CSD 9620 – 1
THE UNIVERSITY OF WESTERN ONTARIO
School of Communication Sciences and Disorders
CSD 9620 – Fluency Disorders
1.0 COURSE INFORMATION
Instructor:
Office Hours:
Class times:
Tutorial Assistant:
Dr. Lisa Archibald
Rm 2597, Elborn College
Ext. 82753
larchiba@uwo.ca
Wednesdays at 11am, or by appointment
Mondays, 9:30am to 12:30
*class time exceptions apply; see tentative schedule
Marie-Eve Caty
2.0 TEXTBOOK AND COURSE MATERIALS
Required: Guitar, B.G. (2006). Stuttering: An integrated approach to its nature and treatment, 3rd ed.
Baltimore, MA: Lippincott, Williams, & Wilkins.
Optional: Shapiro, D.A. (1999). Stuttering intervention: A collaborative journey to freedom. Austin,
Texas: Pro-ed. Inc.
Additional readings are listed below, and are made available on webCT whenever possible.
A ‘Fluency Assessment Cases’ DVD containing sample case files may be borrowed from the
Instructor for the assessment assignment. Students must agree to the borrowing terms by completing
the ‘DVD Agreement’ quiz on webCT. The DVD must be returned to the Instructor by March 1st,
2010. The Assessment Report assignment will not be graded until the respective students have
returned the DVD.
3.0 COURSE OBJECTIVES
Goal of the Course: To provide sufficient knowledge and basic clinical skills to begin practice
in the area of fluency disorders.
Objectives
1. To review the profession's current knowledge base regarding stuttering, including its
development, genetic, behavioural, affective, and cognitive components.
2. To differentiate among developmental stuttering, cluttering, neurogenic fluency disorders,
and psychogenic fluency disorders.
3. To provide basic knowledge of age appropriate assessment protocols for fluency disorders in
children, youth and adults suspected of having a fluency disorder.
4. To provide basic knowledge of age appropriate treatment protocols for children, youth, and
adults who stutter.
5. To develop a personalized understanding of the impact of a fluency disorder on quality of
life.
CSD 9620 – 2
4.0 EVALUATION
Demonstration of fluency targets
Reflection on role of stuttering in a person’s life
Assessment Report
Fluency Intervention Report
Question and Answers – 30 min. on webCT
(3 @ 10% each)
Discussion contributions
Final Exam
5%
10%
15%
15%
30%
by end of term
due Feb. 1st
due Feb. 22nd
due Mar. 29th or Apr. 5th in class
available Feb.8-12; Mar.8-12; Apr.5-9
10%
15%
by Apr. 16th
to be scheduled
5.0 POLICIES
Participation / Attendance
Attendance and participation in all aspects of the course is an expectation of the course. Students are
responsible for material covered in the course should an absence occur. Students wishing to
document a medical reason for missing classes, assignments, or exams should present such
documentation to the Office of the Dean / Counseling office.
Cheating and Academic Misconduct
Students are responsible for understanding the nature of, and avoiding the occurrence of, plagiarism
and other academic offenses. Students are urged to read the section on Scholastic Offenses in the
Academic Calendar. Note that such offenses include plagiarism, cheating on an examination,
submitting false or fraudulent assignments or credentials, impersonating a candidate, or submitting
for credit in any course, without the knowledge and approval of the instructor to whom it is
submitted, any academic work for which credit has previously been obtained or is being sought in
another course in the University or elsewhere. In writing scholarly papers, students must keep firmly
in mind the need to avoid plagiarism. Students must write their essays and assignments in their own
words. Whenever students take an idea or a passage from another author, they must acknowledge
their debt both by using quotation marks where appropriate, and by proper referencing such as
footnotes or citations. Plagiarism is a major academic offence (see Scholastic Offense Policy in the
current Academic Calendar). The University of Western Ontario uses software for plagiarism
checking. Students may be required to submit their written work in electronic form for plagiarism
checking. The penalties for a student guilty of a scholastic offense include refusal of a passing grade
in the assignment, refusal of a passing grade in the course, suspension from the University, and
expulsion from the University.
Appealing academic evaluations
In the first instance, all appeals of a grade must be made to the course instructor (informal
consultation). If the student is not satisfied with the decision of the course instructor, a written
appeal must be sent to the Program Director. If the response of the department is considered
unsatisfactory to the student, he/she may then appeal to the Dean of the Faculty in which the course
of program was taken. Only after receiving a final decision from the Dean, may a student appeal to
the Senate Review Board Academic. A Guide to Appeals is available from the Ombudsperson's
Office.
