Applying the phonological intervention taxonomy to expansion points intervention.

PURPOSE: The Phonological Intervention Taxonomy (Baker, Williams, McLeod, & McCauley, 2018) was developed on the basis of cataloguing the elements of 15 phonological interventions in the domains of the goal of intervention, the teaching moment, the context (who provides the intervention and where it is provided), and procedural issues. Additionally, three summary measures are computed from the tallying of elements in the taxonomy: concentration (the number of required plus optional elements, with a maximum of 72; flexibility (the number of optional elements compared to the total present for the intervention), and distinctiveness (the number of rare elements plus the number of common elements that are absent). In the present paper, the taxonomy is applied to a novel intervention called Expansion Points Intervention (EXP; Smit, Brumbaugh, Weltsch, & Hilgers, 2018) in order to (a) determine how well the taxonomy captures elements of EXP, and (b) compare EXP to other phonological interventions. METHOD: The four domains of the taxonomy were systematically applied to EXP to determine which elements were required, optional, or not relevant to the implementation of EXP, using the definitions supplied with the taxonomy. RESULTS: Of the 72 elements in the taxonomy, 25 were considered required elements in EXP and 15 were considered to be optional, resulting in a concentration of 40 and a flexibility of 37.5 %, both of which were in the lower part of the range for the 15 comparison interventions. By way of contrast, distinctiveness, at 15 % was at the high end of the range. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the ease with which EXP aligns with elements of the taxonomy, the taxonomy was readily applied to EXP. EXP appeared to be comparable to the 15 original interventions, which means that the principles underlying EXP resemble those of other interventions. The implications of these findings for a theory of therapeutic intervention for phonological disorders are discussed.

Treatment of Phonological Disorder: A Feasibility Study With Focus on Outcome Measures.

Purpose: In a feasibility study for a randomized controlled trial of treatments for phonological disorders conducted over a period of 8 months, we examined 6 clinically relevant outcome measures. We took steps to reduce error variance and to maximize systematic variance. Method: Six children received traditional treatment (Van Riper, 1939), and 7 received expansion points (Smit, 2000), a treatment program with both phonological and traditional elements. Outcome measures, which were applied to both word list and conversational samples, included percentage of consonants correct (PCC; Shriberg & Kwiatkowski, 1982), PCC for late and/or difficult (L/D) consonants and number of L/D consonants acquired. Results: In repeated-measures analyses of variance, all measures showed significant differences from pretreatment to posttreatment, and the word list measures were associated with very high power values. In analyses of covariance for between-groups contrasts, the adjusted expansion points mean exceeded the adjusted traditional treatment mean for every measure; however, no differences reached significance. For the L/D PCC (conversation) measure, the contrast between groups was associated with a large effect size. Conclusion: We recommend that practitioners use outcome measures related to a word list. We recommend that researchers consider using L/D PCC on the basis of conversational samples to detect differences among treatment groups. Supplemental Materials: https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.5872677.

Treating children ages 3-6 who have speech sound disorder: a survey.

PURPOSE: In a national survey, speech-language pathologists (SLPs) were asked about service delivery and interventions they use with children ages 3-6 who have speech sound disorder (SSD). METHOD: The survey was e-mailed to 2,084 SLPs who worked in pre-elementary settings across the United States. Of these, 24% completed part or all of the survey, with 18% completing the entire survey. RESULTS: SLPs reported that they provided children ages 3-6 who had SSD with 30 or 60 min of treatment time weekly, regardless of group or individual setting. More SLPs indicated that they used traditional intervention than other types of intervention. However, many SLPs also reported using aspects of phonological interventions and providing phonological awareness training. Fewer SLPs indicated that they used nonspeech oral motor exercises than in a previous survey ( Lof & Watson, 2008). Recently graduated SLPs were no more familiar with recent advances in phonological intervention than were their more experienced colleagues. Discussion This study confirms previous findings ( Mullen & Schooling, 2010) about the amount of service provided to children ages 3-6 who have SSD. Issues related to the use of traditional and phonological intervention with children who have phonological disorder are discussed, along with concerns related to evidence-based practice and research needs.

Preliteracy speech sound production skill and later literacy outcomes: a study using the Templin Archive.

PURPOSE: This archival study examined the relationship between the speech sound production skill of kindergarten children and literacy outcomes in Grades 1-3 in a data set where most children's vocabulary skills were within normal limits, speech therapy was not provided until 2nd grade, and phonological awareness instruction was discouraged at the time data were collected. METHOD: Data were accessed from the Templin Archive (2004), and the speech sound production skill of 272 kindergartners were examined relative to literacy outcomes in 1st and 2nd grade (reading) and 3rd grade (spelling). RESULTS: Kindergartners in the 7th percentile for speech sound production skill scored more poorly in 1st- and 2nd-grade reading and 3rd-grade spelling than did kindergartners with average speech sound production skill; kindergartners in the 98th percentile achieved superior literacy skills compared to the mean. Phonological awareness mediated the effects of speech sound production skill on reading and spelling; vocabulary did not account for any unique variance. CONCLUSION: Speech sound disorders appear to be an overt manifestation of a complex interaction among variables influencing literacy skills, including nonlanguage cognition, vocabulary, letter knowledge, and phonological awareness. These interrelationships hold across the range of speech sound production skill, as children with superior speech sound production skill experience superior literacy outcomes.