Thanks Mary,
That is very helpful information, esp. since the caseload I work with (early intervention/disability), a running speech sample is just not able to be obtained most of the time. Therefore I was looking for some literature etc. relating to single word sampling only.
thanks again,
Rachael
---- marymine2001 <mary.huston@my.minotstateu.edu> wrote:
=============
Rachael,
I typically use Hodson's HAPP-3 assessment to determine severity of phonological delays.
If a client has only a few sounds in error and not groups of sounds (say /s/ instead of all fricatives), I would consider the problem to be articulatory - not phonological. My approach for treatment is different for articulation therapy vs phono therapy. Articulation therapy is typically done very traditional with emphasis on number of correct productions. While I do phono therapy with a broader range while following the Cycles approach.
There is an intelligibility measure available: the Children's Speech Intelligibility Measure which is designed to provide severity ratings for those clients who are severely unintelligible. Like the HAPP-3, the CSIM is based on single-word utterances and not conversational speech. However, Garrett & Moran (1992) reported clinician judgment combined with single-word assessment measures were valid (Garrett & Moran, 1992, A Comparison of Phonological Severity Measures; Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, Volume 23, 48-51)
PCC is typically done with running speech and a 100 word utterance sample. As a school-based clinician, I simply don't have time to do PCC for all my clients with phono problems. I supplement the HAPP-3 score with my professional judgment and, if necessary, a 50 utterance language sample.
Mary
Please do not forward, or publish, or distribute in ANY way,
posts to this electronic mailing list without the author's permission in writing.
0 comments:
Post a Comment