UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

An investigation of speech misarticulations of grade six children in two Canadian school systems Clemons, Margaret Elaine 1964

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1964_A8 C54.pdf [ 5.34MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0104894.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0104894-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0104894-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0104894-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0104894-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0104894-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0104894-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0104894-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0104894.ris

Full Text

AN INVESTIGATION OF SPEECH MISARTICULATIONS OF GRADE SIX ' CHILDREN IN TWO CANADIAN SCHOOL SYSTEMS by MARGARET ELAINE CLEMONS , B.A. , Howard C o l l e g e , 1939 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS i n the Department of E d u c a t i o n We accept t h i s t h e s i s as conforming to the r e q u i r e d standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA A p r i l , 1961* I n p r e s e n t i n g t h i s t h e s i s i n p a r t i a l f u l f i l m e n t of the r e q u i r e m e n t s f o r an advanced degree at the U n i v e r s i t y of • B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a , I agree that the L i b r a r y s h a l l make i t f r e e l y a v a i l a b l e f o r r e f e r e n c e and s t u d y . I f u r t h e r agree that p e r -m i s s i o n f o r e x t e n s i v e c o p y i n g of t h i s t h e s i s f o r s c h o l a r l y purposes may be granted by the. Head of my Department or by h i s r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s . I t i s u n d e r s t o o d t h a t ; c o p y i n g or p u b l i -c a t i o n of t h i s ' t h e s i s f o r f i n a n c i a l g a i n s h a l l not be a l l o w e d without my w r i t t e n permission.? Department of ^/'JM^xi^J^L^-y^ The U n i v e r s i t y . o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a , Vancouver 8, Canada AN ABSTRACT OF A THESIS An I n v e s t i g a t i o n of Speech M i s a r t i c u l a t i o n s of Grade S i x C h i l d r e n i n Two Canadian School Systems  U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, C o l l e g e of E d u c a t i o n , D i v i s i o n of S p e c i a l E d u c a t i o n The purpose of t h i s study was to assess the r e l a t i v e e f f e c t i v e n e s s of a program of speech therapy i n the elemen-t a r y s c hools by determining the d i f f e r e n c e between two urban s c h o o l p o p u l a t i o n s , one having p r o v i d e d a program of speech therapy f o r ten years p r e v i o u s l y , and the other l a c k i n g such a program, i n terms o f : 1. p u p i l performance on a speech t e s t 2. a b i l i t y of teachers t o i d e n t i f y m i s a r t i c u l a t i o n s , and 3. p u p i l s 1 o p i n i o n s of t h e i r speaking a b i l i t y and t h e i r c o n f i d e n c e i n speaking s i t u a t i o n s . P l a n of the Study A d m i n i s t r a t o r s i n the f i e l d of s p e c i a l e d u c a t i o n should, be p r o v i d e d with i n f o r m a t i o n on the e f f e c t i v e n e s s of speech therapy i n the p u b l i c s c h o o l program. Procedure Review of the l i t e r a t u r e was made i n terms of s t u d i e s on speech problems, i n c i d e n c e of speech problems, i i i reports on programmes of speech therapy in public schools, and studies undertaken in Canada. A pilot study was undertaken and the judgments of the investigator, who i s a qualified speech therapist, and of one other qualified speech therapist were compared. Two hundred and seventy-six Grade Six pupils in each of two Canadian school systems were screened by the investigator by means of an articulation test, and the results reported quantitatively. Teachers were asked to identify a l l children with speech misarticulations, and to judge the effect such misarticulations had on the children socially and academically. Teachers* and therapist's identification of speech misarticulations were compared. Pupils were asked to answer a questionnaire contain-ing questions about their speaking a b i l i t y and confidence in speaking situations. The investigator gave an arbitrary value to the responses to these questions, and surmised that the higher the total score, the more the pupil*s concern about speaking a b i l i t y . Results Results of the questionnaire and speech test were collated, summarized and correlated with IBM data-processing equipment. i v The results showed a s t a t i s t i c a l l y significant difference in the mean scores on the speech assessment of the two groups. The children i n the school system providing speech therapy made higher scores. More teachers identified children with articulation d i f f i c u l t i e s in the school system providing speech therapy. Their judgments compared favourably with the judgments of the investigator. In the total group tested, i t was found that children with one or more misarticulations scored, s i g n i f i -cantly higher on.the Pupil Questionnaire than did those children with no misarticulations. This same relationship existed between the mean score on the Pupil Questionnaire for the pupils having one or more misarticulations on the speech assessment, in the school system with therapy. This relationship, however, was not found to be present under the same c r i t e r i a in the school system that did not provide therapy. Conclusions The investigator suggests that the differences in the two groups tested may be accounted for on the basis of a speech therapy programme or the basis of other factors which are as yet unidentified. It was recommended further that the same type of study be repeated in two school systems providing speech therapy, and in two school systems which do not provide speech therapy. ACKNOWLEDGMENT I wish to acknowledge, with deepest a p p r e c i a t i o n , the c o o p e r a t i o n and k i n d l y a s s i s t a n c e of the Superint e n -dents, the P r i n c i p a l s , the S p e c i a l S e r v i c e s p e r s o n n e l , the t e a c h e r s , and the p u p i l s of the two s c h o o l systems p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n t h i s r e s e a r c h . I am a l s o indebted to Dr. Read Campbell, Chairman, and the other members of my T h e s i s Committee, Dr. H a r o l d C o v e l l , Dr. C h a r l o t t e David and Dr. David K e n d a l l . T h e i r t i m e l y suggestions and guidance have e n r i c h e d t h i s i n v e s t i -g a t i o n . TABLE OP CONTENTS CHAPTER PAGE I. ORIENTATION TO THE STUDY 1 O r i g i n of the Problem 1 Statement of the Problem 2 D e f i n i t i o n of Terms 3 L i m i t a t i o n s of the Problem 7 Hypothesis 9 I I . BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY 11 C l a s s i f i c a t i o n and Incidence of Speech Problems 11 E f f e c t of Ma t u r a t i o n Upon A r t i c u l a t i o n S k i l l s Ik The R e l a t i o n s h i p of A r t i e u l a t o r y S k i l l s to Other Areas of Childhood Development. 16 Self-Judgment of Speech A b i l i t i e s 23 The P l a c e of Speech Therapy i n the P u b l i c Schools. . 27 Canadian'Studies of Speech Problems . . . 3*+ Value of Th i s Study 39 I I I . METHODOLOGY ^2 P i l o t Study k2 P l a n of the Major Study k5 C o n s t r u c t i o n of the P u p i l Q u e s t i o n n a i r e . k% v i i CHAPTER PAGE C o n s t r u c t i o n of the A r t i c u l a t i o n Screening Test kQ C o n s t r u c t i o n of the Qu e s t i o n n a i r e f o r Teachers 53 P a t e r n a l Status 5*+ P r e p a r a t i o n of the Information f o r A n a l y s i s 55 IV. ANALYSIS OF DATA 56 I . Speech Assessments 56 I I . Teacher I d e n t i f i c a t i o n of C h i l d r e n with M i s a r t i c u l a t i o n s 57 I I I . P u p i l Q u e s t i o n n a i r e . . . . . . . . 6 l IV. C o r r e l a t i o n s Between the Scores on the P u p i l Q u e s t i o n n a i r e and Scores on the Speech Assessment 67 V. C h i l d r e n Who Had Received Speech Therapy 68 Summary of F i n d i n g s ., - 69 V. CONCLUSIONS, OBSERVATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 73 I . Review of E x p e r i m e n t a l Design . . . 73 I I . C o n c l u s i o n s 73 I I I . Observations . . . . . . . . . . . . 77 IV. Recommendations 79 v i i i PAGE BIBLIOGRAPHY 81 APPENDIX I 87 APPENDIX I I 92 LIST OF TABLES TABLE PAGE I . E s t i m a t e d Number per 1,000 and Per Cent of School-Age C h i l d r e n with Each Type of Speech and He a r i n g Impairment 6 I I . Comparison of R e s u l t s of Q u e s t i o n n a i r e s Sent to Twelve Canadian School Boards i n 1957 and i n 196** 36 I I I . Judgments of Observers A and B 1*3 IV. Number of E r r o r s kk V. P u p i l s with M i s a r t i c u l a t i o n s Reported by Teachers v. . . 59 VI._. R e s u l t s of Tests of S i g n i f i c a n c e A p p l i e d to Mean Scores on P u p i l Q u e s t i o n n a i r e f o r C h i l d r e n with One or More M i s a r t i -c u l a t i o n s as Opposed to Those with P e r f e c t Scores on the Speech Assessment . 6k V I I . Percentage of S i g n i f i c a n t Responses to Questions Made by P u p i l s i n School Systems A and B 66 V I I I . C h i l d r e n from School System A Known to Have Received Speech Therapy 70 CHAPTER I ORIENTATION TO THE STUDY ORIGIN OF THE PROBLEM Teachers and administrators in the f i e l d of special education, through observations of various school systems, have suggested that Canadian school systems have not im-plemented programmes for exceptional children to a degree comparable with that of other nations. It i s generally agreed that one of the areas i n which there has been particularly slow development i s that of remedial f a c i l i t i e s for speech handicapped school children. Studies of speech problems1 indicate that although speech d i f f i c u l t i e s of school children usually decrease in the primary grades, not a l l speech d i f f i c u l t i e s are outgrown by the Grade Six level. Comparable reports of the effects of speech therapy programmes in the public schools are few. It has been suggested by some administrators and school D. W. Morris, "A Survey of Speech Defects in Central High School, Kansas City, Missouri," Quart. Jour. Speech, 25:262-267, April, , 1 9 3 9j- D. R. Evans, "Report of Speech Survey in the 9-A Grade," Quart. Jour. Speech, 21:83-90, February, 1938; ,William.D. Coombs, "The Development of Articulated Speech Sounds in the Elementary School" (Saskatoon: The University of Saskatchewan, 1963). (Mimeographed.) 2 boards that most children grow out of their problems, and therefore speech therapy i s not essential to the basic school programme. Most research investigations have been carried out in the United States and i n England,whiie-'only a few p studies have been reported by Canadian researchers. For the guidance of school administrators, and those concerned with planning more effective speech^therapy programmes i n Canadian schools, the value of speech therapy should be investigated and the results reported. STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM This investigation proposed to explore certain tangential areas testing the effectiveness of a speech therapy programme for children at the Grade Six level. Two Canadian school systems were investigated. One school system had provided speech therapy for ten years prior to the investigation, and the other school system had P. R. Campbell, "Speech Education i n the English-Speaking Teacher Training Institutions of Canada" (un-published Doctoral thesis, The University of Wisconsin, Madison, 1957); D. R. Kjarsgaard, "A Study of the Compari-sons Between the Expressed Interest.Towards the Literature Study Program and Speech S k i l l Proficiency of the North Vancouver High School Senior Classes" (unpublished Master's thesis, Western Washington College, Bellingham, 1962); Coombs, loc. c i t . : Winifred Cory, Report to the British Columbia Speech and Hearing Association, February, 1958. (Mimeographed.) 3 provided the services of a Speech Consultant for three years prior to the investigation. The areas investigated were: a. The number of speech misarticulations among Grade Six children. b. The efficacy of teacher identification of Grade Six children with speech misarticulations. c. Self-judgment of Grade Six children, of their adequacy i n speaking and their feelings toward speaking situations. DEFINITION OF TERMS Among speech pathologists and speech therapists, i t i s generally agreed that the definition of a "speech defect" i s a d i f f i c u l t one to standardize. Because of the subjective and arbitrary nature of evaluations of this kind, and the disabling nature of some slight speech problems, as opposed to the minor effects of more severe speech problems, i t i s advisable to use more specific terminology. It has been stated, however, that when a speech defect exists, i t tends to be primarily demoralizing and frustrating, and every speaker i s affected by his own speech in ways that contribute heavily to a l l that i s meant by individuality or personality.^ ^Subcommittee on Articulation Problems, Report (Monograph Supplement No. 5» Jour. Speech and Hear. Pis., 1959). Anderson has stated: It must be concluded, therefore, that whether a given sample of speech deviates sufficiently from the norm to be conspicuous, and hence, to be defective, i s , i n the end, a matter of subjective judgment on the part of the person who hears i t , provided i n t e l l i g i -b i l i t y i s not seriously affected.M-Another well-known speech therapist, Dr. Van Riper, has defined defective speech in this manner: Speech i s defective when i t deviates so far from the speech of other people that i t calls attention to i t s e l f , interferes with communication or causes i t s possessor to be maladjusted.5 Throughout this report of the investigation, such terms as "speech handicapped," "speech defective," "speech deviate," w i l l be used in reported contexts in the writers* words. These latter terms mean to this investigator that the various writers have considered these labels adequate i n describing speech that has deviated from the average. In some reports the terms "speech therapist," "speech c l i n i c i a n , " and "speech correct!onist" are used. Such terms were interpreted, by this investigator as synonymous, since they describe persons who are professionally trained in diagnosis and remedial areas to work with speech handicapped children and adults. L V. A. Anderson, Improving the Child's Speech (New York: Oxford University Press, 1953), p. 37-yC. Van Riper, Speech Correction, Principles and  Methods (New York: Prentice-Hall, 195*0, p. 19. 5 While recognizing variations in subjective evalua-tions of speech.deviations, i t i s essential that some standards, as set out by authorities in the f i e l d of speech therapy, be accepted. A number of surveys of the incidence of speech d i f f i c u l t i e s among school children 6 have been made. Dr. Wendell Johnson made a summary of these surveys and conservatively estimated that four out of every one hundred school age children have speech or hearing handicaps of such severity that they are certain to go through l i f e at a serious disadvantage vocationally, socially and personally i f not given appropriate corrective attention. Table I, page six, is taken directly from Dr. Johnson's report. It w i l l be seen from this representative spread of the types of speech problems, that the majority of speech deviation's are classified under the term "articulation". In this study, the term "misarticulation" of speech sounds refers to any omission or distortion of a consonant sound, or to the substitution of one consonant sound for another, judged by this investigator on the specified test words. These misarticulations w i l l be reported, quantitatively, and the diagnosis of "speech defect" or "no speech defect" w i l l not be used. 6 Wendell Johnson, Children With Speech and Hearing Impairment. Bulletin No. 5 of the United States Department of Health, Education and. Welfare (Washington: Government Printing Office, 1959). 