INTERVENTION STRATEGIES & ACTIVITIES for PRESCHOOLERS with SPEECH SOUND DISORDERS Nancy Creaghead & Barbara Hodson ASHA Annual Convention—November 16, 2006 PART 1--INTERVENTION for PRESCHOOLERS with HIGHLY UNINTELLIGIBLE.

Download Report

Transcript INTERVENTION STRATEGIES & ACTIVITIES for PRESCHOOLERS with SPEECH SOUND DISORDERS Nancy Creaghead & Barbara Hodson ASHA Annual Convention—November 16, 2006 PART 1--INTERVENTION for PRESCHOOLERS with HIGHLY UNINTELLIGIBLE.

INTERVENTION
STRATEGIES & ACTIVITIES for
PRESCHOOLERS with SPEECH
SOUND DISORDERS
Nancy Creaghead & Barbara Hodson
ASHA Annual Convention—November 16, 2006
PART 1--INTERVENTION for PRESCHOOLERS with
HIGHLY UNINTELLIGIBLE SPEECH
Barbara W. Hodson, PhD, CCC-SLP
[email protected]
CHILDREN with HIGHLY UNINTELLIGIBLE
SPEECH-SOME CONCERNS
• “Critical Age” Hypothesis [5:6]
• “Matthew Effects” [Stanovich]
[Bishop & Adams]
• Later Years--Some Common Difficulties
• Reading [Comprehension & Fluency]
• Spelling & Writing
• “Multisyllabicity”
• Imprecise Speech & Subtle Errors
• Word Finding
SEVERITY CONTINUUM
Note: Distortions & Assimilations may occur at all levels, but
Distortions more common for Mild/Moderate
Unexpected Assimilations Common for Severe/Profound
_________________________
**Profound
EXTENSIVE Omissions
Many Substitutions
Extremely Limited Repertoires
_______________________
*Severe
Many Omissions
EXTENSIVE Substitutions
Limited Repertoires
______________________________
___________________________
~Moderate
Mild
Some Omissions
Some Substitutions
________________________________
Omissions Rare
Few Substitutions
______________________________
TYPICAL PERFORMANCE
3-7 Years
3-5 Years
• Syllable “Structures”
Omissions Rare
[by age 4 yrs]
[e.g., Final Consonants (by age 2);
/s/ Clusters (by age 3, but /s/ may
be distorted)]
• Few “Simplifications”
[Most (e.g., Fronting) Eliminated]
• Intelligibility > 90%
• “Adult-like” Speech
5-7 Years
• Phonemic Inventory
Completed
Liquids [4-6 years]
“th” [by age 7]
• Phonetic Distortions
[e.g., Lisps- Eliminated by age 7]
• “Multisyllabicity”
• “Adult-standard”
MAJOR OPTIONS for TREATMENT
• Emphasis on Phonemes
• “Traditional” [Van Riper]
• Least Phonological “Knowledge” [Elbert & Gierut]
• Maximal Oppositions [Gierut]
• Multiple Oppositions [Williams]
• Oral Motor Exercises
[e.g., Marshalla]
• Whole Language [Hoffman, Norris, & Monjure]
• Phonological Awareness
[Gillon]
• Phonological PATTERNS [Including Minimal Pairs
(Fairbanks) that Contrast child’s actual deviations]
POTENTIAL OPTIMAL “PRIMARY”
PHONOLOGICAL TARGET PATTERNS*
for BEGINNING CYCLES
*Target only those that are CONSISTENT deviations. Targets must be STIMULABLE,
however [otherwise would reinforce inaccurate kinesthetic image]
• Word/Syllable Structures
• “
[OMITTED Phoneme Segments]
Syllableness” [i.e., number of vowels/diphthongs]
– Compound Words [e.g., cowboy, baseball]
– 3-syllable/word combinations [e.g., cowboy hat, baseball bat]
• Singleton Consonants [Syllable/Word Structure]
– CV [word-initial /p,b,m,w/ if lacking]
