“I just want to be a speech-language pathologist or an audiologist. Why do I need to learn about neuroscience and the brain?”

By Richard D. Andreatta, PhD

Author of Neuroscience Fundamentals for Communication Sciences and Disorders

I can’t begin to count the number of times I’ve heard some variation of this statement and question from CSD students during the many years I’ve taught communication neuroscience. But, I’ve realized that from the perspective of the student, it is a very important question to ask, one whose answer actually goes directly to the heart and central purpose of any textbook designed and written to educate students about the nature of the brain. Why do we need to study the fundamentals of neuroscience as a CSD student? I could spend hours trying to provide lofty explanations as to the virtues of neuroscience training in CSD, but I very often prefer to answer this type of question by highlighting one inescapable truth that genuinely surprises most CSD students when they hear it for the first time. The rationale for the importance of neuroscience training in the CSD curriculum boils down to one essential idea that none of us can run away from: whether you are treating a child for a misarticulated /s/ or /r/, a person who stutters, a patient whose had a stroke and can no longer use language, or someone who is hearing impaired, the essence of treatment and all clinical improvement is always about changing some aspect of the patient’s behavior, perception, or cognitive state. The moment you invoke the idea of behavioral, perceptual, and/or cognitive adaptations, one must fully realize that what we are really talking about are changes to the structure and operation of the nervous system itself. To put it simply and plainly, everything we do as clinical speech-language pathologists and audiologists WILL have a direct impact on the very nature, anatomy, and function of the client’s nervous system. I often encourage students to let this idea sink in for a bit and then fully appreciate the magnitude of responsibility that rehab specialists assume when they decide to treat an individual. We are actively changing the brains and nervous systems of our clients through our clinical efforts—period. With this realization in mind, how can students not want to study and understand the nervous system! As I tell students in my university courses, rehab specialists across the spectrum are, in effect, “practicing” clinical neuroscientists whether they realize it or not. And, I believe that it is better to realize this reality than not.

I often discuss with my students that neuroscience is actually one of the few topical areas in the CSD curriculum that literally cuts across and is applicable to virtually all CSD content areas. Neuroscience training is applicable to phonology, voice, stuttering, child and adult language, swallowing, cognitive rehab, motor speech disorders, auditory rehabilitation, hearing aid use, and the list goes on. Neuroscience cuts across these areas because of the fact that we are always talking about behavioral, perceptual, and/or cognitive adaptations when it comes to treatment practice and its impact on client performance and outcome measures. As I teach my course, I frequently emphasize that neuroscience training can help a student appreciate and understand why treatments do or do not work. I also emphasize that neuroscience training can help a student: (1) argue intelligently for the benefits of rehabilitation with other professionals or insurance companies, (2) understand scientific literature on the functioning of the brain during normal and disordered speech-language and hearing behaviors, (3) better understand brain-behavior relationships in order to make appropriate clinical assessments and treatment decisions, and lastly (4) become more creative as a rehab specialist by enhancing their own conception of neurorehabilitation and its potential for a given client (Andreatta, 2019).

As suggested by Barlow (1998), our traditional view of speech pathology will require a dramatic shift to embrace and incorporate different yet related scientific areas (Andreatta, 2008). Specifically speaking, the neurosciences are an area fully capable of contributing much to our profession’s conception of therapy practice. Behavioral therapy programs in general, either intentionally or unintentionally, take advantage of principles of experience-dependent neuroplasticity whereby patterns of behavior are remodeled and trained through graded and targeted activities taught by the intervening therapist. At their essence, clinical interventions function to organize the sensory and motor experiences of the patient by controlling the complexity, frequency, and form of various therapeutic tasks (Barlow, 1998).

From the point of view of someone directly involved in the training of students, it is evident that speech pathology needs to continue making up much ground to more deeply understand, embrace, and incorporate neuroscience principles. From simple articulation errors to the complex deficits associated with neurological or congenital disorders, all available evidence points to the conclusion that treatments provided by a therapist directly impact the individual’s nervous system. Principles of neuroscience and neuroplasticity form the means through which the therapist’s impact on a client’s nervous system will be realized (Andreatta, 2008, 2019).

(Excerpts for this essay were derived from the new textbook by Plural Publishing, entitled Neuroscience Fundamentals for Communication Sciences and Disorders.)

References:

  • Andreatta, R. D. (2008). Sensorimotor elements of the orofacial system: Reviewing the basics. Perspectives on Speech Science and Orofacial Disorders, 18, 51–61.
  • Andreatta, R. D. (2019). Neuroscience Fundamentals for Communication Sciences and Disorders. San Diego, CA: Plural Publishing.
  • Barlow, S. M. (1998). Real time modulation of speech-orofacial motor performance by means of motion sense. Journal of Communication Disorders, 31(6), 511–533.

Navigating Hyperacusis and Disorders of Sound Tolerance in a World of Sound

By Marc Fagelson and David M. Baguley, co-editors of Hyperacusis and Disorders of Sound Intolerance: Clinical and Research Perspectives

The world we navigate is full of sound. As this brief note is being written, the sound of lawn mowers, distant traffic, and snatches of conversations accompanied by rhythmic footfalls stream through windows and doors. When we attend to sounds in the environment, it is impossible not to analyze, and evaluate, and then react. We learn to distinguish information-bearing signals from those whose spectra, we’ve learned as listeners, merit minimal attention and low priority. Some sounds are intentionally attention-grabbing—sirens, doorbells, car horns, shouting—and intended to provoke responses from hearers in the vicinity. Indeed, many alerting sounds are constructed deliberately to be as compelling, and in a sense, as annoying as possible, cutting through distractions and other sounds to demand immediate and sustained attention (Patterson, 1990; Vastfjall et al., 2012). Unfortunately, such sounds may be particularly effective, perhaps overwhelming, for a segment of the population that suffers from experiences of excessive loudness, distraction, pain, and discomfort in their presence. The book Hyperacusis and Disorders of Sound Intolerance offers historical accounts, case studies, and new findings reported by individuals whose work in research labs and clinics focuses upon this underserved population.

At present, audiologists and their patients are adept at estimating thresholds of sensitivity, for example, pure-tone air and bone conduction thresholds. However, it is more challenging in the clinic to obtain important measures of suprathreshold processing, particularly those associated with atypical loudness and sound intolerances. As a result, individuals for whom the world of sound is unusually intense, vivid, perhaps perceived as toxic, endure problems that are difficult to assess and quantify. Interventions lack a substantive evidence base to support specific management approaches. Although most audiologists and otologists know of patients for whom everyday sound evokes discomfort, distress, aversion and in some, pain, such symptoms are difficult to quantify, and management correspondingly difficult to enact. Hyperacusis and Disorders of Sound Intolerance is intended to serve our professions’ abiding and growing need to understand sound intolerance mechanisms and their measurement. If, as is likely, the prevalence of tolerance-related complaints increases and diversifies over time, then the associated challenges will require more effort, empathy, and acceptance on the part of all stakeholders.

