L

Meeting the Critical Shortage of

Speech-Language Pathologists to
Serve the Public Schools—
Collaborative Rewards
Linda I. Rosa-Lugo
University of Central Florida, Orlando
Elizabeth A. Rivera
Orange County Public School District, Orlando, FL
Susan W. McKeown
Brevard County Public School District, Viera, FL

P roviding services to children with communica-

tion disorders in the public schools requires
three basic elements: (1) knowledge of the

ABSTRACT: This article presents a collaborative approach

legislation that makes such programs possible, (2) demand
for and the status of available qualified staff to serve these
children, and (3) training programs to prepare speech-
language pathologists to practice in this work setting.

to providing graduate education to speech-language

pathologists who are employed in public school districts.
A partnership called the Central Florida Speech-Language
Consortium was established among the University of
Central Florida, 10 Central Florida school districts, and
community agencies to address the issue of the critical
shortage of speech-language pathologists in the public
schools. The consortium program provided bachelor-level
speech-language pathologists in the public schools the
opportunity to obtain a master’s degree while they
continued to work in the schools.
Key innovations of the program included: (a) addi-
tional graduate slots for public school employees; (b)
modifications in the location and time of university
courses, as well as practica opportunities in the schools;
and (c) the participation and support of public school
administrators in facilitating supervision and practicum
experiences for the consortium participants. The consor-
tium program resulted in an increase in the number of
master’s level and culturally and linguistically diverse
speech-language pathologists available for employment in
the public schools of Central Florida. Recommendations
for facilitating future endeavors are discussed.
KEY WORDS: speech-language pathology, teacher
certification, teacher recruitment, teacher shortage,
federal legislation, higher education, personnel needs
LEGISLATION
In 1975, the Education for All Handicapped Children
Act (EHA), Public Law (P.L.) 94-142, was enacted (Federal
Register, 1977). This law ensured children with various
handicapping conditions and their families a number of
rights, including a free and appropriate public education,
nondiscriminatory testing and placement, parent participa-
tion in all academic decisions pertaining to their child, and
education and related services in the least restrictive
environment (Florida Department of Education, 1995).
In 1986, The Education of the Handicapped Amend-
ments, P.L. 99-457 (Federal Register, 1986), was signed
into law. This legislation extended the mandates of P.L. 94-
142 to children between the ages of birth to 3 years and
included a provision that early intervention, special
education, and related services to children with disabilities
be provided by qualified personnel (U.S. Department of
Education, 1996). This law also required each state to
develop policies and procedures for ensuring that school
district personnel, responsible for providing services to
children with disabilities and their families, were appropri-
ately trained (Federal Register, 1986; U.S. Department of
Education, 1986). Specifically, the modifications to Part B