– VC [voiceless final Stops /p, t, k/; final /m,n/ if lacking]
– VCV [e.g., apple]
• /s/ Clusters [for omissions, not substitutions/distortions]
– Word-initial [e.g., /sp/, /st/, /sm/, /sn/]
– Word-final [e.g., /ts/, /ps/]
Incorporate phrase: “It’s a [/s/ cluster word]” after child demonstrates facility producing
/s/ clusters in production-practice words [typically by 3rd cycle]
PRIMARY TARGETS-2
[for BEGINNING CYCLES]
• Anterior/Posterior Contrasts
[when stimulable]
• Velars [if “Fronter”]
– Word-final /k/
– Word-initial /k,g/ [occasionally /h/]
• Alveolars/Labials [if “Backer”]
• Facilitation of Liquids
• Word-Initial /l/
[even if not stimulable]
[preceded by week of tongue-tip clicking]
• Word-Initial /r/
[suppress gliding initially]
– Exaggerate vowel
– Do not blend initially
Incorporate /kr/, /gr/ [when child has velars--typically 3rd cycle]
GENERAL COMMENTS
Regarding Targets
• Approximately 60 mn per PHONEME target
• At least 2 phonemes per target PATTERN
• Reassess phonology between cycles
• Recycle Primary Patterns as needed
[until begin to emerge in conversation]
• Proceed to Secondary Patterns after
• Early developing patterns established
• /s/ clusters emerging in conversation
• Contrastive use of Velars & Alveolars
• Practice words for Liquids-produced without Glide
POTENTIAL “SECONDARY” TARGETS
Target Any of the Following that are still
Consistently Lacking/Deficient
• Palatals
• Singleton Stridents
• Other Consonant Sequences
• Vowel Contrasts
• Voicing Contrasts
• Assimilations
• Any Remaining Idiosyncratic Patterns
Minimal Pair Words especially useful for these
INAPPROPRIATE TARGETS for
PRESCHOOLERS
Don’t target aspects that phonologically “normal” peers don’t actually produce
• Word-final Voiced Obstruents
• Unstressed
[weak]
[e.g., /b,d,g,z/]
Syllables [e.g., refrigerator]
• “th” [e.g., mouth]
• “ng” [e.g., going]
• Vocalic /l/ [e.g., ball]
Note: Sibilants are appropriate targets for preschoolers only if
stridency is lacking [e.g., /t/ for /s/; /s/ cluster reduction], but
NOT for LISPS [which maintain stridency and do not have a
particularly adverse effect on intelligibility].
TREATMENT SESSION-BASIC STRUCTURE
• Review last session’s practice words
• Listening activity [approximately 30 seconds]
• 15-20 words containing target [NOT carefully selected]
• Child must not repeat these words
• Slight amplification
• Production-practice words [5-6 carefully selected]
• Activities for eliciting productions
•
•
•
•
• use cues/assists/models as needed [Goal is 100%]
• child “takes turn” after saying “target” correctly in
production-practice word [change activities every 7 or 8 minutes]
Metaphonological Activity [e.g., rhyming]
Probe for next session’s target
Repeat listening activity [with slight amplification]
Home practice [2 minutes per day]
CLIENT EXAMPLE
Age 3:5:15 [years:months:days]
HISTORY
• Upper SES home
• One younger sibling
[toddler]
• Health/Physical History Unremarkable
[except for congestion & upper respiratory infections]
• Receptive Language-Superior
*Adenoidectomy & PE tubes
[age 3:9]