CSD 9620 – 3
Rules of Conduct in the Classroom
Students are expected to maintain the same high standards of conduct and moral judgment in the
classroom as will be expected when they become Speech-Language Pathologists/Audiologists.
Therefore, they are asked to comply with the following reasonable expectations for classroom
conduct:
1. Students and the instructor will behave in a manner that is welcoming, supportive, and
respectful of cultural and individual differences at all times.
2. Students are expected to participate in the course by asking questions and contributing
comments during lectures.
3. Conduct that could distract fellow students or the instructor during a lecture must be
avoided. This includes but is not limited to talking when others are speaking, passing notes,
sleeping, and overt inattention.
4. Please arrive on time for class. If you are unavoidably late, please enter quietly and take the
nearest seat.
5. Cell phones, MP3 players, and PDAs are to be turned off during class. Receiving and
sending text messages should not be undertaken during the lecture.
6. Computers may be used solely for course purposes, e.g., taking notes. Students must not
browse the web, use email or engage in instant messaging during class.
CSD 9620 – 4
TENTATIVE LECTURE AND LAB SCHEDULE
*indicates online reference
Date
Topic and Readings
Readings
January 4
Introduction to the course
Bring a hardcopy of the Essential Pause
11am-5:30pm Training in ‘The Essential Pause’
manual to class.
Program (Professor Moosa)
January 11
1-4:30pm
Practical: Simulation 1 (on your own)
Wk of Jan.11 Demonstration of fluency targets: Students not currently in or already completed
fluency placement with Prof. Moosa sign up for 10 minute demonstration session. Sign
up sheets will be posted on Prof. Moosa & Dr. Archibald’s office doors for Jan. 14
(1:30-3:30) as well as other possible times.
January 18
Recap on introduction to the course
Guitar ch. 1, 4, 5; *DeNil (1998);
1-4pm
Overview of the nature of stuttering
Bernstein-Ratner (2004); Ryan (2001)
January 25
1-4pm
February 1
9:30-12:30
Practical: Simulation 2 (at the UCC) 3pm
or 3:30pm
Overview of the nature of stuttering
cont’d
Assessment and diagnosis
Practical: Counting disfluencies
Assessment and diagnosis cont’d
Practical: Describing disfluencies;
Assessing severity
February 8
9:30-12:30 (all
remaining
sessions)
Differential diagnosis
February 15
February 22
NO CLASS
General therapy considerations
Practical: Review assessment reports
Guitar ch. 6, 7; Shenker (2006); Susca
(2006); Smits-Bandstra (2005)
Bring to class: SSI; Systematic Disfluency
Analysis; Assessment transcription
(handouts on webCT)
Also, see ‘Assessment Materials’ on
webCT (described below under
‘Assessment Report’ assignment).
Shapiro, ch. 4; *Matney (2005); *Seidel
(2005); Van Zaalen-op’t Hof et al., (2009);
Guitar, ch. 13
Bring to class: Daly - Cluttering inventory
March 1
March 8
March 15
March 22
March 29
Apr. 5
Guitar ch. 8; Gregory, ch. 8; Manning, ch.
6; Bothe et al. (2006); Plexico et al. (2005);
Logan & LaSalle (2003)
Therapy for preschool children who
Guitar ch. 9, 10; Mallard (1991); Bernsteinstutter
Ratner (1997); Curlee & Yairi (1997);
Zebrowski (1997); Zebrowski & Schum
(1993); Hammer & Yaruss (1999); Harris
et al. (2002); Jones et al. (2005); Lincoln &
Onslow (1997); *Packman (2003)
Therapy for the intermediate and
Guitar ch. 11, 12; Zebrowski (2002);
advanced stutterer
*Langevin (2001); Bray & Kehle (1998);
Kamhi (2003); Lincoln et al. (2006); Tellis
& Tellis (2003)
In class presentations of assignment, ‘Fluency Intervention Report’
CSD 9620 – 5
CSD 9620 – Fluency Disorders
Course Assignments
Demonstration of fluency targets
Reflection on role of stuttering in a person’s life
Assessment Report
Fluency Intervention Report
Question and Answers – 30 min. on webCT
(3 @ 10% each)
Discussion contributions
Final Exam
5%
10%
15%
15%
30%
by end of term
due Feb. 1st
due Feb. 22nd
due Mar. 29th or Apr. 5th in class
available Feb.8-12; Mar.8-12; Apr.5-9
10%
15%
by Apr. 16th
to be scheduled
SCORING RUBRICS FOR EACH OF THE ASSIGNMENTS APPEAR AT THE END OF THE
COURSE OUTLINE.
