Current Issues: Camp JumpStart: Clinical Training in Prevention

2011 ◽  
Vol 21 (3) ◽  
pp. 87-92
Author(s):  
Peggy C. Agee

The American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA) has expanded the scope of practice in speech-language pathology to include a focus on prevention (2007). Similarly, the knowledge and skills required of speech-language pathologists have broadened to include the prevention, assessment, and treatment of written language disorders. University training programs have a responsibility to provide graduate student clinicians with a wide range of clinical training opportunities that prepare them to enter the profession of speech-language pathology with the requisite knowledge and skills. Therefore, university programs must be creative in designing training opportunities that fulfill this mandate. This article explores one clinical training approach for the prevention of written language disorders through a systematic focus on emergent literacy.

Author(s):  
Louise Cummings

Clinical linguistics is the branch of linguistics that applies linguistic concepts and theories to the study of language disorders. As the name suggests, clinical linguistics is a dual-facing discipline. Although the conceptual roots of this field are in linguistics, its domain of application is the vast array of clinical disorders that may compromise the use and understanding of language. Both dimensions of clinical linguistics can be addressed through an examination of specific linguistic deficits in individuals with neurodevelopmental disorders, craniofacial anomalies, adult-onset neurological impairments, psychiatric disorders, and neurodegenerative disorders. Clinical linguists are interested in the full range of linguistic deficits in these conditions, including phonetic deficits of children with cleft lip and palate, morphosyntactic errors in children with specific language impairment, and pragmatic language impairments in adults with schizophrenia. Like many applied disciplines in linguistics, clinical linguistics sits at the intersection of a number of areas. The relationship of clinical linguistics to the study of communication disorders and to speech-language pathology (speech and language therapy in the United Kingdom) are two particularly important points of intersection. Speech-language pathology is the area of clinical practice that assesses and treats children and adults with communication disorders. All language disorders restrict an individual’s ability to communicate freely with others in a range of contexts and settings. So language disorders are first and foremost communication disorders. To understand language disorders, it is useful to think of them in terms of points of breakdown on a communication cycle that tracks the progress of a linguistic utterance from its conception in the mind of a speaker to its comprehension by a hearer. This cycle permits the introduction of a number of important distinctions in language pathology, such as the distinction between a receptive and an expressive language disorder, and between a developmental and an acquired language disorder. The cycle is also a useful model with which to conceptualize a range of communication disorders other than language disorders. These other disorders, which include hearing, voice, and fluency disorders, are also relevant to clinical linguistics. Clinical linguistics draws on the conceptual resources of the full range of linguistic disciplines to describe and explain language disorders. These disciplines include phonetics, phonology, morphology, syntax, semantics, pragmatics, and discourse. Each of these linguistic disciplines contributes concepts and theories that can shed light on the nature of language disorder. A wide range of tools and approaches are used by clinical linguists and speech-language pathologists to assess, diagnose, and treat language disorders. They include the use of standardized and norm-referenced tests, communication checklists and profiles (some administered by clinicians, others by parents, teachers, and caregivers), and qualitative methods such as conversation analysis and discourse analysis. Finally, clinical linguists can contribute to debates about the nosology of language disorders. In order to do so, however, they must have an understanding of the place of language disorders in internationally recognized classification systems such as the 2013 Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) of the American Psychiatric Association.


2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 326-338 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kristen Weidner ◽  
Joneen Lowman

Purpose We conducted a systematic review of the literature regarding adult telepractice services (screening, assessment, and treatment) from approximately 2014 to 2019. Method Thirty-one relevant studies were identified from a literature search, assessed for quality, and reported. Results Included studies illustrated feasibility, efficacy, diagnostic accuracy, and noninferiority of various speech-language pathology services across adult populations, including chronic aphasia, Parkinson's disease, dysphagia, and primary progressive aphasia. Technical aspects of the equipment and software used to deliver services were discussed. Some general themes were noted as areas for future research. Conclusion Overall, results of the review continue to support the use of telepractice as an appropriate service delivery model in speech-language pathology for adults. Strong research designs, including experimental control, across multiple well-described settings are still needed to definitively determine effectiveness of telepractice services.


2011 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 27-30
Author(s):  
Melissa Jakubowitz

This Letter to the Editor on the topic of speech-language pathology license portability for telepractice, was authored by Melissa Jakubowitz M.A. CCC-SLP, Vice President of SLP Services at PresenceLearning. A speech-language pathologist with over 20 years of clinical and managerial experience, Ms. Jakubowitz is a Board Recognized Specialist in Child Language. Ms. Jakubowitz began her career working in the public schools and has also operated a successful, multi-office private practice.  She is a past Director of the Scottish Rite Institute for Childhood Language Disorders in Stockton, CA. Jakubowitz is also a past-president of the California Speech-Language-Hearing Association, which, with over 5,000 SLP members, is one of the largest speech-language pathologist state associations in the country. Active in the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA), Ms. Jakubowitz served as a Legislative Counselor for 12 years.


2009 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 38-44 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michaela J. Ritter

Abstract In recent years, major changes have occurred in the field of speech-language pathology and education. In the past 2 decades researchers, educators, and speech-language pathologists (SLPs) have increased their focus on the identification, assessment, and treatment of reading disabilities in children (Catts, 1991; Catts, Fey, Zhang, & Tomblin, 2001; Justice & Ezell, 2004; Kaderavek & Justice, 2004). The primary goal of this article is to discuss a variety of ways that the speech-language pathologist can be both directly and indirectly involved in working with children who present with language and reading impairments. For example, Baylor University's Department of Communication Sciences and Disorders has had the opportunity to be involved in the prevention, identification, and treatment of reading disabilities in children both in a direct and indirect way.


1987 ◽  
Vol 30 (3) ◽  
pp. 335-342 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joanne Erwick Roberts ◽  
Vicki McCready

This study investigated differences in causal attributions made by student clinicians taking actor and observer roles in good and poor therapy Sessions. One hundred thirty-four graduate student clinicians in speech-language pathology were asked to imagine a hypothetical good or poor therapy session in which they took either the role of a clinician working with a client in a session or that of a clinician observing the session. To account for the session's hypothesized outcomes, clinicians taking the actor role cited client causes more frequently than other causes while clinicians taking the observer role cited clinician causes. These results are consistent with the actor-observer bias documented extensively in the psychological and educational literatures. Clinicians' causal attributions also differed for good and poor therapy sessions. Implications are discussed in terms of possible impact on the clinical training process in speech-language pathology.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document