The Underlying Ideologies, Theories, and Designs of Culturally Responsive Speech-Language-Hearing Sciences Education Programs: A Systematic Review.

Purpose: This systematic review aims to identify and synthesize foundational conceptual frameworks that shape the design of higher education programs for developing culturally and linguistically responsive care providers in the Speech- Language-Hearing Sciences (SLHS). Method: The review protocol wa...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Publicado en:American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology Vol. 34; no. 6; pp. 3487 - 3511
Autores principales: Khamis, Reem, Rosas, Jason, Caniano, Lori
Formato: questionnaire/scale research systematic review tables/charts Journal Article
Publicado: American Speech-Language-Hearing Association Dec2025
Acceso en línea:Ver este registro en EBSCOhost
Descripción
Sumario:Purpose: This systematic review aims to identify and synthesize foundational conceptual frameworks that shape the design of higher education programs for developing culturally and linguistically responsive care providers in the Speech- Language-Hearing Sciences (SLHS). Method: The review protocol was registered with the International Database of Education Systematic Reviews and followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses checklist to ensure confidence in cumulative evidence. Results: A total of 28 articles were selected for extraction and reviewed in this review article. The studies included a total of 1,027 participants that ranged in age, gender, and racial composition. Analysis indicates that cultural education programs in SLHS are primarily supported by cultural competence frameworks. Conclusions: To achieve genuinely culturally responsive practices, educational frameworks must align with the principles of cultural humility and responsiveness. Our findings show that many cultural education programs for SLHS students and practitioners still rely on cultural competence ideology, highlighting a disconnect between current practices and the field's evolving standards. These standards emphasize ongoing self-reflection, critical analysis of power dynamics, and institutional accountability--elements often missing from existing program designs. We also recommend placing greater emphasis on rigorous empirical studies that evaluate the effectiveness of these trainings.