Ditching the and A System for Data Collection

1
Ditching the and A System for Data Collection

• Rachel Arntson, M.S., CCC-SLP
• Kids Express Train, LLC
• P.O. Box 1462
• Maple Grove, MN 55311
• kids_at_expresstrain.org 877-876-3050

2
Multi-Tasking is a Major Key to our Competence

• How effective are you at simultaneously .
• 1. Relating to clients child and parents
• 2. Using effective therapy tools, and
• 3. Documenting progress?
• Multi-tasking requires efficiency and accuracy
  combined with compassion and flexibility.

3
Data Collection during Early Intervention Home
Visits

• The challenges include
• 1. Taking DAILY data.
• 2. Taking data that parents understand.
• 3. Taking data that gives the true picture of a
  childs progress.

4
Methodology

• A comparative look at treatment logs in an Early
  Intervention Home Visiting Program was done
  looking at a plus-minus system and a 0-3 scoring
  system. This study shows the benefits of using
  the 0-3 system, a simple but specific way of
  analyzing childrens productions.
• Randomly chosen treatment logs from the years
  2004-2008 were used to document the plus-minus
  scoring system and the 0-3 scoring system. Tables
  of treatment tasks including imitation of single
  words, answering questions, and naming objects
  will clearly show the scoring method and its
  usefulness for determining progress.

5
Lets Look at the Plus and Minus -

• What do the plus and minus really mean?
• Data taken on identical vowel productions

This student was a 2 ½ year old little boy with
severe speech delay and inability to imitate
basic sounds or words.
6
Disadvantages of the Plus and Minus -

• When looking back at data taken with a /-
  system, the scoring was confusing and unclear.
  Depending on the task and the possible criteria
  that constituted a or -, this system could vary
  as much as 40 to 100 accuracy.
• The 0-3 Scoring System shows more consistent
  ratings and therefore gives a clearer picture as
  to how the child responded for each task.

7
Potential Uses of the 0-3 Scoring System

• Imitation of sounds, words, phrases
• Naming tasks
• Answering questions
• Any articulation task

8
Scoring Imitation/Naming Tasks Using the 0-3
System
9
Keeping the same data of vowel productions with
one system

• The 0-3 Scoring System offers Accuracy with
  Efficiency

Accurate responses
Attempts
Accurate or with mild distortions
10
Scoring Naming and Imitation Tasks
This student was a little girl, age 2 years, with
no ability to imitate and with a vocabulary
limited to less than 10 words.
11
Scoring Question Answering Skills
This student was a little girl, age 2 ½ years,
with severe receptive and expressive language
delay.
12
Expanded Scoring for Articulation/Imitation
13
Expanded Scoring for Articulation/Imitation
This student was a little boy, age 2 ½ years with
severe expressive language delay and
developmental apraxia.
14
More Comparisons of the /- and 0-3 Systems
This student was a little girl, age 2 ½ years,
with an articulation disorder including omission
of final consonants as well as errors of many
other initial and medial consonants.
15
Discussion

• The 0-3 scoring system
• allows for more specific accuracy ratings without
  the continuous need to record the exact responses
  for each item presented.
• Phonetic transcription of utterances, although an
  often desirable way of recording childs
  productions, makes analysis and progress
  determination very time consuming.
• A plus-minus scoring system ( and -), although
  quick and easy, does not show the necessary
  progression of the objectives set for children.
• The 0-3 system allows quickness with specificity,
  an approach that is desirable for speech-language
  pathologists who desire to show effectiveness of
  treatment in a time-efficient way.

16
Bibliography

• Baum, H., Overview, Definitions, and Goals for
  ASHAs Treatment Outcomes and Clinical Trials
  Activities (What Difference Do Outcome Data Make
  to You?). Language, Speech and Hearing Services
  in the Schools, 29 (4) 246-249 (1998).
• Gallagher, T., Swigert, N., Baum, H., Collecting
  Outcomes Data in Schools Needs and Challenges.
  Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in the
  Schools, 29 (4) 250-256, (1998).
• Gillam, S., Gillam R, Making Evidence-Based
  Decisions About Child Language Interventions in
  Schools. Language, Speech and Hearing Services
  in the Schools, 37 316-319, (2006)
• Kamhi, A., Treatment Decisions for Children with
  Speech-Sound Disorders. Language, Speech and
  Hearing Services in the Schools, 37 279-231,
  (2006).
• Olswang, L., Bain, B., Data Collection
  Monitoring Childrens Treatment Program.
  American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 3
  (3) 55-66 (1994).
• Parnell, M., Amerman, J., Harting R., Responses
  of Language-Disordered Children to Wh-questions.
  Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in the
  Schools, 17 96-106 (1986).