CLIENT’s PHONOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT
PRETREATMENT SCORES* OMISSIONS
Phonological Deviations
Occurrence Percentages
Syllables
Consonant Clusters/Sequences
Consonant Singletons
Prevocalic
Intervocalic
Postvocalic
*Hodson Assessment of Phonological Patterns (HAPP-3; 2004)
0
118
0
7
100
PRETREATMENT SCORES-2
CONSONANT CATEGORY DEFICIENCIES
Phonological Deviations
Occurrence Percentages
Liquids
Nasals
Glides
100
76
60
Stridents
Velars
Other [Anterior Nonstridents/Backing]
100
100
33
Sonorants
Obstruents
Total Occurrences of Major Phonological Deviations [TOMPD] = 195
Pretreatment Severity Interval Rating = High Profound
[HAPP-3 TOMPD Severity Intervals: 1-50 = Mild; 51-100 = Moderate; 101-150 = Severe;
>150 = Profound (Top 10 pts-High; Bottom 10-Low)]
PRETREATMENT SCORES-3
STRATEGIES: SUBSTITUTIONS/ASSIMILATIONS
Occurrences
• Vowel Deviations
31
• Stopping
16
• Fronting
12
• Gliding
12
• Reduplication
10
• Labial Assimilation
7
PHONETIC & PHONOTACTIC INVENTORIES
& PCC
• Consonants
• /p/, /b/
• /t/, /d/
• /m/, /n/
• /w/, /j/
• Syllable Structures
CV and Reduplications of CVs
– No Final Consonants
– No Consonant Clusters
Percentage of Consonants Correct
[Shriberg & Kwiatkowski]
PCC = 10%
STIMULABILITY CONSIDERATIONS
& GOAL STATEMENT
• Stimulable [with assists (i.e., models, tactile cues, &
amplification)] at time of initial assessment [Age 3:6] for
• Final C [/p/ & /t/]
• /s/ Clusters [word-initial /sp/, /st/, /sm/, /sn/]
• Not Stimulable initially for
• Velars
• Liquids
Goal Statement
[for Beginning Cycles]
Enhance the following phonological patterns [to
expedite intelligibility gains]
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
Final Consonants
/s/ Clusters [Stridents & Consonant Clusters]
Velars [when stimulable]
Liquids
CLIENT’S PHONOLOGICAL TARGETS
for CYCLE-ONE
• Word-Final C: /p/;
• /s/ Clusters:
/t/; [1 hour each per semicolon]
– Word-Initial /sp/; /st/;
– Word-Final /ts/; /ps/;
• Velars: Word-Final /k/;
[7 sessions/hours]
[Summer Break--May to Sept—No Phonology Clinic Available]
• Word-Initial /k/; /g/;
• /s/ Clusters: /sn/; /sm/; /sk/; & recycled /sp/; /st/;
• Liquids: /l/; /r/; /kr/;
[10 sessions]
[Also facilitated/stimulated /h/ without actually targeting it]
[Cycle-One Total Sessions/Contact Hours = 17]
CYCLE-TWO TARGETS
• /s/ Clusters: /sp/ & /st/; /sm/ & /sn/;
/sk/;
• Liquids: /l/; /r/; /kr/; /gr/;
• Recycled all /s/ clusters
Added “It’s a ____” phrase
[2 sessions]
• Other CCs [Secondary Patterns]
– /kw/; /kj/; [e.g., queen, Q]
– Medial /st/; [e.g., toaster]
– Final /st/; [e.g., nest]
[Cycle-Two Total Sessions/Hours = 13]
CLIENT’S ADDITIONAL TARGETS for
CYCLES THREE & FOUR
• Liquids
• Palatal Sibilants
• Consonant Clusters/Sequences
–
–
–
–
Medial & Final /s/ Clusters [e.g., basket, desk]
Glide Clusters [e.g., cube, queen]
/r/ Clusters [e.g., /kr, gr, tr, dr/]
CCC [3-Consonant Clusters, e.g., /skr/]
[Cycle Three-13 sessions; Cycle Four-9 sessions]
Total for Cycles Three & Four = 22 Sessions/Hours
PRE-, INTERIM, & POST-TREATMENT
DATA*/OUTCOMES
Cons. Seq.
Post. Sing.