Demonstration of fluency targets
For this assignment, students will demonstrate fluency targets from The Essential Pause program as
taught by Professor Moosa in the training sessions. See the Fluency Target Progress Chart for a listing
of the targets and levels to be tested. Please bring a copy of this chart when you are completing the
assignment. This assignment will be graded on a pass/fail basis. Basic facility with all targets/levels
must be demonstrated by the end of term. Students who have completed a fluency placement with
Prof. Moosa will receive advanced standing for this assignment (i.e., a pass). Students currently in a
fluency placement will complete this assignment as part of their placement. All remaining students
will sign up for a 10-minute session with one of the Instructors on Jan. 14th, 1:30-3:30pm, or other
times as posted. Any targets not passed at the end of this session may be demonstrated to the Course
Instructor at a mutually convenient time before the end of term.
Reflection on role of stuttering in a person’s life
The purpose of this assignment is to investigate the role that stuttering has played in the life of a
person who stutters. Read a biography or autobiography about someone who stutters, poetry or
picture books written about the experience of stuttering, or you may choose to interview a person who
stutters or watch a video featuring someone who stutters. Aim for something for which the purpose is
nonclinical. Reflect on the role stuttering has played in this person’s life, and relate this person’s
experiences to what you’ve learned about stuttering in this course and through other sources.
The paper will be up to 5 typed, double spaced pages. Include a reference list outlining the works you
found useful or insightful. Use APA style to refer to these sources in your text, where appropriate.
The following questions may encourage your reflections. Your paper does not need to address all of
these questions, or indeed any of them – this is your reflection.
1. Who is this person and what is her/his current place in life? Why has he/she written this
work?
2. How does the person describe the experience of stuttering?
3. How was the person’s life shaped by experiences with…..
a. early life experiences with stuttering
b. later life experiences with stuttering
CSD 9620 – 6
c. therapy of any kind
4. Does the person feel she/he has succeeded despite stuttering? What factors have been
important in this success?
a. a transforming event leading to a change in the view of stuttering or self
b. other personal characteristics or experiences
5. How might this work help others understand stuttering? How has this reflection changed your
understanding of stuttering, communication disorders, or life?
Here is a list of some possible works you could read/watch for this assignment…
At the UWO library…
James Earl Jones, Voices and Silences.
Bob Love, The Bob Love Story: If it’s gonna be, it’s up to me.
Jock Carlisle, Tangled Tongues.
Lon Emerick and Larry Jupin, That’s easy for you to say.
Jerry Halvorson, Abandoned: Now stutter my orphan.
Fred Murray, A stutterer’s story.
Tim Newark, Not good at talking.
Kenneth St. Louis, Living with stuttering (a collection of stories from people who stutter).
Unspeakable (video)
The Flimflam Man (see Logan, 2008 listed below for description of this and items below)
Tending to Grace
The only outcast
Ben has something to say
Jason’s Secret
At the London Public Library (look for full listing in Logan, 2008)
Secret heart
Sports mystery series: Cobra threat
The treasure bird
The very worst thing
Mary Marony and the snake
Mary Marony hides out
Mary Marony mummy girl
Mary Marony and the chocolate surprise
Gold in the hills
A matter of trust
The silent spillbills
Give Maggie a chance
The following is available from the Instructor
George Helliesen, 40 years after therapy: One man’s story.
There is a recently published paper listing children’s books featuring individuals who stutter.
Logan, K.J., Saunders Mullins, M., Jones, K.M. (2008). The depiction of stuttering in contemporary
juvenile fiction: Implications for clinical practice. Psychology in the Schools, 45, 609-626.
There are several excellent websites with book chapters, poetry or picture books about stuttering.
Check the ‘Just for Kids’ or ‘Just for Teens’ links…
http://www.mnsu.edu/comdis/kuster/stutter.html
http://www.stutteringhelp.org/
CSD 9620 – 7
http://www.mnsu.edu/comdis/kuster4/part60.html
Jeremy and the Hippo (search on this title)
Marty Jezer, Stuttering: A life bound up in words. (Some chapters from this book are available through
the first website listed above. Click on ‘The Library’ link.)