232 LANGUAGE, SPEECH, AND H EARING SERVICES IN SCHOOLS • Vol. 29 • 232–242 • October 1998 © American Speech-Language-Hearing Association
0161–1461/98/2904–0232
Downloaded from: https://pubs.asha.org Florida State University on 11/01/2023, Terms of Use: https://pubs.asha.org/pubs/rights_and_permissions
mandated that state education agencies establish and
maintain academic and professional standards that were
consistent with their certification or licensing processes.
The standards for service providers within the same
discipline had to be uniform regardless of their hiring
status (e.g., newly hired, retrained) [34 CFR Part
3000.153(b)(c)]. If a state’s education agency could not
fulfill these requirements, it had to establish a plan for
assisting and training staff to meet the specified qualifica-
tions and stipulations within a reasonable amount of time
(U.S. Department of Education, 1996).
P.L. 94-142 was modified and refined again in 1991.
The law was renamed the Individual with Disabilities
Education Act, or IDEA, and P.L. 94-142 was now embod-
ied in the new IDEA legislation. This legislation holds
many implications for speech-language pathologists. In
particular, speech-language pathologists in public school
settings were designated as one of nine essential profes-
sionals who should be actively involved in the habilitation
and rehabilitation of children with communication disor-
ders. They were strongly encouraged to commit to the
intent and meaning of IDEA by becoming qualified for the
services that they were providing (American Speech-
Language-Hearing Association [ASHA], 1995c).
For example, in Florida, the master’s degree is the
entry-level degree required for state licensure from both the
Department of Business and Professional Regulations
(DBPR) and the Department of Education (DOE). There-
fore, the master’s degree is required for certification for
speech-language pathologists employed in public schools
similar to speech-language pathologists working in other
settings (e.g., hospitals, acute rehabilitation centers, private
practice).
As a result of IDEA, the role and scope of speech-
language pathologists working in public school settings
have also changed considerably. Not only do they serve
substantially more children with communication disorders
across age groups and grade levels, but they also serve
more children with greater disabilities and severities
(ASHA, 1996b; Montgomery, 1994). Increases in caseload
sizes and number of students with disabling conditions and
concomitant communication disorders have contributed to
the demand for more trained and qualified speech-language
pathologists in educational settings (ASHA, 1983; Keough,
1990; Lubinski & Masters, 1994; O’Connell, 1997; Peters-
Johnson, 1992).
THE DEMAND FOR QUALIFIED PERSONNEL
Public school districts in Central Florida have encoun-
tered many difficulties and experienced many challenges in
recruiting and retaining qualified speech-language patholo-
gists as the population of adults and children has steadily
increased (ASHA, 1993d). According to the U.S. Bureau of
the Census (1993), Central Florida experienced an average
growth pattern in population size averaging 12.6% per year
from 1990 to 1995, which corresponds to approximately
34,000 new residents.
Downloaded from: https://pubs.asha.org Florida State University on 11/01/2023, Terms of Use: https://pubs.asha.org/pubs/rights_and_permissions
Demographic data from the U.S. Bureau of the Census
(1993) revealed that a significant proportion of Central
Florida’s population growth could be linked to an increase
in the number of culturally and linguistically diverse (CLD)
residents living in the area. This trend has also been seen
nationwide. Sobol (1989) stated that by the year 2000, one
of every three persons in the United States will be from a
CLD background. Moreover, it is expected that 46% of all
children in public school districts will be from CLD
backgrounds (King, 1993).
A major barrier to meeting the communication needs of
these children is the paucity of professionals who have
received adequate training and experiences for serving CLD
children with communication disorders (Campbell, Brennan,
& Steckol, 1992; King, 1993). ASHA has reported an
increase in the number of clinicians from CLD backgrounds
over the past 20 years (ASHA, 1993a; ASHA Committee
on the Status of Racial Minorities, 1991). Yet, of ASHA’s
87,060 members, only approximately 7% (6,094) are
certified clinicians from CLD backgrounds, and less than
approximately 1% (871) of the membership speaks more
than one language fluently (ASHA, 1996a; Campbell &
Taylor, 1992; Kayser, 1994; Terrell & Hale, 1992). There-
fore, the need for more CLD and bilingual clinicians
working in public school districts in both urban and rural
areas of the United States cannot be overemphasized
(Dublinske, 1986; Helge & Marrs, 1982).
Competition among public school districts and private
sector agencies for qualified and competent speech-
language pathologists is intense. Because salary scales and
job prestige are frequently higher in the private sector,
whereas caseload sizes are often smaller, speech-language
pathologists are readily recruited to these employment
settings. As a result, the “critical shortage” of speech-
language pathologists in public schools has essentially
remained unchanged. The trend highlights the need for
university training programs to provide more clinicians
(ASHA, 1993f; Florida Department of Education, 1997a).
TRAINING PROGRAMS
In Florida, six of the ten public universities in the state
university system have communication disorders pro-
grams—four bachelor's degree programs, six master’s
degree programs, and three doctoral degree programs. The
number of students graduating with degrees in communica-
tion disorders (or speech-language pathology) during the
1995–1996 academic year was 164 (Florida Board of
Regents, 1996). Even with this increase in the number of
students graduating in speech-language pathology, Florida’s
public school districts continued to experience a need for
speech-language pathologists. The demand for qualified
clinicians in both public school districts and private sector
settings has exceeded the number of students graduating
with degrees in speech-language pathology.
University and public school district personnel postulate
that ASHA’s faculty/student ratio policy has frequently
inhibited most training programs in Florida from expanding
Rosa-Lugo et al. 233
their program sizes to accommodate critical shortage issues
(ASHA, 1993b). Consequently, public school districts in
Florida must sometimes fill positions with temporary,
unqualified personnel or remain with vacant positions.
MEETING THE CRITICAL SHORTAGE
In 1983, the Florida legislature passed a bill (Section
231.62) allowing the state’s DOE to identify critical
shortage disciplines in the public schools. These disciplines
included exceptional education teachers, to encompass
speech and language impaired (Florida Department of
Education, 1997a). Funding was allocated to assist DOE
and public school districts to recruit and retain profession-
als in critical teacher shortage areas. The funds were
disbursed through three programs: teacher scholarship-loan
programs, tuition reimbursement programs, and loan
forgiveness programs. Since the initiation of these pro-
grams, positive changes have been seen in the number of
students who are graduating in critical shortage disciplines
and being attracted to public school settings. Yet, despite
the funding initiatives, more qualified professionals in
critical shortage areas, including speech-language patholo-
gists, are needed (Florida Department of Education, 1997a,
1997b, 1997e).
To counterbalance the shortage of speech-language
pathologists in the public schools, Florida’s legislature
permitted public school districts to temporarily hire staff
with less credentials to provide speech-language services
through a “2 year/5 year” rule (State Board of Education
Rule, 6A-4.004). This provision allows school districts to
hire bachelor's degree staff for 2 years and to provide the
personnel with a temporary, nonrenewable teacher certifi-
cate. If a staff member is admitted to one of the state
universities’ training programs in speech-language pathol-
ogy, they become eligible for a 5-year nonrenewable
teacher certificate through Florida’s DOE. A renewable
teacher certificate is provided when the clinician completes
a master’s degree in speech-language pathology (Florida
Department of Education, 1997d).
FORGING A PARTNERSHIP
Although the “2-year/5-year” rule provided bachelor's
degree clinicians with the opportunity to be employed in
public school districts while seeking admission and obtaining
a master’s degree from a university training program in
speech-language pathology, there were limited openings in
most graduate programs. In addition, the arrangement and
scheduling of courses and clinical opportunities of these
programs inhibited or made it difficult for many clinicians
employed full-time in the public schools to attend.
Independently, administrators of speech-language
programs from 10 school districts that make up the Central
Florida area were stymied by their need to recruit qualified
personnel and provide training for personnel not fully
meeting the “qualified provider” requirement. As a result,
234 LANGUAGE, SPEECH, AND HEARING SERVICES IN
Downloaded from: https://pubs.asha.org Florida State University on 11/01/2023, Terms of Use: https://pubs.asha.org/pubs/rights_and_permissions
representatives from the 10 school districts, representing
the range of populations from large urban school districts
to small rural school districts, met and discussed strategies
for recruiting and retaining clinicians and for establishing a
partnership with the University of Central Florida’s (UCF's)
Department of Communicative Disorders program to
increase the number of master’s degree speech-language
pathologists working in the public schools.
The school district representatives who participated in
the discussions were from the following districts/counties in
Florida: Brevard, Citrus, Flagler, Lake, Marion, Orange,
Osceola, Seminole, Sumter, and Volusia. Each school
district provides a continuum of educational opportunities
and experiences to children and their families from rural
and urban geographic locations and from different ethnic,
cultural, linguistic, and socioeconomic backgrounds.
Collectively, these school districts serve a total of 425,126
students from pre-kindergarten through twelfth grade
(Florida Department of Education, 1996a, 1996b).
Following the meeting of the 10 Central Florida school
district representatives, they initiated discussions with
UCF’s administrators, including the president, the dean of
the College of Health and Public Affairs (COHPA), and
the chairperson of the Department of Communicative
Disorders. Several meetings were held in which the
combined group of school districts and university repre-
sentatives discussed various topics and issues, including
the accomplishments and needs of the 10 school districts/
counties that make up UCF’s service area, the focus and
mission of the university, and the overall impact of
various programs within COHPA on the Central Florida
community. They also discussed how each school district
was serving large numbers of children with communica-
tion disorders without having adequately trained and
qualified personnel in speech-language pathology.
The discussions led the dean of COHPA and the
chairperson and faculty of the Department of Communica-
tive Disorders to form a partnership with the 10 school
districts. The purpose of the partnership was to increase the
number of qualified and certified speech-language patholo-
gists working in public school settings. It became known as
the Central Florida Speech-Language Consortium.
A COLLABORATIVE PARTNERSHIP:
UNIVERSITY, STUDENTS, SCHOOL
DISTRICTS, AND COMMUNITY
Impact of Consortium Program on Existing
Graduate Program
The inception and implementation of the Central Florida
Speech-Language Consortium represented a unique and
innovative change in the traditional model of graduate
education and training of speech-language pathologists.
Although the scheduling of courses and clinical experiences
was adjusted to accommodate the needs of working
