英国学龄前聋儿家庭的沟通干预

IF 1.2 Q3 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Deafness & Education International Pub Date : 2015-06-01 DOI:10.1179/1557069X14Y.0000000043
R. Rees, M. Mahon, R. Herman, C. Newton, Gordon Craig, J. Marriage
{"title":"英国学龄前聋儿家庭的沟通干预","authors":"R. Rees, M. Mahon, R. Herman, C. Newton, Gordon Craig, J. Marriage","doi":"10.1179/1557069X14Y.0000000043","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract UK professionals use a range of intervention approaches to promote communication development in pre-school deaf children by influencing the familys' interaction style. This investigation surveyed the approaches used and explored how these translated into specific practices. An online questionnaire was developed and reviewed by a panel of experts. Part 1 explored professional background and approaches used. Findings showed that the main approaches were: auditory verbal therapy, Hanen, ‘Parent–child interaction therapy’ (PCIT), and guidance from the Monitoring Protocol for deaf babies and children (GMP). Of the 158 professionals who completed Part 1, 142 used a combination of these approaches, with each approach selected at least ninety-three times. When participants were asked which approach or combination of approaches influenced their practice most strongly, over 25 per cent chose GMP (mainly teachers of the deaf) and over 25 per cent chose Hanen and/or PCIT (mainly speech and language therapists). Part 2, completed by 117 professionals, required participants to rate how frequently they suggested particular strategies to parents and how frequently they used particular methods to encourage parents to adopt those strategies. There was no evidence of an association between the approaches selected and methods used and very little evidence of an association between the approaches and strategies selected. Many professionals were recommending similar strategies and using similar methods but there was also some variation in practice. The overall findings suggest that future research comparing named approaches may be of less value than studies that seek to explore the potential effectiveness of particular strategies and methods.","PeriodicalId":44565,"journal":{"name":"Deafness & Education International","volume":"5 1","pages":"100 - 88"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2015-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"11","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Communication Interventions for Families of Pre-School Deaf Children in the UK\",\"authors\":\"R. Rees, M. Mahon, R. Herman, C. Newton, Gordon Craig, J. Marriage\",\"doi\":\"10.1179/1557069X14Y.0000000043\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract UK professionals use a range of intervention approaches to promote communication development in pre-school deaf children by influencing the familys' interaction style. This investigation surveyed the approaches used and explored how these translated into specific practices. An online questionnaire was developed and reviewed by a panel of experts. Part 1 explored professional background and approaches used. Findings showed that the main approaches were: auditory verbal therapy, Hanen, ‘Parent–child interaction therapy’ (PCIT), and guidance from the Monitoring Protocol for deaf babies and children (GMP). Of the 158 professionals who completed Part 1, 142 used a combination of these approaches, with each approach selected at least ninety-three times. When participants were asked which approach or combination of approaches influenced their practice most strongly, over 25 per cent chose GMP (mainly teachers of the deaf) and over 25 per cent chose Hanen and/or PCIT (mainly speech and language therapists). Part 2, completed by 117 professionals, required participants to rate how frequently they suggested particular strategies to parents and how frequently they used particular methods to encourage parents to adopt those strategies. There was no evidence of an association between the approaches selected and methods used and very little evidence of an association between the approaches and strategies selected. Many professionals were recommending similar strategies and using similar methods but there was also some variation in practice. The overall findings suggest that future research comparing named approaches may be of less value than studies that seek to explore the potential effectiveness of particular strategies and methods.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44565,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Deafness & Education International\",\"volume\":\"5 1\",\"pages\":\"100 - 88\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2015-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"11\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Deafness & Education International\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1179/1557069X14Y.0000000043\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Deafness & Education International","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1179/1557069X14Y.0000000043","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 11

摘要

摘要:英国专业人员采用一系列干预方法,通过影响家庭互动方式来促进学龄前聋儿的沟通发展。这项调查调查了所使用的方法,并探讨了如何将这些方法转化为具体的实践。一个专家小组制定了一份在线问卷,并对其进行了审查。第1部分探讨了专业背景和使用的方法。研究结果显示,主要的治疗方法有:听觉言语疗法、哈宁疗法、“亲子互动疗法”(PCIT)和聋儿监测方案指导(GMP)。在完成第1部分的158名专业人士中,142名使用了这些方法的组合,每种方法至少被选择93次。当被问及哪种方法或方法组合对他们的实践影响最大时,超过25%的人选择GMP(主要是聋人教师),超过25%的人选择Hanen和/或PCIT(主要是言语和语言治疗师)。第二部分由117名专业人士完成,要求参与者评估他们向父母建议特定策略的频率,以及他们使用特定方法鼓励父母采用这些策略的频率。没有证据表明所选择的方法和所使用的方法之间存在关联,很少有证据表明所选择的方法和策略之间存在关联。许多专业人士都在推荐类似的策略和使用类似的方法,但在实践中也有一些差异。总体的研究结果表明,未来的研究比较命名的方法可能不如寻求探索特定策略和方法的潜在有效性的研究有价值。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Communication Interventions for Families of Pre-School Deaf Children in the UK
Abstract UK professionals use a range of intervention approaches to promote communication development in pre-school deaf children by influencing the familys' interaction style. This investigation surveyed the approaches used and explored how these translated into specific practices. An online questionnaire was developed and reviewed by a panel of experts. Part 1 explored professional background and approaches used. Findings showed that the main approaches were: auditory verbal therapy, Hanen, ‘Parent–child interaction therapy’ (PCIT), and guidance from the Monitoring Protocol for deaf babies and children (GMP). Of the 158 professionals who completed Part 1, 142 used a combination of these approaches, with each approach selected at least ninety-three times. When participants were asked which approach or combination of approaches influenced their practice most strongly, over 25 per cent chose GMP (mainly teachers of the deaf) and over 25 per cent chose Hanen and/or PCIT (mainly speech and language therapists). Part 2, completed by 117 professionals, required participants to rate how frequently they suggested particular strategies to parents and how frequently they used particular methods to encourage parents to adopt those strategies. There was no evidence of an association between the approaches selected and methods used and very little evidence of an association between the approaches and strategies selected. Many professionals were recommending similar strategies and using similar methods but there was also some variation in practice. The overall findings suggest that future research comparing named approaches may be of less value than studies that seek to explore the potential effectiveness of particular strategies and methods.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Deafness & Education International
Deafness & Education International EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
7.10%
发文量
14
期刊介绍: Deafness and Education International is a peer-reviewed journal published quarterly, in alliance with the British Association of Teachers of the Deaf (BATOD) and the Australian Association of Teachers of the Deaf (AATD). The journal provides a forum for teachers and other professionals involved with the education and development of deaf infants, children and young people, and readily welcomes relevant contributions from this area of expertise. Submissions may fall within the areas of linguistics, education, personal-social and cognitive developments of deaf children, spoken language, sign language, deaf culture and traditions, audiological issues, cochlear implants, educational technology, general child development.
期刊最新文献
Accessible practices and accommodations during lectures for students who are deaf or hard of hearing in higher education The perceptions of Iranian deaf and hard-of-hearing university students towards Persian as a spoken majority language: A narrative inquiry Immigrant deaf students in the United States: Linguistic injustices brought to light Applying relational autonomy in US special education: Educators’ role in supporting parents’ decisions for deaf or hard-of-hearing children The technology or the child? Moving beyond technological fixes in deaf education in India and elsewhere
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1