The book acknowledges the challenges that will be encountered. Indeed, even the vocabulary used to describe such experiences is varied and imprecise, including decreased, reduced, or collapsed sound tolerance, and several different uses of the term hyperacusis. Sometimes these terms end up signifying more or less the same thing, other times, any one of the terms can be ascribed several distinct meanings. Ultimately, the usage of each of these terms varies; given such fundamental differences, as authors and co-editors Marc Fagelson and David Baguley point out, it is not surprising that data regarding the epidemiology and natural history of hyperacusis are sparse, and inconsistent where it does exist.

From the perspective of recent and emerging investigations, authors Jos Eggermont and Roland Schaette report, in respective chapters, research involving animals and humans. Studies identify physiological mechanisms of loudness and sound-provoked pain perception that remain only partially understood, but whose existence will influence efforts to improve existing assessments and interventions. A group effort from Larry Roberts, Tanit Sanchez, and Ian Bruce reminds us there is lack of translation between the auditory neuroscience and its clinical community’s application of the science that remains difficult to bridge. Don McFerran’s chapter supports this notion as it comprehensively reviews the inventory of medical diagnoses and associated conditions that have influenced, for better or worse, management of sound intolerance.

The experiences of individuals with reduced sound tolerance is heterogeneous, and can vary on a day-to-day, or hour-to-hour basis. In some individuals tolerance is modulated by emotional and psychological state, personal history of trauma or trauma associations in addition to, or interacting with, the auditory environment. Gerhard Andersson’s history of applying psychological techniques of assessment and management for this patient group provides context to the oftentimes uneasy marriage of cross-disciplinary care. Similarly, as pointed out by Melissa Papesh and her co-authors, auditory-processing changes associated with traumatic brain injury require management that challenges standard audiologic rehabilitation.

Tools to assess the extent and severity of loudness tolerance symptoms are crude, and in some cases may be deeply uncomfortable for the patient, as may be the case in some methods of ascertaining the threshold of loudness discomfort using sound stimulation. Because patients with sound intolerance issues express unique impairments and aversions, the need to assess the patient’s self-assessed condition accurately requires validated intake instruments that are both comprehensive and specific. Kathryn Fackrell and Derek Hoare have each collaborated on intake and evaluation forms for sound-related disorders; their chapter addresses the development and use of these essential diagnostic components. Glynnis Tidball reviews audiologic measures that, while imperfect, remain in use and that, when interpreted reasonably, provide value to an intervention’s use and monitoring.

At present, the literature offers little in the way of hard evidence regarding therapy, and which interventions might be optimal for which type of symptoms or patients. Enriching or enhancing the patient’s auditory environment supports improvements in tolerance as well as accuracy monitoring the dynamic sound world. Grant Searchfield and Caroline Selvaratnam provide suggestions for hearing aid fitting approaches and clinical results that indicate the potential benefits of appropriately-fit devices for even the least tolerant patients. Influences of sound intolerance on pediatric patients remains underreported and poorly understood, however many relevant examples and interventions may be accessed, as indicated in the chapter by Veronica Kennedy and her co-authors. Also included is a chapter by musician and music engineer Rob Littwin. His is the story of a patient who received over many years information of mixed accuracy and effectiveness from many sources as he strove to recover from a dramatic, and career-threatening change in sound tolerance. His chapter includes specific listening regimens intended to change tolerance limits through the use of measured and safe sound experiences. Mr. Littwin’s history of sound recording gives a unique perspective to his experiences as a patient and as a seeker of solutions.

Marc Fagelson
David M. Baguley

 

Patterson R.  Auditory warning sounds in the work environment. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 1990;327(1241):485-92

Vastfjall D, Bergman P, Sköld A, Tajadura A, Larsson P (2012) Emotional Responses to Information and Warning Sounds. J Ergonomics 1:106. doi:10.4172/2165-7556.1000106

 

Confessions of a Reformed Developmentalist

Adapted from Speech Sound Disorders:  For Clinicians and Students

Ken Bleile

The Developmental Logic of Treatment

Knowledge of speech development is a foundation of speech treatment. To illustrate this relationship, suppose you determine that a child of 3 years has a speech sound disorder. Next, you might ask what I believe is the best question in our profession, “What am I going to do about it?” Consciously or unconsciously, your answer likely entails asking two, maybe three additional questions:

  • At 3 years, what does a child without speech difficulties know about speech?
  • How does a child of 3 years acquire speech?
  • How can I make speech easier to learn for a child with speech challenges?

What and When?

The first question asks what and when a child learns about speech. For this illustration, suppose your understanding is that a child of 3 years should be 75% intelligible, have a large expressive vocabulary, and speak in short sentences; those might then become possible treatment goals for this potential 3-year-old client. Importantly, another clinician might consult her knowledge base on speech development and decide that elimination of certain phonological processes offers this child the best help. Your answers may differ, but both you and the other clinician looked for answers from your knowledge of speech development.

How?

The second question asks how a child of 3 years learns about speech. For the sake of illustration, suppose you decide that the child would benefit from decreasing the occurrence of a phonological process—fronting, for example. Next, you might consider—either consciously or not—how children typically learn to overcome phonological processes. If you believe in the central role of social relations in speech learning, you will focus your treatment on fostering child-caregiver relationships, and you will likely use treatment techniques that simplify speech input within meaningful social contexts. Alternatively, if you believe that children learn speech mainly through reinforcement, then you will build your treatment on those principles.

Developmentalists

Everything in the previous discussion is based on a developmental perspective. There are other perspectives, of course, and there are also important differences between developmental viewpoints. At some point in your career, I hope you have (or already had) the opportunity to sort out your own perspective.

Strict Developmentalists

If you are a strict developmentalist, what (what is learned?), when (at what age is it learned?), and how (how does a child learn it?) are the only foundations needed for speech treatment. Like many clinicians of my generation, my training was to undertake treatment as a strict developmentalist.

Less Strict Developmentalists

Many clinicians today, myself included, have become less strict developmentalists over time, incorporating ideas and concepts into our clinical work. This “reformist” perspective often came about because a strict developmentalist approach can amount to replicating an environment that had proven unsuccessful for a child with a speech sound disorder. That is, when a child came from a home environment sufficient for speech learning, a strict developmental approach only continues an environment already shown to be insufficient for the child.

