Articulation dismissal

[Robyn]

Is anyone aware of research supporting/outlining dismissal from speech therapy once production of speech sounds have reached a point of positive change (e.g., 80% conversation)?

[jhofstad]

I have not heard of any exact criteria, but I strive for 95% success in conversation.

[slpbiddle]

Some fellow SLPs in my district went to a workshop featuring Wayne Secord (author of S-CAT artic. test and coauthor of CELF tests). They told me that he said to think about dismissal once a child gets to 80% accuracy.

[jiffy]

Questions for jhofstad: do you find that you have students who remain on your caseload for a considerably long time with 95% accuracy in conversation as your dismissal criteria? If so, how does this affect your caseload size and availablity to other students who may need services? Finally, what kind of setting do you work in? I'd be interested to hear opinions from anyone regarding the slp's role in articulation intervention in schools when it does not interfere with a student's ability to access the curriculum.

[Speechmaster]

Jiffy,
In my school district in Indiana, we dismiss articulation cases when the child has reached 90% accuracy in conversation. In order to be eligible for services, the child must demonstrate that the articulation delay is affecting educational success or causing problems socially (self esteem). We have been trying to enforce this policy very strictly this year; consequently, we have cut our caseloads considerably. Very few of the kindergarten students qualify, unless severely speech or lanugage delayed. It has been difficult for me to adjust to this reasoning.

[jhofstad]

By the time the kids are reading at 95% or better, they have usually met criteria for conversation in the speech setting. I then have teachers and parents monitor their conversation before and after they are dismissed. I do fluctuate between 90% and 95% depending on the individual student.

[Cheri]

But what about those kids who can converse with 90 or 100 percent accuracy in speech...so they have the ability...but outside of the speech room their accuracy decreases, sometimes dramatically?

[jhofstad]

I get feedback from the teachers on how the kids are doing. I will also observe in the classroom and catch them talking in the hallway. I tell them "my ears are always turned on", and they understand that it means I listen to them outside of the speech room when they least expect it. Based on the data gathered, I will then dismiss.

[Pacsl]

What about kids who just simply cannot monitor their own conversation unless you are constantly pointing it out to them? I have been working with a child on conversational speech for way too long. Before we have a conversation, we create a list of "s and z words and phrases" that he will talk about. I tell him right before he starts talking that I want him to use those words with his "good s and z sounds," but he immediately falls apart. He won't look in the mirror during conversational speech. If I have him stop and say a sentence over again, he will usually (but not always) correct the errors. He almost never catches an error on his own, though. We've tried videotaping, but he gets bored and isn't motivated to watch, much less to pick out and correct his own errors. This is despite tangible rewards (that he has picked out) for a certain percentage correct. We even have a hierarchy of rewards for higher percentages. This probably belongs in intervention issues topic, but I thought someone may have ideas since we're on the topic of conversational speech in artic.

[Liz8]

I think we tend to strive for perfection. We need to get over that. 80% accuracy is perfectly acceptable. Remember too that the IEP follows the child whereever he goes. Those goals are not just your responsibility. The parents and teachers are ralso a part of this process and have responsibility in seeing that the child reaches the goal. In the educational setting,we should not work with students unless their articulation interferes with their academic success. This is how we differ from services provided in a private setting. They can work with anyone whose speech deviates from what would be considered typical for the age. Don't accept full responsibility for the child's success. Teachers, parents and the child should have responsibility too. As for the child who does well in speech and then leaves the room and doesn't do as well...I'd make the child take more responsibility for his own speech and get help from teachers and parents. They need to be clued into the situation and they need to help. I would not go on indefinitely with this child. YIf the child is old enough, I tell the child like it is....you know what to do, now it's up to you. Good luck.

[Crowesgirl]

I also attended a presentation by Wayne Secord at my district's professional day. He wrote "TPFW" on the overhead and asked us if we knew what that stood for. No one answered. He then said, it's an acronym I use when I hear of a 6th grader who has been working on one or two sounds in speech therapy all through elementary school and continued to receive speech....too pathetic for words! His reasoning is that we cannot take total ownership for remediating artic errors to 90% in conversation. I thought it was an excellent point.

[marieglovr]

I agree with Sr Secord regarding dismissal. Children with mild artic errors need to take responsibility for their own carry-over after a point. After I have reached 90% accuracy in therapy, I begin carry-over work and instruction that the child can use to maintain his own good speech. Parents can be instructed that the child has learned all of the skills that he or she needs to use correct speech sounds. The student is now responsible for their own speech. (be cautious about dismissing too quickly (e.g. 90% in isolation or words) or skills will not be maintained)