Schoolwide Collaboration to Prevent and Address Reading Difficulties: Opportunities for School Psychologists and Speech-Language Pathologists

REFERENCES

• American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. (2001). Roles and responsibilities of speech-language pathologists with respect to reading and writing in children and adolescents (Position statement). Retrieved from www.asha.org/policy.
   Google Scholar
• American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. (2006). Responsiveness-to-intervention technical assistance packet. Retrieved from www.asha.org.
   Google Scholar
• American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. (2010). Roles and responsibilities of speech-language pathologists in schools (Professional issues statement). Retrieved from www.asha.org/policy.
   Google Scholar
• Batsche, G., Elliott, J., Graden, J., Grimes, J., Kovaleski, J., Prasse, D., Tilly, D. (2005). Response to intervention: Policy considerations and implementation. Alexandria, VA: National Association of State Directors of Special Education.
   Google Scholar
• Bergan, J., & Kratochwill, T. (1990). Behavioral consultation and therapy. New York, NY: Plenum Press.
   Google Scholar
• Brown-Chidsey, R., & Steege, M. W. (2010). Response to intervention: Principles and strategies for effective practice (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
   Google Scholar
• Buck, L. (2010). Job satisfaction and retention of Indiana school speech-language pathologists (Unpublished master's thesis). Indiana University, Bloomington, IN.
   Google Scholar
• Burns, M. K., & Coolong-Chaffin, M. (2006). Response to intervention: The role of and effect on school psychology. School Psychology Forum, 1, 3–15.
   Google Scholar
• Burns, M. K., & Gibbons, K. A. (2008). Implementing response-to-intervention in elementary and secondary schools: Procedures to assure scientific-based practices. New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Burns, M. K., Wiley, H. I., & Viglietta, E. (2008). Best practices in implementing effective problem solving teams. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology V (pp. 1633–1644). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.
   Google Scholar
• Burns, M. K., & Ysseldyke, J. E., (2005). Comparison of existing response-to-intervention models to identify and answer implementation questions. California School Psychologist, 10, 9–20.
   Google Scholar
• Cook, C. R., & Browning Wright, D. (2009). The school psychologist's changing role in the RTI era. In Answer book on RTI. Palm Beach Gardens, FL: LRP.
   Google Scholar
• Cook, L., & Friend, M. (2010). The state and art of collaboration on behalf of students with disabilities. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 20, 1–8. doi:10.1080/10474410903535398.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Danielson, L., Doolittle, J., & Bradley, R. (2007). Professional development, capacity building, and research needs: Critical issues for response to intervention implementation. School Psychology Review, 36, 632–637.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dunsmuir, S., Clifford, V., & Took, S. (2006). Collaboration between educational psychologists and speech and language therapists: Barriers and opportunities. Educational Psychology in Practice, 22, 125–140. doi:10.1080/02667360600668246.
   Google Scholar
• Ehren, B. J., & Whitmire, K. (2009). Speech-language pathologists as primary contributors to response to intervention at the secondary level. Seminars in Speech and Language, 30(2), 90–104. doi:10.1055/s-0029-1215717.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Erchul, W. P. (2011). School consultation and response to intervention: A tale of two literatures. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 21, 191–208.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fagan, T. K. (2008). Trends in the history of school psychology in the United States. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology V (pp. 2069–2085). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.
   Google Scholar
• Flanagan, D. P., Ortiz, S. O., Alfonso, V. C., & Dynda, A. M. (2006). Integration of response to intervention and norm-referenced tests in learning disability identification: Learning from the Tower of Babel. Psychology in the Schools, 43, 807–825.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fletcher, J. M., & Vaughn, S. (2009). Response to intervention: Preventing and remediating academic difficulties. Child Development Perspectives, 3, 30–37.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Friend, M. (2000). Myths and misunderstandings about professional collaboration. Remedial and Special Education, 21, 130–132. doi:10.1177/074193250002100301.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fuchs, D., & Fuchs, L. S. (2006). Introduction to response to intervention: What, why, and how valid is it? Reading Research Quarterly, 41, 93–99.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fuchs, D., Fuchs, L. S., & Compton, D. L. (2012). Smart RTI: A next-generation approach to multilevel prevention. Exceptional Children, 78, 263–279.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fuchs, D., Mock, D., Morgan, P. L., & Young, C. L. (2003). Responsiveness-to-intervention: Definitions, evidence, and implications for the learning disabilities construct. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 18, 157–171.
   Google Scholar
• Gansle, K. A., & Noell, G. H. (2007). The fundamental role of intervention implementation in assessing response to intervention. In S. Jimerson, M. Burns, & A. VanDerHeyden (Eds.), Handbook of Response to Intervention: The science and practice of assessment (pp. 244–253). NY: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Glover, T. A. (2010). Supporting all students: The promise of response to intervention. In T. A. Glover & S. Vaughn (Eds.), The promise of response to intervention: Evaluating current science and practice (pp. 1–6). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gresham, F. M. (2008). Best practices in diagnosis in a multitier problem-solving approach. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology V (pp. 281–294). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.
   Google Scholar
• Gutkin, T. B., & Curtis, M. J. (2009). School-based consultation: The science and practice of indirect service delivery. In T. B. Gutkin & C. R. Reynolds (Eds.), Handbook of school psychology (4th ed., pp. 591–635). New York, NY: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Hale, J. B., Kaufman, A., Naglieri, J. A., & Kavale, K. A. (2006). Implementation of IDEA: Integrating response to intervention and cognitive assessment methods. Psychology in the Schools, 43, 753–770.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hardcastle, B., & Justice, K. (2010). Fidelity and RTI: Strategies to ensure intervention integrity in your schools. Horsham, PA: LRP Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Howell, K. (2008). Best practices in curriculum-based evaluation and advanced reading. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology V (pp. 397–418). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.
