. F., Flynn, P. F., Staskowski, M., Torrey,
T. Z., & Adamczyk, D. F. (2010). Evidence-based systematic review: Effects of different
service delivery models on communication outcomes for elementary school-age children.
Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 41, 233–64. doi: 10.1044/01611461(2009/08-0128). 1, 6 – 8.
•
Constable, S., Grossi, B., Moniz, A., & Ryan, L. (2013). Meeting the CCSS for students with
autism: The challenge for educators. Teaching Exceptional Children, 45(3), 6-13.
•
American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. (2006a). Knowledge and skills needed by
SLPs for diagnosis, assessment, and treatment of ASD across the lifespan [Knowledge and
skills]. Retrieved from http://www.asha.org/policy
Ehren, B. J., Blosser, J., Roth, F. P, Paul, D. R., & Nelson, N. W. (2012, April 3). Core
commitment. The ASHA Leader. Retrieved September 30, 2014 from
http://www.asha.org/publications/leader/2012/120403/core-commitment/
•
•
American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. (2006b). Principles for SLPs in diagnosis,
assessment, and treatment of ASD across the lifespan [Technical report]. Retrieved from
http://www.asha.org/policy
Flynn, P. F. (2016). Students with severe disabilities at the secondary level. In Power-deFur,
L.. Common Core State Standards and the speech-language pathologist: Standards-based
intervention for special populations. San Diego: Plural Publishing.
•
Holbrook, M. D. (2007, August). A seven-step process to creating standards-based IEPs.
National Association of State Directors of Special Education, Inc. (NASDSE), 1-8.
•
Blosser, J. , Roth, F. P. , Paul, D. R. , Ehren, B. J. , Nelson, N. W. & Sturm, J. M. (2012,
August 28). Integrating the Core. The ASHA Leader. Retrieved September 20, 2014, from
http://www.asha.org/publications/leader/2012/120828/integrating-the-core/
•
Institute of Education Sciences (IES). (2009, September). Using student achievement data to
support instructional decision making. United States Department of Education
•
Justice, L. (October 2013). From my perspective: A+ speech-language goals. The ASHA
Leader, 19, 10 – 11. Doi:10.1044/leader.FMP.18102013.10.
105
106
•
Morgan, J., Brown, N., Hsiao, Y., Howerter, C., Juniel, P., Sedano, L., & Castillo, W. (2104).
Unwrapping academic standards to increase the achievement of students with disabilities.
•
Power-deFur, L. & Flynn, P. (2012, March). Unpacking the standards for intervention. SIG 16
Perspectives on School-Based Issues, 13, 11-16. doi: 10.1044/sbi13.1.11
•
Murza, K.A., Malani, M.D., Hahs-Vaughn, D.L. (December 2014). Using the Common Core
State Standards to guide therapy in the schools: Confidently accepting the challenge. SIG 16
Perspectives on School-Based Issues, 15, 125-133. Doi:10.1044/sbi15.4.125.
•
Rudebusch, J. & Rojas, E. (2016). Students who are English Language Learners. In PowerdeFur, L. . Common Core State Standards and the speech-language pathologist: Standardsbased intervention for special populations. San Diego: Plural Publishing.
•
National Governors Association Center for Best Practices, Council of Chief State
School Officers, (2010a). Application to Students with Disabilities. Washington,
D.C.: National Governors Association for Best Practices, Council of Chief State School
Officers.
•
Rudebusch, J. (2012, March). From common core state standards to standards-based IEPs: A
brief tutorial. SIG 16 Perspectives on School-Based Issues, 13, 17-24. doi: 10.1044/sbi13.1.17
Intervention in School and Clinic, 49(3), 131-141.
•
National Governors Association Center for Best Practices, Council of Chief State
School Officers. (2010b). Common Core State Standards. Washington, D.C.: National
Governors Association for Best Practices, Council of Chief State School Officers.
•
Seal, B. (2016). Students who are deaf or hard of hearing. In Power-deFur, L. Common Core
State Standards and the speech-language pathologist: Standards-based intervention for special
populations. San Diego: Plural Publishing.
•
Power-deFur, L. (2016). Common Core State Standards and the speech-language
pathologist: Standards-based intervention for special populations. San Diego: Plural
Publishing.
•
Tager-Flusberg. H. (1996). Current theory and research on language and communication in
autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 26(2), 169-172.
•
Thurlow, M.L. (Summer 2012). Common Core State Standards: The promise and the peril for
students with disabilities. The Special Edge. 25, 3, Winner, M. G. (2007). Thinking about you
thinking about me. San Jose, CA: Think Social Publishing.
•
Power-deFur, L. (2010, August 31). The educational relevance of communication disorders.
The ASHA Leader.
107
108
18
1/29/2016
Thank you!
[email protected]
•
109
19