Should We or Shouldn

1
Should We or Shouldnt We?

• Speech Pathologists in Education

Paediatric Language EBP Group 2008 Brooke
Funnell (Leader) Brooke.Funnell_at_sswahs.nsw.gov.au
2
Should Speech Pathologists Work in Schools?
3
How Should Speech Pathologists Work in Schools?
4
In school-aged children with SLI, is a
school-based treatment model an effective way of
managing SLI in the classroom?

• In school-aged children with SLI, is an
  in-class, school-based model better than a
  withdrawal model in managing SLI in the
  classroom?

5
In school-based treatment for school-aged
children with SLI, is a collaborative or
consultative model better than withdrawal?
6
The Papers

• Tollerfield, I. (2003). The process of
  collaboration within a special school setting an
  exploration of the ways in which skills and
  knowledge are shared and barriers are overcome
  when a teacher and speech language therapist
  collaborate. Child Language Teaching Therapy,
  67-84
• Wren, Y., Roulstone, S., Parkhouse, J., Hall, B.
  (2001). A model for a mainstream school-based
  speech and language therapy service. Child
  Language Teaching Therapy, 107-127.
• Hirst, E., Britton, L. (1998). Specialised
  service to children with specific language
  impairment in mainstream schools. International
  Journal of Language Communication Disorders,
  33, supp.

7
The Papers

• McGinty, A.S., Justice, L. (2006).
  Classroom-Based versus Pull-Out Interventions A
  review of the experimental evidence. EBP Briefs,
  1 (1).

8
The Papers

• Farber, J.G. Klein, E.R. (1999).
  Classroom-Based Assessment of a Collaborative
  Intervention Program With Kindergarten and
  First-Grade Students. Language, Speech Hearing
  Services in Schools, 30 (1), 83-91.

9
The Papers

• Cirrin, F.M. Gillam, R.B. (2008). Language
  Intervention Practices for School-Age Children
  With Spoken Language Disorders A Systematic
  Review. Language, Speech Hearing Services in
  Schools, 39, S110-137.

10
The Papers

• Throneburg, R., Calvert, L., Sturm, J.,
  Paramboukas, A., Paul, P. (2000). A Comparison of
  Service Delivery Models Effects of Curricular
  Vocabulary Skills in the School Setting. American
  Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 9, 10-20.

• CBL Students with SLI can make positive changes
  in their knowledge of curricular vocabulary in
  all 3 service deliveries (collaborative,
  consultative and withdrawal) but make more change
  in the collaborative model. Collaborative
  planning is essential for successful joint
  teaching programs.

11
The Papers

• Hadley, P.A., Simmerman, A., Long, M., Luna, M.
  (2000). Facilitating Language Development for
  Inner-City Children Experimental Evaluation of a
  Collaborative, Classroom-based Intervention.
  Language, Speech Hearing Services in Schools,
  31, 280-295.

• CBL At risk students in Kindergarten 1st
  grade involved in collaborative planning and
  teaching between class teachers and SLPs
  demonstrated greater change in regards to
  receptive and expressive vocabulary, as well as
  letter-sound associations, but no broad
  improvement in phonological awareness skills when
  compared with grade-matched peers who werent
  receiving collaborative intervention.

12
The CATs Clinical Bottom Line

• Were not there yet but the generally feeling is
  that all forms of intervention work (traditional
  pull-out, consultative and collaborative),
  however collaborative is the best though it is
  the most time consuming and costly.

13
Evidence in Practice
14
Evidence in Practice
15
Evidence in Practice
16
2008s Achievements

• Academics
• Thank you Natalie Munro Kimberley Docking
• New members
• Attendance
• Thank you everyone
• Teleconferencing
• 3/4
• ACT link ups

17
Where To Now?

• Comprehension
• Specific treatment options teaching text types
• ASD