L&L Therapy Services, LLC

The use of clinical faculty in place of professional or administrative staff is gaining ground in many universities. The authors used survey techniques to gather information from 23 different universities regarding the roles of clinical faculty and opportunities and requirements for promotion. Results indicate that the primary role of clinical faculty members continues to be clinical education, followed by classroom education. In keeping with this finding, most important for promotion in the clinical ladder was performance in clinical education and classroom education. All universities identified a variety of other tasks that were also important to be considered for promotion, including service at university, state- and national-level presentations, publications, and administration. Large ranges in these requirements indicated that the clinical faculty member can develop his/her area of expertise or interest in one of multiple categories to ensure success in promotion.

One of the most time-consuming tasks for clinical educators is reading and editing first drafts of clinical reports prepared by students. Clinical educators at Appalachian State University (ASU) devised a tool that would make this task more efficient for clinical educators without sacrificing student learning. In the fall of 2008, the authors participated in a workshop series about using rubrics for student assessment. Participants from across the university were asked to bring existing rubrics to revise or be prepared to develop new rubrics. We modified an existing general tool into a five-level rubric specific to diagnostic reports, with detailed examples and explanations for each level, a qualitative rating scale, and a quantitative rating scale. After using the rubric for two semesters, we determined that the rubric feedback was of benefit to the students, who were consequently better able to discuss their individual writing strengths and weaknesses. The question remains whether the benefit to the students outweighs the amount of time required for the clinical educators to complete the rubric.

The American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA) has expanded the scope of practice in speech-language pathology to include a focus on prevention (2007). Similarly, the knowledge and skills required of speech-language pathologists have broadened to include the prevention, assessment, and treatment of written language disorders. University training programs have a responsibility to provide graduate student clinicians with a wide range of clinical training opportunities that prepare them to enter the profession of speech-language pathology with the requisite knowledge and skills. Therefore, university programs must be creative in designing training opportunities that fulfill this mandate. This article explores one clinical training approach for the prevention of written language disorders through a systematic focus on emergent literacy.

This article clarifies the role of the speech-language pathologist (SLP) in audiologic screenings. The article addresses recommended procedures consistent with the ASHA Code of Ethics (2010) and other professional documents (ASHA, 1994, 1997, 2004a, 2004b, 2007). In addition, this article explores education needed by SLPs to conduct audiologic screenings.

Technology is constantly evolving, allowing individuals to communicate more quickly and effectively than ever before. Technological advances can often lead to controversy, as is the case with telepractice in the field of speech-language pathology. Telepractice is defined by the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA) as the use of telecommunication technology to connect the clinician with a client to provide services from a distance (2011b). ASHA states that this is a valid form of practice, but several states have declared it illegal. Universal telepractice access will allow delivery of speech and language services to individuals living in diverse areas of the United States. By reviewing policies and case studies surrounding telepractice in the field of speech-language pathology, this research study uncovered how telepractice can be more widely accepted by both health-care professionals and state legislatures.

As clinical supervisors in speech-language pathology and audiology graduate programs, we must consider whether our feedback to graduate student clinicians in the clinical training program is relevant, evidence-based, and culturally sensitive. Clinical supervisors are currently faced with a generation of students who are attached to their mobile devices and crave instant gratification. The question we often forget to ask, however, is whether or not our mode of feedback accommodates students’ technology preferences. Researchers and clinical supervisors at Radford University (RU) investigated the role of technology in clinical supervision through the use of the Apple iPad. Within a single semester, graduate student clinicians in the RU Speech-Language and Hearing Clinic were provided with 6 weeks of clinical feedback presented via handwritten documentation. The student clinicians were then provided with written clinical feedback via the iPad for another 6 weeks. The student clinicians were surveyed regarding the effectiveness and efficiency of both methods of feedback. They were also asked to provide feedback regarding their preference(s) regarding the feedback formats. Based on the results of the surveys, students preferred the electronic mode of communication in regard to timeliness and clarity of clinical feedback but preferred the handwritten feedback when considering helpfulness and comfort levels. These results are discussed and implications for future clinical considerations are presented.