INTERVENTION STRATEGIES & ACTIVITIES for PRESCHOOLERS with SPEECH

SOUND DISORDERSNancy Creaghead & Barbara Hodson

ASHA Annual Convention—November 16, 2006

PART 1--INTERVENTION for PRESCHOOLERS with HIGHLY UNINTELLIGIBLE SPEECH

Barbara W. Hodson, PhD, CCC-SLP

barbara.hodson@wichita.edu

CHILDREN with HIGHLY UNINTELLIGIBLE SPEECH-SOME CONCERNS

• “Critical Age” Hypothesis [5:6] [Bishop & Adams]

• “Matthew Effects” [Stanovich]

• Later Years--Some Common Difficulties

•Reading [Comprehension & Fluency]

•Spelling & Writing•“Multisyllabicity”•Imprecise Speech & Subtle Errors•Word Finding

SEVERITY CONTINUUMNote: Distortions & Assimilations may occur at all levels, but

Distortions more common for Mild/Moderate Unexpected Assimilations Common for Severe/Profound

_________________________**Profound

EXTENSIVE OmissionsMany Substitutions

Extremely Limited Repertoires

______________________________

~ModerateSome OmissionsSome Substitutions

________________________________

_______________________

*SevereMany OmissionsEXTENSIVE Substitutions

Limited Repertoires

___________________________

MildOmissions RareFew Substitutions

______________________________

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

CompletedLiquids [4-6 years]

“th” [by age 7]

• Phonetic Distortions [e.g., Lisps- Eliminated by age 7]

• “Multisyllabicity”• “Adult-standard”

TYPICAL PERFORMANCE3-7 Years

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 [even if not stimulable]

• Word-Initial /l/ [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 COMMENTSRegarding 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 [e.g., /b,d,g,z/]

• Unstressed [weak] 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 ASSESSMENTPRETREATMENT SCORES* OMISSIONS

Phonological Deviations Occurrence Percentages

Syllables 0Consonant Clusters/Sequences 118Consonant Singletons

Prevocalic 0Intervocalic 7Postvocalic 100

*Hodson Assessment of Phonological Patterns (HAPP-3; 2004)

PRETREATMENT SCORES-2CONSONANT CATEGORY DEFICIENCIES

Phonological Deviations Occurrence PercentagesSonorants

Liquids 100Nasals 76Glides 60

ObstruentsStridents 100Velars 100Other [Anterior Nonstridents/Backing] 33

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-3STRATEGIES: 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 StructuresCV 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) Final Consonants(b) /s/ Clusters [Stridents & Consonant Clusters](c) Velars [when stimulable](d) Liquids

CLIENT’S PHONOLOGICAL TARGETS for CYCLE-ONE

• Word-Final C: /p/; /t/; [1 hour each per semicolon]

• /s/ Clusters: – 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/ clustersAdded “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 forCYCLES 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

3:6 4:7 5:7Cons. Seq. 118% 62% 18%Post. Sing. 100% 0 0Stridents 100% 10% 5%Velars 100% 50% 5%Liquids 100% 100% 95%

TOMPD 195 65 30Severity 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 TIMEChronological Age Stimulus 3:6 4:2 4:7 5:7

c

c]

c

c

cccccc

Total Occurrences of Major Phonological Deviations [TOMPD]

Ages 3:6 to 5:7

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

3:06 4:02 4:07 5:02 5:07

TOMPD

MAJOR RECOMMENDATIONSExpressive 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

PATTERNSPHONOLOGICAL

&

METAPHONOLOGICAL

Appendix ASELECTING 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 BSOME SUGGESTIONS for ELICITING SOUNDS

• Final C [e.g., final /p/-pop lips & puff of air]

• /s/ Clusters [Draw finger along arm for /s/ and tap for the 2nd 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 CreagheadUniversity 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 self-regulated 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 InterventionMontgomery, 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 InterventionMontgomery, 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

1 Singleton Final Consonants

2 Stridency3 Stridency & Consonant

Clusters4 Velars

5 Liquids

6 Liquids

7 Stridency & CC8 Stridency & CC

Phoneme Targets

word-final /p/,/t/,/k/word-final /ts/,/ps/,/ks/word-initial /sp/,/st/,/sn/

word-final /k/word-initial /k/,/g/word-initial /1/(2 days)word-final //word-final //word-initial /r/ (2 days)word-final /ts/,/ps/,/ks/word-initial /sp/&/st/word-initial /sm/&/sn/word-initial /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: FricativesTheme: 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.