Another Type of How?

The third question (“How can I make speech easier to learn for a child with speech challenges?”) recognizes that you may wish to include nondevelopmental ideas in your treatment—perhaps hoping to “tweak” an environment to make it an easier place from which to learn. For example, you might decide that our 3-year-old child needs intensive speech production practice, far greater than found in a typical home environment, so you modify the naturalistic family-centered treatment to include more speech production activities.

From Development to Developmental Speech Goals

Speech development offers you—literally—hundreds of options to turn into developmental speech goals. As a shortcut, you can also turn to a published treatment approach, most of which contain one to many developmental speech goals. Baker and McLeod (2011a, 2011b) contains a wonderfully long list of 134 studies representing 46 different approaches. You can also find an excellent collection of treatment approaches with developmental speech goals in Williams, McLeod, and McCauley (2010).

 

References

Baker, E., & McLeod, S. (2011a). Evidence-based practice for children with speech sound disorders: Part 1 narrative review. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 42, 102–139.

Baker, E., & McLeod, S. (2011b). Evidence-based practice for children with speech sound disorders: Part 2 application to clinical practice. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 42, 140–151.

Williams, L., McLeod, S., & McCauley, R. (Eds.). (2010). Interventions for speech sound disorders in children. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.

Practicing Clinicians Need Practical Ideas

Phonological Treatment of Speech Sound Disorders in Children: A Practical Guide

Jackie Bauman-Waengler, Ph.D., CCC-SLP and Diane Garcia, MS, CCC-SLP

Why should I buy this book? What is unique about it?

The first unique feature of this workbook is that it is intended for practicing clinicians who work with children with speech sound disorders. From this workbook’s inception, the goal was to make something user-friendly that clinicians could use in various ways with a limited investment of time.  Another distinguishing feature is its summary of several of the most frequently used approaches for treating phonological disorders in children. While there are other textbooks that give a broad-based understanding of treatment of phonological disorders, this workbook offers a more in-depth discussion of eight different approaches. It describes the type of children this therapy would be optimally suited for, the diagnostic information needed, how to select targets for treatment, how to structure therapy, how to monitor progress, examples of intervention goals, and group therapy ideas. And, for every therapy concept, it provides examples of research which support evidence-based practice with this treatment protocol.

What are the strengths of this book?

This workbook has several areas of strength. First, its structure is a strength. Every therapy chapter offers a brief overview of the method, examples of supporting research, target selection procedures, sample goals, data collection strategies, treatment guidelines, and group therapy ideas. This structure provides the clinician with an easy to follow process from beginning implementation to monitoring therapy progress. Second, many worksheets are offered which can be tailored to meet the needs of individual children. This saves the clinician time during the assessment and intervention process. Third, case studies are offered in each of the chapters to demonstrate the concepts. There is also a separate chapter at the end of the book which is devoted to four children of different ages with varying degrees of severity. Assessment data for each child are given as well as a brief glimpse of a portion of therapy. Fourth, group therapy ideas are included in many of the chapters. To account for increased caseloads, many clinicians must often structure therapy within a group. These ideas offer group application possibilities for children with speech sound disorders and possibly language impairments.

How will this book help me practically in my job setting?

Many clinicians in a variety of settings are working with children with phonological disorders. With caseloads increasing, we often do not have a large amount of time to become experts in the various treatment options available, nor to decide which treatment protocol might be the most effective for an individual child. This workbook gives clinicians a streamlined version which is easy to use while offering specific data collection forms and protocols which assist and guide the therapist throughout the entire process. It also offers a large quantity of practical information that can be immediately used in therapy. Clinicians will find the progression through each of the treatment options easy to follow and practical to implement. In addition, every chapter contains two case studies that demonstrate the application of assessment information to structuring therapy. These case studies will give clinicians further support in developing appropriate intervention plans for their own clients.

What phonological intervention approaches are addressed in this workbook and how were they chosen?

The eight approaches in this book are: Minimal Pair Therapy; Multiple Oppositions; Maximal Oppositions; Complexity Approaches; Phonotactic Therapy; Core Vocabulary Intervention; Cycles Approach; and Phonological/Phonemic Awareness.  These eight were selected based upon several factors: research demonstrating positive evidence-based practice, frequent use of the method, ease of implementation, and availability of resources to support application.  Some of the approaches included represent comprehensive therapeutic protocols, while others primarily describe a specific target selection strategy.  All are designed to remediate phonological difficulties, yet do not necessarily exclude the principles which govern a traditional sound-by-sound approach.

What are the characteristics of children who would most benefit from phonological intervention?

As the name implies, phonological intervention approaches are designed for children with phonological disorders.  That said, all children who demonstrate a speech sound disorder, regardless of etiology, may potentially benefit from the principles of phonological therapy.  Appropriate recipients typically demonstrate more than one or two speech sound errors. They may demonstrate pervasive sound error patterns and exhibit highly unintelligible speech. With specific methods it is important that the child demonstrates a collapse of phonemic contrasts. In other words, one phoneme replaces many other phonemes. For example, the child uses “t” for “s”, “z”, and both the voiceless and voiced “th” sounds.  With other therapy protocols the child fits best if a very restricted phonemic inventory is noted.  Specific characteristics of children who would benefit from each therapy approach, such as age, severity, and types of errors, are provided in this workbook.  This information gives clinicians concrete and verifiable guidelines for selection of appropriate intervention methods for individual children.

What are the advantages of using a phonological intervention approach, as opposed to a traditional motor approach?

There are many advantages!  Phonological intervention targets often include patterns or groups of phonemes, rather than individual sounds.  This results in broader change across a child’s entire phonological system.  Phonological approaches have successfully demonstrated generalization to other sounds or patterns through careful selection of targets according to specific guidelines (Gierut, 2007). On the other hand, the traditional motor approach focuses on correct remediation of the physical production of individual sounds in a sound-by-sound manner. The traditional approach can take a much longer therapy time and generalization to other sounds does not seem to occur (e.g., Bowen, 2011; Dinnsen, Chin, & Elbert, 1992). In addition, phonological therapy targets the linguistic function of sounds, that is, the use of phonemes to create meaningful words.  This shift in focus allows clinicians to facilitate functional communication in natural contexts, thus improving children’s ability to communicate during daily interactions.

I have just been using the traditional-motor approach. Is that wrong?

