COMMUNICATION DISORDERS

Communication Disorders

Communication Disorders

Was the reason asserted clearly?

Yes

How does the study apply to communication disorders?

The reason of this paper is to present the results of a nationwide review that discover the occurrence, profiles, and documented impact of marginal students on expert teaching programs in speech-language pathology and audiology. Current strategies for prevention and intervention, components inhibiting implementation of such schemes, and significances for the student and the program are discussed.

Was relevant backdrop publications reviewed?

Yes

Describe the justification for the study. What does the study add to the literature? Is the first study of its kind or is it an adaptation of previous studies?

Employed with a marginal student is of present and increasing anxiety. Speaking to “when a scholar falls short to make the grade” (p. 51), the Ethics Roundtable (ASHA, 1999) comprised a recount of one student's deficient clinical performance and the reactions and intervention recommendations of three school members. The respondents talked of their expert obligation directed by Principle I in the cipher of Ethics (“Individuals will respect their responsibility to contain paramount the welfare of individuals they serve professionally,” ASHA, 1998), recounted employed with marginal students as “thankfully … infrequent” (p. 51), and addressed the implication of early and constructive instructional evaluation and intervention. Two current lines of investigation concern, if not reply, to the challenges encountered when employed with a marginal student. One is proposition of achievement in graduate school in communication disorders; another is preparation for the supervisory process.

Graduate programs normally use undergraduate degree point average (i.e., GPA) and presentation on the general aptitude sections of the Graduate Record Examination (GRE) to forecast who is most likely to do well. Other components utilised for proposition encompass undergraduate university and major engrossment, notes of quotation, writing samples of vocation interest and individual meetings, amidst others. Forrest and Naremore (1998) found that final graduate GPA and scores on the PRAXIS examination (i.e., the National Examination in Speech-Language Pathology and Audiology, NESPA) were predicted best (i.e., with 93% accuracy) at Indiana University by undergraduate GPA alone. The next best predictor was undergraduate major (i.e., persons with undergraduate majors in areas other than connection disorders did significantly better at the assesses of graduate performance than people with less diverse majors). Predictability was decreased significantly when GRE tallies were employed. Similarly, Ryan, Morgan, and Wacker-Mundy (1998), using the identical dependent assesses as those of Forrest and Naremore, also discovered GRE performance to be a poor predictor of success as a graduate student. In compare, although, Ryan et al. described that “traditional preadmission criteria such as GRE tallies, UGGPA (undergraduate GPA), and SLP-GPA (undergraduate GPA in techniques speaking to speech-language pathology), solely or in combination, have little or no relationship to the magnitude of a student's NESPA tally or GGPA (graduate GPA)” (p. 60). The topic of finding legitimate predictors of achievement in graduate school is magnified in lightweight of the extremely comparable nature of the admission method ( Nye, 1997) and is not restricted to the control and respect of connection disorders ( ...