6 TABLE I ESTIMATED NUMBER PER 1,000 AND PER CENT OF SCHOOL-AGE CHILDREN WITH EACH TYPE OF SPEECH AND HEARING IMPAIRMENT (INCLUDES ONLY THOSE CHILDREN WITH SEVERE HANDICAPS) Type of Impairment Number per 1,000 Per cent Articulation problems 25 2.5 Voice problems 1 0.1 Fluency and rate problems .5 .05 Stuttering 7 .7 Hearing problems of communicative and educational significance 5 .5 Speech problems associated with cleft palate and l i p .5 .05 Retarded speech development .5 .05 Speech problems associated with cerebral palsy and other types of neuromuscular impairment .5 .05 Total ^o k.oo NOTE: Prevalence figures presented here are those of the author. SOURCE: Johnson, op_. c i t . , p. 6. Since the diagnosis of speech d i f f i c u l t i e s i s sub-jective and capable of different interpretations by different listeners, this study sought to eliminate a possible variable i n the results by having the same investi-gator test children i n both school systems. 7 LIMITATIONS OF THE PROBLEM T h i s study d e a l t w i t h m i s a r t i c u l a t i o n s of Grade Six c h i l d r e n i n " m i d d l e - c l a s s " economic areas who were known not to have any p h y s i c a l impairment that would a f f e c t t h e i r a r t i c u l a t i o n of consonant sounds. I t d i d not seek to e x p l a i n any speech d e v i a t i o n s on the b a s i s of a c o n t r i b u t o r y f a c t o r or f a c t o r s . I n s t e a d , the adequacy or inadequacy of the a r t i c u l a t e d sounds was judged on the a c t u a l responses d u r i n g the t e s t i n g s i t u a t i o n . Although r e p o r t s on speech therapy on the c h i l d r e n i n School System A were a v a i l a b l e , s i m i l a r r e p o r t s on the c h i l d r e n i n School System B were u n a v a i l a b l e . No ease h i s t o r i e s were taken. No examination of the o r a l mechanism was made, and no t e s t s of sound d i s c r i m i n a t i o n a b i l i t y were admini s t e r e d . PLAN OF THE STUDY A p i l o t study of t h i r t y - t h r e e Grade S i x . c h i l d r e n was undertaken and the r e s u l t s used to improve the o r g a n i z a -t i o n and to determine the f e a s i b i l i t y of the major study. Permission to conduct the major study was obtained from the Superintendents of two Canadian s c h o o l systems. (See Appendix I.) School System A (with speech therapy) had a t o t a l s c h o o l p o p u l a t i o n of ^8,383 c h i l d r e n i n the s c h o o l year i n which the i n v e s t i g a t i o n took p l a c e . School System 8 B had a school population of 65,559 in the same year, 1962-63. System A maintained a staff of nine speech and hearing therapists. System B employed one Speech Consultant whose duties were diagnostic and consultative. The Superintendents' offices were asked to select three or four schools i n a "middle-class" economic area, from which at least three hundred Grade Six children could be tested. When the schools were selected, letters were sent to the principals requesting their cooperation ; and the cooperation of the Grade Six teachers (Appendix I) . A l l Grade Six teachers who agreed to participate i n this investigation were sent a letter requesting their coopera-tion i n identifying a l l children who had misarticulations. In this letter, d i f f i c u l t i e s , of articulation were described, and the teachers were asked.to identify specific consonant sounds misarticulated (Appendix I). Questionnaires con-taining questions about speech and speaking a b i l i t y were sent to the Grade Six teachers, and they were asked to administer these to their students prior to the investi-gator's v i s i t to the school. (.See Appendix II.) On the day or days of the investigator's v i s i t to the school, each Grade Six child was interviewed individually. The child's name, birthdate, and father's occupation were 9 recorded. Each child was told that the investigator wished his assistance in carrying out a.project with a l l the Grade Six children in the school. The child was shown a l i s t of thirty-three words, and asked to make a short sentence using each word. These words represented tests for twelve consonants: ten consonants being tested in the i n i t i a l , medial and f i n a l positions, two consonants tested in the i n i t i a l and medial positions, and one consonant tested in the medial position only. The investigator listened to the production of the sound being tested, and recorded whether the sound was correct, distorted, omitted, qr whether another sound was substituted. The results of the Pupil Questionnaire, the teachers* referrals and identifications, and the assessment of the investigator were recorded on individual master sheets so that the information could be transferred to IBM cards. The Minnesota Scale of Paternal Occupation was used in categorizing the fathers 1 occupations. A l l testing took place between January 25, 1963 a n d April 12, 1963. HYPOTHESIS In investigating differences in speech misarticula-tions of Grade Six children in two school systems, the investigator accepted a null hypothesis, namely, that speech therapy in the elementary schools, measured by the investigations of this study, does not result in a s t a t i s t i c a l l y significant reduction in speech misarticu lations at the Grade Six level. CHAPTER II BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY CLASSIFICATION AND INCIDENCE OF SPEECH PROBLEMS In the previous chapter, some indication has been given of the d i f f i c u l t y in classifying and identifying speech deviations. Dr. Wendell Johnson*s summary of several studies was reported. In reviewing other investi-gations into the types of problems, the incidence, and particularly the incidence at certain age levels, i t i s apparent that Dr. Johnson's estimate of four per cent speech problems among school-age children i s a conservative one. The Scottish Education Department1 has estimated that five to six per cent of pupils in the primary grades p have speech d i f f i c u l t i e s that warrant therapy. Milisen has pointed out that reports of speech disorders in the general population vary so much, that i t i s necessary to attempt a summary statement which may estimate a median incidence. He states: Great Britain Scottish Education Department, Pupils  Handicapped by Speech Disorders (London: H. M. Printing Office, 1 9 5 D , P. 33. Robert Milisen, "The Incidence of Speech Disorders," Handbook of Speech Pathology. Lee Edward Travis, ed. (New York: Appleton, Century, Crofts, 1957), pp. 2*+6-266. 12 From kindergarten through fourth-grade level roughly 12 to 15 per cent of the children have seriously defective speech. In the next four grades, between k and 5 per cent are seriously defective. General estimates above the eighth grade are based on highly selected samples and- therefore the best guess as to the incidence would be about the same as for the upper elementary grades—k to 5 per cent.3 Among the studies reported are those of Roe and Milisen in < 6 the elementary schools, Sayler^ and Morris in the secondary schools. 7 Morley' reported the results of speech tests given to incoming and transfer students at the University of Michigan over a ten-year period and found the incidence for the entire period to be 3«85 per cent classified as c l i n i c a l cases, and of the number, 1.9 per cent were articulatory problems. ^Milisen, op_. c i t . , p. 2*+6. L Vivian Roe and Robert Milisen, "The Effect of Maturation Upon Defective Articulation i n Elementary Grades," Jour. Speech Pis., 7:37-50, 191+2. % e l e n K. Sayler, "The Effect of Maturation Upon Defective Articulation in.Grades Seven Through Twelve," Jour. Speech and Hear. Pis. . l l+:202-207, September 19*+9. Morris, loc. c i t . n 'P. E. Morley, "A Ten-Year Survey of Speech Pisorders Among University Students," Jour. Speech and Hear. Pis.« 17:25-31, March 1952. On the other hand, i t i s interesting to note the 8 report of a study made by Newman of the results of a questionnaire given by the National Health Survey in 1957-58. Interviews with 36,000 households representing 115,000 persons revealed that only .65 of one per cent of the population were considered speech impaired judged by the "lay" persons interviewed. In an attempt to analyze the "normal" responses 9 of f i r s t grade children, Snow' has presented a detailed analysis of articulation responses of ^38 children. This study bears out the fact that although the number and type of misarticulations may vary because of the phonetic en-vironment of the sound in a particular word, there are a considerable number of misarticulations among Grade One children. In summary then!,: i t has been found that the results of studies of speech problems result in a wide variation in incidence. A l l studies do agree, however, that the largest percentage of these problems i s in articulation, and that there i s a definite decrease in incidence with age and maturation. °P. ¥. Newman, "Speech Impaired?" AiSHA. 3:9-10, January, 1961. % . Snow, "A Detailed Analysis of Articulation Responses of "Normal" F i r s t Grade Children," Jour. Speech  and Hear. Res.. 6:277-290, September, 1963. Ik EFFECT OF MATURATION UPON ARTICULATION SKILLS The maturational aspects of articulation problems have been comprehensively studied by Poole,'1'0 Wellman,11 12 and more recently, Templin. According to these studies, a small percentage of children does not achieve proficiency i n a l l consonant sounds until the age of seven and one-half or eight years. From the standpoint of efficiency of a speech therapy programme, i t would be desirable to select those children for speech therapy who w i l l probably not improve n with maturation and development. Van Hattum J has reviewed the problem of referral overload to the speech therapists in the Rochester Schools, and stated that when a develop-mental concept was used in selecting children with articulation problems for therapy, only 6.6 per cent of the school Irene Poole, "Genetic Development i n Articulation of Consonant Sounds in.Speech," Elem. English, 11:159-161, June, 193^. 11 B. L. Wellman and others, Speech Sounds of Young  Children, University of Iowa Studies in Child Welfare, Vol. V, No. 2 (Iowa City: University of Iowa Press, 1931). 12 Mildred Templin, Certain Language Skills in  Children. Their Development and Interrelationships-?- Mono-graph No. 26, Institute of Child Welfare, The University of Minnesota (Minneapolis: The University of Minnesota Press, 1957). "Holland J. Van Hattum, "Evaluating Elementary School Speech Therapy," Exc. Children. 25:*tll-l+ll+, May, 1959.. 15 population received therapy as compared to 12.5 per cent who received therapy in the previous year. He states, however, It appears that therapists are without foundation in excluding children below the third grade from their caseloads, or excluding kindergarten children, or including a l l of them. In fact, by including children with speech errors one may be in error approximately three out of four times. By working with none of them one may be in error only about one out of four times.lk 15 Steer and Drexler y tested Grade Five children who were f i r s t examined in kindergarten, and on the basis of articulatory testing of those who retained their speech d i f f i c u l t i e s , devised a formula for predicting improved articulation through maturation alone. This formula made use of the kindergarten Level Score on the Templin a r t i -culatory test, and placed a high value on the defectiveness of the sounds of f, 1, and voiceless th. i r Dickson's investigation of three areas, motor proficiency, auditory discrimination,and emotional charac-t e r i s t i c s of the parents, indicated that children who did lk i Van Ha tt urn, op_. c i t . , p. k!2. 15 •^M. D. Steer and Hazel Drexler, "Predicting Later Articulation Ability From Kindergarten Tests," Jour. 'Speech  and Hear. pis., 25'.391-397, November, i 9 6 0 . 1 s S. Dickson, "Differences Between Children Who Spontaneously Outgrow.and Children Who Retain Functional Articulation Errors," Jour. Speech and Hear. Res., 5*263-271, September, 1962. 16 not outgrow their articulation problems were significantly poorer in motor proficiency s k i l l s as measured by the Gseretsky test, and that there was a significant difference in the MMPI (Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory) neurotic tendencies of the mothers of the children who did not outgrow their articulation problems, as compared to the mothers of children who outgrew their articulatory problems. 17 Artley ' concluded that speech defects may be the cause of reading defects, the results of reading defects, or that both may result from the same factor. From a summary of the literature on the maturational, or developmental aspect of articulatory s k i l l s , i t i s seen that some children do outgrow their articulation problems, and, in order to increase the efficiency of any speech therapy programme in the public schools, a measure of pre-d i c t a b i l i t y , particularly in articulation problems, would be useful. THE RELATIONSHIP .OF ARTICULATORY SKILLS TO OTHER AREAS OF CHILDHOOD DEVELOPMENT Some measure of predictability of articulatory improvement would be useful in reducing the therapists 1 caseload, intensifying the remedial work for more severe X'A. S. Artley, "A Study of Certain Factors Presumed to be Associated with Reading and Speech D i f f i c u l t i e s , " Jour. Speech and Hear. Pis., 13:351-360, December, 1948. 17 cases, and more successfully integrating the special services of the speech therapists in the public school. Questions growing out of such an approach would seek to c l a r i f y such relationships as the effect of speech problems upon academic s k i l l s and social adjustment, the optimum time .for therapy, the number of speech therapy sessions needed, and the reactions of adults, particularly the classroom teacher, towards children with speech deviations. The problem of social relationships and peer evalua-tion may be an extremely important one for a young child who does not articulate adequately. Contradictory evidence in this area i s found. Freeman and Sonnega, Brissey and T r o t t e r 1 9 found that social position was not necessarily related to the degree of communicative handicap, whereas 20 Woods and Carros concluded from a larger number of public school elementary school children that a child with a speech defect tended to be less acceptable than a non-speech 21 defective. Giolas and "Williams were interested in 1 o G. G. Freeman and J. il. Sonnega, "Peer Evaluation of Children in Speech Correction Class," Jour. Speech and  Hear. Pis.« 21:179-182, June, 1956. 1 9 F . L. Brissey and W. Trotter, "Social Relationships Among Speech Defective Children," Jour. Speech and Hear. Pis.. 20:277-283, September, 1955. PO Sister Frances Jerome Woods and Sister Mary Arthur Garros, "Choice Rejection Status of Speech Defective Children," J. Exc. Children. 25:279-283, February, 1959. 