Premium
The Surrey speech and language Profile
Author(s) -
CAVE DOROTHEA,
McGREGOR TRICIA
Publication year - 1995
Publication title -
international journal of language and communication disorders
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.101
H-Index - 67
eISSN - 1460-6984
pISSN - 1368-2822
DOI - 10.1111/j.1460-6984.1995.tb01649.x
Subject(s) - audit , psychology , scale (ratio) , speech therapist , medical education , work (physics) , officer , unit (ring theory) , speech language pathology , medicine , speech therapy , mathematics education , business , engineering , audiology , physical therapy , political science , mechanical engineering , physics , accounting , quantum mechanics , law
The County Education Officer for Surrey, the six speech and language therapy managers and their staff were all very concerned about the appropriateness and suitability of children being placed in language units, in particular as places were scarce. No suitable tool could be found to assist in identifying children and little work appeared to have been done on the topic. Surrey speech and language therapists began to develop a Profile and associated criteria to accurately determine a child's need to enter a unit. Department of Health audit money for the therapy professions was being allocated and a Surrey‐wide bid, entitled ‘Audit of the Appropriateness of Admissions and the Effectiveness of Therapy in Language Units in Surrey’ was successful. Funding was made available to employ an audit therapist and supply the necessary hardware and software. Over a series of workshops the language Profile was developed more fully for use as an audit tool. The Profile rates 30 items, grouped in four clinical areas: receptive language, expressive language, speech production and interaction on an 0–7 scale, ranging from ‘average’ to ‘very low’. Separate charts give guidelines for completion. Critiera were agreed for admission to a language unit. Alongside this work, educational psychologists in Surrey were developing psychological criteria which the child would also have to meet. The Profile was piloted on all children who were (a) in Surrey language units and (b) being considered for admission. A second Profile was completed on most of the children in language units in Surrey after six months' intervention to identify changes. Locally, a total of 263 profiles was completed and these were assessed against the criteria to see how many children were placed appropriately. The results led to discussions about the reasons for inappropriate placement and the accuracy of the criteria. Therapists felt that the Profile criteria were set correctly and should be used in the future for selection. The Profile was found to be extremely useful in summarising children's problems, giving an overview of the ability of the child whilst clearly indicating specific areas of difficulty. Following extensive use, the Profile and guidelines have been further modified and a final version is to be used along with an educational psychology Profile to determine language unit admission. The audit has resulted in the production of a much‐needed comprehensive clinical and managerial tool that appears to have more extensive uses. It can be used to assist in clinical decision‐making for any language‐impaired child and gives an instant visual picture of a child's communication skills. The Profile is now being used to determine the need for Statementing and work is beginning on how it may be used to assist in discharge. Importantly, the development of the Profile has led to much‐improved links with the Education Department and a greater understanding of the work of both parties. The audit results are not included here as they are primarily of local interest. The purpose of the paper is to share the clinical tool that has been developed.