Working Through the Complexities of Cognitive Referencing: Connecticut’s Eligibility Criteria Connecticut’s Guidelines for Determining Eligibility for Speech and Language Services as Special Education and Related Services, published as a working draft in June 1999, take a strong stance against the use of cognitive referencing. This position was taken after intense discussion and debate about the subject. In the process, ... Article
Article  |   July 01, 2000
Working Through the Complexities of Cognitive Referencing: Connecticut’s Eligibility Criteria
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Carolyn Isakson
    Connecticut State Department of Education, Hartford, CT
Article Information
Articles
Article   |   July 01, 2000
Working Through the Complexities of Cognitive Referencing: Connecticut’s Eligibility Criteria
SIG 1 Perspectives on Language Learning and Education, July 2000, Vol. 7, 21-26. doi:10.1044/lle7.1.21
SIG 1 Perspectives on Language Learning and Education, July 2000, Vol. 7, 21-26. doi:10.1044/lle7.1.21
Connecticut’s Guidelines for Determining Eligibility for Speech and Language Services as Special Education and Related Services, published as a working draft in June 1999, take a strong stance against the use of cognitive referencing. This position was taken after intense discussion and debate about the subject. In the process, the language committee that helped the State Department of Education (SDE) prepare the guidelines examined federal and state statutes and regulations, state due process cases, professional literature, and United States Department of Education (USDE) policy and wrestled mightily with concerns about burgeoning caseloads. Our review strengthened our respect for the complexities of the language-cognition relationship. In the end, committee members agreed that our document should present the case for rejecting blanket statements, such as “The child is not eligible because language age is commensurate with mental age,” which many of the committee members had been taught to include in reports in such cases. We concluded that the material we had studied called for careful consideration by the Individualized Education Program (IEP) team of the connections between the domains of language and cognition on a case-by-case basis and offered some guidance in this regard.
First Page Preview
First page PDF preview
First page PDF preview ×
View Large
Become a SIG Affiliate
Pay Per View
Entire SIG 1 Perspectives on Language Learning and Education content & archive
24-hour access
This Issue
24-hour access
This Article
24-hour access
We've Changed Our Publication Model...
The 19 individual SIG Perspectives publications have been relaunched as the new, all-in-one Perspectives of the ASHA Special Interest Groups.