Effectiveness of 1:1 speech and language therapy for older children with (developmental) language disorder

Self Cite

“…It was part of a bigger study investigating the effectiveness of all intervention provided one‐to‐one within the school during one school term (Ebbels et al. ).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Participantsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effectiveness of vocabulary intervention for older children with (developmental) language disorder

Wright¹,

Pring

Ebbels

2017

Self Cite

“…More recently, a number of studies have evaluated the effectiveness of vocabulary interventions for secondary school students with language disorder (in individual, group and whole-class settings), with mixed results. A few studies have shown one-to-one specialist speech and language therapy, in a specialist school for adolescents with severe language disorder, to be effective in improving word-finding difficulties (Ebbels et al 2012), vocabulary knowledge (Wright et al 2018) and a broader range of specific expressive and receptive language targets (Ebbels et al 2017). Mixed results were found by Spencer et al (2017b), who explored the effectiveness of a vocabulary intervention in a small group model within mainstream secondary schools.…”

Section: Vocabulary Interventionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…) and a broader range of specific expressive and receptive language targets (Ebbels et al . ). Mixed results were found by Spencer et al .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Improving storytelling and vocabulary in secondary school students with language disorder: a randomized controlled trial

Joffe

Rixon

Hulme

2019

Background Although language and communication difficulties are common in secondary school students, there has been limited research into the efficacy of interventions for adolescents with language and communication difficulties. Aims To investigate the efficacy of teaching assistant (TA)‐delivered narrative and vocabulary interventions to mainstream secondary school‐aged students with language disorder. Methods & Procedures A randomized controlled trial (RCT) of a language and communication intervention was used to evaluate the efficacy of vocabulary and narrative interventions to improve the vocabulary and narrative performance of adolescents (mean age = 12.8 years) with language disorder. The language and communication programmes (narrative, vocabulary and combined narrative and vocabulary) were delivered by TAs in the classroom, three times per week, for 45–60 min each, over 6 weeks, totalling 18 sessions. Standardized and intervention‐specific measures were used as outcomes. Outcomes & Results Twenty‐one schools with 358 eligible participants were recruited. The three intervention groups showed significant improvements ( d = .296) on a narrative latent variable defined by a standardized narrative assessment (the Expression, Reception and Recall of Narrative Instrument—ERRNI), but there were no significant improvements on an overall vocabulary latent variable compared with the waiting control group. Differential effects were found on some non‐standardized intervention‐specific measures with the narrative group making significantly more progress on narrative tasks compared with the waiting control group, the vocabulary group showing the same pattern on specific vocabulary tasks, and the combined narrative and vocabulary group making significantly more progress on some of the intervention‐specific narrative, and all the intervention‐specific vocabulary outcomes compared with the waiting control group. Conclusions & Implications It is possible to improve narrative but not vocabulary skills, as assessed by standardized measures, in secondary school students with a relatively brief group TA‐delivered intervention. There were differential effects for both narrative and vocabulary with intervention‐specific measures. Future work is required to explore whether more intensive and longer lasting interventions would be more effective and to identify which students in this age group are most likely to benefit from such interventions.

“…Direct treatment by a specialist is more effective for expressive phonology, whereas indirect treatment through caregivers seems to be at least as effective as direct treatment for other aspects of expressive language (grammar and vocabulary) and receptive language (Law et al . ; although see also Ebbels about an evaluation of the effects of direct treatment by a speech–language therapist (SLT) in older children with LD). Furthermore, McKean et al .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Development of a language screening instrument for Swedish 4‐year‐olds

Lavesson

Lövdén

Hansson

2018