1 / 23

The Assessment Process with Young Speakers: Preschool and School-Age Children

The Assessment Process with Young Speakers: Preschool and School-Age Children. CHAPTER 5. 1. Copyright 2010 Delmar, a part of Cengage Learning. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Goals for the initial meeting Map surface features— sample Indicators of awareness Two basic decisions

dakota
Download Presentation

The Assessment Process with Young Speakers: Preschool and School-Age Children

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The Assessment Process with Young Speakers: Preschool and School-Age Children CHAPTER5 1 Copyright 2010 Delmar, a part of Cengage Learning. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

  2. Goals for the initial meeting • Map surface features—sample • Indicators of awareness • Two basic decisions • Chronicity v. Recovery • Eliciting fluency breaks • Related problems • Assessment Measures 2 Copyright 2010 Delmar, a part of Cengage Learning. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

  3. The first meeting: Take-home messages for parents • Demistify the phenomenon—stuttering is not a bad word • Decrease guilt and shame—it’s nobody’s fault • Explain onset and development—DC/Component models • Inform about the future of their child • Explain the treatment process • What they can do 3 Copyright 2010 Delmar, a part of Cengage Learning. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

  4. Most children recover • Incidence about 4–5% • Prevalence about 0.5–1.0% • Onset usually at 2–4 years (mean of 33 m.) • Recovery rate @ 75%–85% by age 6 • Remission especially high first 6 months 4 Copyright 2010 Delmar, a part of Cengage Learning. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

  5. Severity of childhood stutteringThe weighted SLD • Add together the number of part-word and single-syllable word repetitions per 100 syllables (PW + SS) • Multiply that sum by the mean number of repetition units (RU) (Repetition units are the number of times a sound, syllable, or word is repeated prior to saying the word, divided by the number of words where this occurred.) (RU/n) (PW + SS) x RU 5 Copyright 2010 Delmar, a part of Cengage Learning. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

  6. The weighted SLD(continued) • Add to the above total twice the number of disrhythmic phonations (DP, blocks and prolongations) per 100 syllables (2 x DP) Disrhythmic phonations are absent or rare in fluent speakers and are a strong indicator of stuttering. The resulting formula is [(PW + SS) x RU] + (2 x DP) A weighted SLD of 4or above and associated nonspeech and psychosocial characteristics (e.g., awareness, negative attitude about communicating, struggle and escape behavior) are indicative of stuttering. 6 Copyright 2010 Delmar, a part of Cengage Learning. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

  7. Awareness & anxiety • No clear differences in anxiety at outset (NFC v CWS); anxiety tends to increase over time (Yairi & Ambrose, 2005) • Puppet Study (Ambrose & Yairi, 1994) • Temperament • More sensitive, inhibited, and reactive • Inhibited with strangers, low tolerance for disfluency • Fertile ground where stuttering will grow? • A contribution to or a consequence of stuttering? 7 Copyright 2010 Delmar, a part of Cengage Learning. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

  8. Awareness & anxiety (continued) • Head and eye movements (Conture and Kelly, 1991) • Pitch rise, schwa substitutions, fear, avoidance behaviors, decreased speaking—electively mute • Results with KiddyCAT (Vanryckeghem, Brutten, & Herandez, 2005; Behavior Assessment Battery (BAB) • CWS = 4.36 v. NFC − 1.79 • Using projective drawings (DeVore, Nandur, & Manning, 1984) • smaller drawings, lower-left quadrant pre-tx 8 Copyright 2010 Delmar, a part of Cengage Learning. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

  9. Anxiety increases following onset 9 Copyright 2010 Delmar, a part of Cengage Learning. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

  10. 10 Copyright 2010 Delmar, a part of Cengage Learning. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

  11. 11 Copyright 2010 Delmar, a part of Cengage Learning. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

  12. Additional characteristics(Yairi & Ambrose, 2005) • Cognitive ability within or above normal range • Speech system may be less stable & more easily perturbed (slower phone production, more shimmer, limited articulatory movement) • Expressive language at or above norm • Phonological ability likely to be lower (especially following onset; may predict chronicity) 12 Copyright 2010 Delmar, a part of Cengage Learning. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