graduate students, the curriculum and department standards
for graduate students remained the same as determined by
SCHOOLS • Vol. 29 • 232–242 • October 1998
ASHA’s Educational Standards Board (ESB) and its Council
on Academic Accreditation (CAA) (ASHA, 1993b, 1993f,
1995b, 1997a). Barriers that could potentially impede a
student’s successful matriculation through the program (e.g.,
limited financial resources, length of program, location of
courses, accessibility of course materials) were considered
in order to minimize their influences.
University and department admissions requirements were
reexamined to ensure that consortium student applicants
would be eligible for admission into the program applying
the criteria that had been previously established for
students applying for admission to the regular graduate
program (e.g, Graduate Record Examination [GRE] scores,
grade point average [GPA], letters of recommendations,
completion of prerequisite coursework, and number of slots
available). Following the reexamination of admission
requirements, modifications were made for consortium
program applicants. They were required to (a) either have a
minimum GPA of 3.0 or a minimum score of 1,000 on the
GRE and (b) have been successfully employed for 1 or
more years in one of the 10 school districts participating in
the Consortium initiative and (c) have the recommendation
and support of the school district speech-language program
administrator.
Course of Study
The curriculum policies and procedures of the
Department of Communicative Disorders including course
sequence and prerequisites, practicum experiences,
clinical clock hour requirements, culminating comprehen-
sive examinations, and other graduation demands were
not modified for students in the consortium program.
Graduate students in both the consortium and regular
programs were held to the same criteria. However,
consortium program students were allowed to extend
their plan of studies over more semesters and register for
fewer courses per semester in order to accommodate
their job restraints (e.g., school hours, travel time).
Similar to students who were admitted to the regular
graduate program each semester of the academic year
(e.g, fall, spring, summer), students in the consortium
program were also admitted each semester.
Whereas students in the regular graduate program were
obligated to have a minimum of four practicum experiences
in clinical settings outside of UCF’s Speech and Hearing
Clinic (e.g., public school, hospital, acute rehabilitation
facility) of their choice as partial fulfillment of their
clinical requirements, students in the consortium program
were required to register for practica each semester.
Regular program students were permitted to complete
internships in a variety of clinical settings; however,
consortium program students were required to complete
their internships in the public schools. This requirement
addressed the critical shortage concerns as well as the
vacancies that would occur during the internship. Decisions
regarding practicum assignment of consortium students
were left to the individual districts, with input from the
University consortium coordinator.
Downloaded from: https://pubs.asha.org Florida State University on 11/01/2023, Terms of Use: https://pubs.asha.org/pubs/rights_and_permissions
Resources Provided for Faculty and Staff
Assistance
With an expectant increase in the number of students
enrolled in the Department of Communicative Disorders’
graduate program, the dean of COHPA provided additional
faculty, instructor, and clinic supervisor position lines and
course sections to accommodate the growth. It was impor-
tant that these measures were taken so that the department
would remain in compliance academically and clinically
with the ASHA Code of Ethics and the ESB/CAA criteria
for accreditation (ASHA, 1993b, 1993c, 1993e, 1993f,
1994, 1995a, 1995b, 1995c).
A faculty member in the Department of Communicative
Disorders was appointed as the coordinator of the consortium
program. The faculty member’s responsibilities included
administering the program and advising and mentoring
participating students. It was anticipated that this administra-
tive position would further ensure the success of the program.
An off-campus placement coordinator was also hired to assist
the coordinator of the consortium program with locating and
assigning students to external clinical settings and with
initiating contracts between the UCF and external settings so
that consortium students would meet ASHA’s clinical require-
ments (e.g., internships, practicum, clock hours). In addition, a
graduate teaching assistant (GTA) was hired to assist with the
daily operation of the program and to assist students with
their clinical plan of study.
Student Collaborations and Contributions
Before a student’s application was considered for the
consortium program, the Department of Communicative
Disorders’ Advisement Office staff and the coordinator of
the consortium program verified that the applicant (a) had
been successfully employed for 1 school year prior to
application in one of the 10 school districts participating in
the program and (b) was recommended and supported by
the speech-language program administrator of the employ-
ing school district.
Students accepted into the consortium program were
informed of both the Department of Communicative
Disorders’ and their school districts’ expectations of them.
Students admitted to the program had to be flexible and
committed to meet the financial and academic requirements
of the graduate program and the demands of their place of
employment. In addition, school district representatives
expressed their expectation that each student would honor
his or her commitment to remain employed with the school
district for a “reasonable amount of time” following
graduation even though there was no legal, binding contract
obligating the student to this agreement. The notion of a
“reasonable amount of time” varied among the school
districts, and to date, this agreement has been informal.
School District Collaborations/Contributions
To ensure the success of this unique partnership, the 10
school districts had to be equally committed and responsible
Rosa-Lugo et al. 235
for facilitating and developing this initiative. Each school
district needed to provide personnel and other resources to
make the partnership successful. In particular, school
district superintendents, assistant superintendents, and
administrators of special education programs in each school
district had to support the consortium program. For
example, consortium students needed their respective school
districts to provide them with:
• release time and adjusted work schedules to attend
classes and pursue clinical clock hours,
• clinic supervisors,
• a variety of practicum and internship sites in the
school district, and
• speech-language coverage for children on their
caseloads while they were in classes or at practicum/
internship sites.
With regard to practicum and internship requirements,
school districts had to provide supervision to bachelor-level
clinicians by licensed or certified speech-language patholo-
gists. These supervisors were then provided with additional
compensation and release time to supervise consortium
students and to attend workshops pertaining to clinical
training and the supervision of student interns. Florida’s
Department of Education’s (1995) statute ES240.529
requires that “school district personnel who supervise
students must have specialized training in clinical supervi-
sion” (Florida Department of Education, 1995).
Issues related to whether consortium students could
receive their salaries while fulfilling their practicum
requirements arose. Prior to 1996, ASHA allowed practicum
sites to provide minimal-to-no pay for students completing
practicum/internships. Thus, students participating in the
consortium and school districts were faced with a dilemma
of not receiving their annual salaries and medical benefits
from their school districts while completing their practicum.
In 1996, the Legislative Council of ASHA passed
legislation (LC 13-84) that allowed students to receive pay
while completing their practicum if their practicum site
chose to provide financial reimbursement for the student’s
services (ASHA, Legislative Council clarification memoran-
dum, February 26, 1996). As a result, a few of the school
districts participating in the consortium program decided to
continue paying the salaries of students from their district
who were completing practicum, whereas other school
districts decided to offer their students leave of absences
and medical benefits during their practicum, but no salaries.
Interestingly, there was minimal attrition of clinicians seen
in school districts that did not offer salaries.
Some school districts provided year-round employment
opportunities to their consortium students, which resulted in
the provision of additional services to children while
facilitating clinical clock hours as required by ASHA’s
ESB/CAA. To attract speech-language pathologists to
provide supervision to consortium students, “Certificates of
Participation” were made available by the University as
incentives to be used to register for courses within any of
the 10 public universities in Florida’s State University
System (SUS).
236 LANGUAGE, SPEECH, AND HEARING SERVICES IN
Downloaded from: https://pubs.asha.org Florida State University on 11/01/2023, Terms of Use: https://pubs.asha.org/pubs/rights_and_permissions
Community Collaboration and Contributions
The collaboration of the community entailed nurturing a
relationship with local education agencies, long-term care
facilities, hospitals, private practitioners, and state schools in
the Central Florida and surrounding area to provide clinical
experiences for the graduate students. These sites facilitated
clinical experiences and supervision. They also made
provisions to provide experiences for students on weekends,
holidays, and evening hours. Additionally, affiliation
agreements were obtained with out-of-state facilities.
DISCUSSION
Impact of the Central Florida Speech-
Language Consortium in Central Florida’s
Public School System
The mission of the partnership established among the
University of Central Florida’s COHPA, Department of
Communicative Disorders, Central Florida school districts,
community agencies, and bachelor's degree clinicians in the
public schools was to increase the number of clinicians
with master’s degrees in speech-language pathology.
As can be seen in Table 1, the number of students
admitted to the Central Florida Speech-Language Consor-
tium program and the regular graduate program from
August 1993 to July 1997 was 164 and 277, respectively.
Of the 164 consortium students admitted, 32% (68) have
graduated with master’s degrees in speech-language
pathology, whereas 68% (146 of 277) of the regular
graduate students have matriculated through the program
(UCF, 1997). Even though the percentage of students
graduating through the regular graduate program was larger
than the percentage of students graduating through the
consortium program, this trend can be explained in a
variety of ways, including the following:
• Consortium students typically register for fewer
courses per semester than regular graduate students.
• Consortium students were allowed by the Department
of Communicative Disorders to lengthen their course
plan of studies to accommodate work schedules.
• Internship and practicum experiences were assigned
according to Consortium students’ completed course
work, work schedule arrangements, and previous
clinical experiences.
Challenges in Recruiting and Retaining CLD
Students
Although undergraduate and graduate programs in
speech-language pathology appear to have few difficulties
in attracting students to the profession of speech-language
pathology, they have, however, faced many challenges in
recruiting and retaining students from CLD backgrounds
(ASHA 1991, 1993a, 1993d; Carter, 1992). A national
shortage of speech-language pathologists and audiologists
SCHOOLS • Vol. 29 • 232–242 • October 1998
 Table 1. Total number and percentage of consortium program and regular program students
admitted to and graduated from the University of Central Florida’s Communicative Disorders
graduate program from August 1993 to July 1997.

