Program Intensity and Service Delivery Models in the Schools: SLP Survey Results

被引:95
作者
Brandel, Jayne [1 ]
Loeb, Diane Frome [2 ]
机构
[1] Ft Hays State Univ, Hays, KS 67601 USA
[2] Univ Kansas, Lawrence, KS 66045 USA
关键词
school intervention; service delivery; dosage; survey; SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGISTS; PHONEMIC AWARENESS; AGE-CHILDREN; INSTRUCTION; PRINCIPALS; ATTITUDES; OUTCOMES;
D O I
10.1044/0161-1461(2011/10-0019)
中图分类号
R36 [病理学]; R76 [耳鼻咽喉科学];
学科分类号
100104 ; 100213 ;
摘要
Purpose: School-based speech-language pathologists (SLPs) routinely work with team members to make recommendations regarding an intervention program's intensity and method of service delivery for children with speech and language impairments. In this study, student, SLP, and workplace characteristics that may influence SLPs' recommendations were examined. Method: Almost 2,000 school-based SLPs completed an online survey about the factors they consider when making recommendations regarding program intensity and service delivery model that students on their caseloads receive. Results: SLPs reported that student characteristics, rather than SLP or workplace characteristics, were the factors they considered the most when making these recommendations. However, these same SLPs reported that current students on their caseload with severe to moderate disabilities participated in intervention 2-3 times a week for 20-30 min in groups outside of the classroom. Students with the least severe disability received intervention 1 time a week for 20-30 min in groups outside of the classroom. Conclusion: The limited variety of intervention program intensities and service delivery models used suggests that student characteristics may not be the most important factor considered when making intervention recommendations, as reported by the SLPs. Instead, caseload size and years of practice appear to influence SLPs' recommendations regarding which program intensity and service delivery models to use.
引用
收藏
页码:461 / 490
页数:30
相关论文
共 25 条
[1]  
American Speech Language Hearing Association, 2010, 2010 SCH SURV REP SL
[2]  
American Speech-Language-Hearing Association, 2009, HIGHL TRENDS ASHA CO
[3]  
[Anonymous], 2002, WORKL AN APPR EST SP
[4]  
[Anonymous], 2005, EVIDENCE BASED PRACT
[5]  
[Anonymous], 2008 SCH SURV REP CA
[6]   Intensity in Vocabulary Instruction and Effects on Reading Comprehension [J].
Baumann, James F. .
TOPICS IN LANGUAGE DISORDERS, 2009, 29 (04) :312-328
[7]   Language intervention practices for school-age children with spoken language disorders: A systematic review [J].
Cirrin, Frank M. ;
Gillam, Ronald B. .
LANGUAGE SPEECH AND HEARING SERVICES IN SCHOOLS, 2008, 39 (01) :S110-S137
[8]   Evidence-Based Systematic Review: Effects of Different Service Delivery Models on Communication Outcomes for Elementary School-Age Children [J].
Cirrin, Frank M. ;
Schooling, Tracy L. ;
Nelson, Nickola W. ;
Diehl, Sylvia F. ;
Flynn, Perry F. ;
Staskowski, Maureen ;
Torrey, T. Zoann ;
Adamczyk, Deborah F. .
LANGUAGE SPEECH AND HEARING SERVICES IN SCHOOLS, 2010, 41 (03) :233-264
[9]  
Dillman D.A., 2009, Internet, Mail, and Mix-Mode Surveys: The Taylored Design Method
[10]   Survey of SLP caseloads in Washington State schools: Implications and strategies for action [J].
Dowden, P ;
Alarcon, N ;
Vollan, T ;
Cumley, GD ;
Kuehn, CM ;
Amtmann, D .
LANGUAGE SPEECH AND HEARING SERVICES IN SCHOOLS, 2006, 37 (02) :104-117