2 1T. G. Giolas and D. Williams, "Children's Reactions to Nonfluencies in Adult Speech," Jour. Speech and Hear. Res., 1:86-93, March, 1958. 18 discovering whether children were aware of non-fluencies in the speech of peers, and they concluded that they were not only aware of the speech deviations, but they they also reacted unfavourably to the non-fluencies. Stark, in discussing the effect of a speech d i f f i c u l t y on learning has stated: The speech handicapped child i s also faced with the problem of social isolationism and severe ridiculing. He often has a history of teasing which extends back to early preschool years. While many children can buffer teasing with such adages as "sticks and stones" . . . this child has been subjected.to unusual pressures. Because he always had trouble making himself understood, i t was always hard for him to relate to his peers.22 23 Solomon J found that f i r s t grade children with articulatory problems exhibited more behaviour problems, particularly in the passivity-submissive category, than did children who did not have articulatory problems. 2k In the area of auditory discrimination, Wepman on the basis of results of administering auditory discrimina-tion tests to children with poor reading scores, and also 2 2 J . Stark, "How Does a Speech Handicap Affect Learning?" Elem. English« ^0:830-832, January-December, 1963. 2^A. Solomon, "Emotional and Behavior Problems of Fi r s t Grade Children With Functional Defects of Articula-tion" (unpublished Doctoral thesis, Stanford University, Stanford, i 9 6 0 ) . 2k J. Wepman, "Auditory Discrimination, Speech and Reading," Elem. School Jour.« 60:325-333, March, i960. 19 to children with poor articulation, suggests that each child should be :studied to determine whether his auditory a b i l i t i e s have reached the level of maturation at which he could:benefit :from phonic instruction in reading or from auditory ;training in speech. -2t) Cohen and Diehl J duplicated an earlier study by Dronvall and Piehl and stressed that major emphasis should be placed on improving sound discrimination a b i l i t y i n children with articulation problems, as they demonstrated a significant weakness in auditory discrimina-tion. 26 Prins looked for evidence, among children with developmental articulation disorders of specific relations between their sound deviations of articulation and scores on a: c l i n i c a l measure of sound discrimination a b i l i t y . He concluded that in children with defective articulation, the speech sound discrimination a b i l i t y could not be meaningfully evaluated as independent of the language process. . ' J . H. Cohen and G.F. Diehl, "Relation of Speech-Sound Discrimination'Ability to Articulation-Type Speech Defect," Jour. Speech and Hear, pis.., 28:187-190, May, 1963• D. Prins, "Relations Among Specific Articulatory Deviations and Responses To a C l i n i c a l Measure of Sound Discrimination A b i l i t y , " Jour. Speech and Hear. Pis., 28: 161-168, June, 1962. 20 Aungst and Frick ' investigated sound discrimination a b i l i t y as related to the articulation of a particular consonant, the r. Their findings indicated that the. traditional speech-sound discrimination tests sample an a b i l i t y which i s well established by eight years of age and i s not related to articulation defects which persist after that age. They concluded: The a b i l i t y to judge one's own speech production i s significantly related to the consistency of articulation; therefore, tests of this a b i l i t y should prove to be valuable i n diagnosis, therapy and research.2o In other areas, Irwin 2 9 investigated the effects of speech therapy upon certain linguistic s k i l l s of f i r s t grade children, and found that although trends were indicated in favour of the groups receiving speech therapy, no significant differences were observed. She suggested that further studies of the effect of speech therapy on linguistic s k i l l s was indicated. 'Lester F. Aungst and James V. Frick, "Auditory Discrimination Ability and Consistency of Articulation of / r / , " Jour. Speech and Hear. Pis.« 29:76-85, February, Ibid., P. 83. 2 9R. B. Irwin, "The Effects of Speech Therapy Upon Certain Linguistic Skills of First-Grade Children," Jour. Speech and Hear. Pis., 28:375-381, November, 1963. . Sommers and others 0 i n carrying on a longitudinal study of the relationship between speech improvement and reading ability,have concluded, to date, that subjects who were provided, with speech improvement both in f i r s t and second grades made significantly higher reading factor scores at the end of the second grade than did subjects who were not provided with speech improvement. They also found no significant difference in the improvement of reading factor scores for first-grade subjects who received sixteen weeks of speech improvement compared with those who received nine months of this treatment. Garrell and Pendergast'-' investigated the relation-ship between spelling a b i l i t y and speech d i f f i c u l t i e s at the Grade Three level and found no significant differences between children with articulatory problems and those who did not have speech problems. Because of the complexity of the speech process, i t i s d i f f i c u l t to assess the individual's past and present efforts to cover up, or to correct a speech d i f f i c u l t y 3°Ronald Sommers, "Effects of Various Durations of Speech Improvement Upon Articulation and Reading," Jour. Speech and Hear. Pis.. 27:5^-61. February, 1962. . ^ 1 J . Carrell and K. Pendergast, "An Experimental Study of the Possible Relations Between .Errors of Speech and Spelling," Jour. Speech and Hear. Pis. , 19:327-33*+, September, 195*+. 22 unless professional speech evaluations have been recorded. Few longitudinal studies have been done to give us the necessary insight into the compensations children tend to make in.their-own attempts to improve speech that seems different.It i s , therefore, interesting to look at the study made by Kjarsgaard^ 2, who found a significant relationship between expressed interest in the literature study programme and. speech s k i l l proficiency of high school students. Glasgow^ also explored the relationship between the sound spectra of voice and speech and associated variations in secondary school audiences* visual and auditory images, moods, ideas and litera r y values. The judges in his experiment listened to two similar passages,and a l l showed preferences for the selection read with speech mannerisms that were good rather than those read with-'poor speech mannerisms'.' Glasgow concluded that speech manner i s an important factor in the educational development of potential lite r a r y appreciations and insights. op -J Kjarsgaard, op. c i t . -*3G. M > Glasgow, "The Effects of Manner of Speech on Appreciation of Spoken Literature," J. Ed. Psych., 52:322-325, December, 1961. 23 .SELF-JUDGMENT OF SPEECH ABILITIES In surveying the literature regarding the value of speech therapy for speech disorders of children and adults, the importance of the feelings of the defective speaker i s repeatedly expressed, or suggested. Most definitions of speech problems include reference to the attitude of the person with the speech problem. For instance, Van Riper states that "Speech i s defective when [ i t ] causes i t s possessor to be maladjusted."-^* Milisen states: A speech defect refers to a deviation which at any moment i s sufficiently severe . . . to interfere with communication or affect adversely either the speaker or the listener.35 Goodstein states: It i s obvious that speech disorders like a l l other obvious anomalies, have a social stimulus value, and the resultant personality of the handicapped individual i s p a r t i a l l y formed by the responses of others to the handicap.3° An inspection of the case history forms of most speech and hearing cl i n i c s reveals many questions concerning ok J Van Riper, op_. c i t . ,p. 19. ^ M i l i s e n , op_. c i t . , p. 2 k 8 . Leonard D. Goodstein, "Functional Speech Disorders and Personality; Methodological and. Theoretical Considera-tions," Jour. Speech and Hear. Res.. 1:377-382, December, 1958. ' . c 2k the client's or speech handicapped person's reactions to situations that might point up the speech problem. Questions concerning avoidances of situations, or withdrawal from situations because of poor speaking a b i l i t y are common. 37 Johnson, Darley and Spriestersbach-" provide a lengthy questionnaire for stutterers, asking their opinion about such statements as: 27. A stutterer should try to be hired for jobs requiring l i t t l e speaking—for example, janitor or wrapping clerk. Strongly agree Moderately agree Undecided Moderately disagree Strongly disagree3° 36. A stutterer should not plan to be a lawyer. Strongly agree Moderately agree Undecided Moderately disagree Strongly disagree39 1+0 Siegenthaler and Flamm compared subjects* ratings of their own speaking a b i l i t y with the ratings made by a group of clinicians. They found that the subjects tended to rate their speech s k i l l s higher than those s k i l l s were rated by judges listening to the recordings. They concluded 3^ W. Johnson, F. Darley and P. Spriestersbach, Diagnostic Manual in Speech Correction (New York: Harper, 11952). 3 8 I b i d . , p. 1*+. 3 9 I b i d . . p. l*+6. 1+0 Bruce M. Siegenthaler and Marshall G. Flamm, "Subjects' Self-Judgments of Speech Adequacy and Judgments .of Trained Observers," Jour. Speech and Hear. Pis., 26:2M+-251, August, 1961. 25 that i t i s : Possible that benefits from therapy other than improved speech played a role in the findings. That i s , other benefits may have caused the subjects to look favorably upon the therapeutic experience and to generalize this to speech . • . these included improved social-emotional adjustment, a healthier attitude toward speech, and a widening range of interests and experienc to 42 Backus has stressed the fact that speech constitutes a particular form of behaviour for human relationships and states: Speech i s viewed in psychological terms for a l l persons, not just for those judged to have "maladjust-ments," nor just for those judged to have "speech disorders." The concept of a dichotomy between normal and disordered speech may have convenience administra-tively in speech departments, but i t i s not considered relevant in discovering causal relations in a client's behavior. For instance, available evidence appears to indicate that the same laws which govern phenomena called "stagefright" i n the classroom, govern phenomena called "anxiety" in.the clinic.^ 3 kk Levin and colleagues studied two aspects of children's speech: the amount of time the child spent i n talking and the number of errors he made during his dis-course under varying conditions. The purpose of the study was to predict each of these speech behaviours from ^Siegenthaler and Blamm, op_. c i t . , p. 2kk. Lp Ollie Backus, "Group Structure i n Speech Therapy," Handbook of Speech Pathology, Lee Edward Travis, ed. (New . York: Appleton, Century, Crofts, 1957), pp. 1025-1064. L f 3 I b i d . , p. 1036. LL Harry Levin, "Audience Stress, Personality and Speech," J.Abn.Soc.Psvch, 61:469-473, i 9 6 0 . 26 situation factors, the number of people listening to the child, and from two personality dispositions which were labeled "Exhibitionism" and "Self-Consciousness". They concluded that most speech errors are made by children who are in conflict over public performance (high scorers i n both Exhibitionism and Self-Consciousness) and fewest errors made by Exhibitionist children who showed l i t t l e apprehension about exposure to public speaking. They concluded: Public approval for goal attainment appears to be a dominant motive for some people. It seems to us useful, therefore, to make a distinction between pure achievement, where public performance is not relevant, and exhibitionist achievement, where reaching the goal i s simply instrumental to public approbation. *+5 Although this study was carried out with children with no speech d i f f i c u l t i e s , the conclusions are worthy of consideration in this present study. From these reports,of investigations dealing with the feelings of the speech handicapped person, one readily recognizes the need to secure some measure of the speaker's self-judgment in evaluating a programme of speech therapy. Levin, op_. c i t . , p.1*73. 27 THE PLACE OF SPEECH THERAPY IN THE PUBLIC SCHOOLS From the foregoing discussion, i t i s evident that areas of speech proficiency and speech deviations are related to the established programmes in the public schools. One of the most d i f f i c u l t decisions to be made by adminis-trators i s that of defining the extent of the responsibility of the public schools for helping each student attain his highest potentials through planned curriculum. As the i960 B. C. Royal Commission on Education stated: The objectives of training for citizenship and developing individual a b i l i t i e s are so interrelated that one cannot be satisfactorily achieved without the other.^6 Most large school systems i n the United States have f e l t that their obligation to the speech handicapped child was clearly expressed in "developing individual a b i l i t i e s " , and have provided f a c i l i t i e s within the school system for those children requiring specialized teaching or therapy in the area of speech. The development of speech therapy services in the public schools began on this continent in 1910, when the British Columbia Royal Commission on Education, A Precis (Victoria: Queen's Printer, i 9 6 0 ) , p. 5« 28 Chicago P u b l i c School System p r o v i d e d r e m e d i a l s e r v i c e s f o r speech d e f e c t i v e c h i l d r e n . By 1953, some t h i r t y S tate Departments of E d u c a t i o n had e s t a b l i s h e d c e r t i f i c a t i o n requirements f o r p u b l i c s c h o o l speech c l i n i c i a n s , and an estimated if,000 i n d i v i d u a l s were employed i n such 1+7 p o s i t i o n s . ' The American Speech and Hearing A s s o c i a t i o n i s the re c o g n i z e d c e r t i f y i n g body f o r p r o f e s s i o n a l l y q u a l i f i e d speech and h e a r i n g t h e r a p i s t s , and i t s most r e c e n t is are l f 9 LQ D i r e c t o r y s t a t e s t h a t approximately 11,000 persons are members of t h i s A s s o c i a t i o n . Based on p r e v i o u s estimates we can assume that over h a l f of t h i s number i s now engaged i n p u b l i c s c h o o l work. I t i s i n t e r e s t i n g t o note t h a t t h i s D i r e c t o r y l i s t s s e v e n t y - e i g h t Canadians as members, with on l y n i n e t e e n of them h o l d i n g p r o f e s s i o n a l c e r t i f i c a -t i o n . Twelve of the seve n t y - e i g h t Canadian members work i n p u b l i c s c h o o l s . k7 'United S t a t e s O f f i c e of E d u c a t i o n C o o p e r a t i v e Research P r o j e c t , " P u b l i c School Speech and. H e a r i n g S e r v i c e s , " Monograph Supplement No. 8, Jour. Speech and  Hear. Dig.,, 196l, p. 1. J+8 American Speech and Hearing A s s o c i a t i o n , 196^  D i r e c t o r y , K. 0. Johnson, e d i t o r . Washington: American Speech and Hearing A s s o c i a t i o n , 196k. 'American Speech and Hearing Committee on the Mid-cen t u r y White House Conference, "Speech D i s o r d e r s and Speech C o r r e c t i o n , " Jour. Speech and Hear. P i s . . 17:129-137, June, 1952, p. 6. . 