Number of students Number of students % of students % of students

admitted to graduating from admitted to graduating from
communicative communicative communicative communicative
disorders programa disorders program disorders program disorders program

Consortium students 164 68 37 32

Regular students 277 146 63 68
Total 441 214b 100 100

a
No acceptance in Summer 1994; bStudents who graduated during Fall 1993–Summer 1997 time period,
but not necessarily admitted during Fall 1993–Summer 1997 time period.

from CLD backgrounds in all work settings (e.g., public
schools, hospitals, private practice) has been documented
nationally (ASHA, 1985; Langdon & Cheng, 1992;
Roseberry-McKibben & Eicholtz, 1994; van Keulen,
Weddington, & DeBose, 1998). Yet, the number of clients
from CLD backgrounds, in particular children, who need
speech-language services has continually increased over the
years (Roseberry-McKibbin, 1994).
The 10 Central Florida school districts participating in
the consortium program have continually encountered
difficulties in recruiting and retaining speech-language
pathologists from CLD backgrounds. Table 2 presents the
number of speech-language pathologists employed in the 10
school districts with bachelor's and master’s degrees in
1997 according to their ethnic/racial distribution. As seen,
only approximately 10% (56 of 535) of the clinicians were
from African American (non-Hispanic) and Hispanic
backgrounds, whereas approximately 90% (477) of the
clinicians were from Caucasian (non-Hispanic) back-
grounds. Interestingly, none of the clinicians represented
“other” ethnic/racial backgrounds including Native Ameri-
can and Asian, and only 4% (19) of the clinicians spoke a
language other than English (see Table 2).
Data regarding the ethnic/racial distribution of speech-
language pathologists employed in the school districts from
1993 to 1996 were not available. However, the authors
ascertained from school district representatives that minimal
to no changes had been seen in the number of ethnic/racial
minority speech-language pathologists employed in the
districts during those years.
One of the challenges faced by school districts is the
provision of services to culturally and linguistically
diverse youngsters (ASHA, 1985; Adler, 1990). Central
Florida school districts enroll a large number of minority
students. For example, Hinman (1997) reported that
minorities are no longer minorities in Orange County
public schools. This school district’s Hispanic students
make up 17.71% of the school population, African

