Checks and balances: keeping the science in our profession.

Kamhi (1999) suggests that clinicians may choose to use an intervention approach 'because it works' rather than relying on their theory of language learning. This suggestion spawned a number of concerns, including who the scientists in our field are, whether our professional definition of language i...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Publicado en:Language, Speech & Hearing Services in Schools Vol. 30; no. 1; pp. 98 - 108
Autor principal: Apel K
Formato: review Journal Article
Publicado: American Speech-Language-Hearing Association Jan99
Acceso en línea:Ver este registro en EBSCOhost
fields @attributes:
  recordID: 1
pdfLink:
plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ccm&AN=107169948&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: ccm
    uiTerm: 107169948
    longDbName: CINAHL Complete
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    dissinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        01611461
        LSH
      jtl: Language, Speech & Hearing Services in Schools
      issn: 01611461
      maglogo: N
    pubinfo:
      dt: Jan99
      vid: 30
      iid: 1
      pid: 42
      pub: American Speech-Language-Hearing Association
      place: Rockville, Maryland
    artinfo:
      ui:
        107169948
        107169948
        1999019054
        10.1044/0161-1461.3001.98
        107169948
      ppf: 98
      ppct: 10
      formats:
        fmt:
          @attributes:
            type: P
      tig:
        atl: Checks and balances: keeping the science in our profession.
      aug:
        au: Apel K
        affil: Dept of Speech Pathology and Audiology, Western Washington University, Parks Hall, R 17, Bellingham, WA 98225-9078. Email: kennapel@cc.wwu.edu
      sug:
        subj:
          Speech-Language Pathology
          Theory
          Language
          Communicative Disorders Therapy
          Research, Speech-Language-Hearing Therapy
      ab: Kamhi (1999) suggests that clinicians may choose to use an intervention approach 'because it works' rather than relying on their theory of language learning. This suggestion spawned a number of concerns, including who the scientists in our field are, whether our professional definition of language is used in our language theories and intervention approaches, and what we say the 'best' intervention is. In this article, these issues are discussed as discrepancies, along with some suggestions for addressing these gaps, in order to integrate science into all of our professional endeavors.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype:
        review
        Journal Article
      ougenre: Article
    language: English
    refInfo:
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N