Educators’ perspectives on facilitating computer-assisted speech intervention in early childhood settings

Abstract

Early childhood educators are frequently called on to support preschool-aged children with speech sound disorders and to engage these children in activities that target their speech production. This study explored factors that acted as facilitators and/or barriers to the provision of computer-based support for children with SSD in early childhood centres. Participants were 23 early childhood educators at 13 centres who participated in the Sound Start Study, a randomised controlled trial that examined the effectiveness of the Phoneme Factory Sound Sorter® (PFSS) computer program (Wren and Roulstone, 2013). Following the trial, participants completed a telephone interview discussing their experiences implementing the program. Transcripts from the interviews were analysed and three categories emerged as factors that influenced the provision of support: (a) Personal factors that related to the children (engagement with PFSS, inclusion/exclusion experience), peers, and educators (service provision, educator engagement, and support of child PFSS use); (b) Environmental factors that related to policies and philosophies (child-centred practice, technology), the physical environment (inclusion/exclusion), and logistics (time, technology); and (c) Program factors that related specifically to PFSS (program format, specific games, game duration). In order to best meet the needs of children, parents, educators, and clinicians, these factors need to be taken into consideration in the provision of speech and language therapy services in early childhood centres.

Comparing Traditional and Tablet-Based Intervention for Children With Speech Sound Disorders: A Randomized Controlled Trial

“…A more recent randomized controlled trial , using the computer-based intervention, originally proposed by Wren and Roulstone, involved listening and responding to visual and auditory stimuli and was delivered by educators. This study reported no significant differences in speech outcomes between intervention and control groups, with low adherence to implementation protocols (Crowe et al, 2017;McCormack et al, 2017). The lack of coupled speech production and perception practice (i.e., combining input and output intervention procedures) was given as a possible reason for this finding.…”

Cluster-Randomized Controlled Trial Evaluating the Effectiveness of Computer-Assisted Intervention Delivered by Educators for Children With Speech Sound Disorders

“…It is possible that under-dosing moderated the effect of PFSS. In follow-up investigations of the current study, the educators were interviewed about their experience implementing PFSS in a preschool setting (Crowe et al, 2016), and comparisons were made regarding the intensity of the intervention as recorded by the educators and the computer (McCormack et al, 2016). As part of these investigations multiple barriers and facilitators to implementation were identified including personal factors (e.g., child engagement with PFSS), environmental factors (e.g., the logistics of implementing PFSS during a busy preschool day), and computer program factors (e.g., program format, varied game durations).…”

“…Some educators worked consistently with the participants, achieving intensity compliance rates over 90%. Some did not adhere to the prescribed intensity (Crowe et al, 2016;McCormack et al, 2016). This variation in intensity may have influenced the result.…”