Assessment Report
This assignment gives you an opportunity to complete assessment activities and integrate results into
an assessment report. You may do this assignment in pairs with each pair handing in ONE
assignment. Assessment reports should not exceed 3 pages. Assessment reports will normally include
the following information: identification, background information, history of presenting problem,
results, summary, conclusions, and recommendations. Examples of assessment reports are available on
webCT.
Choose one of the videotaped cases available on the Fluency Assessment DVD for an individual
fluency assessment. From the video, calculate fluency measures, describe secondary behaviours, and
assess severity. Report this data in the results section of your report. Make up hypothetical
information for all of the remaining material required for the report. The hypothetical information
should be based on what you have learned about stuttering in this course and from other sources.
Attach to the report any completed forms for which you made up hypothetical data such as a case
history, self-reports, and parent or teacher questionnaires. Make appropriate recommendations based
on your results.
Note that this assignment will not be graded until both students completing the report have returned
the Fluency Assessment DVD to the Instructor. The DVD must be returned to the Instructor by March
1st, 2010.
Course transcripts for all of the samples on the DVD will be available on webCT. The example cases
are always available and the remaining cases will be available after the assessment report has been
submitted. You may submit your transcript before the assessment report is due in order to receive a
copy of the course transcript. See webCT for details. Please report any errors in the course transcripts
to the Instructor.
Assessment Materials available on webCT
Andrews, G., & Cutler, J. (1974). Stuttering therapy: The relation between changes in symptom level
and attitudes. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 39, 312-319.
-provides background and interpretation of the Erickson’s Modified S-scale
Communication Attitude Test.
Craig, A.R., Franklin, J.A., & Andrews, G. (1984). A scale to measure locus of control of behaviour.
British Journal of Medical Psychology, 57, 173-180.
-provides background and interpretation of the locus of control of behaviour scale
Keogh, B.K.K., Pullis, M.E., & Cadwell, J. (1982). A short form of the teacher temperament
questionnaire. Journal of Educational Measurement, 19, 323-329.
McClowry, S.G. (1960). The development of the school-age temperament inventory. Merrill-Palmer
Quarterly, 41, 271-285.
CSD 9620 – 8
Modified Erickson Scale of Communication.
Perceptions of Stuttering Inventory.
Review of Vanryckeghem, M., & Brutten, G. (2007). KiddyCat: Communication attitude test for
preschool and kindergarten children who stutter. Canadian Journal of Speech-Language Pathology
and Audiology, 31, 194-195.
Riley, G.D. (1972). A stuttering severity instrument for children and adults. Journal of Speech and
Hearing Disorders, 37, 314-322.
-provides background and interpretation for Stuttering Severity Instrument
Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (1965)
Rowe, D.C., & Plomin, R. (1977). Temperament in early childhood. Journal of Personality
Assessment, 41, 150-156.
Scale for Rating Stuttering Severity.
Self-Efficacy Scaling for Adult Stutterings (Ornstein & Manning, 1985) from Manning, W. (2000).
Clinical decision-making in fluency disorders, 2nd ed. San Diego, Singular Thomson Learning.
Stutterer’s reactions to speech situations.
Stuttering Prediction Instrument.
Willoughby Personality Schedule.
Woolf, G. (1967). The assessment of stuttering as struggle, avoidance, and expectancy. International
Journal of Language and Communication Disorders, 2, 158-171.
-provides background and interpretation of the Perceptions of Stuttering Inventory
Fluency Intervention Report
In this assignment, you will become familiar with the rationale and procedures of a specific
intervention approach, and provide a critical analysis of the method. You may do this assignment in
groups of two or three.
Locate a fairly thorough description of a therapy approach. The source may include a journal article or
articles, a website, or a published program available in the HALeeper Clinic or from the Instructor.
The Instructor must approve your source/intervention method either through direction discussion with
you or in response to an email sent by you to the Instructor. You should have the Instructor’s approval
no later than March 8, 2010.
The assignment will consist of the following:
(1) An 8-minute oral presentation describing the rationale, therapy procedures, and your evaluation;
(2) A 3-page (maximum) summary to be posted on webCT for all class members summarizing the
intervention rationale and procedures, giving examples and your evaluation, and providing relevant
references. This summary may be in point form/outline format.
