4 Leadership Decisions to Help SLPs Decrease Caseload Size A A A Courtesy The Hello Foundation, LLC www.thehellofoundation.com White Paper 201 January 2013 ABSTRACT School administrators have the potential to influence caseload size with four leadership decisions. SUMMARY Caseloads and wor kloads of school- "based speech-"language pathologists nationally are increasing and becoming more complex. In response to increasing demands, speech- "language pathologists (SLPs) often request additional staffing from school district leadership to support identified needs. Strained school budgets and recruiting challenges often make hiring additional SLPs an unrealistic option for many school administrators. Simultaneously , most school administrators are not familiar with the realities, complexities , and clinical demands and/or outcomes SLPs are striving for and therefore, may struggle to identify alter native problem- " solving options. This white paper outlines 4 leadership decisions that administrators can make to help SLPs better address the demands of their workload with an emphasis on decreasing numbers on their caseloads. THE HELLO FOUNDATION PAGE 1
6
Embed
White Paper: 4 Leadership Decisions to Help SLPs Decrease Caseload Size
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
8/20/2019 White Paper: 4 Leadership Decisions to Help SLPs Decrease Caseload Size
Decision 2: Expect Remediation and GrowthSLPs possess the tools and skill sets to remediate most, if not all, articulation errors. If an
SLP is struggling to remediate a student’s sound error or pattern of errors or traditional
therapeutic approaches are not being successful, it is reasonable and appropriate for district
leaders to expect clinicians to consult with other specialists within the school district or seek
outside collaboration. SLPs should not be expected to inherently know the ideal remediation
profile for all students with complex needs. Not seeking this support can result in students not
making growth and goals being carried over year to year.
However, leadership within a school district should not tolerate multiple years of identical
goals and objectives without supporting factors. Too often district leaders do not ask for
explanations as to why students are not making growth in the area of speech and/or language.
Lack of growth may be due to variety of factors: attendance, student illness, lack of follow
through or practice, student motivation, etc. District leadership need to make two critical
decisions, 1) students not making growth will have their treatment plan adjusted and 2) students
continuing to not make growth will have their eligibility reviewed.
Research tells us that as caseloads increase, it take longer for students to remediate in the
area of articulation. Larger group sizes equate to slower growth due to less attention. However,
carrying students forward without changing treatment plans when no growth is observed shouldnot be standard practice.
Decision 3: PreventionThe national association of speech-"language pathologists, ASHA [American Speech and
Hearing Association], outlines prevention as one of the workload responsibilities for SLPs
working within the schools. Prevention efforts within a building can be viewed as an intervention
effort. The goal is to bring the skills of specialists into general education classrooms prior to
individuals beginning to struggle.
For example, SLPs targeting phoneme awareness with kindergarten and first grade
classrooms can bring additional teaching methods to students and new modeling to teachers.SLPs may be able to implement intervention efforts for individuals or small groups prior to
students failing within the classroom setting. Important to caseload size, prevention efforts can
thwart referrals that can result in students qualifying and increasing the caseload of a SLP.
THE HELLO FOUNDATION
4 LEADERSHIP DECISIONS TO HELP SLPS DECREASE CASELOAD SIZE
PAGE 3
8/20/2019 White Paper: 4 Leadership Decisions to Help SLPs Decrease Caseload Size
Three leadership decisions often keep SLPs from implementing prevention efforts within
school buildings. One, administrators may direct SLPs not to spend time with individuals that are
not affiliated with an IEP already. Second, large caseloads can dictate pruning of workload tasks
not deemed essential. Prevention efforts are often the first to be viewed as dispensable. And three,
non-"discussion of the value of prevention can lead to SLPs not prioritizing intervention efforts
with teachers and classrooms.
Decision 4: Abandon Traditional SLP SchedulingSLPs typically spend a significant amount of time at the beginning of each year
establishing their work schedule and the schedule of student therapy. At the secondary level, this
scheduling can happen at the beginning of each semester. Variables at the building level often
make scheduling complicated. For example, protected reading periods, differing lunch, break andteaching planning schedules, and working to compliment scheduling with other special education
staff.
Once a SLP has established the framework for a building schedule of student service,
there is significant reluctance to deviate from this schedule. In addition, administrative leadership
THE HELLO FOUNDATION
4 LEADERSHIP DECISIONS TO HELP SLPS DECREASE CASELOAD SIZE
PAGE 4
8/20/2019 White Paper: 4 Leadership Decisions to Help SLPs Decrease Caseload Size
often request copies of schedules for accountability purposes further restricting SLPs from
making independent changes.
Unfortunately, students do not make progress in accordance to neatly outlined segments
of time that may be identified at the beginning of the year. For example, some students may
benefit from five minute intervention efforts every day while others may benefit from longer
sessions, less frequently. Some students will make greater generalization with the SLP working
more frequently with their classroom teacher while other student’s generalization may require
more frequent parent contacts.
The size of SLP caseloads would benefit from leadership decisions that encourage and
support flexible SLP scheduling. SLPs require the opportunity (mandate) to change service based
on student needs. Without this leadership direction, SLPs often restrict their intervention to theconfines of a school directed schedule that may not be in the best interest of student progress
over time.
CONCLUSION:
School district administrators can do much to support SLPs decreasing caseload sizes. Defining a
system-"wide interpretation for educational impact will ensure students being considered for
special education will all be compared against a similar benchmark. Expecting remediation of
some students with articulation needs should be reviewed and standard practice. System change
that demands support for students prior to crisis in the classroom in the form of prevention keeps
some students from struggling to the extent they would need special education. Finally,abandoning traditional scheduling to give SLPs the freedom within a building to meet the
individual needs of students will go a long way to moving student growth forward, both within
the classroom and their speech experience.
REFERENCES:
Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act, 34 C.F.R. Part 104
(2006) National Dissemination Center for Children with Disabilities