What If We Served Students Before They Needed Special Education?

Imagine a four-year-old in Pre-K who has difficulty producing /r/ and /l/.

At four, those errors may not immediately raise alarm bells. His teacher can understand him. His family can understand him. He participates in class, plays with his friends, and is learning alongside everyone else.

So we give him time.

He enters kindergarten. His speech continues to develop, but /r/ and /l/ are still difficult.

Then he enters first grade.

The errors are still there.

Sometime before Christmas, his teacher catches the speech-language pathologist in the hallway and says something many school SLPs have heard:

“When you get a chance, would you listen to him?”

And this is where I think we have an opportunity to do something differently.

The Six-Month Journey to Help

Let’s say our SLP listens and agrees that the student should be evaluated.

She adds him to her evaluation list alongside the other students she’s already serving, evaluating, and managing. Consent must be obtained. Testing must be completed. A report must be written. Parents and team members must be contacted. A meeting must be scheduled.

Then Christmas break arrives.

Everyone returns in January. Testing is completed. The meeting is scheduled and held. The student qualifies, an IEP is developed, and speech therapy begins.

It’s February or March.

Then comes spring.

Spring break.

State testing.

Field trips.

Student absences.

School activities.

Field day.

End-of-year events.

Then summer.

This isn’t because the SLP, teacher, administrator, or parent did anything wrong.

It’s simply how a school year works.

Our student returns the following fall. It takes a couple of weeks to settle into new routines and regain consistency after summer. Then therapy gets rolling.

He practices. He improves.

Maybe he’s dismissed by the end of that school year. Maybe he needs one more.

What began as a couple of lingering speech-sound errors may have resulted in a year and a half—or possibly two or more years—of special education services.

What if we had intervened earlier?

Let’s Go Back to Pre-K

Let’s rewind.

Our student is four again.

He has difficulty with /r/ and /l/, but he’s young. We’re not suggesting that every four-year-old who can’t say /r/ needs speech therapy.

They don’t.

Speech sounds develop over time, and there’s plenty of normal variation among children.

Contemporary U.S. speech-development norms provide some helpful perspective. A large review involving nearly 19,000 U.S. children found that /l/ was acquired by 90% of children between ages 4;0 and 4;11 and /r/ between 5;0 and 5;11. ASHA also emphasizes that development varies among individual children.

So instead of diagnosing our four-year-old or referring him immediately for special education, what if we simply gave him opportunities to learn and practice?

Maybe it’s five minutes.

Maybe it’s three times a week.

Maybe the whole class participates.

Children could play with sounds, listen for sounds in words, practice how sounds are made, develop phonological awareness, and strengthen early communication skills.

The SLP isn’t diagnosing the class.

The teacher isn’t providing special education speech therapy.

We’re simply giving developing children good instruction and opportunities for practice.

Some children may respond quickly.

Others won’t.

And that information is valuable, too.

Support Doesn’t Have to Begin With Eligibility

Special education is incredibly important.

Some children absolutely need individualized evaluation and intervention from a speech-language pathologist. And MTSS should never become a reason to delay an evaluation when a disability is suspected.

But there is a space between:

“This is developmentally appropriate.”

and

“This child needs special education.”

We can do something useful in that space.

ASHA specifically recognizes a role for speech-language pathologists within Multi-Tiered Systems of Support (MTSS). Its guidance describes SLPs as being able to proactively support students—including students who may need support but don’t qualify for an IEP—and help schools address needs without relying solely on special education.

That matters.

Because an SLP’s expertise isn’t limited to the students on an IEP.

SLPs understand speech-sound development, oral language, phonological awareness, vocabulary, fluency, social communication, and many of the foundational communication skills children are developing during their earliest years at school.

What if we used more of that expertise before a child was referred?

Speech and Literacy Don’t Live in Separate Boxes

There’s another reason early speech and language support matters.

Speech sounds aren’t just about whether a child can pronounce a word clearly.

Children are also learning to hear, identify, manipulate, and connect sounds within spoken words—skills closely connected to phonological awareness and later literacy development.

Research has found that children with speech-sound difficulties, as a group, can be at increased risk for language and reading difficulties. That doesn’t mean every child with an articulation error will struggle with reading.

It does mean speech, language, and literacy development are worth thinking about together.

An SLP working within MTSS might help a teacher incorporate brief phonological-awareness activities into classroom routines. The SLP might help identify which children need additional practice, which are progressing appropriately, and which may need a closer look.

Instead of waiting for a concern to become significant enough for special education, we’re watching development and responding to it.

Earlier Doesn’t Necessarily Mean More

This may be one of the most important distinctions.

Early support doesn’t necessarily mean adding more therapy.

It may mean providing less intensive support at a better time.

Perhaps a developing skill needs a few minutes of frequent, intentional practice.

Perhaps a student responds beautifully.

Perhaps another student doesn’t—and that lack of progress tells the team something important.

The goal isn’t to prevent children who need special education from receiving it.

The goal is to provide support when a child needs support, rather than making special education the first opportunity to receive it.

Now Think About Those 30 Minutes