The traditional motor approach, sometimes called the phonetic approach, is not intended for every child with a speech sound disorder. Decades of research have documented that some children make faster, and more broad-based progress with some of the phonological treatment options (Gierut, Elbert, & Dinnsen, 1987; Gierut, Morrisette, Hughes, & Rowland, 1996; Tyler & Figurski, 1994 ). If you have children on your caseload with multiple errors, then the traditional approach, going sound-by-sound through the child’s errors, can take an enormous amount of time. This is time they are spending in speech therapy and not within the classroom. The goal is to get these children out of therapy as soon as possible. Phonological treatment methods are one very successful way to do this.

 

Bowen, C. (2011). Target selection in phonological intervention. Retrieved from http://www.speech-language-therapy.com/ on 8/12/2018.

Dinnsen, D. A., Chin, S. B., & Elbert, M. (1992). On the lawfulness of change in phonetic inventories. Lingua, 86, 207–222.

Gierut, J. A. (2007). Phonological complexity and language learnability. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 16, 6–17.

Gierut, J. A., Elbert, M., & Dinnsen, D. A. (1987). A functional analysis of phonological knowledge and generalization learning in misarticulating children. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 30, 462–479.

Gierut, J. A., Morrisette, M. L., Hughes, M. T., & Rowland, S. (1996). Phonological treatment efficacy and developmental norms. Language, Speech and Hearing Services in Schools, 27, 215–230.

Tyler, A. A., & Figurski, G. R. (1994). Phonetic inventory changes after treating distinctions along an implicational hierarchy. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics, 8, 91–107.

Gender Biases in Traditional Voice Education

By Liz Jackson Hearns and Brian Kremer

Authors of The Singing Teacher’s Guide to Transgender Voices

Nowhere else in the musical arts are gender roles as staunchly established and upheld as in voice. The binary gender system presides over voice parts, repertoire choices, role casting, competitions, costuming, dressing rooms, and more. Because the established social gender roles of singers have never been deconstructed or recalibrated, the prevalence of the binary system is so ingrained that it often goes unnoticed until someone who does not fit into the system disrupts it. That disruption leaves many voice teachers and music educators at a loss for means to guide their students in ways that support them artistically and help build their careers in such a heavily gendered environment. It also leaves many gender diverse singers, or would-be singers, unable to find or rely on culturally responsive and pedagogically competent teachers, alone in trying to discover their own authentic, true voice. By engaging in discussion and education about gender-inclusive voice care for singers, we can develop new ways of hearing and guiding voices that affirm, welcome, and hold a place for all singers of all genders.

Voice Part Categorizations

One of the more obvious places that gender binaries impact singers and singing education is voice part classification. The traditional Fach system is, in many ways, an antiquated guide for the modern singer, and especially so for a gender diverse singer. Even choral voice parts are delineated and described as they relate to the gender of the singer. Two singers could have identical voice ranges, weight, color, and style; they could sing the same repertoire and audition for the same stage roles, but each might have a different voice part category because of their gender. Does the gender of the singer somehow change the sound of their voice?

Choosing to adopt a particular voice part category requires that the singer choose a gender, essentially. This can be limiting for transgender and gender nonbinary singers because of the traditionally gendered associations that accompany voice classifications. Female low-voiced singers, male high-voiced singers, and gender nonbinary singers are left without any appropriate voice part category. The ensuing confusion on the part of the casting directors may prevent transgender and gender diverse singers from being considered for stage roles, choral contracts, solos, or competitions, because these singers do not fit the mold. Rather than consider the validity and usefulness of the system and make room for growth beyond its outdated modes, educational institutions and casting agencies attempt to box these diverse and boundary-defying singers into established gender norms. Trans singers are then left bewildered with nowhere to belong, and face enormous obstacles to artistic and career development.

Repertoire

Because the singing instrument is the only instrument that creates words, singers are tasked with telling understandable and compelling stories, either as themselves or through character interpretation. The gender identity of the singer may prove to be a factor when deciding if a piece is the right fit, so that the artistic intent of the singer complements the artistic intent of the composer or librettist. Voice teachers may be inclined to suggest repertoire for their students that is either overtly or deceptively gendered, which may be appropriate for the voice quality but grossly inappropriate for the singer. There are very few, if any, pastoral pieces for bass-baritone or songs of sexual and military conquest for soprano. Trans singers may have few options when creating performances or audition books to find repertoire that aligns with both their technical skill and personal identity.

Voice Pedagogy Language

Voice teachers and students form deep personal and artistic bonds inside the voice studio, and it should be a safe place for discovery and exploration for all singers, regardless of gender. Traditional voice pedagogy assumes a level of comfort with one’s body and voice that is likely not present for a transgender or gender nonbinary singer. Trans singers sometimes must overcome the difficulties and limitations that arise from gender dysphoria, especially around voice. Voice is a characteristic through which we categorize people by gender, subconsciously and automatically, and trans people are often acutely aware of the ways that voice can influence how the world sees and hears us. That awareness can lead to extreme discomfort around making vocal sound at all, discomfort with the body as it relates to voice, discomfort or disconnection from sensations in the body, or hypervigilance about parts of the body or the sound of the voice.

Gender-inclusive voice pedagogy can include language that differs from traditional ways of teaching voice by giving agency and autonomy to the singer when learning new skills or taking on new vocal tasks. Gender neutral language also helps alleviate—or at the very least prevents exacerbation of—some symptoms of gender dysphoria for singers, especially when referring to the parts of the body needed for singing or qualities of vocal sound. Rather than describing the sound of a voice as “masculine” or “feminine,” the teacher is challenged to use more specific descriptors, which may actually improve pedagogical efficacy for all students, including trans singers.

First Steps

Transgender voice care is a burgeoning field and serves a population in need of qualified teachers and practitioners. As voice teachers, our responsibilities are to support our students and to help them meet their musical, artistic, personal, and career goals. This often requires us to push ourselves beyond our comfort zones and work together toward changes in the systems that hold our students back. There is still much to learn in this realm of voice, and the first steps involve recognizing and reframing our own subconscious judgments, self-perceptions, perceptions about others, biases with regard to voice, and other factors that we may carry into a lesson with a trans student that could pose serious barriers to that student’s success. The Singing Teacher’s Guide to Transgender Voices aims to aid in the development of a successful vocal pedagogy for the training of transgender singers, help the academic community understand the needs of transgender students as it pertains to vocal training, and engage in a broader discussion about the presence of transgender students in lessons and classes and how this positively impacts teaching, curriculum, and classroom environments.

