A Survey of Speech-Language Pathologists' and Teachers' Perceptions of Collaborative Service Delivery.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare speech-language pathologists' (SLPs) and teachers' perceptions of collaborative service delivery in a school setting. METHOD: We created a survey for SLPs and teachers that included demographic questions and questions about the use of collaborative service delivery models, identification of collaborative partners, and perceived barriers to collaboration. Eighty-seven SLPs and 77 teachers responded to the survey from 28 states. We analyzed the data using mixed methods. RESULTS: The majority of SLPs reported that they used a combination of collaborative and noncollaborative service delivery models. Teachers also reported that the SLP at their school used collaborative and noncollaborative service delivery models. When asked to report on their collaboration experience generally, teachers rated their experience with collaboration more positively than SLPs. Teachers also were not as likely to identify SLPs as collaborative partners when compared with SLPs who identified teachers as collaborative partners. Finally, teachers and SLPs reported similar barriers to implementing a collaborative service delivery model. However, SLPs identified roles and responsibilities and training on collaboration as barriers to collaboration more than teachers. CONCLUSIONS: This study compared SLPs' and teachers' perceptions of collaborative service delivery in schools. The similarities and differences between SLPs and teachers can be used to help facilitate change in the use of collaborative service delivery models.

The Importance of Speech-Language Pathologists' Explicit Knowledge of Morphology.

Purpose Speech-language pathologists (SLPs) work with students with specific language impairment and specific learning disorder who are known to have deficits in morphological knowledge and morphological awareness. Thus, it is important that SLPs have explicit knowledge of morphology to classify, elicit, and correct morphological errors to improve these students' morphological knowledge and morphological awareness. The purposes of this clinical focus article are to summarize current evidence about SLPs and other educators' explicit knowledge of language, to identify information that supports explicit knowledge of morphology, and to illustrate the use of explicit knowledge of morphology with a hypothetical case study. Method A case-based demonstration of an SLP's use of his/her explicit knowledge of morphology to analyze a fourth-grade student's production of derivational morphemes in a spoken language sample and on a sentence completion task is presented. Results and Conclusion The SLP's morphological analyses and summarization of the analyses are presented.

Spoken fictional narrative and literacy skills of children with Down syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Children with Down syndrome (DS) exhibit below average nonverbal intelligence and impaired language skills; however, their spoken narrative production is a relative strength. AIMS: We examined expressive language skills produced during fictional narrative retells and analyzed the unique contribution of expressive language skills to word-level reading and reading comprehension of children with DS. METHODS AND PROCEDURES: The microstructure and macrostructure of fifteen, 8- to 18-year-old children with DS's narrative retells were analyzed. Receptive vocabulary, word-level reading, and reading comprehension also were measured. RESULTS: Narrative microstructure analyses revealed restricted syntactic and semantic diversity. Further analyses of sentence complexity revealed that children with DS predominately produced prepositional phrases and produced more verbs than nouns. Narrative macrostructure analysis revealed participants use of episodic components; however, their stories did not include mental state references. Narrative microstructure contributed unique variance to word-level reading, whereas narrative macrostructure contributed unique variance to word-level reading and reading comprehension. Additionally, strong correlations were found between narrative skills and literacy skills. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: Findings from this study support the use of narrative microstructure and macrostructure analyses as a valuable clinical tool to guide assessment and intervention planning for school-aged children with DS.

Adolescents' production of complex syntax in spoken and written expository and persuasive genres.

Analysing spoken and written language samples across different genres provides speech-language pathologists (SLPs) and educators with information about adolescents' production of complex syntax, an important socially and academically related language skill. However, researchers report that production of complex syntax is affected by genre and modality. Although the narrative and expository genres elicit a greater amount of complex syntax than conversational discourse, it is unknown whether differences in production of complex syntax exist between the persuasive and expository genres. The purpose of this study was to compare adolescents' production of complex syntax across spoken and written expository and persuasive genres. Spoken and written expository and persuasive language samples were elicited from 64 adolescents. Complex syntax was measured by calculating per cent of complex utterances and clausal density. Two repeated measures ANOVA revealed that complex syntax production was affected by genre and modality. Adolescents produced a higher percent of complex utterances and a higher clausal density in the persuasive genre than the expository genre. Adolescents produced a higher percent of complex utterances in the written modality than the spoken modality across genres; however, there was not a significant difference in adolescents' clausal density across modalities. There were significant interaction effects between genre and modality for percent of complex utterances and clausal density. The significant interaction effects suggest that differences in the production of complex syntax between the spoken and written modalities depended on the genre elicited. We discuss multiple implications and specific directions for future research.

Syntax and reading comprehension: a meta-analysis of different spoken-syntax assessments.

BACKGROUND: Syntax is a language skill purported to support children's reading comprehension. However, researchers who have examined whether children with average and below-average reading comprehension score significantly different on spoken-syntax assessments report inconsistent results. AIMS: To determine if differences in how syntax is measured affect whether children with average and below-average reading comprehension score significantly different on spoken-syntax assessments. METHODS & PROCEDURES: Studies that included a group comparison design, children with average and below-average reading comprehension, and a spoken-syntax assessment were selected for review. Fourteen articles from a total of 1281 reviewed met the inclusionary criteria. The 14 articles were coded for the age of the children, score on the reading comprehension assessment, type of spoken-syntax assessment, type of syntax construct measured and score on the spoken-syntax assessment. A random-effects model was used to analyze the difference between the effect sizes of the types of spoken-syntax assessments and the difference between the effect sizes of the syntax construct measured. OUTCOMES & RESULTS: There was a significant difference between children with average and below-average reading comprehension on spoken-syntax assessments. Those with average and below-average reading comprehension scored significantly different on spoken-syntax assessments when norm-referenced and researcher-created assessments were compared. However, when the type of construct was compared, children with average and below-average reading comprehension scored significantly different on assessments that measured knowledge of spoken syntax, but not on assessments that measured awareness of spoken syntax. CONCLUSIONS & IMPLICATIONS: The results of this meta-analysis confirmed that the type of spoken-syntax assessment, whether norm-referenced or researcher-created, did not explain why some researchers reported that there were no significant differences between children with average and below-average reading comprehension, but the syntax construct, awareness or knowledge, did. Thus, when selecting how to measure syntax among school-age children, researchers and practitioners should evaluate whether they are measuring children's awareness of spoken syntax or knowledge of spoken syntax. Other differences, such as participant diagnosis and the format of items on the spoken-syntax assessments, also were discussed as possible explanations for why researchers found that children with average and below-average reading comprehension did not score significantly differently on spoken-syntax assessments.

Morphological awareness intervention with kindergartners and first- and second-grade students from low socioeconomic status homes: a feasibility study.

PURPOSE: The effect of a morphological awareness intervention on the morphological awareness and literacy skills of students from low socioeconomic status homes was investigated. METHOD: A 9-week intervention designed to increase awareness of affixes and the relations between base words and their inflected and derived forms was conducted with students in kindergarten (n = 19), 1st grade (n = 21), and 2nd grade (n = 21). Groups of 4-5 students were provided with instruction 4 times a week for 25 min a day. RESULTS: Results showed medium to very large clinically significant gains in morphological awareness and literacy abilities (ds = 0.29-2.96) across all participants. CONCLUSION: The results of this feasibility study suggest that morphological awareness instruction that requires students to analyze, recognize, orally produce, and determine the spelling patterns of multimorphemic words leads to therapeutic effects within a population of young students who are at risk for future reading difficulties. Initial clinical implications, limitations of the study, and research suggestions are discussed.