Clinical Forum: Implementing Collaborative Consultation Integration of Self-Contained Children With Severe Speech-Language Needs Into the Regular Education

Language, Speech and Hearing Services in Schools, Volume 23, 365-366, October 1992

Elinor Roller
Terry Rodriquez
Joy Warner
Peggy Lindahl

Denver Public Schools

A model for the full integration of children with severe speech-language problems in the regular classroom is presented. After the diagnostic characteristics and educational profiles of the severe speech-language population are defined, the structure and roles of the collaborative teaching teams of speech-language pathologists regular educators, and paraprofessionals we specified. The critical importance of administrative and parental support as well as the active involvement of the staffing teams, we indicated. The implications of collaborating to create a language-rich environment where all children belong and we taught according to their individual needs also are discussed.

Keywords: integration, mainstreaming language disorders, collaboration

Effective speech-language intervention in the public schools includes not only working to meet speech-language goals to help students improve their communicative abilities, but also providing opportunities for students to practice those skills in the educational environment, where they spend the majority of their day. When we first began working in the Intensive Communicative Program at Park Hill Elementary School in Denver, we were a center program for children identified as having oral and written language deficits of such magnitude that they would best be served outside of their home school. The children were bused to us from all over the city, and we taught in self-contained classrooms, segregating children according to their handicaps.

Our population consists primarily of children who show a significant discrepancy between their performance and verbal abilities, as measured by formal psychological testing. Boils formal and informal speech-language testing must indicate a language disorder as the primary cause for the significantly low verbal score. Many of our students display performance scores in the average-to-low-average range. Some of the children have severe written language deficiencies. Pragmatic language skills are almost always an area of extreme difficulty. In addition, several of our students have severe phonological deficits, and some have learning disabilities, emotional needs, or mild physical needs. Math is a strength for the majority of our students.

When we first began at Park Hill, our children were in a self-contained classroom with a speech-language pathologist and a paraprofessional. They were -mainstreamed" into regular education classes for mats, music, and physical education. What we found was that they were "visitors" in these classrooms. They did not form friendships with the other children in the mainstream class, nor did they interact with the other children on the playground or in the lunchroom. They also did not develop opportunities to learn from typical peer role models because of the divisions made between themselves and others.

It was clear that our children required contact with other children in a place where everyone belonged. During the past 2 years, we have found regular education teachers with the same philosophy as ours who were willing to team with us in order to enhance the learning of all students. The result is that we presently have teams at all grade levels. Each teaching team shares one space, the materials, resources, and one group of children (a regular education class with a full range of learners, and the students with language impairments). Depending on the teams, responsibilities are divided in various ways. As speech-language pathologists and regular educators in the same room, we are responsible for teaching the appropriate grade-level curriculum to the entire group of students. We modify and adapt the curriculum as needed to ensure that Individual Education Plan (IEP) goals are met for the learners with disabilities and that school and district level goals are met for typical students. We also share responsibility for parent conferences, evening programs, and decisions concerning report cards for all of the students. As speech-language pathologists, we rely on the regular educator to know the curriculum, to guide us through it, and to teach us whole-group management skills. The classroom teacher relies on us to help modify, adapt, and individualize the curriculum for certain students.

How has it worked? We have found that our students with language impairments do much better in an integrated classroom where they are more than just visitors. Academic achievement, for the majority of our students, has increased dramatically, as have social and pragmatic language skills. We have learned about the expectations of the regular education curriculum and have increased our goals for our students accordingly. As a result, many of our students have exceeded their previous goals, both academically and socially. For example, one of our students had an IEP goal that stated that he would borrow and carry two-digit numbers by the end of third grade. By the end of third grade, he was not only borrowing and carrying, he was multiplying and beginning to divide. In the integrated setting, it was expected that third graders learn to do this, and so he did. It was an expectation we would not have had of him if he continued in the segregated small classroom. The academic performance of the regular education students remained consistent with that of students in the traditional classroom settings in our district.

In the two academic areas causing the greatest problems for our students-reading and writing-we experienced more difficulty. Our children continue to read and write at levels much lower than their typical peers. We adapt the curriculum to meet their needs and use peer achievement as a motivator. In order to reduce frustration, we have found that a strong affective education component is essential. This gives us the opportunity to talk with all students about each of their individual needs, strengths, and learning styles. We focus on all aspects of school, not just academic achievement. Some of our speech-language students are outstanding athletes, artists, and musicians. It has been worthwhile for all children to learn that everyone has strengths and weaknesses. We introduce this idea early in the year because we believe that it is crucial for successfully integrating students with disabilities in the classroom.

Social skills also have shown marked growth. Pragmatic language skills remain difficult for the youngsters with language impairment. They do not understand why their words might be offensive or hurtful. Playground lunchroom, and classroom squabbles arise as frequently in our classrooms as in any other classroom. As with all children, when a problem cannot be solved independently, the speech-language pathologist and teacher help children work through the issue. When the issue arises again at a different time, the adult and the child then can work together to help the child work independently toward finding the appropriate pragmatic skills to solve the problem.

We have learned many things from our venture into full integration. Administrators have assisted us in communicating with parents, community, district-level representatives, and colleagues throughout the district. Administrative support has provided adequate space and planning time in order to make the program successful. We also have learned that the staging team is extremely important. Our children do continue to need some pull-out services in order to meet their needs. The itinerant speech-language pathologist works with our children with phonological disorders, and we support carryover in the classroom. The learning disabilities specialist has ideas and materials for teaching reading, writing, and mathematics-areas in which speech-language pathologists often have little background. The entire staging team assists in completing evaluations as needed.

In addition, we have learned that each member of the team must be comfortable with his or her teaching style and must be willing to take risks in order for collaboration to be successful. Not everyone may be comfortable teaching in this way; however, we have found collaboration to enhance growth for both children and adults.

Finally, we have found that language learning occurs throughout the day. Language goals can be met during math, science, and affective education, as well as during reading, writing, and social studies. Regardless of the curriculum area targeted and the person who plans the lesson, students can be taught to be more effective at using language to manipulate, problem solve, communicate, and learn.

Our primary purpose for integrating students with disabilities into classes with peers is to ensure a quality education for all children by creating a learning community in which everyone belongs. In this environment, we envision a place where the speech-language pathologist and teacher celebrate each child's individuality and uniqueness and where students work and learn together. We see the integration of students with disabilities as only a first step in pooling our human and physical resources as we learn how to teach according to individual needs rather than group norms. Through our collaborative efforts, we have provided children with severe speech-language and learning disabilities the support they require to succeed in the regular classroom.

Received August 29. 1991
Accepted January 23, 1992

Contact author: Elinor Roller, 5908 West Fair Drive, Littleton, Colorado 80123.