SpeechPathology.com Phone: 800-242-5183

New master brand. Same great company. Introducing continued! Read Our Story

Therapia Staffing Careers

Moving Beyond Pullout Only Service Delivery Models

Moving Beyond Pullout Only Service Delivery Models
Charles Carlin, Ph.D.
October 17, 2011
Share:

  Background

In research that was conducted by Sanger, Hux, and Griess (1995), one-third of the school-based speech language pathologists (SLP) surveyed were found to provide pullout speech language services as the only service delivery option for students with communication impairments. More than a decade later, pullout services remain the predominant service delivery model that is used across the United States (ASHA, 2010). What is the reason for this long standing preference for pullout only service delivery models?

Unfortunately, the reason for this preference is not fully understood. Research has identified several administrative barriers and challenges that are believed to be associated with service delivery choices (ASHA, 2010). Large caseloads, excessive workload duties (e.g., paperwork, bus duty), limited planning and collaboration time with teachers, and misperceptions about treatment intensity appear to have the potential to limit service delivery choices and prevent services from being delivered in the least restrictive environment (ASHA, 2010; ASHA, 2002; Roberts, Prizant, & McWilliams, 1995). Clinicians in the field have also encountered teacher and parent resistance and uncertainty about what to do in the classroom to improve communication skills. Despite these barriers and challenges, SLPs are continually being called upon to reassess the appropriateness of traditional pullout only programs and employ alternative approaches in an inclusive setting.  SLPs cannot implement this move away from pullout only models alone. Building-level and district administrators must play an important role in creating and maintaining the systemic change necessary to ensure that appropriate service delivery models are used for students who require speech language services (Achilles, Yates, & Freese, 1991; Beck & Dennis, 1997; Cooper, 1991; Ferguson, 1991; Larson, McKinley, & Boley, 1993; Miller, 1989; Moore-Brown, 1991; Schetz & Billingsley, 1992; Throneburg, Calvert, Sturm, Paramboukas, & Paul, 2000).

Service Delivery Models

The American Speech Language Hearing Association (ASHA) considers service delivery to be a dynamic concept, and recommends that it change as the student moves through the various stages of therapy (1999). As the student progresses in speech language therapy across time, the service delivery model should be reevaluated and modified to address the unique and changing needs of the student. The “one size fits all” approach to service delivery is not appropriate; therefore, school-based SLPs need to be provided the skills, structure, and support to design and implement a continuum of services to effectively serve students on their caseload in the least restrictive environment (ASHA, 1999). There are several service delivery models that can be used in the schools to provide educationally relevant services to students with communication impairments.

The first example, pullout speech language therapy, occurs whenever the SLP works independently and provides small-group or individual services in a setting that is separate from the student’s classroom (e.g., speech therapy room, hallway, etc.). It is important to note that the goals of pullout services do not necessarily coincide with the academic content standards that are established by states (Norris, 1989). These services occur apart from the classroom, teacher, curriculum, and nondisabled peers, and they are often times disconnected from the student’s regular daily activities (e.g., lunch, recess, transitions, etc.). Services in the pullout therapy room can be made more educationally relevant when intervention is provided on those language underpinnings that negatively impact the student’s progress in the general education curriculum or setting (Ehren, 2000). Materials, textbooks, and concepts from the classroom can also be used in the pullout therapy room in order to improve communication goals. In the beginning stages of therapy, nondisabled peer volunteers can also be invited during lunch, recess, or afterschool to participate in social skill lessons. Despite these efforts to infuse the curriculum and nondisabled peers into pullout therapy, a consistent criticism remains. Pullout therapy alone does not promote skill carryover or generalization (Bellini, Peters, Benner, & Hopf, 2007; Elksnin, & Capilouto, 1994; Finn, 2003; Miller, 1989). Speech language services in a therapy room cannot effectively replicate the interactions and activities commonly found in the classroom, which may in turn adversely affect the carryover and generalization of newly learned skills. Speech language services become “decontextualized,” and the student struggles to make connections between what goes on in the therapy room and what needs to occur throughout the rest of the school day (Miller, 1989). Pullout therapy is not the only service delivery option available to SLPs.