Stridents
Velars
Liquids
3:6
118%
100%
100%
100%
100%
4:7
62%
0
10%
50%
100%
5:7
18%
0
5%
5%
95%
TOMPD
195
65
30
Severity
Hi-Profound Moderate
Mild
Intelligibility
5%
65%
90%
---------------------------------[30 hrs] + [22hrs] = 52 Contact Hrs [across 25 months]
*Hodson Computerized Analysis of Phonological Patterns (2003)
PRODUCTIONS/TRANSCRIPTIONS OVER TIME
Chronological Age
Stimulus
3:6
4:2
4:7
5:7
basket
bApc
bQjI
bQsIt
bQskIt
cowboy hat
tAtcA
taUbehQt
kaUbehQt
kaUb]IhQt
glasses
dAtU
dQjI
dQtIs
gwQsIz
hanger
jojc
heNgU
heNU
heNU
ice cubes
Apu
aItup
aItups
aIskjubz
music box
mowIbA
mudibAk
musIbAks
mjusIkbAks
smoke
po
moUk
smoUk
smoUk
soap
po
toUp
soUp
soUp
square
pE
pIo
sEc
skwEU
television
jLjLjojo
tEjc IdZcn
tEwcsIscn
tEwcbIScn
Total Occurrences of Major
Phonological Deviations [TOMPD]
Ages 3:6 to 5:7
200
180
160
140
120
100
TOMPD
80
60
40
20
0
3:06
4:02
4:07
5:02
5:07
MAJOR RECOMMENDATIONS
Expressive Phonology
•
•
•
•
•
Identify Consistent Broad Deviations
Determine Priorities [Clients, Time, Individual/Group]
Select Optimal Targets [Patterns, Phonemes, Words]
Increase Complexity Gradually
Facilitate Development of Awareness
[Auditory, Kinesthetic, Semantic]
• Incorporate
• Slight Amplification [a few minutes & as needed]
• Tactile Cues [as needed]
• Models [particularly for new target]
• Enhance Metaphonological Skills
Develop Precise Phonological Representations
[see Mody; Stackhouse]
GENERAL RECOMMENDATIONS for CHILDREN
with HIGHLY UNINTELLIGIBLE SPEECH
• Early Intervention-Critical
• Individualize Treatment
• Evidence-based Practices/Documentation
• Enhancement of PATTERNS
ENHANCE
PATTERNS
PHONOLOGICAL
&
METAPHONOLOGICAL
Appendix A
SELECTING OPTIMAL PRODUCTION-PRACTICE
WORDS [for BEGINNING CYCLES]
• Monosyllabic Words [Real]
• Facilitative Phonetic Environment (Kent)
• Words in Child’s Lexicon
• Avoid selecting words with consonant at
same place of articulation as substitute
– [e.g., NOT cat, coat, can, kiss, corn, candy, gas, goat,
gate, gun, sock, tack, dog (if substituting /t/ for /k/; /d/ for /g/)]
– [e.g., NOT rope, robe, row, room, roof, rabbit; leaf, lamb,
lamp, lip, loop, laugh (if substituting /w/ for /l/, /r/)]
Appendix B
SOME SUGGESTIONS for ELICITING SOUNDS
• Final C
[e.g., final /p/-pop lips & puff of air]
• /s/ Clusters
the 2nd
[Draw finger along arm for /s/ and tap for
consonant for initial /s/ clusters]
• Velars
[Tap throat for /k/ to indicate “backness”;
sometimes use “dum dum” sucker to stimulate back of tongue;
occasionally model velar fricative /x/]
• Liquids
– /l/ [tongue tip clicking independent of jaw--1 week before]
– /r/-open mouth as wide as possible & emphasize/prolong vowel;
do not blend during initial cycles [Eliminate /w/ first]
• Palatal Sibilants [/s/ plus /j/ for “sh” (e.g., missyou)
/t/ + /s/ + /j/ for “ch”; /d/ + /z/ + /j/ for “j”]
[Reminder: Amplification often helps child]
SOME SELECTED REFERENCES-Books/Special Issues
ASHA Monograph (1994). Children’s phonology disorders: Pathways
and patterns.
Bernthal, J., & Bankson, N. (2004). Articulation and phonological
disorders.
Bleile, K. (2004). Manual of articulation and phonological disorders.
Gillon, G. (2004). Phonological awareness: From research to practice.
Hodson, B. (Ed.) (1994). From phonology to metaphonology: Issues,
assessment, and intervention. Topics in Language Disorders.
Hodson, B. (2007). Evaluating and enhancing children’s phonological
systems: From research and theory to practice.
Hodson, B., & Edwards, M. (Eds.) (1997). Perspectives in applied
phonology.