  13. Other characteristics suggested by the component model(Riley & Riley, 1979, 1984, 2000) Physical Attributes Attending Disorders: 36% (moderate & severe) Speech Motor Coordination: 68% Temperamental Factors High Self-Expectations: 70% Overly Sensitive: 73% Listener Reactions Disruptive Communication Environment: 61% occurrence Secondary Gains: 35% Teasing/bullying: 31% 13 Copyright 2010 Delmar, a part of Cengage Learning. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

  14. Summary of stuttering signs • Occurrence of stuttering in nuclear or extended family * • Parents identify child as stuttering • Weighted SLD score of 4 or greater • SLDs increase when communicating under pressure • SLDs accompanied by tense movements of head, face, & neck • Behavioral or formal indicators of negative psychosocial reactions to stuttering • The child self-restricts communication and social interaction • The child is easily upset by changes in routine or inhibited with strangers 14 Copyright 2010 Delmar, a part of Cengage Learning. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

  15. Table 5-1Yairi & Ambrose (2005) 15 Copyright 2010 Delmar, a part of Cengage Learning. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

  16. Guessing about chronicity Yairi & Ambrose (1999, 2005) • Recovery and persistency are inherited. • Children who stutter and have a familial history of chronic stuttering would tend to follow that same pattern, whereas children who stutter but have a familial history of recovery would tend to follow that pattern. • Children who stutter are more likely to recover if they have mild v. severe phonological scores 16 Copyright 2010 Delmar, a part of Cengage Learning. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

  17. Children likely to become fluentGreen flags • Female • Less than three years old • Few relatives who stuttered • Relatives who did, recovered • May be severe at onset • Rapid decrease in severity • Fewer stuttering-like disfluencies (SLDs) • Normal expressive language 17 Copyright 2010 Delmar, a part of Cengage Learning. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

  18. Children likely to be chronicRed flags • Male • Family history of persistence • Little or no decrease in weighted SLD by 12 months post onset • Phonological skills decrease after onset • 2–3 times more SLDs: • Children Who Stutter (CWS): SLD = 66% • Normally Fluency Children (NFC): SLD = 28% • Clustering of fluency breaks • 2+ part-word repetitions • Faster repetitions • More head & eye movements 18 Copyright 2010 Delmar, a part of Cengage Learning. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

  19. The best estimates of chronicity?(Yairi & Ambrose, 2005) • A strong family history is the single most reliable predictor of persistence and remission • Boys > girls • Decrease in SLDs first year following onset • A flat or inclining function suggests chronicity • Onset later than typical 33 months • Longer strings of part-word repetitions 19 Copyright 2010 Delmar, a part of Cengage Learning. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

  20. Table 5-2Yairi & Ambrose (2005) 20 Copyright 2010 Delmar, a part of Cengage Learning. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

  21. Educational impact(N. Ribbler, 2006) • academic competency • academic learning • social-emotional • independent functioning • quality of life issues 21 Copyright 2010 Delmar, a part of Cengage Learning. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

  22. Procedures for assessing children • Decision Streams (Zebrowski-1997-revised)—Figure 5-3 • Cooper Chronicity Prediction Checklist—Figure 5-4 • Stuttering Prediction Instrument—Figure 5-5 • A-19 Scale—Figure 5-6 22 Copyright 2010 Delmar, a part of Cengage Learning. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

  23. Procedures for assessing children (continued) • Behavior Assessment Battery (BAB) • Speech Situation Checklist—Emotional Reaction (SSC-ER) • Communication Attitude Test (CAT) • Speech Situation Checklist—Speech Disruption (SSC-SD) • Behavior Checklist (BCL) • KiddyCAT • Responsibilities of the IEP team (Ramig and Dodge, 2005) 23 Copyright 2010 Delmar, a part of Cengage Learning. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

More Related