30 In an article addressed to educational administrators 50 and superintendents, Schiefelbusctr emphasized that the areas of speech and hearing covered, in their patterns of training, a l l types of services offered in special educa-tion, and should surely claim to be basic areas in the f i e l d of special education. He pointed out that in the United States 1 Biennial Survey of Education Report of 1952-53? more than sixty per cent of the children receiving special education were those children with speech problems. He stressed that most school systems planned for ten per cent of the school population to receive special help in speech. It was estimated that four per cent of this group could be helped by guidance from the classroom teacher, five per cent helped by reeducative measures with the speech, therapist, and one per cent was beyond the scope of the public school speech therapist. Milisen^ has emphasized that the public schools are the most logical area of rehabilitation of speech defective 5°R. L. Schiefelbusch, "Speech and Hearing as It Relates to Special Education,".Bibliography of Educational  Administrators and Supervisors, 1+5':7-12, January, 1959. •^R. Milisen, "Public Schools as a Site for Speech and Hearing," Speech Teacher, 12:1-9 } January, 19^3. 31 children, as many of the principles involved i n educating the so-called "normal" child are the same as those of the handicapped. He also stressed that most parents turn to the school for the solution to learning problems in their children, and that through the school, a massive preventive therapy programme in speech deviations could be achieved. In a panel discussion of members of the American Speech and Hearing Association, the recognized body on the North American Continent for Certification Standards,^2 impending higher requirements for membership were discussed. These higher requirements were urged, as the panelists concurred that a speech therapist in the public school setting should be competent to provide diagnostic as well as remedial procedures. A speech therapist should be able to identify areas related to and affecting total speech performance, such as perceptual a b i l i t y , dominance, global language a b i l i t y , motor and sensory factors, social and emotional status, auditory status, and many other areas of a related nature. It has been recommended that one speech therapist be appointed for every 5 5 000 elementary school c h i l d r e n . ^ y American Speech and Hearing Association, loc. c i t . 51 -^British Columbia Speech and Hearing Association, "Brief to the Royal Commission on Education, Province of British Columbia," January, 1959. (Mimeographed.) 32 Any attempt on the part of a l l school boards to implement this recommendation could not possibly succeed unless more qualified speech therapists were trained. For instance, Br i t i s h Columbia's total school enrolment in 1962-63, 358,900, would require the services of seventy-one or seventy-two trained speech and hearing therapists. Certain investigations have explored the possibility of "Speech Improvement" activities as a part of classroom procedures to supplement the.work of the trained speech therapist. The committee investigating this area for the American Speech and Hearing Survey, defined speech improve-ment in this manner: . . . speech improvement takes place in the classroom. It consists of systematic instruction in oral communi-cation which has as i t s purpose the development of articulation, voice and language a b i l i t i e s that enable a l l children to communicate their ideas effectively.?^ Darley and Hanlin summarized the research of this same committee by stating: The implementation of effective speech improvement programs i n close relationship to remedial speech programs brings within the realm of possibility the dream of adequate speech help for a l l children and suggests that the total number of highly trained clinicians needed to deal with speech-and-hearing handicapped children can be scaled down to a f i n i t e number a3 5h J United States Office of Education Cooperative Research Project, "Public School Speech and Hearing Services," op. c i t . , p. 78. 55 Ibid., p. 129. 33 A programme of speech improvement relies heavily upon the classroom teacher's knowledge of speech defects, her desire to help a l l children to improve their speaking a b i l i t y , and her a b i l i t y to integrate a speech programme 56 into the academic programme. Lloyd and Ainsworth J i n -vestigated attitudes of classroom teachers toward.speech problems and the additional responsibility placed on the teacher in conducting speech improvement ac t i v i t i e s . They found, in their limited study, that the teachers tended to turn over a l l speech correction work to the speech thera-pis t , and did not become greatly involved in remedial procedures. They concluded that i t would take a considerable amount of diplomatic and educationally sound training to get teachers to accept the more nearly ideal method of cooperative attack on speech problems. 57 Diehl and Stinnett" investigated the efficiency of teacher referrals in a school speech testing programme, in a school system with no therapy, and found that teachers missed forty per cent of the speech defective children a trained speech therapist later identified. However, these J G.. Lloyd and S. Ainsworth, "The Classroom Teacher's Activities and Attitudes Relating to.Speech Correction," Jour. Speech and Hear. Pis.« 19:2Mt-2 L 9 5 June, 195 L . ^C. Piehl and C. Stinnett, "Efficiency of Teacher Referrals i n a School Speech Testing Program," Jour. Speech  and Hear. Pis.,.2 L : 3 k - 3 6 , February, 1959. same teachers were able to i d e n t i f y e i g h t y per cent of the c h i l d r e n with severe types of a r t i c u l a t i o n problems. According to a comprehensive survey c a r r i e d out by the American Speech and H e a r i n g A s s o c i a t i o n i n c o o p e r a t i o n w i t h the U n i t e d S t a t e s O f f i c e of E d u c a t i o n and Purdue 58 U n i v e r s i t y ^ the r e s u l t s showed that most S t a t e s had accepted the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y of p r o v i d i n g some type of speech therapy or c o n s u l t a t i v e s e r v i c e s f o r c h i l d r e n handicapped by speech problems. The t r e n d was to i n c r e a s e the v a l u e of the t r a i n i n g of the p u b l i c s c h o o l t h e r a p i s t s so that they c o u l d more e f f e c t i v e l y i n t e g r a t e t h e i r s k i l l s i n a p u b l i c s c h o o l programme of d i a g n o s i s and r e m e d i a l work. CANADIAN STUDIES OF SPEECH PROBLEMS Few s t u d i e s of speech problems among Canadian 59 c h i l d r e n and a d u l t s have been c a r r i e d out. C o r y ^ / sent q u e s t i o n n a i r e s to superintendents of twelve s c h o o l boards throughout Canada i n 1957} but few superintendents were abl e to g i v e f i g u r e s to the q u e s t i o n , "How many c h i l d r e n • ^ U n i t e d S t a t e s O f f i c e of E d u c a t i o n C o o p e r a t i v e Research P r o j e c t , " P u b l i c School Speech and Hearing S e r v i c e s , " l o c . c i t . 59 y / C o r y , l o c . c i t . do you have who need speech correction work?" Winnipeg replied that i t s survey matched the national figures prior to 1952, ten to fifteen per cent, and since 1952, five to ten per cent. Cory also found that not many ci t i e s employed f u l l y qualified speech therapists in the public schools, and that this number ranged from none, i n three c i t i e s , to seven in two c i t i e s . In February 196*+, the present investigator sent questionnaires to the twelve school boards Cory had contacted and found that there had been an increase in the number of speech therapists employed in the public school systems. A copy of this letter IS found in Appendix I. A comparison of some of the findings of Cory's investigations and those of the present researcher appear in Table II on the following page. 6 0 In an earlier study (1955) Campbell obtained information regarding speech education from the English speaking teacher training institutions of Canada. Among other findings, she interpreted the returns to her questionnaires as suggesting that further study be done in a f i e l d that might be defined,in the present investigator's opinion, in part as "articulation problems". Campbell stated: ^Campbell, loc. c i t . TABLE II COMPARISON OF RESULTS OF QUESTIONNAIRES SENT TO TWELVE CANADIAN SCHOOL BOARDS IN 1957 AND IN 1964 Number of Speech Therapists 1957 1964 Estimated number or per cent of school population with speech problems 1957 1964 Total enrolment 1964 1. Regina 0 2 60 per year 6% or 900 1 5 , 0 0 0 e 2. Ottawa 5 11 5% or 1,255 2 5 , 0 0 0 e 3. Calgary 1 none no survey 5% or 2,689 53,111 4. Edmonton 1/2 12% 48,395 5. Victoria 1/2 1/2 75-100 in 2fo 26,660 time time 18,500 school population 6. Toronto 7 10 (in 1,000 5% or higher 89,535 elementary 4,476 schools only) 3-5% 6^,2^2 7. Montreal 3 4 (Prot. ) 8. Montreal 1 not not reported not reported (Cath.) reported 9. Halifax 1 1 not reported 1-2% 17,992 10. Vancouver 0 1 con- not reported k-5% 66,981 sultant 11. Winnipeg 7 9 5-10$ 5-8% 48,133 12. Saskatoon NOTE: 1957 figures taken from Cory, loc. c i t . e = Elementary schools 37 Because poor enunciation and lack of clear-cut speech were cited so often as a fault by the respondents to the questionnaire, perhaps a study concerned with the whole f i e l d of clearness of diction might be one which could yield f r u i t f u l results. 61 Kjarsgaard studied oral reading s k i l l and interest in literature in 155 Grade Twelve British Columbia students and stressed that: Interest in literature and speech s k i l l i n reading were found to have a significantly strong relationship and, since speech s k i l l s can be taught, i t may be that interest in literature can be raised by teaching of speech s k i l l . It may be that grade average can be raised also by the teaching of speech because speech s k i l l , interest, and grade average in literature a l l inter-correlate at the same significant strength.62 Coombs^3 stressed the fact that few surveys had been made i n Canada, and tested fifteen per cent (or..1,809) of the elementary school children in Saskatoon public schools on a modification of the Bryngelson-Glaspey speech test. He wished to ascertain the proportion of children exhibiting articulation inaccuracies from Grade One to Eight; to describe changes in the articulation of speech sounds from Grades One to Eight, and to investigate changes in the articulation of speech sounds after oral stimulation Campbell, op_. c i t . , p. 197. 62 Kjarsgaard, op_. c i t . , p. 2. ^^William D. Coombs, "The Development of Articulated Speech Sounds in the Elementary School" (Saskatoon: The University of Saskatchewan, 1963). (Mimeographed.) 38 from Grades One to Five. His analysis of the results was concerned, primarily with the percentage of pupils showing some inaccuracy in articulation. For instance, he found 31.77 per cent of Grade Six children with one or more misarticulations. He concluded that his study might serve as a standard of maturation for speech sounds. The articulation of any child could be compared with that of a large sample of children in his grade. His results were 65 similar to those conclusions reached earlier by Milisen, J namely, that there was rapid improvement of the production of articulation speech sounds in the primary grades, but that the proportion of children with misarticulations did not decrease significantly as the grade level increased beyond Grade Three. In summarizing the studies of speech s k i l l s and speech surveys done with Canadian schools and teacher training institutes, i t appears that the problems are similar to those reported by American investigators. The survey type analysis of articulation d i f f i c u l t i e s i n the elementary grades by Coombs, the related speech and 6k Coombs, op_. c i t . , p. 12. 39 l i t e r a t u r e i n t e r e s t areas r e p o r t e d by K j a r s g a a r d , and the r e p o r t s of teacher t r a i n i n g i n s t i t u t i o n s of poor d i c t i o n and e n u n c i a t i o n among t h e i r students, suggest t h a t Canadian c h i l d r e n do not a l l outgrow t h e i r speech d i f f i c u l t i e s , and t h a t t h i s can be a cause of concern i n academic f i e l d s beyond the elementary s c h o o l l e v e l . Cory's study and the q u e s t i o n n a i r e f o l l o w - u p by the present i n v e s t i g a t o r suggest t h a t f a c i l i t i e s f o r speech t r a i n i n g are inadequate i n the p u b l i c s c h o o l systems i n Canada. VALUE OF THIS STUDY S c i e n t i f i c r e s e a r c h i n the f i e l d of speech d i s o r d e r s has been both i n t e n s i v e and e x t e n s i v e d u r i n g the past f o r t y y e a r s . Many e x c e l l e n t s t u d i e s have d e a l t with h i g h l y s p e c i a l i z e d areas, but there has been a growing r e c o g n i t i o n of the need to i n v e s t i g a t e more f u l l y the area where the g r e a t e s t number of speech problems are seen, namely, i n the p u b l i c s c h o o l s . The Subcommittee on A r t i c u l a t i o n Problems, i n r e p o r t i n g t o the American Speech and H e a r i n g A s s o c i a t i o n on Research Needs i n Speech Pathology and Audiology, made recommendations concerning g e n e r a l r e s e a r c h needs. They s t a t e d : ho It i s desirable to have more descriptive studies not involving r i g i d experimental or s t a t i s t i c a l procedures. Much more descriptive information i s needed as a basis for designing controlled experiments.60 These recommendations were partially carried out when the American Speech and Hearing Association cooperated with the U. S. Office of Education and Purdue University in an extensive survey of speech and hearing therapy in the public schools in the United States. In their report, published July, 1961, the.following appears: The logical laboratory for research i s the public schools themselves. Too often when research has been concerned with public school children, the school has been used only as a convenient place to meet the children to be studied. Future research needs to be focused on the children as they function in public school situations. The entire school program must receive research consideration.67 In assessing the value of speech therapy as a special service in the schools, administration must define terminology used by many different investigators, assess the estimated percentages of speech problems and apply these c r i t e r i a to the needs of their particular school systems. .The Canadian administrator has been especially handicapped by the few studies carried out in Canadian Subcommittee on Articulation Problems, Report, Monograph Supplement No. 5, Jour. Speech and Hear. Pis., 1959, P. 16. 