Hodson, B., & Paden, E. (1983, 1991). Targeting intelligible speech: A
phonological approach to remediation.
Kent, R. (Ed.) (2004). The MIT encyclopedia of communication
disorders.
Stackhouse, J., & Wells, B. (1997, 2001, 2006). Children’s speech and
literacy difficulties (I, II, & III).
SOME SELECTED REFERENCES-Articles/Chapters
Forrest, K. (2002). Are oral-motor exercises useful in the treatment of
phonological/articulatory disorders? Seminars in Speech and
Language.
Gordon-Brannan & Hodson (2000). Intelligibility/severity measurements
of prekindergarten children’s speech. AJSLP.
Hodson, B. (1994). Helping children become intelligible, literate, and
articulate: The role of phonology. Topics in Language Disorders
Hodson, B. (1997). Disordered phonologies: What have we learned
about assessment and treatment? Perspectives in applied
phonology.
Hodson, Scherz, & Strattman (2002). Evaluating communicative
abilities of a highly unintelligible preschooler. AJSLP.
Hodson & Strattman (2004). Phonological awareness intervention for
children with expressive phonological impairments. The MIT
Encyclopedia of Communication Disorders.
Nathan, Stackhouse, Goulandris, & Snowling (2004). The development
of early literacy skills among children with speech difficulties.
JSLHR.
Porter & Hodson (2001). Collaborating to obtain phonological
acquisition data for local schools. LSHSS.
Intervention Strategies and Activities
for Preschoolers with
Speech Sound Disorders
Classroom Intervention
Nancy Creaghead
University of Cincinnati
Questions to Consider
• Can/should we work on phonology in the
preschool classroom?
• Can/should work on phonology and language
be combined?
• Does the child’s severity level affect these
decisions?
• What is the evidence?
Relationship between Language
and Phonology
• It has been found that:
– Children with phonological disorders are more
likely to have language disorders.
– Children with language disorders are more likely
to have phonological disorders
– There is an obvious synergistic relationship
between the two – phonology is an aspect of
language!
– Current theories of language and phonologic
acquisition support this relationship.
Assumptions about Intervention
• Does work on phonology help language skills?
• Does work on language skills help phonology?
• Where is it best to target phonology?
– In individual phonological therapy?
– Concurrently with language therapy?
– In naturalistic environments – e.g. the classroom?
Treatment Strategies
• Phonology treatment only
• Language treatment only
• Sequential phonology and language
treatment
• Simultaneous language and phonology
treatment - non integrated
• Integrated phonology and language
treatment
Implications for Treatment
• The possibilities to consider are:
– There is generalization across phonology and
other language domains
– There is no generalization across domains
– There is generalization only in one direction,
i.e. from phonology to other language domain
only or from other language domains to
phonology only.
Generalization from language-based
intervention
to
phonologic
domain
• Hoffman et al.(1990)
– 2 children treated by:
• Minimal pairs for phonology OR
• Story retell for language
– Both children made gains in phonology. Child with phonology treatment
made slightly greater gains
– Child with language treatment made language gains, but child with
phonology treatment did not make significant language gains
• Tyler et al. (2002)
– 20 children treated for morphosyntax and phonology in different
consecutive orders
– Children who received morphosyntax first performed as well as those
who had phonology first.
– Suggests consideration of treatment of morphosyntax first
• Hoffman (1996)
Little generalization
from language to phonology
• Tyler and Sandoval (1994)
– Six preschoolers with both language and speech sounds
disorders
• received intervention on language (focused stimulation of
narratives), phonology (modified cycles: elicited imitation and
minimal pairs) or both
– Some generalization from phonology to language
– Negligible generalization for language to phonology
– Children who received combined approach made greatest gains
in both.
• Tyler & Waterson ( 1991)
Little generalization
from language to phonology
• Fey et al. (1994)
– 26 children in moderate to profound range
for speech sound disorders
• Treated grammar, e.g.
–
–
–
–
Focus on “will” for future time
Focus on “are” as aux and copula
Focus on “is” as aux and copula
Focus on combining sentences with “and”, “but”
• No direct effects on phonology
Evidence to date is not conclusive.