CSD 9620 – 9
Your report may address the questions listed below. It is not necessary to address all of the questions
listed, nor only these questions.
Rationale/Philosophy
What is the rationale behind the approach?
Who would be most suitable for this program?
Are there assessment considerations? What are they?
Therapy Procedures
Describe the components of the therapy program.
Describe the techniques taught in the program.
What are the timelines for progress through therapy?
Measurement
How is progress monitored?
What is the measure of success?
Who completes the measurements?
Evidence/Evaluation
Is the program effective?
Is there independent, empirical evidence of program effectiveness?
What are the strengths and weaknesses of the program?
Question and Answers
The purpose of this assignment is to practice providing information about fluency disorders to
individuals who stutter and family members. You will be provided with a list of 3 or 4 questions that
are commonly asked of SLPs, and your task is to develop an oral response of no more than 250 words
for each question. Write out each of these responses and have them ready at the time the assignment is
due. When the assignment is available, log on to the webCT site for the course and sign in to the
assignment. You will be assigned one of the questions. You will have 30 minutes to upload your
response.
Questions
For February 8
Q&A 1. What causes stuttering?
Q&A 2. Did I do something to cause my child’s stuttering?
Q&A 3. Why does my son jerk his head when he stutters?
Q&A 4. Why are there days when I stutter very badly, and others when I hardly stutter at all?
For March 8
Q&A 5. Don’t you think my child is too young to start therapy?
Q&A 6. How do you know this is ‘normal nonfluency’?
Q&A 7. What can I do to help my child be more fluent?
For April 5
Q&A 8. Will therapy make my teenage daughter fluent?
Q&A 9. How long will I (32 year old, confirmed stutterer) have to be in therapy?
Q&A 10. What can I do to help my student be more fluent in class?
CSD 9620 – 10
Discussion Contributions
The purpose of this assignment is to review and discuss your reactions to some excellent videos
produced by the Stuttering Foundation of America and often shared with clients by SLPs during
therapy. View each of the videos online at http://www.stutteringhelp.org/Default.aspx?tabid=535.
After you view each video, add a comment to the class discussion of the respective video on webCT.
You may comment on your reaction to the video or your thoughts on its therapeutic utility. Two marks
will be awarded for participation in the discussion of each video (2 marks x 5 videos = 10 marks) that
is relevant, on topic, and reflects viewing of the video.
The videos include the following:
Stuttering and Your Child: Help for parents
Stuttering: For kids by kids
Stuttering: Straight talk for teachers
Stuttering: Straight talk for teens
If you stutter: Advice for adults
Final Exam
The final exam will be comprised of short answer questions, and designing a therapy plan. The short
answers will encourage you to think through your philosophy and rationale for the things you do in
assessment and therapy for people who stutter. For the therapy plan, you will be given assessment
details for a client and asked to design an appropriate therapy program. You will have a choice of
questions/cases for all components of the paper.
CSD 9620 – 11
References
Bernstein Ratner, N.E. (1997). Leaving Las Vegas: Clinical odds and individual outcomes. American
Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 6, 29-33.
Bernstein Ratner, N. (2004). Caregiver-child interactions and their impact on children’s fluency:
Implications for treatment. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 35, 46-56.
Bothe, A.K., Davidow, J.H., Bramlett, R.E., & Ingham, R.J. (2006) Stuttering treatment research
1970-2005: I. Systematic review incorporating trial quality assessment of behavioral, cognitive, and
related approaches. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 15, 321-341.
Bray, M.A., & Kehle, T.J. (1998). Self-modeling as an intervention for stuttering. School Psychology
Review, 27, 587-598.
Curlee, R.F., & Yair, E. (1997). Early intervention with early childhood stuttering: A critical
examination of the data. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 6, 8-18.
Daly, D.H. (1996). Inventory of reported differences between cluttering and stuttering. The Source for
Stuttering and Cluttering, p. 167. LinguiSystems Inc.
De Nil, L. (1998). Some thoughts on the multidimensional nature of stuttering from a
neurophysiological perspective. Paper contributed to the International Stuttering Awareness Day
online conference, http://www.mnsu.edu/comdis/isad/papers/denil.html. Accessed on Jan. 5, 2008.
Gregory, C.B., (2002). Counseling and stuttering therapy. In Gregory, H.H., ed. Stuttering therapy:
Rationale and Procedures, p. 263-209. Boston: A and B.