Table 2. Total number of speech-language pathologists (SLPs) with bachelor’s and master’s degree
who were employed in Central Florida public schools in 1997 by ethnic/racial distribution.a

White Black Total SLPs in Total bilingual

School district (Non-Hispanic) (Non-Hispanic) Hispanic Other school district SLPsb

Brevard 113 7 3 0 125 2

Citrus 16 0 0 0 16 0
Flagler 4 1 0 0 5 0
Lake 23 4 0 0 27 0
Marion 12 2 0 0 14 2
Orange 140 17 7 0 164 10
Osceola 26 7 3 0 36 3
Seminole 68 1 1 0 70 2
Sumter 4 0 0 0 4 0
Volusia 71 3 0 0 74 0
Total number of
SLPs by ethnic/racial
distribution 477 42 14 0 535 19

a
Racial/ethnic designations are as reported in the original source data. bBilingual speech-language
pathologists have already been included in one ethnic/racial category.

Rosa-Lugo et al. 237

Downloaded from: https://pubs.asha.org Florida State University on 11/01/2023, Terms of Use: https://pubs.asha.org/pubs/rights_and_permissions
American students represent 28.63%, and Asians and other
minorities make up 3.75% of the school population.
Osceola County public schools is not far behind, with a
minority population of approximately 41%.
Although the number of speech-language pathologists
from CLD backgrounds has not increased in the Central
Florida school districts commensurate with the expansion of
CLD students enrolled in the school districts, the number
of children from CLD backgrounds who needed speech-
language services has (Florida Department of Education,
1996a, 1996b). In 1996, there were approximately 425,126
students enrolled in pre-kindergarten through twelfth grade
in the 10 school districts participating in the consortium
program. Thirty-three percent (139,311) of the students
were from CLD backgrounds (see Table 3) (Florida
Department of Education, 1997e). Of the 425,126 students
enrolled in the school districts, approximately 5% (20,655)
were receiving speech-language services. Approximately
30% (6,282) of the students receiving speech-language
services were from CLD backgrounds (see Table 3) (Florida
Department of Education, 1996a, 1996b).
The authors were unable to obtain data regarding the
total number of students including CLD students who were
enrolled in the 10 Central Florida school districts and who
were receiving speech-language services from 1993 to
1995. However, school district representatives reported that
the total number of students enrolled in the districts and
the total number of students receiving speech-language
services had increased steadily from 1993 to 1995, in
particular, students from CLD backgrounds. For example, in
the Orange County School District and Osceola County
School District, approximately 51% and 41% of their total
student enrollment consisted of students from CLD back-
grounds, respectively (see Table 3). Yet, approximately 50%
(3,708) of the students receiving speech-language services
in the Orange County School District and 38% (941) of the
students receiving speech-language services in the Osceola
County School District were from CLD backgrounds (see
Table 3).
There is an increasing recognition of the need to reduce
the barriers that prevent CLD individuals from entering the
field of speech-language pathology. ASHA and many
university training programs in speech-language pathology
and audiology in recent years have attempted to reduce the
barriers and obstacles that frequently deter many students
from CLD backgrounds from pursuing careers in speech-
language pathology. An example of these efforts has been
the Central Florida Speech-Language Consortium program.
Of the 164 students admitted to the consortium program,
12% (20) were from CLD backgrounds. Fifteen percent (65
of 277) of the students admitted to UCF’s regular program
were from CLD backgrounds (see Table 4). Specifically,
47% of the African American (non-Hispanic) students
admitted to the Communicative Disorders program at UCF
were participants of the consortium program.
Although the data in Table 4 show that a greater number
of CLD students were admitted to the regular graduate
program (15%) than to the consortium program (12%), they
do not portray the qualitative differences that were found
between the two groups of students. In particular, the
majority of the CLD students in the consortium program
were typically older than their counterparts in the regular
graduate program. Moreover, they had families and limited
financial resources to pursue a master’s degree in speech-
language pathology on a full-time basis without working
full-time as well, which was typically not the profile of
most of their counterparts in the regular graduate program.
Even though the number of CLD students admitted to
(4.5%) and graduating (5.6%) from UCF’s master’s degree
program in speech-language pathology through the

Table 3. Total number of regular and culturally and linguistically diverse (CLD) students
enrolled in Central Florida school districts from prekindergarten through twelfth grade and
the total number of regular and CLD students receiving speech-language services.

Number of Number of CLD Number of Number of CLD

students enrolled students enrolled in students receiving students receiving
School district in school district school district servicesa, b servicesb

Brevard 66,679 13,508 4,036 976

Citrus 14,194 1,206 1,346 110
Flagler 5,662 1,205 301 82
Lake 26,133 6,456 2,303 774
Marion 36,244 10,333 2,145 665
Orange 128,941 63,535 7,406 3,708
Osceola 27,376 11,253 2,476 941
Seminole 55,972 15,787 3,874 1,158
Sumter 5,921 1,849 318 58
Volusia 58,004 14,179 3,450 810
Total 425,126 139,311 27,655 9,282

a
Minority student categories include: Black (non-Hispanic), Hispanic, Asian/Pacific Islander,
Native American, Alaskan, and Multiracial. b Students who may be participating in more than one
exceptional program.

238 LANGUAGE, SPEECH, AND HEARING SERVICES IN SCHOOLS • Vol. 29 • 232–242 • October 1998

Downloaded from: https://pubs.asha.org Florida State University on 11/01/2023, Terms of Use: https://pubs.asha.org/pubs/rights_and_permissions
Table 4. Total number and percentage of consortium (cons.) and regular (reg.) students by ethnic/racial background admitted to and
graduated from the University of Central Florida’s Communicative Disorders graduate program from August 1993 to July 1997.a

Number of Number of % of students % of students

students admitted students graduating admitted to graduating from
to communicative from communicative communicative communicative
disorders program disorders program disorders program disorders program
Ethnic/racial background Cons. Reg. Cons. Reg. Cons. Reg. Cons. Reg.

