UNCONDITIONAL EDUCATION
  • Blog
  • About Us
    • Our Model
    • Our Leadership Team
    • Press
    • Contact Us
  • News + Resources
    • News You Can Use
    • Resources
  • Unconditional Education Book

Welcome

​Please scroll down to read our Unconditional Education blog posts.

​You can click the button below to learn more about our Unconditional Education and School Based Services!

OUR UE MODEL AND SERVICES

WHY SHOULD WE KNOW ABOUT THE PATTERNS OF STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES MODEL?

1/12/2017

1 Comment

 
Picture
Picture
One factor many educators new to the Special Education field may not be aware of is the various models used to identify whether or not a child in their school qualifies for services. There are three basic models of identification: the Discrepancy model, the Response to Intervention Model, and the Patterns of Strengths and Weaknesses Model.  In recent months the All-In! School Psychologists and other leadership team members have been a discussing the possibility of moving away from the discrepancy model of Special Education identification to the model of Patterns of Strengths and Weaknesses. Current federal law favors the Response to Intervention model; however, Patterns of Strengths and Weaknesses has been growing in popularity and our team believes it may be a perfect fit for our program.

To understand why our All-In! School Psychologist have been so interested and excited about the potential of making this switch, let’s take a brief look at these other models. First, let’s look at Discrepancy Model, still widely used nationally and by many of the school psychologists in our program. The Discrepancy Model compares a student’s full scale IQ score to academic test scores. If the academic tests scores are lower than the IQ score by a predetermined number (our school psychologists use 22 points, which is a frequent norm), then the student is considered eligible for services. While our school psychologist often utilize a cross-battery approach to assessment and look not just at full scale IQ, but also processing scores,  does this model adequately assess whether or not a student a learning disability? I think in some cases it does; however, in the case of an intellectually gifted child, they may show a relative academic weakness based on their superior full-scale IQ, but this is not a true disability.

The Response to Intervention model focuses on student performance. If the student does not perform at a set level, the he or she is placed in an intervention group. If the student does not respond to the Tier 2 level of support after a particular time (typically six weeks), then they are either referred for evaluation or more intensive intervention. This model is often utilized in many of our schools implementing the RTI approach to intervention; however, there are many challenges for our school psychologists. Several of our psychologists ask: when students are identified for Tier 2 intervention groups, has a skill deficit been identified? Does the intervention address/target the specific area of deficit (i.e. reading fluency)? How is progress monitoring data collected? Is it collected with fidelity and does it adequately identify a student with a disability? Lastly, are practices among practitioners and schools consistent?

The Patterns of Strengths and Weaknesses model generally uses cognitive evaluation, which breaks out the student performance into key areas: processing speed, ability to reason, long-term memory retrieval, short-term memory, working memory, auditory processing, and phonemic awareness. As I mentioned above in the Discrepancy model, our All-In! School psychologist also assess in all of these areas of functioning when evaluating a student for a specific learning disability; however, where our practice differs is that we don’t fully use this model to interpret student qualification for services. In order for a student to qualify under this model, the student must show a set number of cognitive strengths (often three), plus at least one cognitive weakness. The student must then additionally show an associated academic weakness in an area which matches the cognitive weakness (i.e. cognitive weakness in phonemic awareness and academic weakness in areas of reading).

The benefit of the Patterns of Strengths and Weaknesses model is that it gives those designing interventions to the student the ability to identify specific cognitive areas of weakness. Say for example that a student demonstrates a weakness in phonemic awareness. It helps the teacher have better understanding of why the student is struggling with reading fluency and better design specific strategies to address the issue. Similarly, if a student demonstrates a weakness in processing speed it informs both teachers and parents that the student will need additional time to process information before responding to questions.
​
Knowing about the Patterns of Strengths of Weakness not only equips our School Psychologist and other team members with a tool for Special Education identification, but it also helps us as educators understand more deeply why a student is experiencing learning challenging. Additionally, the information ascertained from the Patterns of Strength and Weaknesses evaluation helps to inform our parents as to why their child may experience difficulties in other environments and aspects of their lives. This model is something many of School Psychologists already do; however, we need to take it to the next level and begin using the model for interpretation and identification of services. 

Picture
Blog post written by:
Meka Tull, Director of School Partnerships/Director of Special Education at Lighthouse and Lodestar

1 Comment
Ryan Brown
1/13/2017 09:32:56 am

Oooo... I like this! It seems like an even more whole child approach b/c a strengths and weaknesses view is a life view, not just a school view. Is it accurate to say that teachers, admin, families, and policy makers tend to an academic-centered, and therefore narrower, perspective when talking about and working with RTI and discrepancy models? Do we have a better shot at helping families engage in intervention when it's presented from the very start as life-centered rather then just stuff we do at school? Seems like it might.

Thanks for the write-up - super interesting.

Reply



Leave a Reply.

    Authors:

    School Program Partnerships

    We're Hiring!

    Interested in joining our School Program Partnerships' Team​? Check out our open positions below!
    Teachers
    School Therapists
    Classroom Counselors

    Categories:

    All
    Academic Strand Updates
    All In! Snapshots
    Behavioral Strand Updates
    Clinical Strand Updates
    Program Highlights
    School Highlights
    Staff Guest Posts
    Staff Highlights

    Archives

    November 2023
    October 2023
    September 2023
    May 2023
    April 2023
    March 2023
    February 2023
    January 2023
    December 2022
    November 2022
    October 2022
    June 2022
    May 2022
    March 2022
    February 2022
    January 2022
    December 2021
    November 2021
    October 2021
    September 2021
    June 2021
    May 2021
    April 2021
    March 2021
    February 2021
    January 2021
    December 2020
    November 2020
    October 2020
    September 2020
    June 2020
    May 2020
    April 2020
    March 2020
    February 2020
    January 2020
    December 2019
    November 2019
    October 2019
    September 2019
    June 2019
    May 2019
    April 2019
    March 2019
    February 2019
    January 2019
    December 2018
    November 2018
    October 2018
    September 2018
    May 2018
    April 2018
    March 2018
    February 2018
    January 2018
    December 2017
    November 2017
    October 2017
    September 2017
    June 2017
    May 2017
    April 2017
    March 2017
    February 2017
    January 2017
    December 2016
    November 2016
    October 2016
    September 2016
    June 2016
    May 2016
    April 2016
    March 2016
    February 2016
    January 2016
    December 2015
    November 2015
    October 2015

    RSS Feed

Proudly powered by Weebly