SECTION 4. PI 11.36 (5) (b) 2. is renumbered s. PI 11.36 (5) (b) 2. (intro.) and amended to read:
PI 11.36 (5) (b) 2. One or more of the child's phonological patterns of sound are at least 40% disordered or the child scores in the moderate to profound range of phonological process use in formal testing and the child's conversational intelligibility is significantly affected.Following consideration of the child’s age, culture, language background, or dialect used, the child demonstrates the characteristics of a phonological disorder, which include the following:
SECTION 5. PI 11.36 (5) (b) 2. a. and b. are created to read:
PI 11.36 (5) (b) 2. a. The child’s percent intelligibility of single word and connected speech samples in the languages the child speaks is below the expected range. Intelligibility ratings as documented by school staff or caregivers indicate impact across environments.
b. The child’s phonological process use is documented to be non-developmental or outside of the expected developmental range, as evidenced through at least one observation in a natural environment, and by measurement of either the percent occurrence of phonological error patterns, the performance below the identified cutoff score for distinguishing normal and impaired phonological skills based on individualized standardized or norm-referenced assessment, or both.
SECTION 6. PI 11.36 (5) (b) 3. is renumbered s. PI 11.36 (5) (b) 3. (intro.) and amended to read:
PI 11.36 (5) (b) 3. The child's voice is impaired in the absence of an acute, respiratory virus or infection and not due to temporary physical factors such as allergies, short term vocal abuse, or puberty. The child exhibits atypical loudness, pitch, quality or resonance for his or her age and gender., following consideration of other factors which include the following:
SECTION 7. PI 11.36 (5) (b) 3. a. to e. are created to read:
PI 11.36 (5) (b) 3. a. The child’s age, culture, language background, or dialect used.
b. The child’s vocal volume, including loudness.
c. The child’s vocal pitch, including range, inflection, or appropriateness.
d. The child’s vocal quality, including breathiness, hoarseness, or harshness.
e. The child’s vocal resonance, including hypernasality.
SECTION 8. PI 11.36 (5) (b) 4. is renumbered s. PI 11.36 (5) (b) 4. (intro.) and amended to read:
PI 11.36 (5) (b) 4. TheFollowing consideration of the child’s age, culture, language background, or dialect used, the child exhibits behaviors characteristic of a fluency disorder. The evaluation must include a variety of measures, including case history, norm-referenced assessments, or disfluency analysis, and result in evidence of atypical fluency. For a preschool child, research-based risk factors should be considered for persistent developmental stuttering in addition to observations of disfluency in typical speaking environments, especially for children presenting with varying disfluency. These risk factors may include positive family history of stuttering, onset after 3 years and 6 months of age, stuttering continuing for longer than 6 to 12 months, other speech or language delays, and significant parent concern. Not all risk factors need to be present to determine eligibility for a fluency disorder. One or more of the following behaviors is also observed in at least one natural environment:
SECTION 9. PI 11.36 (5) (b) 4. a. to c. are created to read:
PI 11.36 (5) (b) 4. a. Speech disfluencies associated with stuttering, which include repetitions of phrases, words, syllables, and sounds or dysrhythmic phonations such as prolongations of sounds or blockages of airflow in excess of 2% of total syllables. Non-verbal physical movements, such as eye blinking or head jerking, may accompany the stuttering.
b. Negative feelings about oral communication that are significant enough to result in avoidance behaviors in an attempt to hide or diminish stuttering and that impact full participation in academic or social communication situations.
c. A speech rate that is documented to be rapid, irregular, or both and may be accompanied by sound or syllable omissions, sequencing errors, or a high number of non-stuttering like disfluencies such as interjections, phrase and whole word repetitions, and revisions. The resulting speech fluency pattern is considered to be significantly disruptive to efficient communication.
SECTION 10. PI 11.36 (5) (b) 5. (intro.) is amended to read:
PI 11.36 (5) (b) 5. The child's oral communication or, for a child who cannot communicate orally, his or her primary mode of communication, is inadequate, as documented by allFollowing consideration of the child’s age, culture, language background, or dialect used, the child is performing significantly below expected levels in the area of language form, content, or use, as evidenced through an observation in a natural environment and by measurement of at least two of the following:
SECTION 11. PI 11.36 (5) (b) 5. a. to c. are repealed and recreated to read:
PI 11.36 (5) (b) a. Language sample analysis in the languages the child speaks.
b. Dynamic assessment.
c. Criterion-referenced assessments such as developmental scales.
SECTION 12. PI 11.36 (5) (b) 5. d. is created to read:
PI 11.36 (5) (b) 5. d. Performance below the identified cutoff score for distinguishing normal and impaired language-based on individualized standardized or a norm-referenced assessment.
SECTION 13. PI 11.36 (5) (c) (intro.) is amended to read:
PI 11.36 (5) (c) The IEP team may not identify a student as a student with speech or language impairment when differences in speech or language are based on home language, culture, or dialect used unless the student has a speech or language impairment within their home language, culture, or dialect used. Before the IEP team determines whether the child has a speech or language impairment, the IEP team may not identify a child who exhibits any of the following as having a speech or language impairmentshall consider the following:
SECTION 14. PI 11.36 (5) (c) 1. and 2. are repealed and recreated to read:
PI 11.36 (5) (c) 1. The child’s background knowledge, experience with narratives, and exposure to vocabulary to discern speech or language ability from speech or language difference, such as differences due to lack of exposure, cultural or behavioral expectations.
2. Based on information and data collected, whether the student’s speech or language are a result of a speech or language impairment or a difference in culture, language background, or dialect used.
SECTION 15. PI 11.36 (5) (c) 3. to 6. are repealed.
SECTION 16. PI 11.36 (5) (d) (intro.) is renumbered PI 11.36 (5) (d) and amended to read:
PI 11.36 (5) (d) The IEP team shall substantiate a speech or language impairment by considering all of the following:further evaluate a child’s language by assessing the child’s augmentative and alternative communication skills, when appropriate to determine the child’s needs.
SECTION 17. PI 11.36 (5) (d) 1. to 4. are repealed.
SECTION 18. PI 11.36 (5) (e) is amended to read:
PI 11.36 (5) (e) An IEP team shall include a department-licensed speech orand language pathologist licensed under ch. PI 34 and information from the most recent assessment to assist the IEP team in documentdocumenting whether the child meets eligibility for a speech or language impairment and the need for speech or language services, as well as the child’s speech and language needs. SECTION 19. PI 11.36 (5) (f) is created to read:
PI 11.36 (5) (f) Upon re-evaluation, a child who met initial identification criteria and continues to demonstrate a need for special education under s. PI 11.35, including specially designed instruction, is a child with a disability under this section. SECTION 20. EFFECTIVE DATE:
The proposed rules contained in this order shall take effect on the first day of the month commencing after the date of publication in the Wisconsin Administrative Register, as provided in s. 227.22 (2) (intro.), Stats.