White (Non-Hispanic) 144 232 56 131 32.7% 52.6% 26.2% 61.2%

Black (Non-Hispanic) 16 18 10 0 3.6% 4.1% 4.7% 0%
Hispanic 3 18 2 13 .7% 4.1% .9% 6.1%
Other 1 9 0 2 .2% 2% 0% 0.9%
Total 441 214 100% 100%

a
Racial/ethnic designations are as reported in original source data.

consortium program appears small (see Table 4), the
knowledge, skills, and service that they provide to their
school districts and students should not be minimized nor
underestimated. They have increased the number of trained
and qualified clinicians from CLD backgrounds who work
in the public school districts in Central Florida and who
diagnose and treat children with a variety of disabilities
and disorders and from a variety of cultural, linguistic, and
socioeconomic backgrounds.
FUTURE DIRECTIONS
On June 4, 1997, the IDEA legislation was amended and
reauthorized into P.L. 105-17 (ASHA, 1997a; “Clinton
Signs IDEA,” 1997). P.L. 105-17 maintains that only
qualified service providers should be rendering specialized
services to children and adults with disabilities. Yet, when
qualified personnel are not available, states are able to
adopt guidelines and policies allowing local education
agencies to continue to make good-faith efforts in recruit-
ing and hiring appropriately and adequately trained person-
nel. They can hire individuals in critical shortage disci-
plines for 3 years who are satisfactorily progressing toward
the completion of coursework or a degree required for state
certification standards. This policy language can only be
implemented if local education agencies experience
difficulties in hiring qualified personnel (“Clinton Signs
IDEA,” 1997).
The state of Florida ranked fourth in 1995 among states
with the most rapid population growth. Since 1995, Florida
has continued to show tremendous growth, which is expected
to continue until the year 2005 (Hinman, 1997). Of the 10
fastest growing professions requiring at least a bachelor's
degree, speech-language pathology is ranked eighth (Bureau
of Labor Statistics, 1994b). Additionally, it is predicted that
the field of speech-language pathology will show a 48%
growth rate by the year 2005 (Bureau of Labor Statistics,
1994a; Silvestri & Lukasiewicz, 1992). The Florida Depart-
ment of Education has continued its designation of speech-
language pathology as a critical shortage field for the 1997–
1998 school year due to continued difficulty by school
districts in recruiting and retaining adequate numbers of
fully trained professionals to meet the needs of the schools
(Florida Department of Education, 1997f).
Presently in Central Florida, districts are experiencing
somewhat less difficulty due to the number of clinicians
who are currently enrolled in the consortium program;
however, continued population growth ensures that this
program will need to be maintained into the next century
(Carter, 1992; Montgomery & Herer, 1994). Further,
refinement of the program and retention of speech-language
pathologists in the public schools who have successfully
completed their master’s degree are challenges that are yet
to be fully addressed.
Lessons Learned
A review of the successful components of this alterna-
tive approach to graduate education include (a) a strong
partnership between the University, school districts, and
community; (b) a clear understanding that the regular and
consortium graduates must meet the same requirements of
the graduate program although the time lines of course
completion, location of course offerings, and practica differ;
and (c) a paradigm shift for the provision of practica in
different time periods, such as an extended school year, as
well as locations and within the community.
Similarly, a review of inherent difficulties in the
implementation of this program resulted in acknowledging
issues to be further addressed. Maintenance of the consor-
tium program requires continued staff and faculty participa-
tion and collaboration. Public schools must continue to
employ staff in supervisory roles for practicum placements
as well as for training and mentoring of speech-language
clinicians who have not yet completed their course of
study. The university must continue to provide faculty for
the teaching of graduate courses and provide opportunities
for clinical experiences for these students—both at the
university clinic and in the community. Finally, and most
crucial to the continued success of this effort, is the time
and effort necessary to maintain communication and
collaboration between the districts, the community, and the
university.