Possible Explanations for Discrepancies among
Studies
• Differences in:
– Research methodology
– Duration of treatment programs
– *Treatment methods
– *Severity of impairments across studies
• Importance of child’s ability to make the
sound
Phonological Awareness and
Reading Problems
• Research indicates that
– Children with reading problems often have
difficulty with segmentation.
– Sound segmentation ability in kindergarten
is a strong predictor of later reading ability.
– Sound segmentation may be a necessary
prerequisite for reading.
– Ability to read may improve sound
segmentation.
Relationship between Phonological
Awareness and Speech Sound
Disorders
• Webster and Plante (1992) k-2
– Children with normal phonology scored higher than children
with speech sounds disorders on 3 of 4 phonological
awareness tasks
– Performance was correlated with intelligibility
• Cowan and Moran (1997) k-2
– Children with mild speech sound disorders scored lower
than typical children on the 3 tests.
– Performance was not related to specific sound errors
– Children with accompanying language problems did not
perform more poorly than children without.
– BUT some children with speech sounds errors performed
better than the typical children.
– Severity may be an important factor
Implications regarding
Phonological Awareness
• Improvement of phonological production?
• Improvement of phonological awareness?
• Combination of intervention/instruction?
Treatment Approaches for
Speech Sound Disorders
• Contrast training
– Minimal pair opposition
– Maximal pair opposition
• Selected word practice
• “Seizing the moment”
– Using books
– Using the curriculum
– Intervening during play
We have to consider the treatment issues
when we plan Phonologic Treatment
in Naturalistic Settings – for example:
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Patterns/process selection
Sound/word target selection
Stimulability
Facilitating contexts
Intelligibility
Frequency of occurrence of the sound
Developmental appropriateness
Phonological knowledge
PRINCIPLES OF LANGUAGE
LEARNING
• Children learn language by learning at least
four sets of rules: pragmatic, semantic,
syntactic,phonologic/graphic.
• The language learning process is selfregulated by each child. The child must be
cognitively ready for the language function,
meaning and structure.
• Children learn language in appropriate
contexts which are experientially based and
meaningful for them.
• Children learn language when they have a
reason to communicate.
PRINCIPLES FOR
LANGUAGE "TEACHING"
• The content for language teaching must be
meaningful and relevant to the child and
sequentially based on normal development.
• Pacing must be at the child's own speed.
• Sequencing of skills should consider typical
development.
• Careful observation of each child will allow the
child to help us choose meaningful goals.
• The best motivator is natural reinforcement for
successful communication.
PRINCIPLES FOR
LANGUAGE "TEACHING"
• The context for language teaching should:
– be based on the child's level of cognitive
development;
– draw from the child's natural environment;
– involve interpersonal interaction;
– involve active participation on the part of the child;
– be larger than life.
Remediation Based on Normal
Development
• The acquisition of phonemes and phonological rules
is not an all-or-non process. accuracy comes
gradually and not for one sound at a time.
• All exemplars of a phoneme do not have to be
practiced for acquisition to occur
• Treatment of multiple error patterns in preschool
children presents different issues than treatment of
older children who have errors on only /r/ or /s/.
• There are advantages to working with children in
groups.
• Like other language rules, phonological rules are
learned through the process of communication in
natural and meaningful contexts.
Implications for Serving
Preschool Children
• The preschool classroom provides a natural and
meaningful context where communication is required.
• Every child does not have to work on only one sound
that is chosen as his target. Modeling and practice of
a variety of sounds can occur and is in keeping with
normal acquisition.
• Naturally occurring words can be used for practice
words.
• Modeling, exposure and the opportunity for practice
can be provided.
• Children can learn from each other and can be
encouraged to try when other children participate.
Evidence for Classroom Based Intervention
Montgomery, J., Bonderman, I. (1989) Serving preschool children with
severe phonological disorders. LSHSS, 20, 76-84.