67 'United States Office of Education Cooperative Research Project, "Public School Speech and Hearing Services," op. c i t . , p. 119. hi public schools, and must make use of statistics and standards of speech from other countries. This present research was planned so that some of the variables found in other surveys could be eliminated. The same investigator assessed the speech of children in two Canadian school systems. CHAPTER III METHODOLOGY PILOT STUDY In order to test the effectiveness of the organiza-tion of the planned major study, and to correlate the judgments of the investigator with the judgments of another speech therapist, a Pilot Study was carried out in a school system not included i n the major study. The superintendent of the school system was asked to select a school of "middle-class" economic standing, where the middle group of Grade Six students could be tested. The total number of the class was thirty-three, eighteen boys and fifteen g i r l s . The investigator, who holds Basic Certification with the American Speech and Hearing Association, and another speech therapist, with the same professional qualifications, visited the school. A l l Grade Six children to be tested were asked to answer the questionnaire. . Following the completion of this part of the investiga-tion, the pupils were sent, one by one, to the testing room. In the testing room, the students were given a set of typed instructions and a word l i s t (Appendix II). Each child was told to begin with his sentences when he was ready. Each observer scored each child on separate testing sheets (Appendix II). The individual testing was completed within three hours. This testing time averaged approximately five minutes for each child, although some children were much slower in their responses than others. In assessing the Pilot Study, the investigator found that her working time in the school could be used to better advantage by asking the teachers to give the questionnaire to the children before the investigator arrived at the school. Otherwise, i t was not necessary to make any changes in the procedure planned for the major study. The following table shows the tabulation for the number of defective consonants found in the speech of the thirty-three children as judged by Observers A and B. TABLE III Incorrect Observer A Observer B S Z 37 35 19 21 2 10 2 2 3 13 5 3 0 0 Th. L CH . ;Sh ZH;, J V F r Th (vl) 0 7 2 2 6 11 0 1 1 0 The coefficient of correlation for this number of defective consonants, using the Pearson ^r correlation coefficient was r = . 9 0 . The scores on the rating sheets of the thirty-three children were also correlated by the Pearson .r, using i the data i n the following table. In this case, r = .55* TABLE IV NUMBER OF ERRORS. (WEIGHED SCORE) Child Observer A Observer B Child Observer A Observer B 1 25 0 17 8 '23 . 2 9 0 18 0 0 3 0 2 19 2 10 k 0 0 20 0 5 0 0 21 7 0 6 28 10 22 0 5 7 16 32 10 36 8 3 11 2k 7 0 9 7 5 25 30 10 9 0 26 8 0 11 8 21 27 8 8 12 8 6 28 8 18 13 52 \3 29 0 0 Ik 9 Ik 30 k 20 15 19 6 31 0 0 16 8 0 32 0 0 33 9 17 The value of the second correlation was much lower as i t took into account not only the relative judgments of Observers A and B, but also the rating system.; It w i l l k 5 be seen, that the Individual Rating Sheet (Appendix II) gives a weighed score to each consonant. A different judgment of the two observers of one consonant which had a very high numerical rating ( i . e . , j [ , v, or £) would lower the correlation coefficient quite considerably, whereas greater discrepancies in lower rating consonants would have a relatively small effect on the value of r. PLAN OF THE MAJOR STUDY This study investigated the following aspects of speech deviations and judgments of speech deviations in two Canadian School Systems. One System provided speech therapy and the other provided Speech Consultant services only. Specifically, the following areas were investigated: 1. The null hypothesis was asserted that children at the Grade Six level i n a school system providing speech therapy, when compared to children from another school system having no speech therapy, would not make higher scores on a speech test administered by the same tester. 2A. When Grade Six teachers are given instructions asking them to identify children i n their classes with speech misarticulations, how do their judgments compare with the judgments of a trained speech therapist? 2B. When these same teachers are asked to judge the handicapping effect of the misarticulations on social and academic achievement, do the children in School System A appear to have better adjustment to their misarticulation than do children in School System B as measured by the average ratings given by the teachers? 3. Do children with speech misarticulations at the Grade Six level have a higher score, on the pupil questionnaire than do children who do not have speech misarticulations? When asked the question, "Have you ever had a speech d i f f i c u l t y ? " h ow many children from each school system reply i n the affirmative? h. The null hypothesis was put forth that no difference exists between the correlations of the scores on the Pupil Questionnaire and the Articulation Test scores for the two school systems tested. CONSTRUCTION OF THE PUPIL QUESTIONNAIRE The pupil questionnaire was constructed by the investigator. It contains thirty questions about school and extra-curricular a c t i v i t i e s . Among these thirty questions are ten relating to speech a b i l i t y and attitudes toward speech. These ten questions were a r b i t r a r i l y composed by t h i s i n v e s t i g a t o r and were each g i v e n an a r b i t r a r y n u m e r i c a l value* The f o l l o w i n g q u e s t i o n s concerned the c h i l d ' s p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n speaking s i t u a t i o n s and were scored with a zero f o r YES, a score of one f o r undecided, and a score of two f o r NO. 1. Do you l i k e to g i v e a r e p o r t t o your c l a s s ? 19. Have you ever had a speaking p a r t i n a s c h o o l or c l a s s p l a y ? 20. Have you ever been s e l e c t e d by your classmates to g i v e a t a l k or a r e p o r t ? 25. Have you ever been t o l d t h a t you speak w e l l ? The f o l l o w i n g questions asked f o r a d e f i n i t e o p i n i o n about the c h i l d ' s a t t i t u d e s toward h i s own speech. They r e c e i v e d a zero score f o r NO, a score of one f o r undecided, and a score of two f o r YES. 6. Do you ever have t r o u b l e pronouncing new words? 10. Have you ever had t r o u b l e saying c e r t a i n sounds i n words? 15. Have you ever had a speech d i f f i c u l t y ? 22. Have you ever r e f u s e d to answer a q u e s t i o n because you were a f r a i d you c o u l d n ' t pronounce a word c o r r e c t l y ? 26. Do you f e e l f r i g h t e n e d when you get up i n f r o n t of your c l a s s t o make a t a l k or gi v e a r e p o r t ? 30. Do you wish you c o u l d speak b e t t e r than you do? The h i g h e s t p o s s i b l e score on t h i s q u e s t i o n n a i r e was 20. T h i s i n v e s t i g a t o r assumed t h a t the h i g h e r the score on the q u e s t i o n n a i r e the g r e a t e r was the i n d i c a t i o n of poor speaking a b i l i t y and/or strong n e g a t i v e f e e l i n g s abo speaking s i t u a t i o n s . 48 In addition to a numerical value for each pupil questionnaire, each question was tabulated as being significant or non-significant on the master sheet. Significant scores were 2, non-significant scores were 1 or 0. CONSTRUCTION OF THE ARTICULATION SCREENING TEST The Individual Rating Sheet for the Articulation Screening Test i s given in Appendix II. The instructions for this test are also l i s t e d i n Appendix II. A review of research revealed the consonant sounds other investigators discovered to be most frequently efective among school children. Van Riper 1 found that the s., z, voiced and voiceless th, r_, zh, 1, s h , sh, f and v were the most common errors p among school children. Hall l i s t e d s, z, sh, ch, j., zh, wh, voiceless th and r. In his analysis of misarticulations in school children in Saskatoon, Grades One through Eight, Van Riper, loc. c i t . 2M. E. Ha l l , "Auditory Factors in Functional Articulatory Speech Defects," J. Exc. Ed., 7:110-132, December, 1938. k 9 Coombs-^  l i s t e d the s., z, voiceless th, sh, r_, j., ch, £,, v, 1, k and g. in decreasing order of difficulty.. These most common errors in the speech of school children compare with the consonant sounds that are among the last to be k assimilated through maturation. 5 6 Spriestersbach and Curtis^ and Snow have reported inconsistencies i n the articulation of speech sounds among school children. They point out that a sound may be articulated adequately i n one word, but misarticulated in another word. Snow and Templin also investigated the effect of oral stimulation on the child's response. Templin found that there was l i t t l e or no significant difference in the testing of consonants through picture test or through oral stimulation. Snow found that oral stimulation seemed to be affecting the responses of children by giving them the proper auditory pattern. •^ Coombs, loc. c i t . L. Poole, loc. c i t . ; Templin, loc. c i t . ; Wellman, loc. c i t . ^Spriestersbach and Curtis, loc. c i t . K. Snow, "A Detailed Analysis of Articulation Responses of "Normal" F i r s t Grade Children," Jour. Speech  and Hear. Res., 6:277-290, September, 1963$. Templin, loc. c i t . A review of literature also discloses that articula-tion testing with young children has been done primarily through a picture test. If the child i s old enough to read, he i s given a l i s t of sentences containing a number of words having the consonant to be tested, and the examiner records the response. In both picture tests and reading tests, the sound to be tested i s usually e l i c i t e d in the medial, f i n a l and i n i t i a l positions. This investigator chose twelve consonants for the articulation test in this study. The sh, ch, f, ]., s, z, voiceless th, v, 2 , and r sounds were tested in the i n i t i a l , medial and f i n a l positions; the voiced th i n the i n i t i a l and medial positions, and the zh i n the medial position only. Wo blends were tested. A l l of the words used in the articulation test appear i n the Thorndyke and Lorge 7 basic 30,000 word vocabulary l i s t . Each student was asked to make a short sentence using the words in the l i s t . The examiner listened for the production of the consonant being tested, and scored this as being satisfactory, 'E. L. Thorndyke and I. Lorge, The Teacher's Word  Book of 30.000 Words (New York: Columbia University Press, 19 k4). 51 distorted, omitted, or whether another sound was substituted. Following the p i l o t study, in which two observers listened to the speech of thirty-three children, the investigator decided to make a judgment on the test word only, although in conversation, with some of the pupils, i t was noted that their responses on certain sounds were inconsistent. On the Individual Rating Sheet, an adaption of a i o scale used by Simonsen was used. This investigator devised a scoring scale based on the order of development of sounds, that would give each sound a weighted score. Simonsen tested twenty-three sounds that were given arbitrary numbers from one to twenty-three. If a child misarticulated sounds usually acquired at an early developmental stage, his score was penalized, more than i f he misarticulated sounds usually acquired at a later age. In this present study, the investigator gave the consonants an arbitrary, numerical rank that related closely to the studies reported earlier. This ranking was as follows: J. W. Simonsen, "The Relationship Between I n t e l l i -gence and Certain Linguistic Ab i l i t i e s in the Elementary Grades" (unpublished Master's thesis, University of Wisconsin, Madison, 1939) . 52 s - 1 voiced th - 5 zh - 9 2 . - 2 1 - 6 j - 10 L - 3 £ h - 7 v - 11 voice-less th - 4 sh - 8 f - 12 From this ranking, i t w i l l be seen that the lower the ranking, the more common the articulation error. For instance, there i s common agreement, among the research reports quoted, that the s i s the most commonly misarticula-ted consonant. This sound, then, carried a value of only 1. The f sound, on the other hand, i s seldom misarticulated by children at the intermediate level, and therefore i t was assigned an arbitrary value of !£. If the sound was tested in only two positions, i t s numerical value was multiplied by two. If the sound, for instance zh, was tested in one position only, i t s numerical value was multiplied by one. If the sound was tested in three positions i t s numerical value was multiplied by three. The sum of the products of the numerical value of each letter and i t s frequency of testing was 211. A score of 211 meant that there were no errors in articulation as judged by this screening test. In order to convert the scores to positive scores, the total number of errors on each test was added and then subtracted from 211. CONSTRUCTION OF THE QUESTIONNAIRE FOR TEACHERS The q u e s t i o n n a i r e to teachers of the Grade S i x p u p i l s i s i n Appendix I I . T h i s q u e s t i o n n a i r e d e s c r i b e d an a r t i c u l a t i o n problem, and asked the t e a c h e r s * coopera-t i o n i n i d e n t i f y i n g the c h i l d r e n i n the c l a s s who had a r t i c u l a t i o n d i f f i c u l t i e s . In a d d i t i o n , i t asked f o r the s p e c i f i c sounds m i s a r t i c u l a t e d . The teacher was a l s o asked to g i v e her o p i n i o n , on a one to f i v e r a t i n g s c a l e , of the e f f e c t of any c h i l d ' s a r t i c u l a t i o n d i f f i c u l t y on h i s s c h o o l work and on h i s s o c i a l c o n t a c t s . T h i s i n v e s t i g a t o r asked the superintendents of the r e s p e c t i v e s c h o o l systems to s e l e c t a s c h o o l , or s c h o o l s , l o c a t e d i n a middle-economic a r e a , from which a t l e a s t t hree hundred Grade S i x c h i l d r e n c o u l d be t e s t e d . A l l c h i l d r e n , r e g a r d l e s s of known p h y s i c a l handicap, emotional problems, or i n t e l l e c t u a l achievement were t e s t e d by t h i s i n v e s t i g a t o r . However, a f t e r checking with the nurses i n the schools i n School System B, and with the speech t h e r a p i s t s i n School System A, the t e s t r e s u l t s of the f o l l o w i n g c h i l d r e n were not used i n t h i s study: a l l c h i l d r e n with known b i - l a t e r a l h e a r i n g l o s s e s of more than 20 d e c i b e l s ; a l l c h i l d r e n known to be handicapped by c e r e b r a l p a l s y or c l e f t p a l a t e or c l e f t l i p c o n d i t i o n s ; a l l c h i l d r e n known to have had some p a r a l y s i s of the o r a l structures; and a l l children known-to stutter. Because of absentees, either on the day of the examiner*s v i s i t to the school, or on the day the children answered the questionnaires, and because of the excluding conditions mentioned here, a total of only 276 children i n each school system was eventually used in this study. Although these children were selected according to total class enrolment, the number of males and females was similar as i s seen by the following distribution: Boys Girls Total School System A ikB 128 276 School System B l k 9 127 276 552 PATERNAL STATUS Previous investigations have been made into the possible relationship of socio-economic and economic a -positions and articulatory defects i n children.' The paternal occupation was obtained from each child interviewed and this information was scaled on the Minnesota Scale for Paternal Occupations. The following figures 'C. Weaver, Catherine Furbee, and R. Everhart, "Paternal Occupational Class and Articulatory Defects in Children," Jour. Speech and Hear. Pis.« 25:171-175, May, I960. 