September 4, 2007 Features

Teaming Up for Literacy in the Schools

Education changes so quickly that it can be difficult to keep up. I found myself crunched for time, with a caseload of 35 students, constant meetings, and endless paperwork.

Something needed to change. I had looked at a significant amount of research data on reading, evaluated many children struggling with language and literacy, and talked to many administrators. I began to ask myself tough questions: How could I use my knowledge about articulation and language to make a difference in early intervention for reading in K-2? Was I strong enough to take a professional risk to close the literacy gap? How would school staff and administration respond to a service delivery change?

Seeking answers to these questions began the long journey on the road to literacy teaming.

From Problem to Pilot Program

In my 15th year of working with speech and language students, I was assigned to case-manage kindergarten special education students in addition to my regular responsibilities. Little did I know that this would change the course of my career.

That year I learned a tremendous amount about the developmental process of learning to read. I gained a better understanding of balanced literacy instruction, which emphasized phonics and whole language, as well as the importance of phonemic awareness. I realized that I could no longer tolerate the "wait-and-fail" model of special education. Waiting until children meet the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) definition of learning disabled to provide students with the specific kinds of intervention they clearly needed much earlier, wasn't working for me anymore.

Special-education referrals were increasing at an alarming rate, and I evaluated both children who exhibited a true learning disability and those who I call "curriculum casualties" who did not respond to the curriculum. Too much of my time was taken up by unnecessary referrals for children who showed a pattern of weakness in phonemic awareness and literacy.

Studies show a clear connection between children with speech and language impairments and delayed early literacy skills (Catts, 1991; Catts & Kamhi, 1986). It made sense that early reading intervention could help prevent reading difficulty in children with speech and language delays. What if early reading intervention strategies were integrated with articulation and language treatment for children in grades K-2? If early reading intervention helped children identified with speech and language delays, then that intervention should be beneficial for other children struggling with early literacy skills.

I surrounded myself with others who shared the same visions and values in educating children. The support of colleagues who were willing to take risks for the benefit of children was critical.

Pilot Program to Practice

We began a responsiveness-to-intervention pilot program of pullout small-group instruction to teach phonemic awareness and early writing skills to struggling learners in the first and second grades. We utilized parts of the Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS) assessment and other informal district assessments to guide our instruction.

Students—both on and off my caseload—who were either at-risk or struggling with sound-symbol relationships demonstrated success in gaining a foundational base for literacy. Those students who may have exhibited a slower pace of learning, weak auditory skills due to delays in articulation and/or language development, low memory skills, or significant attention issues now had targeted small group instruction to address individual areas of need. Feedback from teachers and reading staff working with these children and parents was amazing.

As with any change in the schools, resistance was strong. We encountered outdated policies, entrenched ideas, and hesitant staff. We made detours, taking into account acceptable solutions, knowing in our hearts that this change in literacy instruction was the right move for students.

A few years later we moved into a new building with a new principal who recognized our accomplishments. With this guidance, literacy teaming developed from a pilot program to practice, moving from small-group pullout instruction to whole-class participation with teachers' involvement.

Literacy teaming combines the best concepts of literacy coaching and professional learning communities and integrates them into a collaborative approach to teaching literacy. Literacy teams can include the SLP, the special education teacher, the resource teacher, student teachers, related service providers, and administrators.

In our building, children with speech and language needs in K-2 are clustered into literacy-teaming classrooms and receive speech and language services in the classroom during a literacy block. The children I served who were struggling with emergent literacy were placed in groups of four to six students according to ability level and were seen at least three times a week for 30 minutes. These students included those who were at risk and those who had speech and language difficulties. Progress was monitored every four to six weeks, with struggling readers assessed more frequently, and then students were regrouped according to need. All literacy-team teaching staff met for 45 minutes weekly to review assessments and progress, ask questions, learn from each other, and plan for the next week.

Inspired by students' progress, we expanded this approach into several first-grade classrooms where I combined students receiving speech-language services and at-risk students, with similar results. In kindergarten we waited until mid-year to begin literacy teaming to give children a chance to solidify alphabet and sound-symbol skills. Once again, I provided intervention using a balanced approach to literacy instruction with an emphasis on phonemic awareness. These instructional concepts were then transferred to written language. Individualized education program (IEP) objectives were addressed by the SLP through direct instruction or through consultation with staff.