Hammer, D.W., & Yaruss, J.S. (1999). Helping parents learn to facilitate young children’s speech
fluency. Stuttering Center of Western Pennsylvania.
Harris, V., Onslow, M., Packman, A., Harrison, E., & Menzies, R. (2002). An experimental
investigation of the impact of the Lidcombe Program on early stuttering. Journal of Fluency
Disorders, 27, 203-214.
Jones, M., Onslow, J., Packman, A., Williams, S., Ormond, T., Schwarz, I., & Gebski, V. (2005).
Randomised controlled trial of the Lidcombe programme of early stuttering intervention. British
Medical Journal, 331, 659-664.
Kamhi, A.G. (2003). Two paradoxes in stuttering treatment. Journal of Fluency Disorders, 28, 187196.
Langevin, M. (2001). Helping children deal with teasing and bullying. Paper contributed to the
International Stuttering Awareness Day online conference,
http://www.mnsu.edu/comdis/isad4/papers/langevin.html. Accessed on Jan. 4, 2007.
Lincoln, M.A., & Onslow, M. (1997) Long-term outcome of early intervention for stuttering.
American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 6, 51-58.
Lincoln, M., Packman, A., & Onslow, M. (2006). Altered auditory feedback and the treatment of
stuttering: A review. Journal of Fluency Disorders, 31, 71-89.
CSD 9620 – 12
Logan, K., & LaSalle, L.R. (2003). Developing intervention programs for children with stuttering and
concomitant impairments. Seminars in Speech and Language, 24, 13-19.
Mallard, A.R. (1991). Family intervention in stuttering therapy. Seminars in Speech and Language, 12,
265-278.
Manning, W.H. (2001). Clinical decision making in fluency disorders, 2nd ed. Vancouver: Singular
Publishing.
Matney, J.S. (2005). A decade of stuttering. Paper contributed to the International Stuttering
Awareness Day online conference, http://www.mnsu.edu/comdis/isad8/papers/matney8.html.
Accessed on Jan. 4, 2007.
Packman, A. (2003). When a young child stutters: To treat or not to treat. Paper contributed to the
International Stuttering Awareness Day online conference,
http://www.mnsu.edu/comdis/isad6/papers/packman6.html. Accessed on Jan. 4, 2007.
Plexico, L., Manning, W.H., & DiLollo, A. (2005). A phenomenological understanding of successful
stuttering management. Journal of Fluency Disorders, 30, 1-22.
Ryan, B.P. (2001). A longitudinal study of articulation, language, rate, and fluency of 22 preschool
children who stutter. Journal of Fluency Disorders, 26, 107-127.
Seidel, D. (2005). This ain’t no fairy tale. Paper contributed to the International Stuttering Awareness
Day online conference, http://www.mnsu.edu/comdis/isad8/papers/seidel8.html. Accessed on Jan. 4,
2007.
Shapiro, D. (1989). Stuttering intervention: A collaborative journey to fluency freedom. Austin, Tx:
ProEd.
Shenker, R.C. (2006). Connecting stuttering management and measurement: I. Core speech measures
of clinical process and outcome. International Journal of Language and Communication Disorders,
41, 355-364.
Smits-Bandstra, S. (2005). Counting Stuttering. Handout prepared for CSD 620, University of
Western Ontario.
Susca, M. (2006). Connecting stuttering measurement and management: II. Measures of cognition and
affect. International Journal Language Communication Disorders, 41, 365-377.
Tellis, G., & Tellis, C. (2003). Multicultural issues in school settings. Seminars in Speech and
Language, 24, 21-26.
Van Zaalen- op’t Hof, Y., Wijnen, F., & De Jonckere, P.H. (2009). Differential diagnostic
characteristics between cluttering and stuttering – Part one. Journal of Fluency Disorders, 34, 137154.
Zebrowski, P.M. (1997). Assisting young children who stutter and their families: Defining the role of
the Speech-Language Pathologist. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 6, 19-28.
CSD 9620 – 13
Zebrowski, P.M. (2002). Building clinical relationships with teenagers who stutter. Contemporary
Issues in Communication Sciences and Disorders, 29, 91-100.
Zebrowski, P.M., & Schum, R.L. (1993). Counseling parents of children who stutter. American
Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 2, 65-73.