The second service delivery model that is employed infuses services into the classroom setting and is known by many names. It can be called inclusion or integrated classroom-based, curriculum-based, or classroom-based services, and this model directly impacts upon the student’s academic and functional performance across educational settings (ASHA, 1999). The SLP provides direct services in the classroom through either co-teaching with the educational staff or leading large or small-group lessons. The SLP works with the classroom teacher or aide to select communication skills or strategies that not only benefit the student with the communication impairment but also the rest of the class. The SLP works with the classroom personnel to infuse these strategies or skills into ongoing classroom instruction so that they are carried over throughout the school day and after the SLP leaves the classroom. The SLPs models for the teachers and aides the use of the strategy or skill in hopes that the teaching staff will infuse these into classroom instruction. Services of this type are better able to ensure a carryover and generalization of newly learned skills across educational settings and communication partners (Bellini et al., 2007; Throneburg et at., 2000; Wilcox, Kouri, & Caswell, 1991). “The goal of introducing alternative models of service delivery [is] not to eliminate pullout services; rather, the goal [is] restriction of the use of pullout services to appropriate cases and the provision of alternative approaches when they best serve students’ needs” (Sanger et al., 1995, p. 80).

 
This page The rest of this article is not available, because you are not logged in to your SpeechPathology.com account.

Join Now to get the whole article and handouts.
This page The rest of this article is not available, because you are not logged in to your SpeechPathology.com account.

Join Now to get the whole article and handouts.
This page The rest of this article is not available, because you are not logged in to your SpeechPathology.com account.

Join Now to get the whole article and handouts.

charles carlin

Charles Carlin, Ph.D.

Charles Carlin is an assistant professor at The University of Akron in the School of Speech-Language Pathology and Audiology. Charles is the principle investigator of a project that is exploring the use of e-supervision in rural and hard-to-fill school districts in Ohio. His research interests include supervision, classroom-based service delivery models, and response to intervention models for students with speech or language impairments.



Related Courses

Written Narrative Language Skills for the Common Core State Standards
Presented by Monica Gordon Pershey, EdD, CCC-SLP
Video
Course: #6225 1 Hour
This course provides an overview of the developmental narrative language capabilities needed for students to meet the Common Core English Language Arts Standards in Writing. Topics include strategies for informal assessment of written narrative, interventions designed to prepare students with language needs to achieve the standards, and suggestions for curricular and instructional accommodations and modifications for children with language needs.

Building Better Vocabulary for Middle and High School Students
Presented by Shari Robertson, Ph.D., CCC-SLP
Video
Course: #6613 1 Hour
The secondary-level academic environment creates particular challenges for effective education of students with special needs, including those with language-learning and motivational challenges. However, rather than reducing expectations, it is important to ramp up vocabulary learning in the middle and high school years to prepare students for vocational options and life pursuits. Numerous strategies, consistent with the current empirical literature base, will be provided that facilitate successful acquisition of higher-level vocabulary, including specialized tier-three vocabulary required for advanced content subject areas such as biology and math.

How to Write SMARTER IEP Goals: Strategies for SLPs
Presented by Kelly Ott, M.Ed, MHS, CCC-SLP, Lara L. Wakefield, PhD, CCC-SLP
Video
Course: #6683 1 Hour
The acronym S.M.A.R.T.E.R. can be used as a mnemonic to assist SLPs with writing IEP goals that align with federal and state mandates. This course explores the following concepts of the mnemonic: Specific, Measurable, Attainable within a year, Research-based, Teachable with cues and strategies, Evaluated and communicated to parents, and Relevant to common core or state standards. Examples of SMARTER IEP goals will be provided in the course to demonstrate how to use the mnemonic for best practices.

Goal Writing Aligned with State Standards
Presented by Marva Mount, M.A., CCC-SLP
Video
Course: #6690 1 Hour
In order to create more opportunities for students with language-based learning disorders to thrive in today’s educational settings, the time has come for speech-language pathologists to become more knowledgeable about the common core state standards. SLPs are urged to take a more collaborative approach to service delivery in the school setting in order for students to demonstrate more deliberate mastery of educational expectations. This course will discuss ways to incorporate the common core into speech-language goals and objectives.

Creating a Functional Therapy Plan: Therapy Goals & SOAP Note Documentation
Presented by Tatyana Elleseff, MA, CCC-SLP
Video
Course: #6817 1 Hour
This course will explain how to create the most effective therapy plan following the client's assessment.