Child Language Teaching and Therapy

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here for more information

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Baker, E.
Right arrow Articles by Bernhardt, B.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Child Language Teaching and Therapy, Vol. 20, No. 3, 287-318 (2004)
DOI: 10.1191/0265659004ct276oa

From hindsight to foresight: working around barriers to success in phonological intervention

Elise Baker

School of Communication Sciences and Disorders, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia

Barbara Bernhardt

School of Audiology and Speech Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada

A major goal of phonological intervention is to help bring a child's speech development to within normal range for his or her developmental stage. Reaching that goal may take longer than anticipatedfor some children. This paper illustrates an in–depth retrospective evaluation of assessment data from one child with a phonological impairment, who progressed slowly during intervention (Baker and McLeod, 2004). An alternative intervention plan is suggested that takes key factors from the assessment data into account, and utilizes a nonlinear phonologicalframework to set up the goal sequence. The insights gained from hindsight in this case may lead to foresight for other children s intervention programmes.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
LSHSSHome page
T. W. Powell
The Use of Nonspeech Oral Motor Treatments for Developmental Speech Sound Production Disorders: Interventions and Interactions
Lang Speech Hear Serv Sch, July 1, 2008; 39(3): 374 - 379.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
LSHSSHome page
T. W. Powell
An Integrated Evaluation of Nonspeech Oral Motor Treatments
Lang Speech Hear Serv Sch, July 1, 2008; 39(3): 422 - 427.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Child Language Teaching and TherapyHome page
F. E. Gibbon and L. Paterson
A survey of speech and language therapists' views on electropalatography therapy outcomes in Scotland
Child Language Teaching and Therapy, October 1, 2006; 22(3): 275 - 292.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Child Language Teaching and TherapyHome page
B. Bernhardt
Editorial: Maximizing success in phonological intervention
Child Language Teaching and Therapy, October 1, 2004; 20(3): 195 - 198.
[PDF]


Home page
Child Language Teaching and TherapyHome page
E. Baker and S. McLeod
Evidence-based management of phonological impairment in children
Child Language Teaching and Therapy, October 1, 2004; 20(3): 261 - 285.
[Abstract] [PDF]