A Critical Analysis of State-Level Policies Impacting Racialized Emergent Bilinguals Suspected or Labeled as Dis/abled.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this review article is to conduct a critical analysis of state-level policies focusing on the provision of speech-language therapy and special education to children and youth who are racialized emergent bilinguals (REBs) suspected or labeled as dis/abled. METHOD: We analyzed the state-level policies focusing on speech-language therapy and/or special education of California, Kansas, Florida, and New York. We coded content in terms of labels used to describe REBs; the focus of states' policies, whether the policy mentioned the provision of bilingual services, and the orientation toward bilingualism. Thematic analyses and descriptive statistics were used to analyze the policies, and interrater reliability was calculated. RESULTS: The results of this review revealed that most state-level policies contain English-centric, deficit-based labels to describe REBs and that most focus primarily on the classification and eligibility for dis/ability. Only one state addresses the provision of bilingual education for REBs labeled as dis/abled. The bulk of policies are underpinned by an ideology of "bilingualism as a difference," meaning that the main idea of the policies is that emerging English skills does not result in a dis/ability. CONCLUSIONS: Policies do not exist in a vacuum and are influenced by sociopolitical ideologies. The findings of this review highlight the urgency of applying an intersectional, justice-focused approach to the policies and practices impacting REBs suspected and/or labeled as disabled in the fields of speech-language therapy and special education.

Initial Development of a National Survey on Remote Learning in Early Childhood During COVID-19: Establishing Content Validity and Reporting Successes and Barriers.

This article describes the development and administration of a survey to identify early childhood educators' successes and barriers when delivering remote instruction (e.g., online whole or small group instruction) during the COVID-19 pandemic to children 2-5 years old. The survey was developed using procedures outlined by the commonly accepted stages of an instrument development process. Content validity was established using four approaches: (a) identification of the purpose of the survey, (b) creation of a blueprint of items, (c) cognitive interviews, and (d) expert panel review. A total of 1,053 early childhood educators began the survey, with 808 (77%) of the responses included because educators met the inclusion criteria of working in the United States and responding to at least one question related to remote instruction. The survey contained 37 closed-ended and six open-ended items covering eight domains: (a) demographic information; (b) preparation, guidelines, and materials for remote learning; (c) caregiver communication and engagement; (d) assessment; (e) instruction; (f) educators' levels of confidence before and after remote learning; (g) access to services (i.e., wraparound and/or special education); and (h) planning for the return to face-to-face instruction. Both quantitative (descriptive, t-test, regression, ANOVA, and Chi-square tests) and consensual qualitative research analyses were applied to summarize the survey results. Findings from this survey indicated that even with limited or no guidance from administrators, educators successfully adapted to remote instruction and their levels of confidence increased over time. Ongoing improvements need to be made to sustain regular communication with all families, to offer access to technology (i.e., devices and internet), to administer assessments or universal screeners, and to provide cohesive guidelines and expectations. Results from this study begin to shed light on early childhood educators' adaptation to remote instruction as a result of COVID-19. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10643-021-01216-y.

Speech-Language Pathologist Involvement in Multi-Tiered System of Supports Questionnaire: Advances in Interprofessional Practice.