Putting Theory into Practice through Hands-On Experience

By Bre Lynn Myers, Aud, FAAA

Author of Vestibular Lab Manual, Second Edition

Putting theory into practice can be one of the largest obstacles students and clinicians face particularly when the subject matter appears complicated. Guided hands on practice is necessary in order to obtain the confidence and skill set critical to properly instruct, collect, and analyze data from each test accurately.  In addition to guided practice, it is also helpful when learning something new, to have someone who is able to explain complex ideas with everyday examples. The Vestibular Lab Manual, Second Edition does both. The text begins with an overview of a well-equipped vestibular/balance lab and suggests observation and reflection as a means to begin the appreciation of vestibular diagnostics. Every student interested in learning a skill, be it in the health care field or humanities, should have an appreciation of the “final product” before beginning to dissect each part.  Following the introductory chapters, subsequent chapters break down vestibular assessment protocols piece by piece. Each chapter provides general instructions, tips, and guidance, suitable for practice with any manufacturer’s equipment.

Learning is also more fun and less stressful when you have a friend beside of you. Chapter exercises are designed to be completed with a partner or small group in approximately one hour, allowing for each participant to serve as clinical operator and “patient.” Once students complete the “guided practice” portion of the chapter, reflection and review questions or case studies are provided to reinforce theory with practice. By setting learning objectives, providing a little background and specific goals students and clinicians can move through each chapter at their own pace, freeing up lab instructors to provide specific feedback and address questions as they arise.

Bringing Active Learning to Cleft Palate

By: Linda D. Vallino, PhD, CCC-SLP/A, FASHA, Center for Pediatric Auditory and Speech Sciences, Nemours/A.I. DuPont Hospital for Children, Wilmington, Delaware

Dennis M. Ruscello, PhD, CCC-SLP, FASHA, West Virginia University, Morgantown, Virginia

David J. Zajac, PhD, CCC-SLP, FASHA, University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina

Authors of Cleft Palate Speech and Resonance: An Audio and Video Resource

Individuals with cleft and craniofacial anomalies represent a complex heterogeneous population. Like their medical presentations, their communication impairments can be diverse in nature and severity, the result of various causative factors.  Although some individuals with cleft palate may have normal sounding speech others will not. Some will present with obligatory errors that occur as a direct result of velopharyngeal dysfunction (VPD) (e.g., hypernasality, audible nasal air emission, nasalized plosives). Others will present with learned maladaptive articulations that occur as compensation for VPD (e.g., glottal stops, pharyngeal stops, fricatives, and affricates). Individuals with cleft palate may also present with obligatory errors as a direct consequence of oral structural anomalies (i.e., frontal distortions). Even still, there are those patients with and without cleft palate who produce unusual articulations such as nasal fricatives (i.e., phoneme-specific nasal emission) (Vallino, Ruscello, & Zajac, in press; Zajac & Vallino, 2017). Any one or more of these errors as well as those errors unrelated to the cleft palate can co-occur. Given the complexity of speech problems in this population, the student of speech-language pathology might find this all quite confusing. Misidentification of errors can lead to misdiagnosis and inappropriate treatment recommendations. The challenge to any instructor is how to effectively teach cleft palate, a complex disorder, to students; and create a successful transfer of evidence-based knowledge and skill to real-life clinical practice that will result in optimal care for the clients they will come to serve.

 

Traditional Teaching of Cleft Palate

A most pressing issue in the area of cleft palate is that clients with this disorder constitute a low incidence population, and many clinicians have limited academic exposure and/or clinical training in this area (Vallino, Lass, Bunnell, & Pannbacker, 2008). The typical, and most dominant, approach to teaching a course in cleft palate speech is pedagogical. The instructor disseminates (didactic) information about the features of the various speech disorders (i.e., resonance, nasal air emission, articulation, phonation) associated with cleft palate and students are passive recipients of this knowledge. Instructors may supplement the material presented with a textbook on cleft palate that includes illustrations using snippets of recorded speech samples of a particular speech feature to which the students simply listen. Presentations of case studies are rare. The students take notes on the information presented, only to recall it on a written examination (Siegel, Omer, & Agrawal, 1997). They are thought to understand the material based on the grade received for the course. As is known, the grade a student receives is not always a valid or accurate predictor of the student being able to apply his or her knowledge (Albanese & Mitchell, 1993).

The advantages of this traditional didactic approach are that it introduces the student to a fairly broad array of speech disorders associated with cleft palate that might not be otherwise covered in any other course, and the instructors have maximum control over the material presented. The disadvantage of this type of teaching is that it is essentially unstimulating, and that information presented this way tends to be forgotten rather quickly. As Jaebi (n.d.) pointed out, the didactic approach lacks student focused learning, emphasis on critical thinking, and process-oriented learning.  Importantly, it lacks interactivity. Students too have different learning styles and preferences, and if the goal in teaching is to make all students successful learners then this predominant one-way approach is not always a good learning fit for all.

The students who sit in our classrooms in 2018 are millennials. They have grown up with and interact constantly with technology, and this is affecting how they want to be taught. For this reason, it only makes sense that technology be used to bring to the student an interactive approach to their learning about speech problems associated with cleft palate. Classrooms are equipped with this technology (i.e., Smart Boards, data projectors and projection screens or LCD/TV monitors, DVD players, audio systems, and capabilities for video conferencing), which can easily provide access to real-life examples. Students learn well and retain information well when they are engaged, when they are active participants in the learning process.

Cleft palate is a specialty in speech-language pathology that particularly lends itself to learning both in the classroom and experientially, through problems and problem solving. The very nature of this “visible” disorder, the complex case histories, and the multiple disciplines involved can present genuine challenges for the student. However, these challenges can be used to actively involve the student in real-life situations.

Creating a hybrid of traditional classroom learning, problem-based learning and experiential learning translates to a student who becomes a confident, competent, resourceful, and effective speech-language pathologist. It’s about creating a student-centered approach to learning.  The goal is to provide the student with the necessary tools and resources to apply the skills learned to real-life practice.


Problem-Based Learning

Problem-based learning (PBL) is a student-centered approach to teaching that uses problem scenarios to promote concept learning and problem-solving abilities (Barrows, 1996; Hmelo-Silver & Eberbach, 2012; Savery, 2006). Its application has been promoted in the fields of medicine and health disciplines, including speech-language pathology (Burda & Hageman, 2015; Whitehill, Bridges, & Chan, 2014). In contrast to didactic teaching in which the knowledge is provided to the student, PBL turns to the student to apply his or her knowledge.  Through a discussion-based approach and questioning, an instructor facilitates students’ critical ways of thinking without providing them with solutions. Students work in collaborative groups to learn what they need to learn in order to solve the problem. They are presented with a case history (or scenario) that involves a challenge—much like in the real clinical world for which they have to provide a solution (see Box 1).

