在言语和语言治疗中依赖非正式来源:为什么以及如何依赖?

F. C. Durgungoz
{"title":"在言语和语言治疗中依赖非正式来源:为什么以及如何依赖?","authors":"F. C. Durgungoz","doi":"10.46827/ejse.v7i3.3898","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study aims to explore whether and why speech and language therapists (SLTs) use informal sources to guide their intervention decisions for children with developmental language delay (DLD). A qualitative study was conducted. Sixteen Turkish SLTs participated in this study. The methods of interviewing, participant observation and audio diary were used. An inductive thematic approach was taken to analyse the data. Five main themes were revealed from the data: 'The lack of trust in the formal standardised tests and sources', 'experience over theory', 'trial-error, 'other professionals’ opinion' and 'instinct' showed that the SLTs value variety of sources and their cumulative experience when making an intervention decision. While evidence-based practice (EBP) has been increasingly used and encouraged in the SLT profession, this study shows that informal sources play a significant role in SLTs' clinical reasoning. This study sheds light on the behind factors of relying on informal sources to make intervention decisions. The role and dynamic of using informal sources could help understand the value and risks of this approach in clinical reasoning. \n \n Article visualizations:","PeriodicalId":378693,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Special Education Research","volume":"68 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-08-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"RELYING ON INFORMAL SOURCES IN SPEECH AND LANGUAGE THERAPY: WHY AND HOW?\",\"authors\":\"F. C. Durgungoz\",\"doi\":\"10.46827/ejse.v7i3.3898\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This study aims to explore whether and why speech and language therapists (SLTs) use informal sources to guide their intervention decisions for children with developmental language delay (DLD). A qualitative study was conducted. Sixteen Turkish SLTs participated in this study. The methods of interviewing, participant observation and audio diary were used. An inductive thematic approach was taken to analyse the data. Five main themes were revealed from the data: 'The lack of trust in the formal standardised tests and sources', 'experience over theory', 'trial-error, 'other professionals’ opinion' and 'instinct' showed that the SLTs value variety of sources and their cumulative experience when making an intervention decision. While evidence-based practice (EBP) has been increasingly used and encouraged in the SLT profession, this study shows that informal sources play a significant role in SLTs' clinical reasoning. This study sheds light on the behind factors of relying on informal sources to make intervention decisions. The role and dynamic of using informal sources could help understand the value and risks of this approach in clinical reasoning. \\n \\n Article visualizations:\",\"PeriodicalId\":378693,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of Special Education Research\",\"volume\":\"68 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-08-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of Special Education Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.46827/ejse.v7i3.3898\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Special Education Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.46827/ejse.v7i3.3898","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究旨在探讨言语和语言治疗师(slt)是否以及为什么使用非正式资源来指导他们对发育性语言迟缓(DLD)儿童的干预决策。进行了定性研究。16名土耳其slt参与了本研究。采用访谈法、参与观察法和录音日记法。采用了归纳专题方法来分析数据。从数据中揭示了五个主要主题:“对正式标准化测试和来源缺乏信任”,“经验胜于理论”,“试错”,“其他专业人士的意见”和“直觉”表明,在做出干预决策时,特殊语言教学者重视来源的多样性和他们累积的经验。虽然循证实践(EBP)在SLT职业中越来越多地被使用和鼓励,但本研究表明,非正式来源在SLT的临床推理中起着重要作用。本研究揭示了依赖非正式资源进行干预决策的背后因素。使用非正式来源的作用和动态可以帮助理解这种方法在临床推理中的价值和风险。可视化条
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
RELYING ON INFORMAL SOURCES IN SPEECH AND LANGUAGE THERAPY: WHY AND HOW?
This study aims to explore whether and why speech and language therapists (SLTs) use informal sources to guide their intervention decisions for children with developmental language delay (DLD). A qualitative study was conducted. Sixteen Turkish SLTs participated in this study. The methods of interviewing, participant observation and audio diary were used. An inductive thematic approach was taken to analyse the data. Five main themes were revealed from the data: 'The lack of trust in the formal standardised tests and sources', 'experience over theory', 'trial-error, 'other professionals’ opinion' and 'instinct' showed that the SLTs value variety of sources and their cumulative experience when making an intervention decision. While evidence-based practice (EBP) has been increasingly used and encouraged in the SLT profession, this study shows that informal sources play a significant role in SLTs' clinical reasoning. This study sheds light on the behind factors of relying on informal sources to make intervention decisions. The role and dynamic of using informal sources could help understand the value and risks of this approach in clinical reasoning. Article visualizations:
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信