Here is the last article of the study!! Brought to you by Kelly Miklosh:
***Don’t forget that to receive credit you must comment on each of the posts (Other than your own of course!)***
Langevin, M. & Prasad, N. G. N. (2012). A Stuttering Education and Bullying Awareness and Prevention Resource: A Feasibility Study. Lang Speech Hear Serv Sch, 43(3), 344-358. doi: 10.1044/0161-1461(2012/11-0031).
This article speaks primarily about peer attitude towards children who stutter and toward bullying within the school setting. It proposes the idea of using a curriculum level stuttering education program to promote positive opinions towards CWS. To measure the progress, a pretest-posttest study design was used.
The article goes on to define bullying as a type of aggressive behavior with an imbalance of power with an intent to harm. The researchers broke down the roles of bullying into 4 main groups: perpetrators of bullying, victims of bullying, dually involved children, and uninvolved children. All 4 main groups were targeted in the study and completed the education program and pretest-posttest. Multiple pretest-posttests were used including the Peer Attitudes Toward Children Who Stutter Scale (PATCS), The Provictim scale, and bullying involvement and knowledge questionnaires. The PATCS is comprised of 36 items that are categorized into 3 subscales: positive social distance, social pressure, and verbal interaction. Overall higher scores reflect more positive attitudes. The Provictim scale was used to quantify children’s attitudes toward bullying. The 3 subscales measure approval of bullying, rejection of weak kids, and support for victims. Again, higher scores represented more positive attitudes. The questionnaires comprised of questions assessing participant role status, changes in knowledge, and student perceptions of the curriculum based program. Questions were answered using a 5-point Likert scale.
In regards to the curriculum based stuttering education program used, the authors developed their own as they saw a significant need for more universal interventions that target the student population. With this need, they developed the Teasing and Bullying: Unacceptable Behavior Program (TAB). The TAB is intended to increase people’s knowledge about bullying and stuttering, improve attitudes toward CWS, reduce approval of bullying, improve support for children who are bullied, and mobilize the peer group to support CWS. The population that TAB was intended for was grades 3 to 6 as evidence suggest children in younger grades were unable to label disfluent speech as stuttering. It should be stated that the TAB was designed to be given by both teachers and SLP’s; however, for the feasibility of this study, the TAB was only given by teachers. The TAB contains 6 teaching units with each unit comprising of in-class discussion guides, potential responses from children, reproducible activities, and take-home parent-child activities. The Tab also has a video that goes along with eat unit.
As mentioned above only students grades 3 through 6 were used. A total of 608 students were used. Schools used were in socioeconomically advantaged and disadvantaged urban and rural areas. Results of the study were aimed at answering 3 questions. The questions were as follows 1. Was there significant differences in pretest and posttest PACTS and Provictim scores between the group of participants as a whole 2. Was there significant differences in knowledge about how to respond to bullying and 3. Did the participants like the TAB program? Results indicated that overall there was a statistically significant increase in the test scores as whole group as well as a statically significant increase in knowledge about how to respond to bullying. Lastly results revealed majority of the students, 65.7 %, like the TAB. Overall results suggest the TAB program has the possibility to improve attitudes towards CWS.
Personally, what I conclude from this article us that there is a large need for more universal instruction with education about stuttering. Many times as SLP’s we focus on client based instruction. While the
article only used teachers to deliver the TAB, the authors stated SLP’s can deliver it as well. However, it should be noted that the TAB takes 4 hours to deliver completely; consequently, I am unsure of the feasibility of completing the whole unit. Perhaps SLP’s can use parts of it and deliver it to multiple classrooms.