Box 1. Problem scenario (case history)

This is a 6-year-old male with paired bilateral cleft lip and palate. The lip was repaired at 3 months and the palate at 10 months of age. He has a history of otitis media with effusion treated with myringotomies and pressure-equalization tubes. Current audiologic examination showed normal hearing sensitivity, bilaterally. This child has a history of speech therapy beginning with Early Intervention. His speech is characterized by mild hypernasality, pharyngeal fricatives and stops as well as an /r/ distortion. During the perceptual assessment, it was a challenge for him to repeat sentences and he had to be redirected to task several times. The family is concerned about this child’s hypernasality and expressed that his teachers do not easily understand him.

After reading the patient’s history, the students begin by identifying the knowledge they have about the condition. They need to ask themselves, what facts do I already have and what else do I need to understand in order to resolve this problem? The students have to research the areas where they have identified gaps in their knowledge and the uncertainties they must resolve before finding the solution to the problem and making treatment recommendations. During this process, they have to sort through relevant evidence using a variety of resources.

The advantages of this type of learning include developing the student’s ability to make decisions and effectively solve problems, becoming analytical, working as a team, raising awareness of the complexity of issues, developing an ability to extend learning beyond a presented problem, and integrating theory and practice (Gentry, 2000, p. 13).

 

Experiential Learning

Anchored to PBL, is experiential learning (EL). PBL uses realistic problems to set up the learning leading to a diagnosis and recommendation. EL is a continuous process whereby knowledge is created through an authentic experience (Kolb, 1984). As in PBL, the instructor directs and facilitates. EL is a participatory event and, in effect, a holistic approach to learning in which the student progresses through a cycle of four integrated processes: concrete experience, reflective observation, abstract conceptualization, and active experimentation. (Kolb, 1984).  These features are summarized in Table 1. Central to both EL and PBL is encouraging critical and independent thinking in the student.

Table 1. Summary of key features of experiential learning (adapted from Kolb, 1984)

Stages Feature
Concrete experience Actively experiencing an activity
Reflective observation of the new experience Active reflection on experiences based on personal experience or what is known
Abstract conceptualization New ideas about the problem are formed or modifications of previous conceptions
Active experimentation Apply ideas to practical experience

Both PBL and EL are indispensable to learning through problem solving and although they would be particularly meaningful in a specialty as complex as cleft palate, they have been insufficiently explored in this specialty.  The strength of learning comes from an integration of these two approaches. PBL provides an opportunity to apply a student’s knowledge to a relevant problem. EL provides the experience through avenues such as audio and/or video recordings which bring the problem to life. It draws the connection between the history and the actual presentation of the problem, and further supports ongoing problem comprehension. Moreover, in contrast to didactic teaching, the instructor’s role in PBL and EL is transformed from one that disseminates all the information and answers to one of guidance and facilitation. Gentry (2000, p. 11) noted that instructors in this role often experience revitalization about teaching and a renewed interest in the topic being presented.


Integrating PBL and EL in the Classroom for Cleft Palate        

The experience of audio and/or videotape recordings can be effective when in teaching a course in cleft palate where it is important to integrate coursework and an experience, while also addressing the learning preferences of the student. The recordings are more than just a speech sample, and when presented alone, are ineffective in learning about cleft palate. The true value of these recordings along with case histories and other supplemental information is the added “real-life” dimension to teaching that is unavailable in textbooks even with their short speech samples. They help explain concepts and act as a trigger for discussion. Because the recordings can be played over and over again or stopped at various points, students have an opportunity to hear those aspects of speech that they may have missed or did not understand the first time and to also engage in further discussion about the problem.

A true experiential learning in cleft palate involves audio and video recordings and all of the steps and processes from PBL and EL. Figure 1 illustrates this type of learning within the classroom.

The first step involves a concrete experience in which an audio and/or video recording of the case is presented. The second step involves making observations and reflecting on what was heard and seen in the experience, facilitated by the instructor, and engagement with peers. Using a white board, a systematic approach to problem-solving can be illustrated. Here, the facilitator or instructor can be helpful in offering guiding questions that lead to further understanding of the problem.  Third, the remarks and discussions lead to abstract conceptualization (analysis) and conclusions about the problem and recommendations. During this time misinformation and confusion about the client and speech can be clarified. The fourth step is to test this new-found knowledge during independent practices using real-world problems and/or clinical placements.  This process is a valuable guide in understanding any case regardless of complexity.

In summary, a hybrid of didactic, problem-based learning, and experiential learning will enhance the training experience of the student studying cleft palate. Audio and video recordings can be effective in this process where integration of theory and actual practice are so vital. The role of these recordings is to provide concrete experience along with other steps in the learning process. Given that there have been so few opportunities like this in the past, we have written our new textbook, Cleft Palate Speech and Resonance: An Audio and Video Resource, to facilitate problem based and experiential learning in the classroom (Vallino et al., in press).

 

References

Albanese, M. A., & Mitchell, S. (1993). Problem-based learning: A review of literature on its outcomes and implementation issues. ACADEMIC MEDICINE-PHILADELPHIA, 68, 52.

Barrows, H. S. (1996). Problem‐based learning in medicine and beyond: A brief overview. New Directions for Teaching and Learning1996(68), 3–12.

Burda, A. N., & Hageman, C. F. (2015). Problem-based learning in speech language pathology: Format and feedback. Contemporary Issues in Communication Science and Disorders42, 47–71.

Gentry, E. (2000). Creating student-centered, problem-based classrooms. University of Alabama in Huntsville. URL: http://www.scimas.sa.edu.au/scimas/files/SCIMAS/Articles/Education/project_based_classroom.pdf

Hmelo-Silver, C. E., & Eberbach, C. (2012). Learning theories and problem-based learning. In S. Bridges, C. McGrath & T. L. Whitehill (Eds.), Problem-based learning in clinical education (pp. 3–17). Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Springer.

Jaebi, I. “Disadvantages of traditional classroom training.” Synonym, http://classroom.synonym.com/disadvantages-traditional-classroom-training-7866705.html. Retrieved March 10, 2018.

Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development (Vol. 1). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Savery, J. R. (2006). Overview of problem-based learning: Definitions and distinctions. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 1, 1, Article 3.