Rosa-Lugo et al. 239

Downloaded from: https://pubs.asha.org Florida State University on 11/01/2023, Terms of Use: https://pubs.asha.org/pubs/rights_and_permissions
 Refinement of the consortium program is crucial to
developing polished professionals with the same skills and
training as their full-time graduate counterparts. Careful
consideration must be given to the application and accep-
tance process without discouraging minority and recycled
candidates from other areas from pursuing this profession.
Consortium and full-time graduate students, due to time
and location availability, take the same courses. Faculty
must guard against tailoring their courses to public school
issues and provide instruction that is applicable to the full
range of opportunities within our profession.
Finally, once consortium students have graduated, how
do we keep them in the public schools? Discussions and
brainstorming relating to compensation for the advanced
degree, new responsibilities, and opportunities for graduates
should be examined. Legally, considerations should be
given to written agreements between potential graduate
students and the school districts upon consideration of
employment that in return for supervision and training, the
students will continue employment in the district for a
reasonable period of time or repay the district for the cost
of that supervision. Currently, the school districts are
collecting data to determine the retention of speech-
language pathologists in the public schools who have
graduated from the consortium program.
Numerous sources continue to document the increasing
number of linguistically and culturally diverse individuals
in the United States (Henry, 1990). In these times of
changing demographics, the importance of recruiting and
retaining culturally and linguistically diverse individuals in
the field of speech-language pathology cannot be overem-
phasized (Carter, 1992). Generating and preparing speech-
language pathologists to provide appropriate services to
limited English proficient students is a charge that graduate
programs will have to meet.
The health care industry is in direct competition with
educational settings for speech-language pathologists
(Shewan, 1994). The financial lure to the private sector is
tantalizing, and salaries and benefits have escalated
significantly in recent years. Educational settings, however,
have experienced minimal increases. Speech-language
pathologist graduates have opted for employment in the
private sector with salaries that are almost double those
that are offered in educational settings. If this trend
continues, this factor, as well as others, will continue to
contribute to increased shortages and demand for speech-
language pathologists in the public school setting.
It is imperative that the benefits of working in the
educational area with reasonable hours, summer vacation,
and the challenge of working with children be emphasized
to offset this migration. As an incentive, public schools
might consider paying the fees incurred by speech-language
pathologists to maintain their certification and licensure.
Another consideration would be to provide continuing
education opportunities within the speech-language patholo-
gist workday. This would enable them to obtain continuing
education units through their local school district so as to
maintain licensure and ASHA accreditation.
Promotion of the public schools as a work setting can
be accomplished through both the districts and the state
240 LANGUAGE, SPEECH, AND HEARING SERVICES IN
Downloaded from: https://pubs.asha.org Florida State University on 11/01/2023, Terms of Use: https://pubs.asha.org/pubs/rights_and_permissions
Speech-Language and Hearing Association. Finally, re-
search—examining the choices made by trainees who
interned in the public schools and opted to serve as public
school speech-language pathologists—might provide insight
and prove beneficial in recruiting and retaining public
school speech-language pathologists.
CONCLUSION
Through its successes, the Central Florida Consortium
program has met many challenges. The program allowed
many bachelor's degree clinicians the opportunity to obtain
a master’s degree in speech-language pathology while
maintaining their employment status in the public schools.
It also provided an opportunity for new and innovative
partnerships to be established among various organizations
in the Central Florida area—university, school districts, and
community. When various challenges arose during the
implementation of the program, none of the collaboration
partners showed a decrease in commitment or involvement
in the consortium program. Most importantly, the partner-
ship has taken the charge of IDEA seriously in making an
effort to secure the “highest qualified provider” to meet the
needs of children and adults with disabilities in all settings.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors wish to acknowledge the pioneers of the consor-
tium initiative, with special recognition to Rhonda S. Work, Florida
Department of Education, University of Central Florida, College of
Health and Public Affairs administrators and faculty, and the public
school district speech-language program administrators that make
up the “Central Florida Consortium.”
The authors would like to express their gratitude to the
graduate teaching assistants who helped in the daily operations of
the program: Elon Booth, Jennifer Grelotti, Kathleen Steil-Brecht,
Tracy Chasey, and Carla Conover. Sincere appreciation is also
expressed to Sabrina Andrews, Assistant Director of UCF’s Office
of Institutional Research, for her assistance in data collection and
interpretation, and to Janice Thompson and Kenyatta O. Rivers for
proofreading and editing of the manuscript.
REFERENCES
Adler, S. (1990). Multicultural clients: Implications for the speech
language pathologist. Language, Speech and Hearing Services in
Schools, 21, 135–139.
American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. (1983).
Guidelines for caseload size and speech-language service
delivery in the schools. Asha, 26(4), 53–58.
American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. (1985). Clinical
management of communicatively handicapped minority language
populations. Asha 27(6), 29–32.
American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. (1993a).
Demographic profile of the ASHA membership and affiliations.
Rockville, MD: Author.
SCHOOLS • Vol. 29 • 232–242 • October 1998
American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. (1993b).
Educational standards board accreditation manual. Rockville,
MD: Author.
American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. (1993c).
Ethics: Resources for professional preparation and practice.
Rockville, MD: Author.
American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. (1993d).
Personnel shortages in the schools: Contributing factors and
related ASHA activities. Rockville, MD: Author.
American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. (1993e).
Preferred practice patterns for the professions of speech-
language pathology and audiology. Asha, 35(Suppl. 11), 1–97.
American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. (1993f).
Technical assistance report. Retraining personnel to meet the
highest requirements in the state. Language, Speech, and
Hearing Services in Schools, 24(2), 114–121.
American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. (1994). Issues
in ethics. Asha, 36(Suppl. 13), 17–27.
American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. (1995a).
Legislative Council reports. Asha, 37(Suppl. 14), 1–9.
American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. (1995b).
Position statements, guidelines, definitions, and relevant papers,
Asha, 37(Suppl. 14), 36–37.
American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. (1995c). State
education agency requirements for certification of speech-
language-pathologists. Rockville, MD: Author.
American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. (1996a).
Highlights and trends: ASHA members and certificate holders