• 9 children with severe or profound ratings
• Preschool class directed toward phonological
intervention followed Hodson’s Cycles Approach
• Direct treatment followed Hodson’s approach
• Snack and break included sound monitoring
• 5-minute home program each day
• Children attended 3 days/week for 2 hours for 2
two-month periods separated by summer break
(17 weeks/50 days)
Evidence for Classroom Based Intervention
Montgomery, J., Bonderman, I. (1989) Serving preschool children with
severe phonological disorders. LSHSS, 20, 76-84.
• All children decreased severity levels
either 1 or 2 levels
• Four children were dismissed from
services.
• No children met preschool eligibility
requirements at the end of the program.
• The child with least progress missed 17
days
Montgomery & Bonderman (1989) Targets:
Session One
Week Phonological Patterns
Phoneme Targets
1
2
3
word-final /p/,/t/,/k/
word-final /ts/,/ps/,/ks/
word-initial /sp/,/st/,/sn/
4
Singleton Final Consonants
Stridency
Stridency & Consonant
Clusters
Velars
5
Liquids
6
Liquids
7
8
Stridency & CC
Stridency & CC
word-final
word-initial
word-initial
word-final
word-final
word-initial
word-final
word-initial
word-initial
word-initial
/k/
/k/,/g/
/1/(2 days)
//
//
/r/ (2 days)
/ts/,/ps/,/ks/
/sp/&/st/
/sm/&/sn/
/sp/,/st/,/sm/,/sn/
Our Preschool Phonology
Group
• Traditional preschool classroom setup and schedule: 4
– 6 children
• Two days per week, 2 hours per day
•
•
•
•
Opening group: calendar, songs, poems, books
Craft activity
Snack
Free play
Our Preschool Phonology
Group
• Modified cycles approach to targeting patterns
for whole group
– Pattern changed weekly
• Patterns/sounds targeted within classroom
theme and activities
• Entire classroom designed to elicit target sounds
• Stories/books modified or created to include
target sounds
Target: Fricatives
Theme: At the Beach
• Books
–
–
–
–
–
Rainbow Fish
Rainbow Fish Lost at Sea
Rainbow Fish to the Rescue
At the Ocean
The Ocean: Alphabet
• Sand/Water Table
– Sand, seashells, shells, salt water, same/different, fish, swim, swish,
• Craft
– Painting seashells, brush
• Snack
– Fish, sand dollar cookies, seaweed slaw
Including Phonology in the
Preschool Classroom
• Calendar
– /k/ calendar, cold, week
– /s/ sunny, summer, snow
– /r/ rain, September, year
– /f/ Friday, February, fair
• Songs/poems
– /k/ Five Little Monkeys
– /s/ Itsy Bitsy Spider, The Wheels on the Bus
– /r/ Row, Row, Row Your Boat, The Wheels on the Bus
– /f/ Five Little Monkeys
• Play activities
– /k/ cars and trucks, blocks
– /s/ sand table, school
– /r/ rolling the ball, rocking the baby, making a road
– /f/ farm football
• Arts and crafts activities
– /k/ crayons
– /s/ scissors
– /r/ rock painting
– /f/ finger painting
• Snacks
– /k/ popcorn
– /s/ juice
– /r/ raisins
– /f/ fruit
• Book reading
– /k/ The Very Hungry Caterpillar (Carle)
– /s/ Cinderella
– /r/ Are You My Mother (Eastman)
– /f/ Find My Blanket (Brady)
Velar Opportunities for “Going
on a Picnic”
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Carrots
Cake
Candy
Cookies
Coolade
Ice cream
Coke
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Picnic
Milk
Bake
Take
Like
Sack
Back pack
Phonologic Treatment in
Preschool Settings
• Response to Intervention
(Speech Improvement?)
– Providing a strong curriculum for all children
– Providing targeted instruction in the classroom for at
risk children
– Providing an intervention
program to reduce the
number of identified
children
References
• Masterson, J. (1993). Classroom-based
phonological intervention. American Journal of
Speech-Language Pathology, 2, 5-9.
• Schlosser, K. G., Phillips, V. L. Building literacy
with interactive language charts. Scholastic Inc.
• Warren, J. The piggyback song book series.
Waren Publishing House Inc.