For anyone working with the school age population, navigating Common Core Standards for students in special education can be a nightmare.
Most of us know our students are far behind where they should be, especially when it comes to these early developing language skills that typically emerge before students come to school.
But we can’t talk about language development without talking about what to do when your students aren’t ready to work on skills in the Common Core Standards for their current grade level.
This is a question we constantly have if we’re working in special education.
So the scenario goes: Our students are in elementary or secondary school; but they’re lacking some of these language skills that should have emerged before Kindergarten.
So what do we do?
The most obvious: We work on the skills appropriate for where the student is right now.
I know, I know. What about aligning with Common Core Standards? Special education law requires we do this, right?
Yes, it does; but the myths surrounding this issue aren’t in whether we should or shouldn’t be doing this. Rather they lie in how we do it. So let’s clear up some of those myths right now.
Myth #1. If the language skills we’re working on aren’t directly stated in the Common Core Standards, we’re not “aligning” with the curriculum.
Common Core Standards were written to create consistency and accountability across the nation with regards to what we expect for each grade. Not to make our jobs more difficult. Unfortunately, that was an unintended consequence in some cases.
But Common Core Standards (for special education especially) simply define where we’re going. Not how we get there.
That means that they don’t dictate the techniques we use to get our students closer to meeting the standards or the skills we address along the way to get there.
Think about how we might address any type of skill hierarchy. We want our students to get to point C, but they’re still at point A. We wouldn’t expect them to just skip point B. Rather, we’d work back in sequence and get our students closer to C, one step at a time.
This means that if you’re working on a skill that will get your students closer to meeting whatever skill is stated in the Common Core Standards, you are by definition “aligning” with the curriculum whether the skill you’re targeting is directly stated in the standards or not.
If a student is lacking an early-developing language skill and it’s impeding their progress, we need to be working on said skill. Usually these easier skills are prerequisite to more difficult ones.
And, just because certain language skills are specified at that grade level doesn’t mean we automatically have to be working on them right now. What we want to do instead is work on the language skills that will get them to the next stage of development.
Myth #2. We’re violating the law or our district’s policies if we work at a students’ level and not at grade level.
This is really just an extension of the first myth. We’ve already confirmed that you’re doing what’s best for your student by targeting skills they need instead of blindly following the standards.
We also talked about how you’re still “aligned” even if the skills you may be working on are below grade level.
But I wanted to talk more about what we’re required to do legally and what our district leadership might be telling us we need to do.
Typically when I explain the first myth, some people have an “aha” moment and go on their merry way. But others still feel stuck and have some follow-up questions.
These points of confusion come up because we’re required to indicate a grade level standard that’s aligned with our IEP goals.
So if we’re working below grade level with the intent of filling in the gaps, can we still meet legal guidelines?
The answer is “Yes.” It may look like this:
Let’s say you have a student in 4th grade. But maybe your assessments show that they should be working on skills in 1st or 2nd grade. You might be required to list a state standard that aligns with the goals you’re writing, so you would write a 4th grade standard that’s related to the language skill you’re addressing.
Even though you’ve listed a 4th grade standard, you may write goals in the benchmarks that look more like what you’d expect for a younger student. However, if these skills are necessary for the student to master before they can achieve the 4th grade level standards, your goals are technically aligned.
For example, if your students really struggle with grammar, you’d find a 4th grade Common Core Standard about grammar and list that as your “aligned” standard. But then in your interventions, you’d address the grammar skills that the students need to move forward rather than rigidly sticking only with “4th grade” skills.
Myth #3 “But my administrator is making me do it this way. What if I do what I feel is best and get in trouble?”
If I sound like a broken record repeating the same myth over and over again, it’s because I hear this question/concern about writing goals and planning therapy a million times a week.
And it all ties back to the same myth worded in different ways.
When an SLP or other professional working in special education tells me this, there are a couple possibilities.
First, it’s possible that they’re misunderstanding what the administrator is telling them to do with regards to Common Core Standards and special education.
For example, I know a special education director who explains curricular alignment the exact way that I did above; but his staff often misunderstand his philosophy as it’s communicated through his many special education coordinators and then discussed among staff.
Then everyone assumes he’s forcing them to be working on skills way above a student’s ability level, when this is NOT what he’s recommending at all. It’s kind of like playing telephone.
This director has a tremendous amount of respect for those of us who know the important language skills that emerge during school age. He knows that we know it better than he does, and he’d never presume to tell us what’s best for therapy. But the communication breakdown happens because we’re all busy people and the legal guidelines are confusing.
So my first thought if you’ve experienced “myth #3” would be to re-examine what your admin is recommending. They may be more supportive of your practices than you realize.
It’s also possible that the administrator really IS telling you that you should be working way above a students’ ability level.
Maybe they don’t understand language development or what you do all day, and maybe they’re misinterpreting the legal guidelines.
If this is the case, you have a couple options.
One option is to adopt an “ask for forgiveness, not permission” mindset. Work on what you know is right for students. Write goals for what you think your student can reasonable achieve, and just make sure you’ve made a reasonable effort to document what Common Core Standards they align with.
The question to ask yourself here would be, “What’s the worst thing that would happen if I did what I know is right?”
The administrator might get on your case and take some kind of disciplinary action; which would be preposterous (yet you never know). Or they may be too busy to follow you around and monitor everything you’re doing.
If that’s the case, the “worst” possible scenario would be that you did what was right for your student.
You also have the option of talking to the administrator about your concerns/question; which could either result in improving their understanding and your relationship; or could result in you getting shut down completely.
In my experience, these types of issues result more of misunderstanding and lack of communication; so I tend to give people the benefit of the doubt. The administrators I’ve worked with are all good people who want the same things we do, which is for our students to improve.
The times I’ve felt shut down have usually come about because they’re really busy dealing with so many things and not because they don’t care.
If you’re not sure where to start in having this conversation, you can start by sharing information about typical early language development and why it’s so important to address these skills in the school age years
*There will be more information to come this next month about later language development.
Last but not least, if you’re in a situation where you feel forced to disregard some of the critical language skills that develop while students are in school for the sake of “Common Core Standard” alignment, you do have another option.
And that is to look for a new job. There are loads of recruiters emailing prospective therapists every day. You may feel like you’re forced to settle for your current situation, but that may not be true.
It’s easy to complain about our current situation and assume we have no other choice, but you can challenge that assumption.
The question here is, “Am I really as limited as I think I am? Or are there options I’m not considering?”
I know we took an unexpected turn in this discussion of language development, but I knew these questions and concerns would come up along the way.
Now that we’ve addressed these myths head-on, we can forge ahead to the next article; where I’ll discuss the development of morphology through the school age years.
Stay tuned.
To learn more about which language skills are important to track over the school-age years, check out this free glossary for SLPs.
This glossary will help you to:
- Identify the key skills that are relevant to language growth.
- Determine what syntactic skills indicate continued progress.
- Get clarity on which skills are highest priority for academic success and language comprehension.
>>>Click here to sign up for the glossary.<<<