semiannual counts for mid-year 1996. Rockville, MD: Author.
American Speech-Language Hearing Association. (1996b).
Survey of speech language pathology services in school-based
settings. Final report executive summary. Rockville, MD: Author.
American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. (1997a). ASHA:
IDEA overview. Rockville, MD: Author.
American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. (1997b).
Membership and certification handbook speech language
pathology. Rockville, MD: Author.
American Speech-Language-Hearing Association Committee on
the Status of Racial Minorities. (1991). Multicultural action
agenda 2000. Rockville, MD: Author.
Bureau of Labor Statistics. (1994a). Bureau of Labor Statistics
occupational outlook quarterly. Washington, DC: Author.
Bureau of Labor Statistics. (Fall, 1994b). Job trends 2005.
Washington, DC: Author.
Campbell, L. R., Brennan, D. G., & Steckol, K. F. (1992).
Preservice training to meet the needs of people from diverse
cultural background. Asha, 34(12), 29–32.
Campbell, L. R., & Taylor, O. L. (1992). Perceived competencies
of SLPs employed in schools relative to providing services to
culturally diverse children. Tejas, 18, 31–34.
Carter, D. G. (1992). The 21st century: A futuristic look at the
importance of minority teachers in our nation’s schools—Who
needs them and why? In E. Middleton, E. Mason, F. Bickel, D.
Jones, & R. Gaskin (Eds.), Recruitment and retention of
minorities in education (pp. 100–108). Lexington: Center for
Professional Development, University of Kentucky.
Clinton signs IDEA into law. (1997, June 17). ASHA Leader, p. XX.
Dublinske, S. (1986). The need for qualified speech-language
pathologists in rural/remote areas. Rural Special Education
Quarterly, 7(3), 3–5.
Downloaded from: https://pubs.asha.org Florida State University on 11/01/2023, Terms of Use: https://pubs.asha.org/pubs/rights_and_permissions
Federal Register. (1977). Education for all handicapped children
act, P.L. 94-142 Regulations, 42 (163), Sec. 121a. 303. Vol. No.
163 42, Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
Federal Register. (1986). Education of the Handicapped Act
Amendments of 1986, Part H for Infants and Toddlers with
Disabilities, and the Preschool Grant Program (now IDEA), P.L.
99–457.
Florida Board of Regents. (1996). Student data course file, 1995–
1996. Tallahassee, FL: Author.
Florida Department of Education. (1995). A resource manual for
the development and evaluation of special programs for
exceptional students. Federal laws and regulations pertaining to
the education of students with disabilities (Vol. I-C). Tallahas-
see, FL: Author.
Florida Department of Education. (1996a). Exceptional student
membership by racial/ethnic category (duplicated), December 1,
1996 (Survey 9). Tallahassee, FL: Author.
Florida Department of Education. (1996b). Pk-12 student
membership by racial/ethnic category (duplicated), December 1,
1996 (Survey 9). Tallahassee, FL: Author.
Florida Department of Education. (1997a). Critical teacher
shortage areas: 1997–1998. Tallahasee, FL: Office of the
Deputy Commissioner for Planning, Budgeting and Management.
Florida Department of Education. (1997b). Projected number
of teachers needed through 2010–2011. Tallahassee, FL: Office
of the Deputy Commissioner for Planning, Budgeting and
Management.
Florida Department of Education. (1997c). Programs for
exceptional student data report (Series 97-28). Tallahassee, FL:
Division of Public Schools: Bureau of Student Services and
Exceptional Education.
Florida Department of Education. (1997d). A resource manual
for the development and evaluation of special programs for
exceptional students (Vol. I-B): Florida Statutes and State Board
of Education Rules–Excerpts for Programs for Exceptional
Students. Tallahassee, FL: Author.
Florida Department of Education. (1997e). Teacher supply and
demand. New hires by subject. Available: http://www.firn.edu/
doe…47/newhire.htm#TEACHNEW
Florida Department of Education. (1997f, February). Trends in
the supply of new teachers in Florida. (pp. 1–18). Tallahassee,
FL: Office of Strategy Planning.
Helge, D. I., & Marrs, L. W. (1982). Personnel recruitment and
retention in rural America: A growing problem. The Pointer,
26(2), 28–33.
Henry, W. A. (1990). Beyond the melting pot. Time, 135(15),
28–31.
Hinman, C. (1997, May 18). Minorities are majority in schools.
Orlando Sentinel Online, Pp. 1–4. Available: http://
www.orlandosentinel.com/news/o518maj.htm/#top
Kayser, H. (1994). Bilingual speech language pathology. A
Hispanic focus. San Diego, CA: Singular.
Keough, K. (1990). Emerging issues for the professions in the
1990s. Asha, 32, 55–58.
King, S. H. (1993). The limited presence of African American
teachers. Review of Educational Research, 63,(2),115–149.
Langdon, H., & Cheng, L. (1992). Hispanic children and adults
with communication disorders. Gaithersburg, MD: Aspen.
Lubinski, R., & Masters, M. Gay. (1994). Special populations,
special settings: New and expanding frontiers. In R. Lubinski &
Rosa-Lugo et al. 241
 C. Frattali (Eds.), Professional issues in speech-language
pathology and audiology (pp. 149–165). San Diego, CA:
Singular.
Montgomery, J. (1994). Service delivery issues for schools. In R.
Lubinski & C. Frattali (Eds.), Professional issues in speech-
language pathology and audiology (pp. 218–232). San Diego,
CA: Singular.
Montgomery, J. K., & Herer, G. R. (1994). Future watch: Our
schools in the 21st century. Language, Speech, and Hearing
Services in Schools, 25, 130–135.
O’Connell, P. (1997). Speech, language and hearing programs in
schools. Gaithersburg, MD: Aspen.
Peters-Johnson, C. (1992). Professional practices perspective on
caseloads in schools. Asha, 34, 12.
Roseberry-McKibben, C. A. (1994). Multicultural students with
special language needs. Oceanside, CA: Academic Communica-
tion Associates.
Roseberry-McKibben, C. A., & Eicholtz, G. E. (1994). Serving
LEP children in schools: A national survey. Language, Speech,
and Hearing Services in Schools, 25(3), 156–164.
Shewan, C. (1994). Work force issues in communication disorders
and sciences. In R. Lubinski & C. Frattali (Eds.), Professional
issues in speech-language pathology and audiology (pp. 121–
132). San Diego, CA: Singular.
Silvestri, G., & Lukasiewicz, J. (1992, May). Outlook: 1990–
2005. Occupational employment projections. Washington, DC:
U.S. Government Printing Office.
Sobol, T. (1989). Understanding diversity. Educational Leadership,
48(3), 27–30.
242 LANGUAGE, SPEECH, AND HEARING SERVICES IN SCHOOLS • Vol. 29 • 232–242 • October 1998
Downloaded from: https://pubs.asha.org Florida State University on 11/01/2023, Terms of Use: https://pubs.asha.org/pubs/rights_and_permissions
Terrell, B. Y., & Hale, J. E. (1992). Serving a multicultural
population: different learning styles. American Journal of
Speech-Language Pathology, 1, 5–8.
U.S. Bureau of the Census. (1993). Current population reports,
P25-1104, Population projections of the U.S., by age, sex, race
and Hispanic origin: 1993–2050. Washington, DC: U.S.
Government Printing Office.
U.S. Department of Education. (1986). P.L. 99-457. Education of
the Handicapped Act Amendment of 1986, Title I, Handicapped
Infants and Toddlers. Washington, DC: House of Congressional
Records.
U.S. Department of Education. (1996). Eighteenth annual report
to Congress on the implementation of the Individuals with
Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). Reston, VA: National
Clearinghouse for Professions in Special Education.
University of Central Florida. (1997). Office of Civil Rights-B2
student enrollment surveys, Fall 1993–Summer 1997. Orlando,
FL: Office of Institutional Research and Planning Support.
van Keulen, J., Weddington, G., & DeBose, C. (1998). Speech,
language, learning and the African American child. Boston, MA:
Allyn & Bacon.
Received September 4, 1997
Accepted April 28, 1998
Contact author: Linda I. Rosa-Lugo, EdD, University of Central
Florida, Department of Communicative Disorders, 12424 Research
Parkway, Suite 200, Orlando, FL 32826-2215. Email:
lrosa@pegasus.cc.ucf.edu