CSD 9620 – 14
Fluency
Target
Progress
Chart
Name:
Target
Level
Criterion
Pass
(Date/Signature
of
Instructor)
Pause
Target
2
second
pause
in
single
sentence
Word
Repetition
Single
sentence
(1
per
sentence)
Easy
Onset
2‐occurrences
@
sentence
level
2‐second
duration
Open
airway
Natural
breathing
Every
4‐6
words
Position
as
directed:
medial,
initial,
semantic
Open
airway
Natural
breathing
Pause
target
Minimal
air
release
Gentle
contact
of
vocal
cords
Stretch
on
first
syllable
Maintain
or
increase
in
volume
across
syllable
No
change
in
pitch
Light
Contacts
2‐occurrences
Minimal
pressure
of
@
sentence
articulators
level
Stretch
on
first
syllable
CSD 9620 – 15
Assignment Scoring Rubrics
Reflection Scoring Rubric (10%)
Grade Ranges →
Content
Below 70
The material
chosen was about
stuttering but did
not explore the
experience of
stuttering.
70-80
The paper is
limited to a
description of the
material chosen.
80-90
The paper explores
the writer’s
understanding of
the experience of
stuttering and
draws on the
material chosen.
Style
Writing lacks
cohesion; poor
sentence
construction; poor
proofreading.
Cohesive and well
written.
Cohesive and well
written.
90-100
The paper describes
what the writer has
learned about the
experience of
stuttering illustrated
by the material
chosen, and the
development of
his/her
understanding of
stuttering.
Excellent writing
style.
CSD 9620 – 16
Assessment Report Scoring Rubric (15%)
Grade Ranges
→
Data
Below 70
70-80
80-90
90-100
History and
assessment
inaccurate and
incomplete.
History and/or
assessment may be
inaccurate or
incomplete.
Format
Deviates from
sample report in a
manner that makes
the presentation
less clear.
Follows report
format from
samples.
History complete
but succinct.
Accurate
assessment of
stuttering severity,
feelings, and
attitudes.
Hypothetical data is
consistent and
reasonable.
Follows report
format from
samples.
Interpretation
Inappropriate
incomplete
summary,
conclusions, and/or
recommendations.
Appropriate but
incomplete
summary,
conclusions, and/or
recommendations.
Appropriate
summary,
conclusions, and
recommendations.
Style
Writing lacks
cohesion; poor
sentence
construction; poor
proofreading.
Cohesive and well
written.
Cohesive and well
written.
Accurate and
thorough history
and assessment
data. Brief but
important
additional details
add to the
assessment picture
but are not
overdone.
Follows report
format from sample
plans. Minor
deviations (e.g.,
additional
subheadings)
clarify information.
Appropriate
summary,
conclusions, and
recommendations.
Creative and/or
unique comments
matched to the
individual case.
Excellent writing
style.
CSD 9620 – 17
Fluency Intervention Report Scoring Rubric (15%)
Grade Ranges →
Presentation
Written paper content
Written paper style
Below 70
Provides a
description of
some of the
components of the
therapy program
chosen.
70-80
Provides a
description of
some of the
components of the
therapy program
chosen.
80-90
Provides a brief,
pertinent
description of each
component of the
therapy program
chosen.
Presentation goes
over the allotted
time.
Detail lacking
throughout.
Inadequate use of
references.
Presentation stays
within allotted
time.
Provides an
adequate reference
summarizing the
program with
some detail
lacking.
Uses a few key
references.
Presentation stays
within allotted
time.
Provides a good
reference
summarizing the
program.
Uses a few key
references.
Writing lacks
cohesion; poor
sentence
construction; poor
proofreading.
Cohesive and well
written.
Cohesive and well
written.
90-100
Provides a good
picture of the basic
elements of the
therapy program
while reviewing
each component of
the assignment.
Presentation stays
within allotted
time.
Provides an
excellent reference
summarizing the
program.
Additional
information
enhances the
paper.
Draws on a
number of key and
related references.
Excellent writing
style.
CSD 9620 – 18
Question and Answer Quizzes (30% - 3 quizzes, each 10 marks)
Grade Ranges →
Below 7
Inaccurate or
incomplete
response.
7-8
Provides adequate
information. Uses
complex language
or jargon.
8-9
Provides adequate
information using
accessible
language.
9 – 10
Provides enough
but not too much
information.
Empathic –
matches the tone of
the question,
recognizes
underlying
concerns.