Outline Evidence Based Practice Dyslexia
Transcription
Outline Evidence Based Practice Dyslexia
Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l’alphabétisation CANADIAN LANGUAGE & LITERACY RESEARCH NETWORK Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l’alphabétisation CANADIAN LANGUAGE & LITERACY RESEARCH NETWORK Outline Evidence Based Practices for the Treatment of Speech Sound Disorders Susan Rvachew School of Communication Sciences and Disorders McGill University Partager la science. Éveiller les esprits. ● sharing the science. opening minds. Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l’alphabétisation CANADIAN LANGUAGE & LITERACY RESEARCH NETWORK • • • • • • Evidence Based Practice Representation Based Approach Target Selection and Ordering Speech Perception Articulation/Stimulability Phonological Awareness Partager la science. Éveiller les esprits. ● sharing the science. opening minds. Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l’alphabétisation CANADIAN LANGUAGE & LITERACY RESEARCH NETWORK Dyslexia Intervention Evidence Based Practice 1. Definition of evidence based practice. 2. Application of evidence based practice. • Would you provide or recommend this treatment to your clients with dyslexia? • (Or ADHD, or dyspraxia of speech, or Asperger’s syndrome?) VIDEO http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=19RwE7PaX_g http://www.badscience.net/?p=320 Partager la science. Éveiller les esprits. ● sharing the science. opening minds. Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l’alphabétisation CANADIAN LANGUAGE & LITERACY RESEARCH NETWORK Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l’alphabétisation CANADIAN LANGUAGE & LITERACY RESEARCH NETWORK Evidence Based Practice Application of EBP • Integrate your own clinical expertise, the patient’s values and preferences, and the best research evidence to make decisions about the care of individual patients. • • Partager la science. Éveiller les esprits. ● sharing the science. opening minds. American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. (2004). Evidence-Based Practice in Communication Disorders: An Introduction [Technical report]. Available at: http://www.asha.org/ members/deskref-journals/deskref/default • Underlying Theory • Basic research • Clinical trials • Appropriateness of context • Professional experience Partager la science. Éveiller les esprits. ● sharing the science. opening minds. Partager la science. Éveiller les esprits. ● sharing the science. opening minds. 1 Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l’alphabétisation CANADIAN LANGUAGE & LITERACY RESEARCH NETWORK Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l’alphabétisation CANADIAN LANGUAGE & LITERACY RESEARCH NETWORK Early Speech Development Representation Based Approach 1. Levels of Representation. 2. Implications for the treatment of SSD Partager la science. Éveiller les esprits. ● sharing the science. opening minds. • How does the infant learn to produce speech-like vocalizations? • How does phonology emerge? VIDEO Partager la science. Éveiller les esprits. ● sharing the science. opening minds. Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l’alphabétisation CANADIAN LANGUAGE & LITERACY RESEARCH NETWORK Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l’alphabétisation CANADIAN LANGUAGE & LITERACY RESEARCH NETWORK Summary • Phonological Representations • Sudden shifts in organization of the lexicon on the basis of phonetic similarities among items Animated Demonstration of Phonological Development at Different Levels of Representation • Increase in vocabulary size (neighborhood density) • Improvements in phonetic knowledge • Acoustic-Phonetic Representations • Gradual increases in the specificity of acousticrepresentations • Amount, quality, and variability of acoustic input • Articulatory-Phonetic Representations • Gradual increases in the precision and flexibility of motor plans/programs • Repeated practice achieving specific speech goals with feedback and knowledge of results Partager la science. Éveiller les esprits. ● sharing the science. opening minds. Partager la science. Éveiller les esprits. ● sharing the science. opening minds. Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l’alphabétisation CANADIAN LANGUAGE & LITERACY RESEARCH NETWORK Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l’alphabétisation CANADIAN LANGUAGE & LITERACY RESEARCH NETWORK Implications for Treatment Levels of Representation Input Output Acoustic Phonological Acoustic Phonetic Articulatory Phonetic σ VL O C R V Motor • Intervention should address all levels of representation • Intervention should promote gradual acquisition of knowledge in each domain TT TB LP GL Partager la science. Éveiller les esprits. ● sharing the science. opening minds. Partager la science. Éveiller les esprits. ● sharing the science. opening minds. 2 Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l’alphabétisation CANADIAN LANGUAGE & LITERACY RESEARCH NETWORK Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l’alphabétisation CANADIAN LANGUAGE & LITERACY RESEARCH NETWORK Representation Based Approach to Target Selection Target Selection 1. 2. 3. Representation Based Approach vs Learnability Theory RCT Evidence: Teach complex or simpler targets first? Additive complexity and the nonlinear approach • Nonlinear advances in phonological organization emerge from gradual changes in phonetic knowledge, therefore: • Treatment should serve to gradually increase specificity of acoustic-phonetic representations and precision of articulatory-phonetic representations, therefore: • Gradually increase complexity of treatment targets over time Partager la science. Éveiller les esprits. ● sharing the science. opening minds. Partager la science. Éveiller les esprits. ● sharing the science. opening minds. Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l’alphabétisation CANADIAN LANGUAGE & LITERACY RESEARCH NETWORK Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l’alphabétisation CANADIAN LANGUAGE & LITERACY RESEARCH NETWORK Learnability Theory Approach to Target Selection • The laws that unify phonological systems generally may be used as input in treatment so as to expose a child to the governing properties of language. This thereby complements ontological complexity in targeting higher order categories to induce cascading effects on generalization learning, i.e.: Rvachew, S. & Nowak, M. (2001). The effect of target-selection strategy on phonological learning. Journal of Speech Language & Hearing Research, 44(3), 610-623. • Simpler input actually makes language learning more difficult because the child is provided with only partial information about linguistic structure. • Treating simple targets promotes only within class learning. • Treating complex targets is necessary to promote across class generalization. Partager la science. Éveiller les esprits. ● sharing the science. opening minds. Partager la science. Éveiller les esprits. ● sharing the science. opening minds. Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l’alphabétisation CANADIAN LANGUAGE & LITERACY RESEARCH NETWORK Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l’alphabétisation CANADIAN LANGUAGE & LITERACY RESEARCH NETWORK Treat Unstimulable First Treat Most Stimulable First Block 1 Block 2 Block 1 Level 4 t d k g l v ð z Level 4 Level 5 k g v ʤ z ɹ Level 5 Level 6 unstimulable l ð θ ɹ θ Partager la science. Éveiller les esprits. ● sharing the science. opening minds. Block 2 p d v Level 6 unstimulable l ʧʤ ʃ ðθ ɹ l ʧʤ ʃ ðθ ɹ Partager la science. Éveiller les esprits. ● sharing the science. opening minds. 3 Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l’alphabétisation CANADIAN LANGUAGE & LITERACY RESEARCH NETWORK Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l’alphabétisation CANADIAN LANGUAGE & LITERACY RESEARCH NETWORK Change in treated and untreated sounds in 6 wks Stimulable First (ME) Gain for treated stim targets greater than gain for untreated stim targets Unstimulable First (LL) Stimulable First (ME) Unstimulable First (LL) 14 14 14 14 12 12 12 12 10 10 10 8 8 8 6 6 6 6 4 4 4 4 2 2 2 2 0 0 0 A1 A2 A1 A3 A2 Partager la science. Éveiller les esprits. ● sharing the science. opening minds. A3 10 4 8 3 0 A1 A2 A3 A1 Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l’alphabétisation CANADIAN LANGUAGE & LITERACY RESEARCH NETWORK Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l’alphabétisation CANADIAN LANGUAGE & LITERACY RESEARCH NETWORK Gain for untreated unstim targets greater than gain for treated unstim targets Conclusion Stimulable First (ME) Unstimulable First (LL) 14 14 12 12 10 10 8 8 6 6 4 4 A2 Partager la science. Éveiller les esprits. ● sharing the science. opening minds. A3 • Improving articulation accuracy for phonemes that were partially correct facilitated learning of phonemes that were initially absent from the phonetic repertoire, i.e.: • Treating simpler targets first promoted both within-class and across-class learning. 2 2 2 1 0 0 A1 A2 A3 A1 A2 Partager la science. Éveiller les esprits. ● sharing the science. opening minds. A3 Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l’alphabétisation CANADIAN LANGUAGE & LITERACY RESEARCH NETWORK Partager la science. Éveiller les esprits. ● sharing the science. opening minds. Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l’alphabétisation CANADIAN LANGUAGE & LITERACY RESEARCH NETWORK Target Selection Principles Additive Complexity and the Nonlinear Approach Partager la science. Éveiller les esprits. ● sharing the science. opening minds. • Target selection is based on a nonlinear analysis of the child’s phonology at all levels of the hierarchy, considering individual and interactive elements at all levels. • Targets are set for both word and phrasal (prosodic) structure and features (and their related segments) at the outset • Strengths are used as supports for the needs, i.e. established word structures and word positions are used to target new features, and vice versa. Partager la science. Éveiller les esprits. ● sharing the science. opening minds. 4 Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l’alphabétisation CANADIAN LANGUAGE & LITERACY RESEARCH NETWORK Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l’alphabétisation CANADIAN LANGUAGE & LITERACY RESEARCH NETWORK Suggested Goals • • • • • • • • • • Age 2;5 More [moʌ] Mummy [mʌmʌ] Duck [dʌ] Puzzle [pʌ] Puppy [pʌ] Me [mː] Meow [ʌ] House [ʌ] Boy [bʌ] • Prosodic Level • Phrase • CV + CV phrases • Foot/word • CVCV words • Rime • V → VV • Feature • Manner • Introduce labial glide /w/ in CV syllables • Stabilize labial stops and nasals → labiodental fricative • Place • Expand repertoire of vowels used in labial C + V syllables Partager la science. Éveiller les esprits. ● sharing the science. opening minds. Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l’alphabétisation CANADIAN LANGUAGE & LITERACY RESEARCH NETWORK 6 month outcome • Age 2;5 • More [moʌ] • Mummy [mʌmʌ] • Duck [dʌ] • Puzzle [pʌ] • Puppy [pʌ] • Me [mː] • Meow [ʌ] • House [ʌ] • Boy [bʌ] • • • • • • • • • • • • Age 3;1 Shower [dauwə] Water [wʌtə] Bath [bæ] No have baby [no hʌ bei] No open bottle [no obi bɔʔo] No cheerio [no ʧiwio] No cowboy horse ride [no dʌboi ho wai] Pink [pɪn] Cup [tʌp] Pen [pɛn] Where cup go? [wɛ tʌ do] Partager la science. Éveiller les esprits. ● sharing the science. opening minds. Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l’alphabétisation CANADIAN LANGUAGE & LITERACY RESEARCH NETWORK Partager la science. Éveiller les esprits. ● sharing the science. opening minds. Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l’alphabétisation CANADIAN LANGUAGE & LITERACY RESEARCH NETWORK Application to Child with Residual Errors • “r” incorrect in all instances except: • ‘ear’/iɝ/, ‘gear’/g iɝ/, ‘four’/foɝ/ • ‘green’/gɹin/ • Recommended goal ordering • Expand and stabilize repertoire of Vɝ contexts in CVC words. • Expand and stabilize repertoire of Cɹ contexts in CCVC and CCVCC words. • Introduce intersyllabic /ɹ/ in CVCVC words. • Introduce prevocalic /ɹ/ in CV and CVC words. • Introduce unstressed /ɚ/ in CVCV words. Partager la science. Éveiller les esprits. ● sharing the science. opening minds. Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l’alphabétisation CANADIAN LANGUAGE & LITERACY RESEARCH NETWORK SAILS Speech Perception 1. Video demonstration of SAILS 2. Speech perception skills of children with SSD 3. Empirical evidence of treatment efficacy Partager la science. Éveiller les esprits. ● sharing the science. opening minds. • How can you improve children’s acousticphonetic representations? Video demonstration of the Speech Assessment and Interactive Learning System Partager la science. Éveiller les esprits. ● sharing the science. opening minds. 5 Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l’alphabétisation CANADIAN LANGUAGE & LITERACY RESEARCH NETWORK Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l’alphabétisation CANADIAN LANGUAGE & LITERACY RESEARCH NETWORK Adult Produced /ɹ/ (left) Child Produced /ɹ/ Distortion (right) Shuster, L. I. (1998). The perception of correctly and incorrectly produced /r/. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 41, 941-950. F4 F4 F2 and F3 merged. Partager la science. Éveiller les esprits. ● sharing the science. opening minds. F3 F3 F3 starts F2 high; rises gently F1 F2 F1 F1 and F2 merged. Partager la science. Éveiller les esprits. ● sharing the science. opening minds. Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l’alphabétisation CANADIAN LANGUAGE & LITERACY RESEARCH NETWORK Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l’alphabétisation CANADIAN LANGUAGE & LITERACY RESEARCH NETWORK Participants Adult Produced /ɹ/ (left) Child Produced /ɹ/ Distortion (right) • Group 1 (Younger) participants: • 13 children who were just starting treatment for /r/ • mean age 8;6 • Group 2 (Older) participants: • 13 children who had received least 2 years of treatment without success • mean age 11;0 Partager la science. Éveiller les esprits. ● sharing the science. opening minds. Partager la science. Éveiller les esprits. ● sharing the science. opening minds. Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l’alphabétisation CANADIAN LANGUAGE & LITERACY RESEARCH NETWORK Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l’alphabétisation CANADIAN LANGUAGE & LITERACY RESEARCH NETWORK Perception Task Right/Wrong Judgments (younger group) 50 • • • • 25 self-produced words (incorrect) 25 self-produced words (corrected) 25 other-produced words (incorrect) 25 other-produced words (corrected) • Task • Judge if the word was said ‘right’ or ‘wrong’ • Judge if self-produced or other-produced Percent Correct Judgments • Stimuli 40 30 20 10 0 self+ Partager la science. Éveiller les esprits. ● sharing the science. opening minds. other+ self- other- Partager la science. Éveiller les esprits. ● sharing the science. opening minds. 6 Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l’alphabétisation CANADIAN LANGUAGE & LITERACY RESEARCH NETWORK Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l’alphabétisation CANADIAN LANGUAGE & LITERACY RESEARCH NETWORK Right/Wrong Judgments (older group) Percent Correct Judgments 50 Rvachew, S. & Jamieson, D.G. (1989). Perception of voiceless fricatives by children with a functional articulation disorder. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 54, 193-208. 40 30 20 10 0 self+ other+ self- other- Partager la science. Éveiller les esprits. ● sharing the science. opening minds. Partager la science. Éveiller les esprits. ● sharing the science. opening minds. Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l’alphabétisation CANADIAN LANGUAGE & LITERACY RESEARCH NETWORK Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l’alphabétisation CANADIAN LANGUAGE & LITERACY RESEARCH NETWORK Perception of Fricatives Individual Variability 16 Mean Number of "s" Responses 14 12 10 8 6 4 Adults 16 16 14 14 14 12 12 12 10 10 10 8 8 8 6 6 6 4 4 4 2 2 2 0 0 1 2 3 Typical Children 2 16 4 5 6 7 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Misarticulating Children 0 1 seat 2 3 4 Stimulus 5 6 7 sheet Partager la science. Éveiller les esprits. ● sharing the science. opening minds. Partager la science. Éveiller les esprits. ● sharing the science. opening minds. Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l’alphabétisation CANADIAN LANGUAGE & LITERACY RESEARCH NETWORK Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l’alphabétisation CANADIAN LANGUAGE & LITERACY RESEARCH NETWORK Rvachew et al., 2004: Study Design Rvachew, S., Nowak, M., & Cloutier, G. (2004). Effect of phonemic perception training on the speech production and phonological awareness skills of children with expressive phonological delay. American Journal of SpeechLanguage Pathology, 13, 250-263. Partager la science. Éveiller les esprits. ● sharing the science. opening minds. EXPERIMENTAL CONTROL Pretreatment Assessment Pretreatment Assessment Speech Therapy Speech Therapy SAILS Dialogic Reading Post-treatment Assessment Post-treatment Assessment Follow-up Assessment Follow-up Assessment Partager la science. Éveiller les esprits. ● sharing the science. opening minds. 7 Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l’alphabétisation CANADIAN LANGUAGE & LITERACY RESEARCH NETWORK Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l’alphabétisation CANADIAN LANGUAGE & LITERACY RESEARCH NETWORK SAILS: Perception and PA SAILS: 16 lessons Speech Assessment and Interactive Learning System. See www.avaaz.com for more information . • [ɹæt] One module per week: • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 1. Phonemic Perception 2. Letter Identification 3. Sound-Symbol Association 4. Onset identification [wæt] [jæt] Partager la science. Éveiller les esprits. ● sharing the science. opening minds. Toe /t/Pea /p/Man /m/Coat /k/Lamb /l/Rope /r/Feet /f/Soap /s/Mitt -/t/ Top -/p/ Ham -/m/ Book -/k/ Nail - /l/ Door -/r/ Knife -/f/ Bus -/s/ Partager la science. Éveiller les esprits. ● sharing the science. opening minds. Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l’alphabétisation CANADIAN LANGUAGE & LITERACY RESEARCH NETWORK Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l’alphabétisation CANADIAN LANGUAGE & LITERACY RESEARCH NETWORK Dialogic Reading Condition Results: GFTA errors control experimental 40 Where are Grandma and Little Critter going? 19% resolved 30 Click the mailbox. 20 See for RCT evidence of the effectiveness of this intervention: van Kleeck, A., Vander Woude, J., & Hammett, L. (2006). Fostering literal and inferential skills in Head Start preschoolers with language impairment using book-sharing discussions. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 15, 85-95. What might happen if Little Critter ran out on the road? 10 What do you think is in Grandma’s basket? 50% resolved Pretreatment Partager la science. Éveiller les esprits. ● sharing the science. opening minds. Post-treatment Follow-up Partager la science. Éveiller les esprits. ● sharing the science. opening minds. Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l’alphabétisation CANADIAN LANGUAGE & LITERACY RESEARCH NETWORK Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l’alphabétisation CANADIAN LANGUAGE & LITERACY RESEARCH NETWORK Results: Percent Consonants Correct Results: PA Test Scores control experimental 20 15 10 5 Pretreatment Partager la science. Éveiller les esprits. ● sharing the science. opening minds. Post-treatment Follow-up Partager la science. Éveiller les esprits. ● sharing the science. opening minds. 8 Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l’alphabétisation CANADIAN LANGUAGE & LITERACY RESEARCH NETWORK Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l’alphabétisation CANADIAN LANGUAGE & LITERACY RESEARCH NETWORK Case Studies Case Studies Pretreatment PA07 (SAILS) PA08 (Control) GFTApercentile 4 3 PCCpercent correct 66 SAILSpercent correct PA07 (SAILS) PA08 (Control) GFTApercentile 17 1 51 PCCpercent correct 80 62 73 77 SAILSpercent correct 90 69 PPVTpercentile 48 40 DSSraw score 6.48 7.13 DSSraw score 4.56 3.54 PAraw score 25 13 PAraw score/34 3 5 ELAraw score 10 8 Partager la science. Éveiller les esprits. ● sharing the science. opening minds. Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l’alphabétisation CANADIAN LANGUAGE & LITERACY RESEARCH NETWORK Posttreatment Partager la science. Éveiller les esprits. ● sharing the science. opening minds. Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l’alphabétisation CANADIAN LANGUAGE & LITERACY RESEARCH NETWORK Case Studies Follow-up PA07 (SAILS) PA08 (Control) GFTApercentile 44 4 PCCpercent correct 94 86 PPVTpercentile 68 87 DSSraw score 7.16 5.23 PAraw score 34 34 ELAraw score 31 19 Partager la science. Éveiller les esprits. ● sharing the science. opening minds. Articulation/Stimulability 1. Perceptual Target 2. Feedback 3. Knowledge of Results Partager la science. Éveiller les esprits. ● sharing the science. opening minds. Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l’alphabétisation CANADIAN LANGUAGE & LITERACY RESEARCH NETWORK Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l’alphabétisation CANADIAN LANGUAGE & LITERACY RESEARCH NETWORK How at Articulate /ɹ/ Simple View of Motor Learning • How does any child learn to produce the /ɹ/ phoneme? • SAAS demonstration Partager la science. Éveiller les esprits. ● sharing the science. opening minds. • Motor learning requires • practice achieving a target • with feedback • and knowledge of results. Partager la science. Éveiller les esprits. ● sharing the science. opening minds. 9 Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l’alphabétisation CANADIAN LANGUAGE & LITERACY RESEARCH NETWORK Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l’alphabétisation CANADIAN LANGUAGE & LITERACY RESEARCH NETWORK Importance of the Target Outcome of traditional approach with SAILS substituted for ‘ear training’ • Rvachew, S. (1994). Speech perception training can facilitate sound production learning. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 37, 347-357. • Rvachew, S., Rafaat, S., & Martin, M. (1999). Stimulability, speech perception and the treatment of phonological disorders. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 8, 3334. • Rvachew, S. (2005). Stimulability and treatment success. Topics in Language Disorders. Clinical Perspectives on Speech Sound Disorders., 25(3), 207-219. cat vs. Pete Did not achieve stimulability for /ʃ/ in isolation. Achieved production of /ʃ/ in syllables. shoe vs. moo Achieved production of /ʃ/ in words. shoe vs. Xshoe 1 2 3 Isolation 4 Words 5 6 7 Phrases 8 9 Sentences Production Level Achieved in Therapy Partager la science. Éveiller les esprits. ● sharing the science. opening minds. Partager la science. Éveiller les esprits. ● sharing the science. opening minds. Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l’alphabétisation CANADIAN LANGUAGE & LITERACY RESEARCH NETWORK Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l’alphabétisation CANADIAN LANGUAGE & LITERACY RESEARCH NETWORK Modification of cycles approach: Add SAILS + stimulability training Interaction of Perception and Stimulability 50 80.00% Percent Change Percentage of Targets Improved 100.00% 60.00% 40.00% 45 /ʃ/ in inventory 40 /ʃ/ not in inventory 35 30 27 27 25 20 12 15 10 5 5 0 20.00% SAILS Control 0.00% Year 1 Year 2 Partager la science. Éveiller les esprits. ● sharing the science. opening minds. Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l’alphabétisation CANADIAN LANGUAGE & LITERACY RESEARCH NETWORK Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l’alphabétisation CANADIAN LANGUAGE & LITERACY RESEARCH NETWORK Interaction of Perception and Stimulability Percent Change 50 45 /ɹ/ in inventory 40 /ɹ/ not in inventory 35 30 25 25 20 15 10 6 5 5 0 0 SAILS Partager la science. Éveiller les esprits. ● sharing the science. opening minds. Control Partager la science. Éveiller les esprits. ● sharing the science. opening minds. Importance of Feedback • Gibbon, F. E. (1999). Undifferentiated lingual gestures in children with articulation/phonological disorders. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 42, 382-397. • Shuster, L. I., Ruscello, D.M., & Toth, A.R. (1995). The use of visual feedback to elicit correct /r/. American Journal of SpeechLanguage Pathology, 4, 37-44. • Masterson, J. J., & Rvachew, S. (1999). Use of technology in phonology intervention. Seminars in Speech and Language, 4, 233-250. Partager la science. Éveiller les esprits. ● sharing the science. opening minds. 10 Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l’alphabétisation CANADIAN LANGUAGE & LITERACY RESEARCH NETWORK Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l’alphabétisation CANADIAN LANGUAGE & LITERACY RESEARCH NETWORK Production of /ɹ/ Undifferentiated lingual gesture Partager la science. Éveiller les esprits. ● sharing the science. opening minds. Partager la science. Éveiller les esprits. ● sharing the science. opening minds. Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l’alphabétisation CANADIAN LANGUAGE & LITERACY RESEARCH NETWORK Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l’alphabétisation CANADIAN LANGUAGE & LITERACY RESEARCH NETWORK Spectrographic Feedback Spectrographic Feedback Spectrogram of the clinician model of the phrase "The writer." From: www.medicine.mcgill.ca/microp The focus of treatment is the final syllable "er". T1 marker points to the highest value of the third formant (F3), just after release of the "t". The F3 falls in frequency, as expected for "er". The drop in frequency between the T1 and T2 markers is 781 Hz. Notice that the F2 is parallel to and very close in frequency to the F3. Both formants begin to fall immediately after release of the "t". T1 = 2465 Hz T2 = 1684 Hz Partager la science. Éveiller les esprits. ● sharing the science. opening minds. Curt, a 13 year old boy with dyspraxia of speech, produced this syllable with a flat F3 during the first treatment session. Curt gradually learned to reduce the F3 by progressively larger increments. After he few sessions, he accomplished this 342 Hz change in F3 frequency near the end of the syllable. Notice that the syllable does not sound correct, but the progress that could be observed in the spectrogram motivated Curt to continue trying. T1 = 2085 Hz T2 = 2343 Hz Partager la science. Éveiller les esprits. ● sharing the science. opening minds. Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l’alphabétisation CANADIAN LANGUAGE & LITERACY RESEARCH NETWORK Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l’alphabétisation CANADIAN LANGUAGE & LITERACY RESEARCH NETWORK Spectrographic Feedback Spectrographic Feedback After approximately 6 weeks of treatment, Curt was producing a consistent change in F3 frequency that corresponded to a perceptually correct "er". For Curt, a decline in F3 frequency of at least 800 Hz was required for the production of a perceptually correct "er". However, the fall in the F3 continued to be delayed, resulting in an "-or"like percept. The F3 is moreor-less flat for 115 ms after release of the "t". Subsequent treatment focused on reducing this time interval. T1 = 2563 Hz T2 = 1904 Hz Partager la science. Éveiller les esprits. ● sharing the science. opening minds. After many more weeks Curt was producing perceptually correct ‘er’ syllables although their duration was too long. After Curt learned to lower his F3 sufficiently to produce a perceptable word final "er", attention shifted from the frequency characteristics to the temporal characteristics of F3 change. In this production, the F3 begins to fall 45 ms after the release of the "t". T1 = 2563 Hz T2 = 1489 Hz Future treatment will focus on reducing the duration of this syllable and encouraging consistent use of word final "er" in conversational speech. Partager la science. Éveiller les esprits. ● sharing the science. opening minds. 11 Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l’alphabétisation CANADIAN LANGUAGE & LITERACY RESEARCH NETWORK Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l’alphabétisation CANADIAN LANGUAGE & LITERACY RESEARCH NETWORK Knowledge of Results • Provide clear information about the accuracy of the child’s response. • Teach the child to evaluate his/her own response. Phonological Awareness Interventions 1. Monsters and Rimes 2. Basic Research on PA and SSD 3. Effectiveness of PA Interventions • http://www.learningfundamentals.com/ • Articulation I • Speech Visualization I Partager la science. Éveiller les esprits. ● sharing the science. opening minds. Partager la science. Éveiller les esprits. ● sharing the science. opening minds. Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l’alphabétisation CANADIAN LANGUAGE & LITERACY RESEARCH NETWORK Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l’alphabétisation CANADIAN LANGUAGE & LITERACY RESEARCH NETWORK Monsters and Rimes PA Skills of SSD vs NS Groups 0.5 Software Demonstration 0 Standardized Effect Size • Does phonological awareness intervention prevent reading disability? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 -0.5 9 10 11 12 -1 -1.5 -2 -2.5 -3 Severity of SSD Phonological Processing Multiple Risk Factors Persistence of SSDLanguage Impairment -3.5 Partager la science. Éveiller les esprits. ● sharing the science. opening minds. Partager la science. Éveiller les esprits. ● sharing the science. opening minds. Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l’alphabétisation CANADIAN LANGUAGE & LITERACY RESEARCH NETWORK Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l’alphabétisation CANADIAN LANGUAGE & LITERACY RESEARCH NETWORK Summary of Basic Research SES x PA Interaction • Risk Factors • • • • Speech Sound Disorder Language Impairment Family History Phonological Processing Difficulties • Protective Factors • Large vocabulary size • Preschool resolution of speech/language problems • Appropriate inputs and home and school Partager la science. Éveiller les esprits. ● sharing the science. opening minds. Partager la science. Éveiller les esprits. ● sharing the science. opening minds. 12 Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l’alphabétisation CANADIAN LANGUAGE & LITERACY RESEARCH NETWORK Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l’alphabétisation CANADIAN LANGUAGE & LITERACY RESEARCH NETWORK Speech Perception, Vocabulary and Phonological Awareness Variations in Input Hart & Risley (1995) 100 Cluster 1 PA = 22 2500 Cluster 2 PA = 19 90 48 M words Cluster 3 PA = 11 Cluster 4 PA = 9 80 1500 28 M words 1000 12 M words 500 Speech Perception Words per Hour 2000 70 60 50 40 0 Professional Working Class Welfare 30 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 Receptive Vocabulary Partager la science. Éveiller les esprits. ● sharing the science. opening minds. Partager la science. Éveiller les esprits. ● sharing the science. opening minds. Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l’alphabétisation CANADIAN LANGUAGE & LITERACY RESEARCH NETWORK Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l’alphabétisation CANADIAN LANGUAGE & LITERACY RESEARCH NETWORK National Reading Panel: Effective Programs SSD and Reading Sight Word Reading Vocabulary Rime Awareness Speech Perception Onset Awareness & Onset Segmentation Letter Knowledge Nonword Reading • Effective programs taught one or two skills to mastery • Effective programs lasted between 5 and 18 hours • Effective programs made explicit links between PA skills and letter knowledge and/or reading • Effective programs taught children in small groups • Effective programs were provided early, before or as the children were beginning to learn to read Rvachew & Grawburg (Submitted). Partager la science. Éveiller les esprits. ● sharing the science. opening minds. Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l’alphabétisation CANADIAN LANGUAGE & LITERACY RESEARCH NETWORK Partager la science. Éveiller les esprits. ● sharing the science. opening minds. Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l’alphabétisation CANADIAN LANGUAGE & LITERACY RESEARCH NETWORK Sound Foundations Trial Byrne, B., & Fielding-Barnsley, R. (1991). Evaluation of a program to teach phonemic awareness to young children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83(4), 451-455. Byrne, B., & Fielding-Barnsley, R. (1993). Evaluation of a program to teach phonemic awareness to young children: A 1-year follow-up. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85(1), 104-111. Byrne, B., & Fielding-Barnsley, R. (1995). Evaluation of a program to teach phonemic awareness to young children: A 2- and 3- year follow-up and a new preschool trial. Journal of Educational Psychology, 87(3), 488-503. Recruited 128 children from 4 preschool programs Random assignment Intervention Control n = 12 groups n = 12 groups Post-treatment assessment about 12 weeks later Follow-up assessment at end of kindergarten Byrne, B., Fielding-Barnsley, R., & Ashley, L. (2000). Effects of preschool phoneme identity training after six years: Outcome level distinguished from rate of response. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92(4), 659-667. Hindson, B., Byrne, B., Fielding-Barnsley, R., Hine, D. W., & Shankweiler, D. (2005). Assessment and early instruction of preschool children at risk for reading disability. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97(4), 687-704. Partager la science. Éveiller les esprits. ● sharing the science. opening minds. Follow-up assessment at end of grade 1 Follow-up assessment at end of grade 2 Follow-up assessment in grade 5 Partager la science. Éveiller les esprits. ● sharing the science. opening minds. 13 Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l’alphabétisation CANADIAN LANGUAGE & LITERACY RESEARCH NETWORK Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l’alphabétisation CANADIAN LANGUAGE & LITERACY RESEARCH NETWORK Intervention vs. Control Post-treatment Generalization 12 • Matching • Sorting • Identifying • Semantic categories • Matching • Sorting • Identifying 10 8 Correct Responses • Rime and phoneme awareness 6 4 Experimental (Initial) Experimental (Final) 2 Control (Initial) Control (Final) 0 Pretest Partager la science. Éveiller les esprits. ● sharing the science. opening minds. Posttest Partager la science. Éveiller les esprits. ● sharing the science. opening minds. Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l’alphabétisation CANADIAN LANGUAGE & LITERACY RESEARCH NETWORK Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l’alphabétisation CANADIAN LANGUAGE & LITERACY RESEARCH NETWORK Follow-up Assessments Hindsen, Byrne et al. 2005 Pre-treatment Assessment • Nonword decoding significantly better in the experimental group through grade 5 • No significant differences for real word reading, spelling, or reading comprehension • 16% of experimental group and 28% of control group scored below 75 on one or more reading tests in grade 5 Intervention: Intervention: Wait Risk: Not At-Risk At-Risk At-Risk n = 65 n = 69 n = 17 17 week intervention Sound Foundations Phonological Awareness Intervention Letter Knowledge Dialogic Reading Post-treatment Assessment Partager la science. Éveiller les esprits. ● sharing the science. opening minds. Partager la science. Éveiller les esprits. ● sharing the science. opening minds. Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l’alphabétisation CANADIAN LANGUAGE & LITERACY RESEARCH NETWORK Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l’alphabétisation CANADIAN LANGUAGE & LITERACY RESEARCH NETWORK Intervention Program Sound Foundations • 30 minute sessions (individual), 2 or 3 per week, each targeting (in order) • Phoneme identity • Visual and tactile exposure to the letter that represents the target phoneme • Dialogic book reading • Criterion test for the days target Partager la science. Éveiller les esprits. ● sharing the science. opening minds. • Targets • Initial /s/, /m/, /p/, /l/, /t/, and /æ/ • Final /s/, /m/, /p/, /l/, and /t/ • /ʃ/, /g/, and /ɛ/ were omitted from this study but are normally part of this program • Procedures • • • • • Worksheets for sound matching Posters for identifying target words Card games such as Snap Dominoes-like game Recorded jingles with alliteration Partager la science. Éveiller les esprits. ● sharing the science. opening minds. 14 Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l’alphabétisation CANADIAN LANGUAGE & LITERACY RESEARCH NETWORK Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l’alphabétisation CANADIAN LANGUAGE & LITERACY RESEARCH NETWORK Dialogic Reading Phoneme Identity 18 • Completion Pre 16 • Dad and Amy drove to the _______. Post 14 • Recall 12 • Why were they going to the dump? 10 • Open-ended prompts • You tell me about this page. 8 • Wh-questions 6 • What are they doing? 4 • Distancing 2 • Do you remember when we went to the dump? 0 Intervention Not At Risk Partager la science. Éveiller les esprits. ● sharing the science. opening minds. Intervention At Risk Wait List Control At Risk Partager la science. Éveiller les esprits. ● sharing the science. opening minds. Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l’alphabétisation CANADIAN LANGUAGE & LITERACY RESEARCH NETWORK Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l’alphabétisation CANADIAN LANGUAGE & LITERACY RESEARCH NETWORK Letter Knowledge Concepts About Print 14 25 Pre Post 20 Pre 12 Post 10 15 8 6 10 4 5 2 0 0 Intervention Not At Risk Intervention At Risk Wait List Control At Risk Partager la science. Éveiller les esprits. ● sharing the science. opening minds. Intervention Not At Risk Intervention At Risk Wait List Control At Risk Partager la science. Éveiller les esprits. ● sharing the science. opening minds. Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l’alphabétisation CANADIAN LANGUAGE & LITERACY RESEARCH NETWORK Réseau canadien de recherche sur le langage et l’alphabétisation CANADIAN LANGUAGE & LITERACY RESEARCH NETWORK Receptive Vocabulary (PPVT) Acknowledgments 115 • Canadian Language and Literacy Research Network. Pre Post 110 • Alberta Children’s Hospital Foundation • Alberta Children’s Hospital 105 • Jill Newman, Michele Nowak, Patty Delaney-Bernier, Susan Rafaat 100 • Children’s Hospital of Eastern Ontario 95 • Dr. Robin Gaines 90 • McGill University 85 80 Intervention Not At Risk Intervention At Risk Wait List Control At Risk Partager la science. Éveiller les esprits. ● sharing the science. opening minds. • Francoise Brosseau-Lapre, Genevieve Cloutier, Pi-Yu Chiang, Myra Cox, Marie Desmarteau, Natalia Evans, Meghann Grawburg, Joan Heyding, Debbie Hughes, Alyssa Ohberg, Rishanthi Sivakumaran, Alysha Serviss, and Jessica Whitley Partager la science. Éveiller les esprits. ● sharing the science. opening minds. 15 EVIDENCE BASED PRACTICES FOR THE TREATMENT OF SPEECH SOUND DISORDERS Reference List Section I: Evidence Based Practice 1. Definition of EBP Ben talks about his dyslexia and DDAT (now Dore). http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=19RwE7PaX_g Goldacre, B. Dore – The miracle cure for dyslexia. Bad Science (Nov 4, 2006) http://www.badscience.net/?p=320 American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. (2004). Evidence-Based Practice in Communication Disorders: An Introduction [Technical report]. http://www.asha.org/ members/deskref-journals/deskref/default 2. Application of Evidence Based Practice Faciltated communication: Siegel, B. & Zimnitzky, B. (1998). Assessing ‘alternative’ therapies for communication disorders in children with autistic spectrum disorders: Facilitated communication and auditory integration training. Journal of SpeechLanguage Pathology and Audiology, 22(2), 61-69. FastForWord: (a) Benasich, A. A., & Tallal, P. (2002). Infant discrimination of rapid auditory cues predicts later language impairment. Behavioural Brain Research, 136, 31-49. (b) Nittrouer, S. (1999). Do temporal processing deficits cause phonological processing problems? Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 42, 925-942. (c) StuddertKennedy, M. (2002). Deficits in phoneme awareness do not arise from failures in rapid auditory processing. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 15, 5-14. (d) Gillam, R. B., Loeb, D. F., Hoffman, L. M., Bohman, T., Champlin, C. A., Thibodeau, L., et al. (2008). The efficacy of Fast ForWord Language Intervention in school-age children with language impairment: A randomized controlled trial. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 51, 97-119. Learnability theory: (a) Gierut, J. (2007). Phonological complexity and language learnability. American Journal of SpeechLanguage Pathology, 16, 6-17. (b) Diedrich, W. M. (1989). A response to Gierut, Elbert, and Dinnsen, "A functional analysis of phonological knowledge and generalization learning in misarticulating children". Journal of Speech ahd Hearing Research, 32, 219. (c) Rvachew, S., & Nowak, M. (2001). The effect of target selection strategy on sound production learning. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 44, 610-623. (d) Morrisette, M. L., & Gierut, J. A. (2003). Unified treatment recommendations: A response to Rvachew and Nowak. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 46(2), 383-385. (e) Rvachew, S., & Nowak, M. (2003). Clinical outcomes as a function of target selection strategy: A reply to Morrisette and Gierut. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 46(2), 386-389. (f) Rvachew, S. (2005). Stimulability and treatment success. Topics in Language Disorders. Clinical Perspectives on Speech Sound Disorders., 25(3), 207-219. Dore Achievement Centres: Bishop, D. V. M. (2007). Curing dyslexia and attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder by training motor co-ordination: Miracle or myth? Journal of Pediatrics and Child Health, 43, 653-655. Prelinguistic milieu therapy: (a) Yoder, P. J., & Warren, S. F. (2001). Relative treatment effects of two prelinguistic communication interventions on language development in toddlers with developmental delays vary by maternal characteristics. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 44, 224-237. (b) Yoder, P. J., & Warren, S. F. (2002). Effects of prelinguistic milieu teaching and parent responsivity education on dyads involving children with intellectual disabilities. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 45, 1158-1174. Community SLP Services in the U.K.: Glogowska, M., Roulstone, S., Enderby, P., & Peters, T. (2000). Randomised controlled trial of community based speech and language therapy in preschool children. BMJ, 321, 923-928. Focused Stimulation: Fey, M. E., Cleave, P. L., Long, S. H., & Hughes, D. (1993). Two approaches to the facilitation of grammar in children with language impairment: An experimental evaluation. