Strategic.

Evidence-Based.

Our Framework

Our framework was designed to address the following:

  • Suspected articulation and phonological impairments.

  • Suspected expressive and receptive language impairments including,

    • Morphology (word structure)

    • Syntax (sentence structure) - Coming soon

    • Semantics (vocabulary)

    • Pragmatics (social language) - Coming soon

    • Phonological awareness - Coming Soon

  • Suspected fluency impairments

What’s included:

  • Training on how to use the framework.

  • Detailed goals that you can tailor to your student’s needs.

  • Step by step instructions for each week.

  • Evidenced-based interventions to implement each week.

  • Explicit instructions for collecting data.

  • Explicit instruction on how to interpret and present data to stakeholders.

How the framework helps:

  • Teachers and speech therapists can quickly collaborate.

  • No more researching, purchasing random resources, or struggling to implement evidence-based interventions.

  • Minimal preparation necessary. Just print and go.

Challenges of RTI

Response to Intervention was intended to be delivered in the general education setting, not in the special education setting. Due to the complicated nature of suspected communication disorders, teachers and speech therapists are required to collaborate with one another in order to provide appropriate interventions. Ideally, speech therapists and teachers will utilize their unique skill sets to develop and implement RTI plans.
‍
However, sometimes professional boundaries can become blurred when working in the RTI model. Without clearly identified roles and ways to collaborate, the workload of RTI may inevitably and unfairly fall to one professional. Or it may be forgotten all together. This can lead to speech therapists and teachers feeling frustrated with each other, administration, and with the RTI process.

Common Challenges:

  • Teachers feel under-prepared to screen students, in addition to creating and implementing RTI plans related to speech and language needs without significant involvement from the speech therapist.

  • Speech therapists find it difficult to provide extensive and tailored guidance to all teachers in the school, in addition to their workload.

  • Teachers and speech therapists often have different opinions about who should develop and implement the RTI plan.

  • Teachers and speech therapists both experience significant work demands so RTI can feel overwhelming to implement when no additional resources or training are provided.

  • Developing activities from scratch can be costly and time consuming.

Addressing the Surge in Special Education Referrals: A Call for Comprehensive Communication Interventions

In recent years, there has been a notable increase in the number of students referred for special education services, posing a substantial challenge to special education departments. Increasing the number of students who qualify for speech therapy results in larger therapy groups, less time devoted to each student, and more red tape for both the general education teacher and the speech therapist.

In the rapidly changing education space, it is crucial to establish a system that allows students to access evidence-based interventions aimed at enhancing their communication skills within the general education environment. This imperative initiative is vital for the overall success of every student within the school community.

Response To Intervention

Multi-tiered system of supports (MTSS) is federally mandated in the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) of 2015. It requires public schools to identify and provide support to students who are struggling academically, behaviorally, or emotionally.  
‍
‍Response to Intervention (RTI) and Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS) are ways that schools implement MTSS.    
‍
MTSS, RTI, and PBIS are often used interchangeably amongst professionals in the schools. While there are obvious distinctions between MTSS, RTI, and PBIS, state laws and local districts typically already have established procedures for how to identify and provide support to students who are struggling in the general education setting, regardless of the name that is used.

The Speech RTI Assistant refers to the ways in which schools provide tiered support as Response to Intervention. More specifically, this program relates to suspected communication disorders in TIER 2 and TIER 3.

Response to Intervention (RTI) is a multi-tiered approach that schools use to identify and support students with learning and behavioral needs. Here is a brief explanation of how schools typically implement RTI:

  1. Screening and Identification:

    • Schools start by conducting universal screenings to identify students who may be at risk of academic or behavioral difficulties.

    • These screenings are usually brief assessments conducted three times a year to evaluate students' basic skills and identify those who may need additional support.

    • Screenings may also occur on an "as needed" basis throughout the year.

  2. Tiered Levels of Support:

    • RTI is organized into three tiers of intervention, each providing a different level of support based on the student's needs.

    • Tier 1: Universal Instruction - All students receive high-quality, evidence-based instruction in the general education setting.

    • Tier 2: Targeted Intervention - Students who require additional support beyond regular classroom instruction receive targeted instruction provided by a general education teacher/educator.  

    • Tier 3: Intensive Intervention - Students with significant challenges receive individualized, intensive interventions tailored to their specific needs by speech therapists and/or other special education educators.

  3. Progress Monitoring:

    • Regular and systematic monitoring of students' progress is a crucial component of RTI. This helps educators assess the effectiveness of the interventions and make data-informed decisions.

    • Progress monitoring tools may include frequent assessments, teacher observations, and other data collection methods.

  4. Data-Driven Decision-Making:

    • Educators use collected data to make informed decisions about a student's response to interventions. If a student is making progress, the current level of support may be maintained or adjusted. If not, more intensive interventions may be considered.

  5. Collaboration and Communication:

    • RTI relies on collaboration among teachers, administrators, special education staff, and parents. Regular communication ensures that everyone involved is aware of the student's progress and can contribute to decision-making.

  6. Parental Involvement:

    • Parents are an integral part of the RTI process. Schools communicate with parents about their child's progress, provide information about interventions, and seek parental input in decision-making.

  7. Individualized Education Program (IEP) Consideration:

    • If a student continues to struggle despite interventions at Tiers 1, 2, and 3, the school may initiate the process of developing an Individualized Education Program (IEP) for the student, which is a more formalized plan that outlines specific accommodations and services.

By implementing RTI, schools aim to provide early and effective support to students, address learning and behavioral challenges proactively, and prevent the need for more intensive interventions or special education services later on.