Today Nicole Limbrick submitted her thesis as part of her Bachelor
of Health Science (Speech
Pathology) (Honours) degree at Charles Sturt University. Jane McCormack
and I have really enjoyed supervising her, and have been very proud that
already she has presented her work at the Speech Pathology Australia
National Conference and submitted her work for consideration in an
international journal.
 |
| Nicole Limbrick, Jane McCormack and the honours thesis! |
Here is the title and abstract of her thesis:
Designs and decisions: The creation of informal measures for assessing speech
production in children
Speech-language
pathologists (SLPs) frequently assess children’s speech to diagnose and
identify areas of difficulty, then determine appropriate intervention goals.
Formal measures are available for assessment; however, many SLPs use informal
measures within clinical practice. The purpose of this two-part mixed methods
study was to describe and explore the creation of informal measures for the
assessment of children’s speech. Study 1 involved a systematic review of 39
informal measures identified via journal database and internet searches,
scanning of reference lists, and submission by SLPs and researchers. The
measures were reviewed in terms of their conceptualisation (purpose and scope)
and operationalisation (evaluation and validation). Common conceptual features
included assessment of consonant singletons, single word sampling, computer
format, and picture-naming to elicit target sounds. Few measures provided
information addressing the operational criteria. Study 2 involved an inductive
thematic analysis of journal entries from eight creators of informal measures
that explored key considerations in the conceptualisation of these measures.
Informal measures were created due to the absence of measures which were culturally
appropriate and sufficiently comprehensive, as well as a desire to incorporate
technology. Considerations in the creation of informal measures included the
engagement of children and the measure’s useability. Informal measures
reviewed in study 1 largely reflected the considerations described by creators
in study 2. Informal measures featured innovative ideas which could be
incorporated in future test development.
