 |
| 20 year medals for Prof Sharynne McLeod, Dr Julie Lancaster and Dean Will Letts |
 |
| Recipients of the 5, 10, 20 and 30 year service awards with Charles Sturt's writing desk and students' PhD theses behind |
 |
| CSU colleagues: Dr Rahul Ganguly, A/Prof Alan Bain, Jessica Graham, Jenny Dwyer |
 |
| Dean Will Letts with his 20 year award and Associate Dean Lucie Zundans |
 |
| https://buff.ly/33Cn7Wq |
Abstract: Speech-language pathologists (SLPs) may be approached by multilingual speakers wishing to improve their intelligibility in English. Intelligibility is an essential element of spoken language proficiency and is particularly important for multilingual international students given their need to express complex ideas in an additional language. Intelligibility Enhancement aims to improve the intelligibility and acceptability of consonants, vowels and prosody with multilingual speakers who are learning to speak English. This study aimed to describe the Intelligibility Enhancement Assessment and Intervention Protocols and determine whether the intervention changed multilingual university students’ English intelligibility. A multiple-baseline single-case experimental design was applied with direct inter-subject replication across two female participants whose home languages were Vietnamese and Putonghua (Mandarin). English intelligibility was assessed at multiple intervals pre, post and during intervention. The intervention protocol consisted of 11 weekly 1-h sessions with an SLP targeting English consonants, vowels and prosody. Following intervention, both participants displayed increased performance across most measures. For example, the Vietnamese participant’s percentage of consonants correct (PCC) increased from 62.5% to 85.0% in probe keywords. Effect sizes, when comparing baseline and withdrawal phases, were 5.5 for PCC, 4.6 for final consonants, 2.3 for consonant clusters and 1.6 for syllables indicating improvements in all variables measured. Her speech rate reduced, word stress increased in accuracy and she perceived less difficulty communicating in English. These promising results suggest further testing of the Intelligibility Enhancement Protocols is warranted to determine effectiveness as an intervention for multilingual speakers.
The Intelligibility in Context Scale (ICS) is a free parent-report screening tool that has been translated into over 60 languages. To date, there is cross-linguistic evidence regarding its validity and reliability reported in 18 studies of over 4,235 children from 14 countries (Australia, Croatia, Fiji, Germany, Hong Kong SAR China, Italy, Korea, Jamaica, The Netherlands, New Zealand, Portugal, Slovenia, Sweden, Viet Nam) speaking 14 languages (Cantonese, Croatian, Dutch, English, Fijian (Standard or dialects), Fiji-Hindi, German, Italian, Jamaican Creole, Korean, Portuguese, Slovenian, Swedish, Vietnamese). Cross-linguistic research provides support for the use of the ICS as a primary screening tool for young children to identify which children require additional assessment. Additional research has been undertaken to determine its relevance during assessment and intervention as a descriptive tool and outcome measure for children (and some adults) with speech sound disorders, cleft lip and palate, hearing loss, and autism spectrum disorder. The review concludes with an exploration of cross-linguistic possibilities of the ICS within implementation science.
Background: Many people with communication disorders wait for speech-language pathology services. Children may miss out on timely intervention and families may feel disempowered. Waiting list management poses a challenge for stakeholders, including children, parents, and speech-language pathologists (SLPs).
Aim: This paper aims to inform SLPs’ waiting list management by presenting a care pathway and example framework for planning, evaluating, and implementing waiting list management strategies. Method: This paper draws on literature and a programme of research involving: (1) submissions to an Australian Government Senate Inquiry (n = 133); (2) questionnaire responses about waiting lists from SLPs (n = 264); (3) design of an active waiting website based on feedback from members of the public (n = 119), focus groups (n = 16), and a review of existing sites (n = 25); and (4) a randomized controlled trial evaluating active versus passive waiting by children and families (n = 97).
Results: Studies 1 and 2 informed the development of a speech-language pathology care pathway, extending on findings from the literature, to promote holistic consideration of the duration and stages of waiting and support advocacy. Studies 3 and 4 were mapped onto Plan-Do-Study-Act cycles to demonstrate a potential framework for planning, evaluating, and implementing waiting list management strategies in clinical settings.
Conclusion: Action is needed to address waiting lists in the absence of timely intervention. When managing waiting lists, professionals, governments, and policymakers are encouraged to consider the impact of waiting throughout the care pathway and adopt a systematic, planned approach when implementing solutions.