   Google Scholar
• Howell, K. W., & Nolet, V. (2000). Curriculum-based evaluation: Teaching and decision making (3rd ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
   Google Scholar
• International Reading Association. (2006). New roles in response to intervention: Creating success for schools and children. Retrieved from http://www.asha.org/slp/schools/prof-consult/RtoI.htm
   Google Scholar
• Jackson, S., Pretti-Frontczak, K., Harjusola-Webb, S., Grisham-Brown, J., & Romani, J. M. (2009). Response to intervention: Implications for early childhood professionals. Language, Speech and Hearing Services in Schools, 40, 424–434. doi: 10.1044/0161-1461.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Justice, L. M. (2006). Evidence-based practice, response-to-intervention, and the prevention of reading difficulties. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 37, 284–297. doi:10.1044/0161-1461(2006/033).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kovaleski, J. F., & Black, L. (2010). Multi-tier service delivery: Current status and future directions. In T. A. Glover & S. Vaughn (Eds.), The promise of response to intervention: Evaluating current science and practice (pp. 23–56). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kratochwill, T. R., Volpiansky, P., Clements, M., & Ball, C. (2007). Professional development in implementing and sustaining multitier prevention models: Implications for response to intervention. School Psychology Review, 36, 618–631.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lidz, C. S., & Pena, E. D. (2009). Response to intervention and dynamic assessment: Do we just appear to be speaking the same language? Seminars in Speech and Language, 30, 121–133. doi:10.1055/s-0029-1215719.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Martín, J. L. (2011). Child find in the RTI era: Do we really understand it? In Answer Book on RTI. Horsham, PA: LRP Publications.
   Google Scholar
• National Association of School Psychologists. (2006). The role of the school psychologist in the RTI process. Bethesda, MD: Author. Retrieved from http://www.nasponline.org/advocacy/rtifactsheets.aspx.
   Google Scholar
• Nellis, L. M. (2012). Maximizing the effectiveness of building teams in response to intervention implementation. Psychology in the Schools, 39, 245–256. doi:10.1002/pits.21594.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nelson, J. M., & Machek, G. R. (2007). A survey of training, practice, and competence in reading assessment and intervention. School Psychology Review, 36, 311–327.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Palikara, O., Lindsay, G., Cullen, M., & Dockrell, J. (2007). Working together? The practice of educational psychologists and speech language therapists and children with specific speech and language difficulties. Educational & Child Psychology, 24, 76–87.
   Google Scholar
• Reschly, D. J. (2008). School psychology paradigm shift and beyond. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology V (pp. 3–15). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.
   Google Scholar
• Reutebuch, C. (2008). Twenty ways to succeed with a response-to-intervention model. Intervention in School and Clinic, 44, 126–128.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reynolds, C. R., & Shaywitz, S. E. (2009). Response to Intervention: Ready or not? Or, from wait-to-fail to watch-them-fail. School Psychology Quarterly, 24, 130–145.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roth, F., Dougherty, D., Paul, R., & Adamczyk, D. (2010). RTI in action: Oral language activities for K-2 classroom. Rockville, MD: American Speech-Language-Hearing Association.
   Google Scholar
• Rudebusch, J. (2009). Involving the speech-language pathologist in RTI. In Answer book on RTI. Palm Beach Gardens, FL: LRP.
   Google Scholar
• Sanetti, L. H., & Kratochwill, T. R. (2009). Toward developing a science of treatment integrity: Introduction ot the special series. School Psychology Review, 38, 445–459.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shepard, J., & Dawson, M. M. (1998). Educational and school psychology in the United Kingdom and the United States: An introduction. School Psychology Review, 27, 7–13.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sheridan, S. M., & Gutkin, T. B. (2000). The ecology of school psychology: Examining and changing our paradigm for the 21st century. School Psychology Review, 29, 485–502.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sullivan, A. L., & Long, L. (2010). Examining the changing landscape of school psychology practice: A survey of school-based practitioners regarding response to intervention. Psychology in the Schools, 47, 1059–1070. doi:10.1002/pits.20524.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ukrainetz, T. (2006). The implications of RTI and EBP for SLPs: Commentary on L. M. Justice. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in the Schools, 37, 298–303. doi:10.1044/0161-1461(2006/034).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• U.S. Department of Education. (2004). Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004, Pub. L. No. 108-446, § 1400 et seq.
   Google Scholar
• Waldron, N. L., & McLeskey, J. (2010). Establishing a collaborative school culture through comprehensive school reform. Journal of Educational & Psychological Consultation, 20, 58–74. doi:10.1080/10474410903535364.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walker, H. M., & Shinn, M. R. (2010). Systemic, evidence-based approaches for promoting positive student outcomes within a multitier framework: Moving from efficacy to effectiveness. In M. R. Shinn, H. M. Walker, & G. Stoner (Eds.), Interventions for achievement and behavior problems in a three-tier model including RTI (pp. 1–26). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.
   Google Scholar
• Witt, J. C., Daly, E., & Noell, G. H. (2000). Functional assessments: A step-by-step guide to solving academic and behavior problems. Longmont, CO: Sopris West.
   Google Scholar
• Zirkel, P. A. (2011a). State laws and guidelines for RTI: Additional implementation features. NASP Communiqué, 39(7), 30–32.
   Google Scholar
• Zirkel, P. A. (2011b). What does the law say? Teaching Exceptional Children, 43(3), 65–67.
   Google Scholar
• Zirkel, P. A., & Thomas, L. B. (2010). State laws for RTI: An updated snapshot. Teaching Exceptional Children, 42, 56–63.
   Google Scholar