The collaborative approach provided an opportunity for team members to expand their professional-development horizons and to become more creative in addressing children's language concerns. Most importantly, team members have been able to effectively serve the students who otherwise might have become "curriculum casualties."

The Role of the SLP

Literacy teaming demonstrated the impact of speech and language intervention on students' academic achievement. I incorporated articulation and language therapy objectives directly into group literacy sessions in the classroom. Progress occured at a faster pace with greater carryover and I was able to work more efficiently with more children.

Serving children in the classroom gave me a different perspective on my students' pragmatic skills, oral and written language needs, vocabulary needs, and language comprehension skills. I also was able to alert regular education teachers to at-risk children, coordinate service delivery with other disciplines, and incorporate developmentally appropriate literacy activities into K-2 classrooms. Our responsiveness-to-intervention approach met the needs of learners by intervening early with high-quality instruction from teaching staff.

Literacy Teaming in the Future

John Kotter, in his business fable "Our Iceberg is Melting: Changing and Succeeding Under Any Conditions," writes about resistance to change and intractable obstacles. He presents steps involved in successful change.

When I put two of these steps into practice—surrounding oneself with a guiding team and empowering others to act—I was able to make a transformative change to leadership as an SLP. I had taken a risk in advocating for change and found myself going down a path with challenges and opportunities as well as roadblocks. Along on my journey were collaborative colleagues and wonderful students who simply needed a more specific type of instruction geared towards their learning styles.

Literacy teaming has offered me a manageable and effective way to serve students, bringing my journey to a satisfying end—and a new beginning.  

Sue Lease, is an SLP at Glacier Edge Elementary School in Verona, Wisconsin. She has an interest in emergent literacy in young children and is obtaining certification in reading. Contact her at Sue.Lease@verona.k12.wi.us.

cite as: Lease, S. (2007, September 04). Teaming Up for Literacy in the Schools. The ASHA Leader.

10 Great Literacy Teaming Ideas for the SLP

  1. Actively participate on pre-referral teams to ensure that at-risk children are being identified early and interventions are in place before making a referral for an evaluation for special education.
  2. Brainstorm with colleagues in your building who share the same philosophies and ideas around literacy.
  3. Form literacy teams with other staff, which can include regular education teachers, reading teachers, resource teachers, student teachers, other related-service providers, administrators, and building leadership-team members.
  4. Begin literacy teaming by clustering speech and language students into one classroom. Start small and gradually add more classrooms.
  5. Make literacy-teaming blocks a scheduling priority and gain support from the administration for this schedule.
  6. Target a variety of IEP speech and language objectives through literacy activities with students.
  7. Collaborate closely with reading staff to plan and implement programs targeting children struggling in literacy.
  8. Utilize academic preparation and training in sound-symbol relationships to help other staff identify when a child is developmentally ready to benefit from a specific type of reading instruction.
  9. Consider an SLP position specifically for K-2.
  10. Consider obtaining additional training in reading and learn more about how children learn to read. Children with speech and language needs will greatly benefit from specific strategies implemented by an SLP who understands the importance of phonemic awareness skills in reading.


Literacy Teaming Components

  • Team teaching
  • Assessment and flexible grouping 
  • Shared planning time


  • References and Resources

    American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (2001). Roles and responsibilities of speech-language pathologists with respect to reading and writing in children and adolescents. Rockville, MD: author.

    American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (2006). Responsiveness to Intervention (RTI).

    Catts, H. W. (1991). Early Identification of reading disabilities. Topics in Language Disorders, 12, 1-16.

    Catts, H. W., & Kamhi, A. G. (1986). The linguistic basis of reading disorders: Implications for the speech-language pathologist. Language, Speech and Hearing Services in Schools, 17, 329-341.

    International Reading Associationhttp://www.reading.org/General/Default.aspx

    Kotter, J. (2006) Our Iceberg is Melting: Changing and succeeding under any conditions. New York: St. Martin's Press.



      

    Advertise With UsAdvertisement