55 give the distribution of the paternal economic status for the children in the two school systems and suggests that the children used in this investigation came from similar economic backgrounds. Distribution for Paternal Economic Status on the Minnesota Scale  1 2 3 k 5 6 7 Total X School System A 10 43 68 25 91 32 7 276 3.97 School System B 6 31 58 16 89 61 15 276 4.43 PREPARATION OF THE INFORMATION FOR ANALYSIS The results of the screening test, the questionnaire, and the teachers' identification sheet were scored and entered on a master sheet that would be used for IBM pro-cessing. This master sheet i s given in Appendix II. The master sheet i s largely self-explanatory, except for the Card Column 59« It was not possible to discover whether the children in School System B had had Speech Therapy in the past, so that this column would be blank for a l l children from School System B. CHAPTER IV ANALYSIS OF DATA I. SPEECH ASSESSMENTS A perfect score on the speech assessment was 211. The means of the scores on the speech assessments were found to be 208.565 for School System A (with speech therapy), and 205.*+7 for School System B (with speech consultative services only). The difference, 3.09 k » was found to have a c r i t i c a l ratio of 3»36. The formula: x 2 2 d i f f Where S.E. d i f f = U S.E. d i f f A B and Difference = 3 . 0 9 k t = 3.36 / *. 4.V. O ^ •> 4- - O O O ^ S ' E « d i f f = 0.9209 (at the 0.01 level, t = 2.326) That i s , the difference between the mean scores, on the speech assessment, for the two school systems was found to be significant at the .01 level of confidence. The null hypothesis, namely, "that children in a school system providing speech therapy when compared to children from another school system having no speech therapy, would not make higher scores on a speech test administered by the same tester1;1,1 was therefore rejected. In view of these findings, i t can be said that pupils in Grade Six in the school system that provides speech therapy, when 57 compared with the pupils at the same grade level in another school system that provides speech consultant services only have higher scores in "speech" as assessed by one examiner, with this particular instrument, at this time. The speech assessment scores were analyzed on the basis of the median for the two school systems. The results were: Median Score on Speech Assessment School System A male - 211 female - 211 combined 211 School System B male - 209 female - 211 combined 210 II. TEACHER IDENTIFICATION OF CHILDREN WITH MISARTICULATIONS The investigator found more children with one or more misarticulations i n School System B than in School System A. The number of children identified by the teachers, however, was smaller in School System B than in School System A, as shown: Number Identified Investigator's Opinion By Teachers of Number of Children with One or More Mis-articulations  School System A 11 68 School System B 3 119 Because of the-small number of children reported by the teachers, s t a t i s t i c a l analysis of these data was not applied. Table V, on the following page, presents data for a l l of the children identified by teachers as having misarticulations. This summary illustrates how the judg-ments of teachers relate to the investigator's assessments. On inspection of this table, i t appears that teachers* identifications were closely related to the speech assess-ment scores. The mean score for the "identified" pupils was 201.21 which was 5-96 points below that (207.17) of the remainder of the group. A test of significance was applied to these data, with the following results: 2 2 t = d i f f Where S.E. d i f f = A f e S.E. d i f f XA B t = 2.4-32 where difference= 5*96 (at 0.01 level, t = 2.326) S.E. d i f f = 2.451 The mean score of the speech assessments of the children identified by Grade Six classroom teachers was significantly different from that of the remainder of the group at the 0.01 level of confidence. In view of these findings, one can say that the classroom teachers' judg-ments of misarticulations of Grade Six pupils were valid for the small number of children identified in this study. TABLE V PUPILS WITH MISARTICULATIONS REPORTED BY TEACHERS P u p i l no. Sex Score on q u e s t i o n -n a i r e Speech a s s e s s -ment Teachers* E v a l u a t i o n of E f f e c t of A r t i c u l a t i o n Problem on: School Work Social Contact Item 15 Speech on t h e r -q u e s t i o n - a v y n a i r e F , y Sounds M i s a r t i c u l a t e d School 131. System A M 9 19k 1 2 undec. t h ( v l ) i m f I1 155. M lk 205 5 yes l m 156. M 10 206 3 k yes yes ? z i £ 157. M 15 208 5 5 yes yes s f / 187. F 18 201 5 5 undec. yes z1 t h ( v l ) m f 219. 229. F F 12 12 211 209 k 2 5 l no yes yes s i f 238. 239. M M 18 10 207 177 2 k 2 2 yes no no t h ( v d ) m s i m s h f  z i m f s h i m f 251. M lk 193 2 2 yes yes s i m f £ i m f t h C v l ) f t h ( v d ) m 273. M 12 211 1 2 no 51. Mean X = F 15 3.09 195 k X = 3.09 k no s 1 c h 1 s h 1 53. 108. F F 7 3 197 203 1 2 1 1 yes no m r mf s tkCvd) 1 zimf l m Mean X = 2.33 X = 2.00 Mean 12.07 201.21 i m f - i n i t i a l - medial - f i n a l NOTE: E v a l u a t i o n made on a one to f i v e r a t i n g s c a l e . 60 It i s noteworthy that two of the pupils in School System A identified by teachers as having misarticulations were given a perfect score in the speech assessment by the investigator. Teachers 1 estimates of the handicapping effect of the misarticulations on school work and on social contacts are also presented in Table V. Generally speaking, teachers are "Undecided" as to whether or not the misarticulations affect school work. It i s noteworthy that for three pupils in School System A, teachers f e l t that the misarticulations "Very Definitely" affected school progress. In much the same way, teachers were "Undecided" about the effect of misarticulations on social contacts. Here again the ratings for three pupils i n School System A were "Very Definitely" handicapping. While, admittedly, the samples were small, there i s some indication in the means of these ratings that the teachers in School System A considered that misarticula-tions had a somewhat greater handicapping effect on school work and on social contacts than did teachers in School System B. 61 III. PUPIL QUESTIONNAIRE The Pupil Questionnaire (Appendix II) contained ten questions of self-judgment of speaking a b i l i t y , and an expression of feelings about speaking situations. A maximum score of twenty, i n the investigator ls opinion, indicated that the pupil f e l t himself to be a poor speaker and probably did not participate in situations requiring good speaking a b i l i t y . The mean of the scores on the Pupil Questionnaire for pupils in School System A was IO.O83, and for pupils i n School System B, 10 . 5 3 3 , with a difference of 0.*+5. This difference was not s t a t i s t i c a l l y significant. The median scores for the Pupil Questionnaires were as follows: Pupil Questionnaire Median Score School System A male - 10 female - 10 combined - 10 School System B male - 10 female - 11 combined - 10 A further analysis of the Pupil Questionnaire results was made. The question was asked, "Do children with speech misarticulations at the Grade VI level have a higher mean score on the Pupil Questionnaire than do children who do not have speech misarticulations as measured by ( l ) the 62 teachers* judgments of misarticulations, and (2) the investigator's judgment of misarticulations?" A partial analysis of the f i r s t question, based on teacher identifications, i s shown in Table V. These pupils had a mean score of 12.07, as compared to the mean score (10.26) of the remaining pupils in both school systems. A test of significance was applied to these data: t = d i f f Where Diff. = 1.81 S.E. Diff S.E. Diff = 1.076 t = 1.682 (At the 0.01 level of confidence, t = 2.326; at the 0.05 level of confidence, t = 1.645); therefore, t i s s i g n i f i -cant at the 0.05 level of confidence, and. not at the 0.01 level of confidence. From this, then, one may conclude that the children identified by teachers as having misarticulations, made slightly higher scores on the Pupil Questionnaire than did the children who were not identified by the teachers as having misarticulations. The mean score on the questionnaire of a l l children with one or more misarticulations, and the mean score on the Pupil Questionnaire of a l l children having a perfect score on the speech assessment were compared, and a test 63 of significance of the difference between these mean scores was made. The results were: t = d i f f t = 1*18 O.38 S.E. Diff 2 Where S.E. d i f f +°£ and Diff - 1.18 2 S.E. Diff = O.38 t = 3.1026 (At the 0.01 level, t = 2.326) From this test of significance, i t i s seen that for the total group of children tested, those children having misarticulations tended to make higher scores on the Pupil Questionnaire than did the children having perfect scores on the assessment. The scores were broken down into the categories set out i n Table VI, and tests of significance were run with the results reported in the table. It can be seen from this table that the significance shown for the entire group i s not present for a l l groups in School System A, nor i s this significance present for any of the three groups in School System B. These findings suggest to the investigator that in a school system where speech therapy i s provided, that the ,need to correct speech deviations may be more important to children, and that their awareness of these speech deviations i s reflected i n their answers to the 64 TABLE VI SHOWING RESULTS OF TESTS OF SIGNIFICANCE APPLIED TO MEAN SCORES ON PUPIL QUESTIONNAIRE FOR CHILDREN WITH ONE OR MORE MISARTICULATIONS AS OPPOSED TO THOSE WITH PERFECT SCORES ON THE SPEECH ASSESSMENT Differ- S.E. ence Differ-ence Total Group 1.179 O.38 3.1026 Significant at both 0.01 and 0.05 levels of confidence School System A 1.82 0.65 2.8000 Significant at both 0.01 and 0.05 levels of confidence School System B 0.616 0.502 1.227 Not significant School System A - male 1.704 0.744 2.2903 Significant at 0.05 level of confidence but not at' 0.01 level School System A - female 2.131 1.475 1.447 Not significant School System B - male 0.548 0.685 0.80 Not significant School System B - female O.898 0.753 1.1926 Not significant (t at 0.01 level = 2.326; t at 0.05 level = 1.645). questions on the Pupil Questionnaire. Also, in a school system where speech therapy i s not provided, Grade Six children, with more misarticulations than were found i n Grade Six children in the therapy setting, are either not aware of the speech deviations, or do not consider them important, and these attitudes are reflected in the answers to the questions regarding speech and speaking situations. In addition to the above analysis, the answers to the questions were rated as "Significant", or "Nonsignifi-cant", and the number of significant responses given by pupils i n School System A and School System B, together with the total and the percentages, are presented in Table VII. The differences between the percentages of children answering "Significantly" in the two school systems should be particularly noted i n Questions 3> 6, 15 and 30. From these responses, more children in School System B (without therapy) f e l t that they had trouble pronouncing new words, f e l t that they had had a speech d i f f i c u l t y , and wished that they could speak better. Also, more children in School System B did not like to give a report to their class. TABLE VII PERCENTAGE OF SIGNIFICANT RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS MADE BY PUPILS IN SCHOOL SYSTEMS A AND B Question System A System B no. Signi-ficant answer Male no. Per cent Fe-male no. Per cent Total Total per cent Male no. Per Fe-cent m a l e no. Per cent Total Total per cent 3. Do you like to give a report to your class? no 60 4o.5 48 37.8 108 39.13 76 51 63 49.5 139 50.36 6. Do you ever have trouble pronouncing new words? yes 82 55.4 65 50.7 147 53.26 88 59 86 67.8 174 63.04 10. Have you ever had trouble saying certain sounds in words? yes 74 50.0 52 ito.6 126 45.65 79 53 63 49.6 142 51.45 15. Have you ever had a speech dif f i c u l t y ? yes k6 31 37 28.7 83 30.07 64 43 55 43.3 119 43.12 19. Have you ever had a speaking part in a school or class play? no 3k 23 28 21.9 62 22.46 30 20.1 19 15.0 49 17.75 20. Have you ever been selected by your class-mates to give a talk or report? no 86 58.1 78 60.9 164 59.42 109 73.2 80 63.O 189 68.48 22. Have you ever refused to answer a question because you were afraid you couldn't pronounce a word correctly? yes kk 29.7 41 32.0 85 30.80 45 30.2 46 36.2 91 32.97 25. Have you ever been told you speak well? no 85 57.4 73 57 168 60.87 95 63.8 66 52.0 161 58.33 30. Do you wish you could speak better than you do? yes 86 58.1 62 48.4 148 53.62 103 69.I 82 64.6 185 67.03 67 IV. CORRELATIONS BETWEEN THE SCORES ON THE PUPIL QUESTIONNAIRE AND SCORES ON THE SPEECH ASSESSMENT The correlations between the scores on the Pupil Questionnaire and the Speech Assessment for the two school systems were calculated by the formula: r _ N 2 x y - 2 x 2 y AJ[N2X^ - (Zx) 2] [N2y2 - (Sy) 2] For School System A, r = 0.201 For School System B, r = 0.182 0.019 A test of significance of the difference between the two correlation coefficients was then applied, using Fisher's z p transformation, 1 0 and the formula: z = z - .z r l r 2 \| (N x -3) (N 2 -3) z = 0.23 At the 1 per cent level of confidence z - 2.58 At the five per cent level of confidence z =-1.96. Therefore, the difference of 0.019 "was not found to be significant. 1 0George A. Ferguson, St a t i s t i c a l Analysis jn Psycho-logy and Education, McGraw-Hill Series in Psychology (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1959), Ipp. 153-15 L. The investigator had put forth the nul l hypothesis that no difference existed between the correlations of the scores on the Pupil Questionnaire and the Articulation Test Scores for the two school systems tested. According to Ferguson 1 1 because of the formula used: we f a i l to reject the null hypothesis, but this does not mean that the null hypothesis i s necessarily true. An indefinitely large number of alternative hypotheses exist, in addition to the null hypothesis, which on the basis of any particular bit of experimental evidence cannot be rejected.12 This finding suggests that the relationship in one school system between the scores pupils made on the questionnaire and their speech assessment scores was not in any way different from the relationship between the two variables in the other school system. V. CHILDREN WHO HAD RECEIVED SPEECH THERAPY Under the organization of this study, i t was not feasible to determine how many of the children from System B "Ferguson, loc. pit. "Ibid., p. 133. 69 had received speech therapy in the past. However, Table VIII shows the speech assessment scores of the children from School System A who had received therapy and their scores on the Pupil Questionnaires. It i s seen that of these ten children, one child replied "No", and another, "Undecided", in answering the question, "Have you ever had a speech d i f f i c u l t y ? " It w i l l be seen that the mean score ( l k . 5 ) on the Pupil Questionnaire of this group having therapy i s 3.19 points above the mean (IO.3O8) for the entire group of pupils. The mean score on the speech assessment for this group was 2 0 3 . 8 , or 3.22 points below the mean ( 2 0 7 . 0 2 ) for the entire group. The types of misarticulations made by these children are mostly distortions, and occur in the most commonly defective sounds as reported i n an earlier chapter, that i s , s, z, voiced and voiceless th, and r_, with only one sh distortion. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS The results of this study failed to support the null hypothesis that there were no significant differences between the mean speech articulation score of Grade Six children in a school system that provided speech therapy, TABLE VIII CHILDREN FROM SCHOOL SYSTEM A KNOWN TO HAVE RECEIVED SPEECH THERAPY No. Sex Score on Question-naire Speech Assess-ment Question 15* 1 M 16 207 yes 2 M 15 206 Undecided 3 M 16 202 no k F ik 209 yes 5 M 10 206 yes 6 M Ik 193 yes 7 M 15 208 yes 8 F 18 201 yes 9 M Ik 205 yes 10 M 13 201 yes Mean ik. 5 203.8 Mean for entire group 10.308 207.018 Sounds Misarticulated s , m f z f, (distorted) thj^vd.), (Substitution) imf , . . .. r_ , sub. omit, omit. , (distorted) f m , (distorted) s i m f , z i m f (distorted) th^vd) substituted, t h m (vl.)sub. f f s. , z (distorted) z 1 , (sub.) th r a f(vl.)omitted _mf mf m z , (distorted) sh (distorted) •Question 15: Have you ever had a speech d i f f i c u l t y ? ( i - i n i t i a l position; m - medial position; f - f i n a l position) 3 71 and the mean speech articulation score of Grade Six children in a school system that provided speech consultant services only, as measured by a particular instrument, at a particular time, by the same tester. No differences were found between the mean scores of the responses to the Pupil Questionnaire for the two school systems. More teachers from School System A (providing therapy) identified children with speech misarticulations than did teachers in the school system having speech consultant services. On the whole, these identifications compared favourably to the investigator's judgments. Pupils who had received speech therapy in School System A made more errors on the speech assessment and had higher scores on the Pupil Questionnaire than did the remaining pupils in both school systems. In evaluating the groups as a whole, pupils with misarticulations scored s t a t i s t i c a l l y higher on the Pupil Questionnaire than did those pupils with no misarticula-tions. Although this same relationship was not reflected i n the scores of the pupils with misarticulations in School System B, i t was shown to be present i n the scores of the pupils with misarticulations in School System A. The results of a test of significance on the correlations of the scores on the Pupil Questionnaire and the Speech Assessment for the two school systems suggests that the relationships between these two variables was not in any way different in the two school systems. CHAPTER V CONCLUSIONS, OBSERVATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS I. REVIEW OF EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN This study was designed to compare quantitatively the speech misarticulations of Grade Six children in two Canadian school systems. Two hundred and seventy-six children from each school system were used i n the f i n a l analysis of the data. One school system, A, had provided speech therapy for the previous ten years; the other school system, B, had provided speech consultant's services for the previous three years. The speech assessments were made by one examiner. This study was also designed to investigate the self-judgment of speaking a b i l i t y and feelings about speaking situations of the children tested. In addition, the study compared the results of classroom teachers 1 judgments of articulation with the judgments of the investigator, who i s a trained speech therapist. II. CONCLUSIONS In the analysis of data, a s t a t i s t i c a l l y significant difference was found between the mean scores on the Speech Assessment of the Grade Six children in the two school systems; the children in the school system providing therapy had a mean score higher than the mean score of the children 7k i n the other school system. Under the organization of this study, more detailed analysis of the background of each Grade Six child was not made. Therefore, one cannot conclude that the scores on the articulation test were better because of the inclusion of speech therapy in the public school programme. In School System A, only ten children used in this study had actually received speech therapy, but an additional nine had been tested by the speech therapists. However, the two groups of children from the two different school systems were closely matched with respect to sex, paternal economic status, and grade placement. No s t a t i s t i c a l l y significant difference was found between the responses of the pupils of the two school systems to the Pupil Questionnaire. However, an inspection of the percentages of children giving "Significant" responses to four specific questions revealed a slight tendency for the children from School System B to feel less adequate about their speaking a b i l i t y . The findings of this study indicate that teachers in a school system with speech therapy are more aware of speech deviations and that their judgments are usually comparable to those of a trained speech therapist, as judged by a small sampling. It was not possible to compare 75 the two school systems in the efficacy of teacher i d e n t i f i -cation of speech d i f f i c u l t i e s , because of the small number (only three) identified by teachers in School System B. In considering a l l students from both school systems, i t was found that students having perfect scores on the speech assessment test had a mean score on the Pupil Questionnaire which was significantly lower than the mean score on the questionnaire of students making one or more misarticulations on the speech assessment. However, in breaking down this analysis into school systems, i t was found that there was not a significant relationship between the mean questionnaire scores in the school system with no therapy. Nor was there a relationship between the mean scores of the Male and Female Group in School System B. However, of School System A, Total Group, and Male Group, those students achieving a perfect score on the speech assessment had a significantJLy lower mean score on the Questionnaire than the mean score on the Questionnaire of those students making one or more errors on the speech assessment. The difference was not found to be s t a t i s t i -cally significant between the mean questionnaire scores of School System A, Females, although the actual difference, 2.131j between the mean scores was greater than for any other group, including those for whom the difference was found to be s t a t i s t i c a l l y significant. This i s most probably due to the small number (15) of females in School System A making one or more misarticulations on the speech assessment, which resulted in a relatively high standard error of the difference between the mean scores on the questionnaire for the females of School System B. The investigator suggests that these differences in the two groups tested from the two school systems may be explained by any of the following factors or combination of factors: 1. That children in a school system providing speech therapy have better scores on an articulation test at the Grade Six level because of the classroom teachers* awareness of speech d i f f i c u l t i e s and the fact that the speech therapists provide guidance and encouragement in stimulating better speech through classroom activi t i e s . 2. That Grade Six children in a school system providing speech therapy are more aware of good speech standards, and therefore feel more concerned about achieving better speech. On the contrary, children in a school system with no speech therapy may not be aware of their speech deviations, and therefore do no)t show concern about their speech standards. 3. That a speech therapy programme in the public schools does improve speech standards by reducing the number of misarticulations among Grade Six children, but that not a l l children having received therapy have achieved a "perfect" score on the speech assessment. The types of speech deviations remaining, despite therapy, are recognized as being among the most d i f f i c u l t to correct. k. That the s t a t i s t i c a l difference between the mean scores on the articulation assessment of the pupils in the two school systems may be the result of other factors, and that a repetition of this study carried out in two school systems with speech therapy, or two school systems without speech therapy, might produce results similar to those of this present study. III. OBSERVATIONS Limitations of this study have been mentioned i n a previous section. However, further acknowledgment of the restrictions of the methodology should be made. The analysis of the speech assessment data did not make use of the classification of substitutions, distortions, or omissions as a means of describing the types of speech deviations. Such information would have been worthwhile, although this was not the main purpose of this investigation. 78 The screening device used did not ask for further investigation of related areas such as bi-lingualism, examination of the structure and function of the oral mechanism, auditory discrimination a b i l i t i e s , or emotional problems. The assumption in using this restricted screening device i s questionable, but the differences in the two school populations are s t a t i s t i c a l l y significant under the c r i t e r i a used. Further limitations of this study were present in the use of the Pupil Questionnaire. No attempt was made to standardize the questions. However, as the groups were comparable with respect to age, grade placement, and economic status, the investigator f e l t that these questions did, to some extent, test valid feelings about speech and speaking a b i l i t y , recognizing the limitations of any questionnaire given at a particular time to a particular group of children. Many teachers indicated interest in the way their pupils answered the questionnaires., . - i. One principal suggested that this was, perhaps, the most important area of the study. One of the secondary findings of this study was the fact that so many of the twelve school boards responding to the Questionnaire showed great interest in the study, and many of them sent Annual Reports or special 79 reports to enrich this investigator's approach to a study of speech problems in the public schools throughout Canada. Some school systems indicated that they had created speech therapy positions, but could not find qualified personnel to f i l l the positions. Although School System A maintained a staff of nine speech therapists during the year of this investigation, the administrative details of the speech therapy programme did not include weekly v i s i t s to each school each year. One of the schools in which the testing took place provided over one hundred Grade Six children for this study, but this school was not visited regularly by the speech therapist during the year of the investigation. It was interesting to note that in this school, two of the Grade Six teachers were new to the system, and they did not report any children with misarticulations. The investigator also recognizes the limitations of this study related to a lack of information about possible speech therapy that may have been received by the pupils in School System B. IV. RECOMMENDATIONS The investigator recommends that the data accumulated from this research be further analyzed by any researcher under the following c r i t e r i a : 80 1. What sounds were most commonly misarticulated at the Grade Six level, and what type of errors were made? 2. Pupils tested in this study should be given a standardized personality inventory to ascertain the relationship of their responses to the questions posed in the present investigation. 3. That information on pupils from School System B be obtained to ascertain whether or not they had received speech therapy previously. It i s also recommended that the same procedure and testing material be used to test Grade Six children from two other Canadian c i t i e s providing speech therapy, and two other Canadian c i t i e s that do not provide speech therapy. In conclusion, the investigator would strongly recommend that the role of the classroom teacher i n helping children with speech problems be studied in the areas of elementary school curriculum, courses available in teacher training institutions, and the usefulness of speech therapy or speech consultant services in the public schools. BIBLIOGRAPHY A. BOOKS Anderson, V. A. Improving the Child's Speech. New York: Oxford University Press, 1953* Johnson, W., F. Parley, and D. Spriestersbach. Diagnostic  Manual in Speech Correction. New York: Harper, 1952. Thorndike, E. L., and I. Lorge. The Teacher's Word Book of 30?000 Words. New York: Columbia University Press, 19kk7 Van Riper, C. Speech Correction. Principles and Methods. New York: Prentice-Hall, 195**. B. BOOKS: PARTS OF SERIES Ferguson, George A. Statistical Analysis in Psychology and  Education. McGraw-Hill Series in Psychology. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1959. Milisen, R. "A Rationale for Articulation Disorders." Monograph . Supplement No. !+, Jour. Speech and Hear. Pis. , 195 k . Subcommittee on Articulation Problems. Report. Monograph Supplement No. 5> Jour. Speech and Hear. Pis., 1959. Templin, Mildred. Certain Language Skills i n Children. Their Pevelopment and Interrelationships. Monograph No. 26, Institute of Child Welfare, The University of Minnesota. Minneapolis: The University of Minnesota Press, 1957. United States Office of Education Cooperative Research Project. "Public School Speech and Hearing Services." Monograph Supplement No. 8, Jour. Speech and Hear. Pis., 1961. Wellman, B. L., and others. Speech Sounds of Young Children. University of Iowa Studies in Child Welfare, Vol. V, No. 2. Iowa City: University of Iowa Press, 1931. 82 C. PUBLICATIONS OF THE GOVERNMENT, LEARNED SOCIETIES AND OTHER ORGANIZATIONS British Columbia Royal Commission on Education. A Precis. Victoria: Queen's Printer, i960. Great Britain Scottish Education Department. Pupils Handi-capped by Speech Disorders. London: H. M. Printing Office, 1951. Johnson, Wendell. Children With Speech and Hearing Impair-ment. Bulletin No. 5 of the United States Department of Health, Education and Welfare. Washington: Government Printing Office, 1959. University of Minnesota, Institute of Child Welfare. The  Minnesota Scale for Paternal Occupations. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1936. D. PERIODICALS American Speech and Hearing Association. "Services and Functions of Speech and Hearing Specialists in Public Schools," ASHA, 4:99-100, April, 1962. American Speech and Hearing Committee on the Midcentury White House Conference. "Speech Disorders and Speech Correction," Jour. Speech and Hear. Pis., 17:129-137, June, 1952.. Artley, A. S. "A Study of Certain Factors Presumed to be Associated with Reading and Speech D i f f i c u l t i e s , " Jour. Speech and Hear. Pis., 13:351-360, December, 1948. Aungst, Lester F., and James V. Frick. "Auditory Pisc.rimina-tion Ability and Consistency of Articulation of / r / . " Jour. Speech and Hear. Pis., 29:76-85, February, 1964. Brissey, F. L., and W. Trotter. "Social Relationships Among Speech Pefective Children," Jour. Speech and Hear. P i s . ? 20:277-283, September, 1955. Carrell, J., and K. Pendergast. "An Experimental Study of the Possible Relations Between Errors of Speech and Spelling," Jour. Speech and Hear. Pis., 19:327-334, September, 1954. 83 Cohen, J. H., and C. F. Diehl. "Relation of Speech-Sound Discrimination Ability to Articulation-Type Speech Defects," Jour. Speech and Hear. Pis., 28:187-190, May, 1963. Curry, E. T. "The Efficiency of Teacher Referrals in a School Hearing Testing Programme," Jour. Speech and  Hear. Pis.. 15:211-214, September, 1950. Dickson, S. "Pifferences Between Children Who Spontaneously Outgrow and Children Who Retain Functional Articulation Errors," Jour. Speech and Hear. Res., 5*263-271, September, 1962. Diehl, C , and C. Stinnett. "Efficiency of Teacher Referrals in a School Speech Testing Program," Jour. Speech and  Hear. P i s . ? 