In this follow-up, Janine and Abbie answer common questions from school-based SLPs and share practical insights, guidance, and resources to support your journey.
ASHA reiterates that caseload is only part of the picture. Therefore, this is insufficient when looking at the actual work SLPs face. You may know, ASHA does not recommend a specific caseload number, even though some states have caseload caps. This is because they argue that a fixed number does not account for the varying complexity of student needs or the time required for non-direct tasks.
When measuring workload, it is important to take into account all activities performed by the SLP, which include direct intervention, indirect services, compliance tasks, and school-wide activities (among other things!) ASHA prefers a workload model as it emphasizes the quality over services, not just the quantity of students. It improves compliance and IDEA/FAPE compliance. It seeks to improve student outcomes and increase job satisfaction and retention.
Data helps move from the subjective (a “feeling”) to the objective (hard data. Administrators are often looking at numbers, budgets, and compliance. When they have data to demonstrate workload and how a higher workload impacts the ability to meet legal mandates (FAPE) and impact students progress, they are more willing to consider workload over caseload.
When you are speaking to your administration about workload data, you may consider emphasizing the following information:
Both are valuable, but if you have to prioritize, time spent is often the most "digestible" metric for administrators initially. It clearly shows that there aren't enough hours in the day to complete the work.
However, intensity and complexity patterns (weighting) are what make the argument sustainable. A "weighted" approach explains why 40 students with significant complex communication needs (requiring AAC programming and high-level consultation) require more time than 40 students with isolated articulation goals. Combining the two—showing that complexity leads to more time spent—is the gold standard for advocacy.
Personally, I also find weighted caseloads are much easier to measure when reports are run! Usually, all of this data (e.g. preschool age, AAC) can be pulled straight from your IEP system.
ASHA reminds us that services should be individualized—not based on a single model, but on student needs, progress, and educational impact. At the same time, many school-based SLPs rely on familiar approaches, such as seeing students in the speech room, especially when high caseloads and busy schedules make those options feel most manageable, even though other approaches may better match students' needs.
Flexible scheduling supports students in using their skills across the school day, not just in the speech room. Flexible scheduling allows services to be adjusted based on students' needs and progress, rather than a familiar routine. It can be a helpful option, but it isn’t the right fit for every student. The goal is to match the service model to the student—not the other way around.
Flexible approaches can also support workload. When services are aligned with eligibility, student progress, and current needs, it helps ensure time is focused where it’s most needed, while creating space for collaboration, planning, and documentation without compromising meaningful services.
If you’re thinking about trying a different service model, start small:
When talking with families and teams about service recommendations, keep it simple and focused on the student. Explain that services aren’t meant to stay the same forever and that they’re designed to change as students grow. Flexible scheduling isn’t about doing less; it’s about doing what’s most helpful to support the student. It helps to start these conversations early. When families and teams understand that services are based on student needs and will shift over time, it creates space for more natural conversations about change, so changes can feel less surprising. If there are concerns or hesitations, keep the conversation focused on student progress, data, IEP goals, and what is best for the student.
Let’s be honest, change is hard, especially in school settings where routines help everything run smoothly. Trying something new can feel overwhelming, and many SLPs aren’t always sure where to start or what the next step looks like. On top of that, our training, past experiences, and expectations from teams, families, and administrators can all shape how we make decisions.
Shifting away from “business as usual” takes time, and it’s okay if it feels a little uncomfortable at first. A good place to start is simply pausing and reflecting on these questions:
These small moments of reflection can help guide more confident decisions, lead to better outcomes for students, and help us manage our caseloads in a way that supports our own well-being.
The good news is you don’t have to figure this out on your own. Reach out to other SLPs—meet in small groups, talk through student cases, and share how you’re making decisions. Use team meetings effectively to review eligibility together, practice applying it on real cases, or discuss ways to approach conversations with families and IEP teams. When you do this as a team, it not only feels more manageable but also helps create more consistency in how decisions are made across your site or district.
Decisions about service delivery are made by the IEP team and should be based on the individual student rather than a set model or schedule. As an SLP, your recommendations about type, frequency, and setting are guided by data, progress, and what would help the student access their education and make progress. ASHA also reinforces that these decisions are made on a case-by-case basis, using data, evidence, and professional judgment.
The reality is that there can be barriers to looking at service delivery differently. It’s common for families or teams to feel some hesitation about change, and they may feel that more service is always better or worry that a change means less support. Some districts may also have general guidelines that shape how services are typically provided. All of these factors can make it harder to try something new, even when a different approach may better match student needs. At the end of the day, service decisions should always come back to the student and what they need, how they’re progressing, and how they are accessing their education.
Approaching conversations when there is pushback or resistance isn’t always easy. Here are some helpful tips:
Key Takeaways: As school-based SLPs, we often rely on familiar routines and systems. Trying something new can feel overwhelming and a bit out of our comfort zone. However, when things stay the same, the outcomes of high caseloads, ongoing stress, and burnout will remain unchanged. Small, thoughtful shifts can begin to change those outcomes for both students and SLPs.
Using a workload approach, combined with flexible scheduling and a shift in mindset, allows services to better reflect the complexity of student needs in schools. As you move forward, consider what small changes might look like in your setting. Whether it’s starting a conversation, collaborating with your SLP team, trying a flexible approach, or gathering data, each step can help move services closer to what students need—and what supports sustainable practice.
To support your next steps, we are sharing additional resources below.