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 36, 141-157. Cycles Approach: (1) Pamplona, M. C., Ysunza, A., and Espinoza, J. (1999). "A comparative trial of two modalities of speech intervention for compensatory articulation in cleft palate children: phonological approach versus articulatory approach." International Journal of Pediatric Otorhinolaryngology, 49(21-26). (2) Almost, D., & Rosenbaum, P. (1998). Effectiveness of speech intervention for phonological disorders: a randomized controlled trial. Developmental Medicine and Child Neurology, 40, 319-325. (3) Hodson, B. W., & Paden, E. P. (1983). Targeting intelligible speech: A phonological approach to remediation. Boston: College Hill. West Virginia Speech-Language-Hearing Association Spring Convention (Friday April 18 2008) Page 1 of 5 EVIDENCE BASED PRACTICES FOR THE TREATMENT OF SPEECH SOUND DISORDERS Reference List Section II: Representation Based Approach 1. Levels of Representation Infant Speech Development (video): (a) Bloom, K., Russell, A., & Wassenberg, K. (1987). Turn taking affects the quality of infant vocalizations. Journal of Child Language, 14, 211-227. (b) Bloom, K. (1988). Quality of adult vocalizations affects the quality of infant vocalizations. Journal of Child Language, 15, 469-480. Phonological Development at Different Levels of Representation (animation): (a) Beckman, M. E., & Edwards, J. (2000). The ontongeny of phonological categories and the primacy of lexical learning in linguistic development. Child Development, 71, 240-249. (b) Callan, D. E., Kent, R. D., Guenther, F. H., & Vorperian, H. K. (2000). An auditoryfeedback-based neural network model of speech production that is robust to developmental changes in the size and shape of the articulatory system. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 43, 721-738. (c) Munson, B., Edwards, J., & Beckman, M. E. (2005). Phonological knowledge in typical and atypical speech-sound development. Topics in Disorders, 25(3), 190-206. (d) Pierrehumbert, J. B. (2003). Phonetic diversity, statistical learning, and acquisition of phonology. Language and Speech, 46, 115-154. (e) Walley, A. C., Metsala, J. L., & Garlock, V. M. (2003). Spoken vocabulary growth: Its role in the development of phoneme awareness and reading ability. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 16, 5-20. 2. Implications for Treatment Rvachew, S. (2005). Phonetic factors in phonology intervention. In A. G. Kamhi & K. E. Pollock (Eds.), Phonological Disorders in Children: Assessment and Intervention (pp. 175 -188). Baltimore, Maryland.: Paul Brookes Publishers. Rvachew, S. & Bernhardt, B. (in progress). Clinical implications of the dynamic systems approach to phonology intervention. Section III: Target Selection 1. Representation Based Approach versus Learnability Theory Gierut, J. (2007). Phonological complexity and language learnability. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 16, 6-17. 2. RCT Evidence: Teach Complex or Simpler Targets First Rvachew, S., & Nowak, M. (2001). The effect of target selection strategy on sound production learning. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 44, 610-623. Rvachew, S., & Nowak, M. (2003). Clinical outcomes as a function of target selection strategy: A reply to Morrisette and Gierut. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 46(2), 386-389. Rvachew, S. (2005). Stimulability and treatment success. Topics in Language Disorders. Clinical Perspectives on Speech Sound Disorders., 25(3), 207-219. 3. Additive Complexity and the Nonlinear Approach Bernhardt, B., & Stoel-Gammon, C. (1994). Nonlinear phonology: Introduction and clinical application. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 37, 123-143. Bernhardt, B.H., Stemberger, J. & Major, E. (2006). General and nonlinear phonological intervention perspectives for a child with resistant phonological impairment. Advances in Speech-Language Pathology, 8, 190-206. Section IV: Speech Perception 1. SAILS Video demonstration Speech Assessment and Interactive Learning System (see http://www.medicine.mcgill.ca/srvachew/ for updates). Locke, J. L. (1980). The inference of speech perception in the phonologically disordered child. Some clinically novel procedures, their use, some findings. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 45, 445-468. Girolametto, L., Pearce, P. S., & Weitzman, E. (1997). Effects of lexical intervention on the phonology of late talkers. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 40, 338-348. West Virginia Speech-Language-Hearing Association Spring Convention (Friday April 18 2008) Page 2 of 5 EVIDENCE BASED PRACTICES FOR THE TREATMENT OF SPEECH SOUND DISORDERS Reference List 2. Speech Perception Skills of Children with SSD Shuster, L. I. (1998). The perception of correctly and incorrectly produced /r/. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 41, 941-950. Rvachew, S., & Jamieson, D. G. (1989). Perception of voiceless fricatives by children with a functional articulation disorder. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 54, 193-208. 3. Empirical Evidence of Treatment Efficacy Rvachew, S., Nowak, M., & Cloutier, G. (2004). Effect of phonemic perception training on the speech production and phonological awareness skills of children with expressive phonological delay. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 13, 250-263. Section V: Articulation/Stimulability 1. Perceptual Target Kent, R.D. & Lybolt, J.T. (1982). Motor schema as a basis for motor learning. In W.H. Perkins (Ed) General Principles of Therapy. Thieme-Stratton, Inc.: New York. Guenther, F.H. (2003). Neural control of speech movements. In: A. Meyer and N. Schiller (eds.), Phonetics and Phonology in Language Comprehension and Production: Differences and Similarities. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. http://cnsweb.bu.edu/~guenther/Schiller_Book_Chapter.pdf Guenther, F.H. (2006). Cortical interactions underlying the production of speech sounds. Journal of Communication Disorders, 39, pp. 350-365. http://cns-web.bu.edu/~guenther/Guenther_J_Comm_Disorders_in_press.pdf Rvachew, S. (1994). Speech perception training can facilitate sound production learning. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 37, 347-357. Rvachew, S., Rafaat, S., & Martin, M. (1999). Stimulability, speech perception and the treatment of phonological disorders. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 8, 33-34. Rvachew, S. (2005). Stimulability and treatment success. Topics in Language Disorders. Clinical Perspectives on Speech Sound Disorders., 25(3), 207-219. 2. Feedback Gibbon, F. E. (1999). Undifferentiated lingual gestures in children with articulation/phonological disorders. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 42, 382-397. Shuster, L. I., Ruscello, D.M., & Toth, A.R. (1995). The use of visual feedback to elicit correct /r/. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 4, 37-44. Masterson, J. J., & Rvachew, S. (1999). Use of technology in phonology intervention. Seminars in Speech and Language, 4, 233-250. Rvachew, S. Use of Microcomputers in Phonology Intervention. http://www.medicine.mcgill.ca/microp/ 3. Knowledge of Results Locutour Articulation Software: http://www.learningfundamentals.com/ Section VI: Phonological Awareness 1. Monsters and Rimes Grawburg, M., & Rvachew, S. (2007). Phonological awareness intervention for children with speech sound disorders. Journal of Speech-Language Pathology and Audiology, 31, 19-26. Monsters and Rimes: (see http://www.medicine.mcgill.ca/srvachew/ for updates on availability) West Virginia Speech-Language-Hearing Association Spring Convention (Friday April 18 2008) Page 3 of 5 EVIDENCE BASED PRACTICES FOR THE TREATMENT OF SPEECH SOUND DISORDERS Reference List 2. Basic Research on PA and SSD Bird, J., Bishop, D. V. M., & Freeman, N. H. (1995). Phonological awareness and literacy development in children with expressive phonological impairments. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 38, 446-462. Hart, B. & Risley, T. (1992). American parenting of language-learning children: Persisting differences in family-child interactions observed in natural home environments. Developmental Psychology, 28, 1096-1105 Nathan, L., Stackhouse, J., Goulandris, N., & Snowling, M. J. (2004). The development of early literacy skills among children with speech difficulties: A test of the "critical age hypothesis". Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 47, 377-391. Noble, K. G., Wolmetz, M. E., Ochs, L. G., Farah, M. J., & McCandliss, B. (2006). Brain-behavior relationships in reading acquisition are modulated by socioeconomic factors. Developmental Science, 9, 642-654. Noble, K. G., Farah, M. J., & McCandliss, B. (2006). Socioeconomic background modulates cognition-achievement relationships in reading. Cognitive Development, 21, 349-368. Raitano, N. A., Pennington, B. F., Tunick, B. F., Boada, R., & Shriberg, L. D. (2004). Pre-literacy skills of subgroups of children with speech sound disorders. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 45(4), 821-835. Rvachew, S. (2007). Phonological processing and reading in children with speech sound disorders. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 16, 260-270. Rvachew, S. (2006). Longitudinal prediction of implicit phonological awareness skills. American Journal of SpeechLanguage Pathology., 15, 165-176. Rvachew, S., Chiang, P., & Evans, N. (2007). Characteristics of speech errors produced by children with and without delayed phonological awareness skills. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 38, 60-71. Rvachew, S., & Grawburg, M. (2006). Correlates of phonological awareness in preschoolers with speech sound disorders. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 49, 74-87. Rvachew, S., Ohberg, A., Grawburg, M., & Heyding, J. (2003). Phonological awareness and phonemic perception in 4-yearold children with delayed expressive phonology skills. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 12, 463–471. Rvachew, S. & Grawburg, M. (in press). Reflections on Phonological Working Memory, Letter Knowledge, and Phonological Awareness: A Reply to Hartmann. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research. Webster, P. E., Plante, A. S., & Couvillion, M. (1997). Phonologic impairment and prereading: Update on a longitudinal study. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 30(4), 365-376. 3. Effectiveness of Phonological Awareness Interventions Byrne, B., & Fielding-Barnsley, R. (1991). Evaluation of a program to teach phonemic awareness to young children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83(4), 451-455. Byrne, B., & Fielding-Barnsley, R. (1993). Evaluation of a program to teach phonemic awareness to young children: A 1year follow-up. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85(1), 104-111. Byrne, B., & Fielding-Barnsley, R. (1995). Evaluation of a program to teach phonemic awareness to young children: A 2and 3- year follow-up and a new preschool trial. Journal of Educational Psychology, 87(3), 488-503. Byrne, B., Fielding-Barnsley, R., & Ashley, L. (2000). Effects of preschool phoneme identity training after six years: Outcome level distinguished from rate of response. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92(4), 659-667. Ehri, L. C., Nunes, S. R., Willows, D. M., Schuster, B. V., Yaghoub-Zadeh, Z., & Shanahan, T. (2001). Phonemic awareness instruction helps children learn to read: Evidence from the national reading panel's meta-analysis. Reading Research Quarterly, 36(3), 250-287. Hindson, B., Byrne, B., Fielding-Barnsley, R., Hine, D. W., & Shankweiler, D. (2005). Assessment and early instruction of preschool children at risk for reading disability. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97(4), 687-704. Lonigan, C. J., Driscoll, K., Phillips, B. M., Cantor, B. G., Anthony, J. L., & Goldstein, H. (2003). Evaluation of a computerassisted instruction phonological sensitivity program with preschool children at-risk for reading problems. Journal of Early Intervention, 25(248-262). Whitehurst, G. J., Falco, F., Lonigan, C. J., Fischel, J. E., DeBaryshe, B. D., Valdez-Menchaca, M. C., et al. (1988). Accelerating language development through picture book reading. Developmental Psychology, 24, 552-558. West Virginia Speech-Language-Hearing Association Spring Convention (Friday April 18 2008) Page 4 of 5 EVIDENCE BASED PRACTICES FOR THE TREATMENT OF SPEECH SOUND DISORDERS Reference List Effect size figure: Each effect size and corresponding confidence interval on the chart corresponds to the difference between a clinical group of and a normally developing control group, with details as follows: Author Nathan et al. Rvachew 2007 Raitano et al. 2004 Webster, Plante, & Couvillion 1997 Nathan et al. Raitano et al. 2004 Larrivee & Catts Rvachew 2007 Bird, Bishop & Freeman 1995 Bird, Bishop & Freeman 1995 Raitano et al. 2004 Raitano et al. 2004 Outcome Letter Knowledge, Sight Word, Nonword Reading TOWRE (Sight Word Reading, Nonword Decoding) BBF(Rime Match), CTOPP (Elision, Blending, Matching) Pseudoword segmentation Group # 1 Effect Size -0.36 Upper CL 0.28 Lower CL -1.01 SSD/High PP 2 -0.49 0.11 -1.08 Normalized SSD No LI 3 -0.782 -0.04 -1.2 SSD 4 -0.88 -0.13 -1.63 SSD LI 5 -1 -0.33 -1.68 Persistent SSD No LI 6 -1.018 -0.5 -1.5 SSD LI 7 -1.14 -0.58 -1.7 Experimental Group SSD Letter Knowledge, Sight Word, Nonword Reading BBF(Rime Match), CTOPP (Elision, Blending, Matching) Woodcock Reading Mastery Test Composite Score TOWRE (Sight Word Reading, Nonword Decoding) Sight Word Reading SSD/Low PP 8 -1.17 -0.55 -1.79 SSD 9 -1.38 -0.65 -2.1 Sight Word Reading SSD LI 10 -1.45 -0.59 -2.32 BBF(Rime Match), CTOPP (Elision, Blending, Matching) BBF(Rime Match), CTOPP (Elision, Blending, Matching) Persistent SSD Normalized LI 11 -1.677 -1 -2.4 Persistent SSD Persistent LI 12 -2.301 -1.5 -3.1 West Virginia Speech-Language-Hearing Association Spring Convention (Friday April 18 2008) Page 5 of 5