Purpose This article describes the development and initial validation of the Speech-Language Pathologist (SLP) Involvement in Multi-Tiered System of Supports (MTSS) Questionnaire. It was developed to measure the extent to which SLPs are involved in MTSS at their school site(s). Method A total of 567 SLPs practicing in the United States responded to up to 39 Likert-type items meant to reflect six domains: scope of practice, professional development, leadership, consulting/collaborating, assessment and analysis, and intervention. Measurement quality was evaluated in terms of score reliability and validity. An exploratory factor analysis was conducted to evaluate the internal structure of the questionnaire responses. A three-factor model with the following dimensions of Carrying out Roles and Responsibilities, Leading, and Planning and Providing Interventions was supported. Loadings for retained factors ranged from .35 to .87. Internal consistency estimates ranged from .87 to .92. Descriptive statistics summarized the overall involvement of SLPs in MTSS, and responses to questions to assess the feasibility and acceptability of this questionnaire were analyzed. Results Questionnaire responses indicated that SLPs infrequently engage in MTSS activities. The item with the highest mean was related to SLPs collaborating with teachers to help them address students' speech and language disorders in their classrooms. Most of the SLPs who took the questionnaire found it easy to complete, but only some found the information to be useful. Conclusions The infrequent involvement of SLPs in MTSS indicates a need to disseminate information on the potentially valuable roles SLPs can play in MTSS implementation. This tool may be used by SLPs to better understand contributions they can make within an MTSS framework and self-reflect on their current levels of involvement. Supplemental Material https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.13874516.

Iterative Development of a Home Review Program to Promote Preschoolers' Vocabulary Skills: Social Validity and Learning Outcomes.

Purpose This article describes the iterative development of a home review program designed to augment vocabulary instruction for young children (ages 4 and 5 years) occurring at school through the use of a home review component. Method A pilot study followed by two experiments used adapted alternating treatment designs to compare the learning of academic words taught at school to words taught at school and reviewed at home. At school, children in small groups were taught academic words embedded in prerecorded storybooks for 6 weeks. Children were given materials such as stickers with review prompts (e.g., "Tell me what brave means") to take home for half the words. Across iterations of the home intervention, the home review component was enhanced by promoting parent engagement and buy-in through in-person training, video modeling, and daily text message reminders. Visual analyses of single-subject graphs, multilevel modeling, and social validity measures were used to evaluate the additive effects and feasibility of the home review component. Results Social validity results informed each iteration of the home program. The effects of the home program across sites were mixed, with only one site showing consistently strong effects. Superior learning was evident in the school + home review condition for families that reviewed words frequently at home. Although the home review program was effective in improving the vocabulary skills of many children, some families had considerable difficulty practicing vocabulary words. Conclusion These studies highlight the importance of using social validity measures to inform iterative development of home interventions that promote feasible strategies for enhancing the home language environment. Further research is needed to identify strategies that stimulate facilitators and overcome barriers to implementation, especially in high-stress homes, to enrich the home language environments of more families.

Protocol for the systematic review of research on professional learning to promote implementation of a multitiered system of support in education.

INTRODUCTION: A multitiered system of supports (MTSS) represents a widely adopted public health approach to education in the USA. Researchers agree professional learning is critical for educators to implement the critical components of MTSS; however, professional learning approaches vary in their designs and targeted outcomes. While researchers increasingly focus their inquiries on professional learning for MTSS, no systematic research review exists. OBJECTIVES: The primary objectives for this mixed-methods review are to (1) understand how professional learning focused on MTSS has been operationalised (2) determine the impact of professional learning on educator (eg, knowledge) and implementation (eg, data-based decision-making processes) outcomes and (3) understand the contextual variables that influence professional learning in the USA. We aim to determine which elements of professional learning improve educators' capacity to implement MTSS. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will include studies that use quantitative and qualitative methods. PsycInfo, PubMed, CIHAHL and ERIC will be the primary research databases used to search for studies published from January 1997 to May 2018. We also will search the US Institute for Educational Sciences and Office of Special Education Programs websites, ProQuest, Google Scholar, Science Watch and MSN. Finally, we will search the proceedings of relevant conferences, examine the reference lists of studies that pass full screening and contact authors for additional work. Data extraction will include participant demographics, intervention details, study design, outcomes, analyses and key findings. We will conduct a quality assessment and analyse the data using effect size and thematic analyses. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Institutional review board or ethics approval is not needed for this review of already published works. We will disseminate the findings through presentations at state, national and international conferences; presentations to stakeholders and agencies; publication in peer-reviewed journals; and posts to organisational and agency websites.