Language Speech and Hearing Services in Schools最新文献

Purpose: Deaf and hard of hearing (DHH) children may develop compensatory strategies in language learning due to auditory limitations, such as using speechreading to process spoken information. However, it remains unclear whether similar visual compensatory mechanisms are employed by DHH children when acquiring written languages, especially in visually complex logographic systems such as Chinese. This study examined the characteristics of speechreading as well as phonological and visual-orthographic processing skills in Chinese reading among DHH children, utilizing both age- and reading level-matched designs.

Method: A total of 24 DHH children who used sign language participated in the present study, alongside 24 age-matched and 24 reading level-matched hearing peers. All participants completed a battery of assessments on reading and related cognitive skills, including Chinese character reading, sentence comprehension, text comprehension, phonological awareness, rapid naming, speechreading comprehension, and orthographic and visual processing.

Results: Whereas DHH children performed significantly worse than age- and reading level-matched hearing children on phonological awareness and rapid naming, they performed significantly better than the two hearing groups on speechreading comprehension and visual search tasks. In addition, DHH children also performed comparably to the two hearing groups on orthographic skills. Correlation analyses revealed that, for DHH children, higher phonological awareness was significantly correlated with better Chinese character reading and that faster rapid naming and better speechreading at the single-word level were significantly correlated with increased text comprehension. Additionally, the hit rate of real characters and visual processing showed a trend toward correlation with Chinese character reading.

Conclusion: These findings suggest that, despite challenges in auditory and phonological processing, DHH children may resort to visual compensatory strategies to facilitate their reading development.

Supplemental material: https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.31337374.

Background: School-based speech-language pathologists (SLPs) play a critical role in minimizing the negative educational impact of their students' speech sound disorders (SSDs). Current studies on SSDs in children are rich with discussions of therapy- and child-level contributions to gains in speech sound production. However, while many studies have supported using curricular content during language interventions, there is little theoretical and no empirical evidence to demonstrate that using academically integrated therapy materials during intervention provides a positive educational impact for students with SSDs.

Tutorial overview: This tutorial applies an implementation science lens to help SLPs translate research into feasible, sustainable school-based practices. This includes examining how the choice of therapy materials functions as an implementation variable that may shape students' educational access and success.

Application: The purpose of this tutorial is to guide practitioners to review adjacent research in school-based intervention practices for SSDs to determine if the materials used during school-based speech therapy could impact academic performance in the classroom.

Purpose: The purpose of this tutorial was to describe why identifying error type is important to clinical practice and to help clinicians identify typical and atypical phonological errors in English-speaking children.

Method: In this tutorial, we define atypical phonological errors and describe assessment guidelines for identifying atypical phonological errors. We then review research on clinical considerations for assessment and intervention when a child produces atypical phonological errors. Next, we consider implications for assessing children who speak languages other than English. We then present a case study demonstrating clinical decision making for a child who produces atypical phonological errors.

Conclusions: Atypical phonological errors are more likely to be associated with co-occurring phonological processing difficulties than typical phonological errors. Identifying children who produce atypical errors will guide clinical decision making.