Siegel, P. H., Omer, K., & Agrawal, S. P. (1997). Video simulation of an audit: an experiment in experiential learning theory. Accounting Education, 6(3), 217–230.

Vallino, L. D., Lass, N. J., Bunnell, H. T., & Pannbacker, M. (2008). Academic and clinical training in cleft palate for speech-language pathologists. The Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Journal, 45(4), 371–380.

Vallino, L.D., Ruscello, M., & Zajac, D.J. (in press). Cleft palate speech and resonance: An audio and video resource. San Diego, CA: Plural Publishing.

Whitehill, T. L., Bridges, S., & Chan, K. (2014). Problem-based learning (PBL) and speech-language pathology: A tutorial. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics28(1–2), 5–23.

Zajac, D. J., & Vallino, L. D. (2016). Evaluation and management of cleft lip and palate: A developmental perspective. San Diego, CA: Plural Publishing.

 

From Multiculturalism to Critical Consciousness: Updated Concepts for Providing Culturally Responsive Practices at Home and Abroad

By Yvette D. Hyter, PhD, CCC-SLP

Co-Author of Culturally Responsive Practices in Speech, Language, and Hearing Sciences

In the 1990s a new generation of faculty members in Communication Sciences and Disorders (CSD) emerged, ready to infuse courses or to develop and teach courses focused on “multicultural content,” which was the term at the time. There were a limited number of comprehensive texts on how to employ culturally relevant practices as a speech-language pathologist. Many of the SLP faculty who were teaching courses about “multiculturalism,” or “cultural competence,” often utilized texts from other fields, such as education, nursing, or communication and rhetoric, and relied heavily on published articles in disciplines including anthropology, political science, nursing, and social work. It was not until mid-1990s that one of the more complete books on multiculturalism in communication sciences and disorders (CSD) was published (e.g., Battle, 1993, 2012). Nevertheless, as the world has become more complex and smaller as a result of global processes, new concepts and comprehensive practices that consider causal relations are required.

Multiculturalism is a contested concept, but typically refers to including people from diverse cultural backgrounds (Malik, 2015) in program development or service delivery for example.  Multiculturalism as a concept falls short, primarily because it suggests that inclusion (or assimilation) is the principle issue. Although health care providers and educators offer and provide services to all people regardless of their cultural (or racialized class, ethnic, gender, national, or linguistic) backgrounds (e.g., inclusion), services can remain inadequate or irrelevant if we also do not consider how services might be reconceptualized or changed to meet the cultural premises of those receiving services.

Cultural competence, a concept that emerged in the 1980s (e.g., Cross, Bazron, Dennis, & Isaacs, 1989), is more useful than multiculturalism but is weighed down by preconceived notions of competence. The perception is that “competence” refers to skills or knowledge that one acquires, and that those skills can be completed or mastered (checked off), are static, and independent of context or history (Hyter & Salas-Provance, 2019; Willbergh, 2015). This perception of competence has caused many disciplines in the health professions to move away from it in favor of other terms.

Cultural responsiveness, a term coined by Ladson-Billings (1995), seems to be more accessible than multiculturalism and cultural competence. It refers to engaging in practices that are consistent with or relevant to the cultural values, beliefs, and assumptions of a person or group with whom a solution (or clinical outcome) is co-created. In this manner, responsiveness is inherently dynamic, dependent on context and shared historical memories.  Hyter (2014) has conceptualized culturally responsive practices as those that take place beyond the micro level (individual), but also at the meso (community and family) and macro levels (social structures such as economics, politics, culture, cultural institutions, and state sanctioned violence [Hyter & Salas-Provance, 2019, p. 171]). Culturally responsive practices require knowledge that is not always a part of the CSD curriculum such as critical consciousness—the ability to deconstruct one’s own social, cultural, historical, economic, and political situation and co-construct solutions to problems (Freire, 1974); dialectical thinking—the ability to synthesize conflicting perspectives; cultural humility – believing that cultural practices and perspectives different from one’s own are as valuable as one’s own  (Ortega & Faller 2011; Tervalon & Murray-Garcia, 1998); and cultural reciprocity—understanding and using the client’s cultural beliefs to co-construct (with the client) services provided (Kalyanpur & Harry, 2012). Culturally responsive practices also require an elevation of concepts that are already inherent in CSD clinical practice such as critical thinking, critical self-awareness, and reflection.  To truly work at the level of cultural responsiveness or relevancy in the United States or abroad, as a profession, speech-language pathologists and audiologist need to adapt new vocabulary and new theoretical frameworks that will help us question the dominant premises, change the terms of public and professional debate, and address the shared problems of structurally excluded groups with interventions that acknowledge and incorporate their world view.

References

Battle, D. E. (1993). Communication disorders in multicultural populations. Boston, MA:utterworth-Heinemann

Battle, D. E. (2012). Communication disorders in multicultural and international populations. 4th edition. St. Louis, MO: Mosby

Cross, T., Bazron, B., Dennis, K., & Isaacs, M. (1989) Towards a culturally competent system of care: A monograph on effective services for minority children who are severely emotionally disturbed. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Child Development Center, CASSP Technical Assistance Center. Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED330171.pdf

Friere, P. (1974). Education for critical consciousness. New York, NY: Continuum

Hyter, Y. D. (2014). A conceptual framework for responsive global engagement in communication sciences and disorders. Topics in Language Development, 34(2), 103–120.

Hyter, Y. D., & Salas-Provance, M. (2019). Culturally responsive practices in speech, language and hearing sciences. San Diego, CA: Plural Publishing.

Kalyanpur, M., & Harry, B. (2012). Cultural reciprocity in special education: Building family-professional relationships. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.

Ladson-Billings, G. (1995). Toward a theory of culturally relevant pedagogy. American Educational Research Journal, 32(3), 465–491.

Malik, K. (2015). The failure of multiculturalism. Foreign Affairs, 94, 21–32.

Ortega, R. M., & Faller, K. C. (2011). Training child welfare workers from an intersectional cultural humility perspective: A paradigm shift. Child Welfare, 90(5), 27–49.

Tervalon, M., & Murray-Garcia, J. (1998). Cultural humility versus cultural competence: A critical distinction in defining physician training outcomes in multicultural education. Journal of Health Care for the Poor and Underserved, 9(2), 117–125.

Willbergh, I. (2015). The problems of ‘competence’ and alternatives from the    Scandinavian perspective of Bildung. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 47(3), 334–354.