24:34-36, February, 1959. Evans, D. R. "Report of 'Speech Survey i n the 9-A Grade," Quart. Jour. Speech, 21:83-90, February, 1938. F i t s Simons, R. "Teaching Speech-Handicapped Pupils," Education, 84:119-122, October, 1963. Freeman, G. G., and J. A. Sonnega. "Peer Evaluation of Children in Speech Correction Class," Jour. Speech and  Hear. Pis., 21:179-182, June, 1956. . French, R. B., chairman. "Clinical Approach in the Public Schools: A Panel," Convention Abstracts, ASH A, 5:798, October, 1963. Geyer, M., and A. Yankauer, "Teacher Judgment of Hearing Loss in Children," Jour..Speech and Hear. Pis., 21:482-486, December, 1956. Giolas, T. G., and D. Williams. "Children's Reactions to Nonfluencies in Adult Speech," Jour. Speech and Hear. Res., 1:86-93, March, 1958. Glasgow, G. M. "The Effects of Manner of Speech on Appreciation.of Spoken Literature," J. Ed. Psych., 52:322-325, December, 1961. Goodstein, Leonard D. "Functional Speech Disorders and Personality; Methodological and Theoretical Considera-tions," Jour. Speech and. Hear. Res., 1:377-382, December, 1958. . Qk H a l l , M. E. "Auditory Factors in Functional Articulatory Speech Defects," J. Exc. Ed., 7*110-132, December, 1938. Irwin, R. B. "The Effects of Speech Therapy Upon Certain Linguistic.Skills of First-Grade Children," Jour. Speech and Hear. Pis., 28:375-381, November, 1963. Levin, Harry. "Audience Stress, Personality and Speech," J. Abn. Soc. Psvch., 6l:l+69- k 73, i960. Lloyd, G., and S. Ainsworth. "The Classroom Teacher's Activities and Attitudes Relating to Speech Correction," Jour. Speech and Hear. Pis. , 19:2kk-2k9, June, 195 k . Milisen, R. "Public Schools as a Site for Speech and Hearing." Speech Teacher. 12:1-9, January, 1963. Morley, P. E. "A Ten-Year Survey of Speech Pisorders Among University Students," Jour. Speech and Hear. Pis., 17:25-31, March, 1952. Morris, P. W. "A Survey of Speech Pefects in Central High School, Kansas City, Missouri," Quart. Jour. Speech, 25:262-267, April, 1939. Newman, P. W. "Speech Impaired?" ASHA. 3:9-10, January, 1961. Poole, Irene. "Genetic Pevelopment i n Articulation of Consonant Sounds in Speech," Elem. English, 11:159-161, June, 193k. Prins, P. "Relations Among Specific Articulatory Peviations and. Responses To A C l i n i c a l Measure of Sound Discrimina-tion Ability," Jour. Speech and Hear. Pis., 2 8 : l 6 l - l 6 8 , June, 1962. Reid, G. "The Efficacy of Speech Re-Education of Functional Articulatory Defectives i n the Elementary School," Jour. Speech and Hear. Pis., 12:301-313, September, 19 k 7. Roe, Vivian and R. Milisen, "The Effect of Maturation Upon the Pefective Articulation i n Elementary Grades," Jour. Speech Pis., 7:37-50, 19 k 2. Sayler, Helen K. "The Effect of Maturation Upon Pefective Articulation in Grades Seven Through Twelve," Jour. Speech and Hear. Pis., l k : 2 0 2 - 2 0 7 , September, 19+9. 85 Schiefelbusch, R. L. "Speech and Hearing as It Relates to Special Education," Bibliography of Educational  Administrators and Supervisors, 45:7-12, January, 1959. Siegenthaler, Bruce M. and Marshall G. Flamm, "Subjects' Self-Judgments of Speech Adequacy and Judgments of Trained Observers," Jour. Speech and Hear. Pis., 26:244-251, August, 1961.. Snow, K. "A Detailed Analysis of Articulation Responses of "Normal" F i r s t Grade Children," Jour. Speech and Hear. Res., 6:277-290, September,.1963. Sommers, Ronald. "Effects of Various Purations of Speech Improvement Upon Articulation and Reading," Jour. Speech  and Hear. Pis.. 27:54-61, February, 1962. . Spriestersbach, P., and J. Curtis. "Misarticulation and Piscrimination of Speech Sounds," Quart. Jour. Speech, 37:483-491, December, 1951. Stark, J. "How Poes a Speech Handicap Affect Learning?" Elem. English. 40:830-832, January-December, 1963. , Steer, M. D., and Hazel Drexler. "Predicting Later Articulation Ability From Kindergarten Tests," Jour. Speech and Hear. Pis., 25:391-397, November, I960. Templin, M. "Speech Development in the Young Child: Development of Certain Language Skills in Children," Jour. Speech and Hear. Dis., 17:280=285, September,. 1952. Van Hattum, Rolland J. "Evaluating Elementary School Speech Therapy," Exc. Children, 2 5 : 4 l l - 4 l 4 , May, 1959. Weaver, C., Catherine Furbee, and R. Everhart. "Paternal Occupational Class and Articulatory Pefects in Children," Jour. Speech and Hear. Pis. , 25:171-175, May, I960. Wepman, J. "Auditory Piscrimination, Speech and Reading," Elem. School Jour., 60:325-333, March, i 9 6 0 . Wood, K. S. "Parental Maladjustment and Functional Articulatory Pefects in Children," Jour. Speech and Hear. Pis., 2:255-275, Pecember, 1946. . 86 Woods, Sister Frances Jerome, and Sister Mary Arthur Carros. "Choice Rejection Status of- Speech Defective Children," J. Exc. Children, 25:279-283, February,' 1959. E. ESSAYS AND ARTICLES IN COLLECTIONS Backus, Ollie. "Group Structure in Speech Therapy," Handbook of Speech "Pathology, Lee Edward Travis, editor. New York: Appleton, Century, Crofts, 1957, ?p. 1025-1061*. Milisen, Robert. "The Incidence of Speech Disorders," Handbook of Speech Pathology, Lee Edward Travis, editor. New York: Appleton, Century, Crofts, 1957. Pp. 2 L 6-266. F. UNPUBLISHED ARTICLES British Columbia Speech and Hearing Association. Brief to the Royal Commission on Education, Province of British Columbia, January, 1959* (Mimeographed.) Campbell, P. R. "Speech Education in the English-Speaking Teacher Training Institutions of5Canada." Unpublished Doctoral thesis, The University of Wisconsin, Madison, 1957. Clemons, E. S. Annual Report of the Speech Consultant to the Vancouver School Board. June, i 9 6 0 . (Mimeographed.) Coombs, William D. "The Development of Articulated Speech Sounds in the Elementary School." The University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, 1963. (Mimeographed.) Cory, Winifred. Report to the British Columbia Speech and Hearing Association. February, 1958. (Mimeographed.) Kjarsgaard, D. R. "A Study of the Comparisons Between the Expressed Interest Towards the Literature Study Program and Speech S k i l l Proficiency of the North Vancouver High School Senior Classes." Unpublished Master's thesis, Western Washington College, Bellingham, 1962. APPENDIX I Copy of Letter Sent to Twelve School Boards 88 Dear Sir: As a part of my research project nearing completion at the University of British Columbia, I would appreciate your cooperation: in answering the following questions concerning your public school programme for the speech handicapped child. 1. Does your school system maintain speech and/or hearing therapists for children requiring speech therapy? If so, how many? 2. What percentage of your school population do you estimate have speech and hearing problems that should receive therapy? 3. What i s your total school enrolment during the 1963-6^ school year? Elementary Secondary Thank you for your kindness in answering these questions. Your reply w i l l be most useful in helping me to bring my facts up to date on speech and hearing therapy services in the public schools i n Canada. Sincerely yours, (Mrs.) "Elaine S. Clemons" 89 Copy of Letter Sent to Principals of Schools Participating in This Study The Superintendent of the Public Schools, has kindly given me permission to approach you regarding the possibility of your school's participation in a research project on speech d i f f i c u l t i e s . In brief, this study w i l l screen, by means of a speech articulation test, three hundred grade six children in two Canadian school systems. These same children w i l l be asked to complete a short questionnaire that includes specific questions concerning their speaking a b i l i t y . The home room teachers of these children w i l l be asked to give their judgments of the number of children having speech mis-articulations. It i s hoped that the results of this study w i l l provide worthwhile information for Canadian educators in planning for children with speech d i f f i c u l t i e s . As a result of a p i l o t study conducted in the schools, I found that the following procedure facilitated my investigations and brought about fewer disruptions to the classroom ac t i v i t i e s . 1. About a week previous to my v i s i t to the school, the home room teachers administered a short questionnaire to a l l grade six pupils. The time required for this part of the study did not exceed fifteen minutes of class time. (See attached questionnaire.) 2 . Each home room teacher was asked to l i s t the children in her room who had speech misarticulations. (See attached.) 3. On the day of the examiner's arrival at the school, each grade six pupil was screened by means of a short articu-lation test. The actual machinery for this screening indicated that no child need be absent from his classroom for more than ten minutes. The testing in each room began with two children being sent to the testing room. As soon as the f i r s t child had been screened, he returned to the classroom and sent the third child to the testing room. The second child sent the fourth child, and • so con and in this manner disruption of classroom activities was kept to a minimum. I would greatly appreciate i t i f you would discuss this proposal with your grade six teachers, and notify the Super-intendent's office i f you agree to participate in this study. Sincerely yours, "Elaine Clemons" 90 Division School Dear A research project on speech d i f f i c u l t i e s has been planned. We would greatly appreciate your help in carrying out this study. Will you please answer the following questions concerning certain children in your class? Thank you for your cooperation. An articulation d i f f i c u l t y i n speech is said to occur when a child omits, distorts, or substitutes one consonant for another. That i s , a child may say "hou—" for "house" (omission), or he may have a "mushy" s or sh should.when he says words like "sun" or "shoe" (distortion), or he may say "Thaturday" for "Saturday". Will you please l i s t the name of each child in your room who has, i n your opinion, any d i f f i c u l t y in articulating a sound or sounds? If possible, try to l i s t the sounds he i s having trouble articulating, and answer the questions con-cerning each child. * * * Child's name Sound or sounds In the two following questions, please cir c l e the response that best f i t s your opinion. 1. Is this child's school work affected by his articulation difficulty? a. Definitely not b. Probably not c. Undecided d. Possibly e. Very definitely 2. Are this child's social contacts affected by his articulation difficulty? a. Definitely not b. Probably not c. Undecided d. Possible e. Very definitely * * * Child's name Sound or sounds In the two following questions, please cir c l e the response that best f i t s your opinion. 1. Is this child's school work affected by his articulation difficulty? a. Definitely not b. Probably not c. Undecided d. Possibly e. Very definitely 91 2. Are this child's social contacts affected by his articulation difficulty? a. Definitely not b. Probably not c. Undecided d. Possibly e. Very definitely (If there are other names to be added, ask your Principal for additional forms.) APPENDIX II 93 Pupil's name • Division School The following questions are asked to find out how YOU feel about certain subjects and activities. They DO NOT have a right or a wrong answer. Please circle YES or NO to as many questions as possible. If you really cannot make up your mind, circle the- word UNDECIDED. 1. Do you like arithmetic? Yes No Undecided 2. Do you like to play baseball? Yes No Undecided 3. Do you like to give a report to your class? Yes No Undecided Do you have any difficulty in spelling? Yes No Undecided 5. Do you feel that your writing is about average or better? Yes No Undecided 6. Do you ever have trouble pronouncing new words? Yes No Undecided 7. Do you usually watch television every day? Yes No Undecided 8. Do you enjoy your art classes? Yes Nc Undecided 9. Do you ever draw or paint pictures at home? Yes No Undecided 10. Have you ever had trouble saying certain sounds in words? Yes No Undecided 11. Have you ever been to a summer camp? Yes No Undecided 12. Do you think reading is one of your best subjects? Yes No Undecided 13. Do you think you do well in Social Studies? Yes No Undecided Hi. Do you read as many as ten library books each year? Yes No Undecided 15. Have you ever had a speech difficulty? Yes No Undecided 16. Do you want to finish High School? Yes No Undecided 17. Do you like to listen to classical music? Yes No Undecided 18. Do you enjoy watching Western T.V. shows? Yes No Undecided 19. Have you ever had a speaking part in a school or class play? Yes No Undecided 20. 21. Have you ever been selected by your classmates to give a talk or report? Do you wish you could improve in sports? Yes Yes No No Undecided Undecided 22. Have you ever refused to answer a question because you were afraid you couldn't pronounce a word correctly? Yes No Undecided 23. Have you ever been selected as captain or manager of a team? Yes No Undecided 2li. Have you ever won a prize in music or art? Yes No Undecided 25. Have you ever been told you speak well? Yes No Undecided 26. Do you feel frightened when you get up in front of your class to make a talk or give a report? Yes No Undecided 27. Do you take music lessons outside of school hours? Yes No Undecided 28. Do you take ice skating lessons? Yes No Undecided 29. Do you wish you could be a better speller? Yes No Undecided 30. Do you wish you could speak better than you do? Yes No Undecided 94 On this page you w i l l see a l i s t of common words. Look at these words carefully. If there i s a word you do not know, please ask for help. When you have looked at a l l of the words, begin with the f i r s t word i n the l i s t and make a short sentence using the word. For instance: "I brush my teeth every morning". Then go on to the next work and make another sentence. Continue until you have made a sentence with every word in the l i s t . 1. brush 12. vase 23. jam 2. sheep 13. that one 24. t i r e 3. chair 14. mouth 25. zebra 4. f i r e 15. match 26. rabbit 5. ladder 16. dress 27. bottle 6. basket 17. brother 28. bathtub 7. thimble 18. saw 29. butterfly 8. knife 19. music 30. seven 9. barrel 20. pillow 31. five 10. engine 21. cage 32. kitchen 11. measure 22. ears 33. dishes 95 INDIVIDUAL RATING SHEET Date Child' s name _________________________^  School City Division Birthdate Father's Occupation .  Did teacher report child ? Yes No Give rating '  Does child report d i f f i c u l t y with speech? • Consonant I n i t i a l Position Medial Position Final Position Numerical Rank s 1 X z 2 x = r 3 x = th (vl.) il x = th 5 x = 1 6 • x = ch 7 x = sh 8 x = zh 9 x = 3 10 x = V 11 x » f 12 x -Total Score = 211 - = t Scoring: ( - ) omission ( ) sound substituted (dis.) distorted Does medical report indicate condition that might exclude this child's score in the f i n a l analysis? Yes No __________ Condition Has child had speech therapy? Yes No Individual Group For what period of time? At what age? Card Column Pupil # Sex Father's Occupation Pupil Questionnaire 1 - 3 4 5 6 - 7 Male Female 3 4 Response Question ;> 6 10 15 19 20 22 25 26 30 Teacher Opinion Effect on School Vork Sig. 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Not Sig. 4 Effect on Social Adjustment 19 Did Teacher Report 20 Assessment - Mrs. Clemons 21 Rating Sheet 23 Has the Child had Speech Therapy 59 22 58 Yes Yea No No 

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0104894/manifest

Comment

Related Items