Can the SLP Help Make RtI Part of the Educational DNA? Y-E-S

By Wayne A. Foster, PhD, CCC-SLP/A

Author of The Role of the Speech-Language Pathologist in RtI: Implementing Multiple Tiers of Student Support

Is there a role for a speech and language pathologist (SLP) in Response-to-Instruction/Intervention (RtI) beyond the application of special education services (Tier III in a three-tiered model)? Some will say that an SLP can play a (limited) role in the application of pre-referral interventions. I wrote this book to argue that there is a very special but previously poorly defined role for the SLP. In fact, in the absence of support for the RtI process by those who understand the principles of child development, it is likely that RtI will fail to thrive.

Response-to-Instruction or Intervention (RtI) makes great sense as a system to support struggling students in America’s K–12 educational system. In short, RtI refers to the application of academic and/or behavioral support that is linked to the student’s functional level within a given domain and is provided at an appropriate intensity and frequency. This support is monitored for effectiveness and modified as needed. The ultimate goal is to close the gap between a student’s functional level and the level needed to progress in the standard curriculum.

While RtI makes sense it is relatively rarely implemented with the fidelity necessary to generate the type of success needed to help it become part of the DNA of the educational process. In many schools RtI never takes root and where it has been implemented it is constantly under threat of being dismantled in favor of more traditional educational processes.  Today it seems no easier to implement and sustain a multi-tiered system of student support (such as RtI) than it was two decades ago. Why is it so difficult to make a multi-tiered system of student support work?

One answer became clear to me at a 2008 workshop on literacy I presented to the kindergarten through fifth grade teachers in a moderate-sized school district. At this training session the developmental progression of literacy skills was outlined via a series of slides. The initial slides associated the development of language to the development of early phonological awareness. With each slide the teachers could see how literacy skills transitioned and ultimately led to the ability to comprehend lengthy, complex, and abstract text. They were fascinated and most admitted that this was the first time they had ever learned about the development of literacy over time (and grades). The teachers in the room clearly understood the standards of their grade level curriculum but were not aware of normal patterns of development for literacy. In fact, far too many educators have not been trained in the patterns of child development for language, literacy, mathematics, or behavior (including socio-emotional development).

Implementation of RtI demands knowledge of development. How is one to address the needs of a student who is functioning in one or more domains well below a grade-level curriculum? One answer is that you must meet the student at their functional level with an intervention that helps close their developmental gap.  This requires a rather detailed knowledge of development. In workshop after workshop  I realized that general educators across America had not been adequately trained in the language of development. I came to the conclusion that there exist two major educational languages spoken in America’s public schools—the language of curriculum and the language of child development. Unfortunately few educators are fluent in both.

In most tiered systems (such as RtI) the initial application of support is provided through differentiation of instruction within the general classroom. Many educators understand this differentiation to mean appreciation of different learning styles (e.g., visual versus auditory versus tactile/kinesthetic) and how to modify instruction to allow students to access the curriculum via the learning style that maximizes their learning potential. This is a correct view but differentiation also means assisting a student who may be delayed in development of skills. Differentiation can mean breaking down instruction into smaller steps and providing meaningful feedback. If differentiation is not successful then individual or small group interventions are applied and monitored for progress (Tier I in the RtI model). If this level of support is not sufficient, then a more intense, frequent, and individualized intervention may be necessary (Tier II in the RtI model).  Think about what this requires on the part of the professional. First, they must identify where in the developmental progression the student is functioning. Second, they must select an appropriate treatment (i.e., intervention) that moves the student forward. Third, they must monitor progress and know when the appropriate skill level for the child’s age is attained.  This is a developmental perspective, clearly more of a developmental perspective than a curricular one.

If RtI is to work in a school those professionals who understand child development must support those charged with implementing the early Tier I and Tier II level interventions. RtI will flounder as an educational paradigm if there is poor integration of the two languages and poor coordination between the professionals who are fluent in those languages. Unfortunately, that has been the case in many of the schools I have visited over the past decade.

School-based SLPs are highly trained in the realm of child development and are well positioned to provide support of the RtI–multi-tiered system of student support. The major reason for writing The Role of the Speech-Language Pathologist in RtI: Implementing Multiple Tiers of Student Support was to provide a description of the differences between curricular and developmental perspectives and explicate the role of the SLP in making RtI successful without dramatically increasing the workload of the school-based clinician. Further, there did not seem to be a resource available that could help an SLP better understand their own educational approach (development) much less come to a strong appreciation of the general educator approach (curriculum).

Finally, a coding and reimbursement book written specifically for audiologists, otolaryngologists, academic institutions, and staff!

By Debra Abel, AuD, editor of The Essential Guide to Coding in Audiology: Coding, Billing, and Practice Management

The Essential Guide to Coding in Audiology: Coding, Billing, and Practice Management is that necessary and essential one stop shop office resource for coding, billing, and compliance written specifically for independent audiologists and their office staffs, for otolaryngologists and their office staffs, and for academic programs, with information contained in one repository that has been historically scattered in other places. This book includes many contemporary topics including the critical tools, codes (CPT, ICD-10-CM, and HCPCS) and guidelines necessary for compliant audiology billing, reimbursement, and payment. Medicare, considered the gold standard by most commercial payers, has an entire chapter devoted to those requirements applicable to the audiologist, often an anomaly in payer policies when compared to other health care professions.

The basic tools don’t end there. With an increase in commercial insurance third-party payers and third-party administrators, those payers often don’t speak the same language as the audiologist, which can lead to confusion and heartburn. Kim Cavitt, AuD, a nationally known audiology coding and reimbursement expert, offers a chapter on insurance that includes a glossary of terms and processes for negotiating if you choose to successfully incorporate these commercial payers into your practice. Stephanie Sjoblad, AuD, a pioneer and expert in successful itemization for hearing aid services in her university clinic that functions as a private practice, brings over 10 years of how-to’s to successfully itemize in your own practice. For those practices considering a transition to this process, this chapter will be a major guiding force. Kim Pollock, another nationally known coding and reimbursement consultant, offers a chapter on managing your revenue, something not usually provided specifically to audiologists in a written format, by one of the most knowledgeable sources who has performed audits and risk management for otolaryngology/audiology practices for many years. The final contributor, Doug Lewis, PhD, JD, MBA, an audiologist with significant credentials, has a chapter on the federal regulations that impact the practice of audiology, a compendium of all those requirements essential to maintaining compliance while offering services. Finally, the concluding chapter is a checklist of the fundamentals and the components needed when one considers and establishes a private practice.

Apart from the chapter devoted to revenue, each data-driven chapter on coding, reimbursement, and compliance, was written by audiologists for audiologists, unprecedented at the time of publication. This is a necessary resource for every audiology office and academic program!