PURPOSE: This study documented evidence-based practice (EBP) patterns as reported by speech-language pathologists (SLPs) employed in public schools during 2010-2011. METHOD: Using an online survey, practioners reported their EBP training experiences, resources available in their workplaces, and the frequency with which they engage in specific EBP activities, as well as their resource needs and future training format preferences. RESULTS: A total of 2,762 SLPs in 28 states participated in the online survey, 85% of whom reported holding the Certificate of Clinical Competence in Speech-Language Pathology credential. Results revealed that one quarter of survey respondents had no formal training in EBP, 11% of SLPs worked in school districts with official EBP procedural guidelines, and 91% had no scheduled time to support EBP activities. The majority of SLPs posed and researched 0 to 2 EBP questions per year and read 0 to 4 American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA) journal articles per year on either assessment or intervention topics. CONCLUSION: Use of ASHA online resources and engagement in EBP activities were documented to be low. However, results also revealed that school-based SLPs have high interest in additional training and resources to support scientifically based practices. Suggestions for enhancing EBP support in public schools and augmenting knowledge transfer are provided.
PURPOSE: This study documented evidence-based practice (EBP) patterns as reported by speech-language pathologists (SLPs) employed in public schools during 2010-2011. METHOD: Using an online survey, practioners reported their EBP training experiences, resources available in their workplaces, and the frequency with which they engage in specific EBP activities, as well as their resource needs and future training format preferences. RESULTS: A total of 2,762 SLPs in 28 states participated in the online survey, 85% of whom reported holding the Certificate of Clinical Competence in Speech-Language Pathology credential. Results revealed that one quarter of survey respondents had no formal training in EBP, 11% of SLPs worked in school districts with official EBP procedural guidelines, and 91% had no scheduled time to support EBP activities. The majority of SLPs posed and researched 0 to 2 EBP questions per year and read 0 to 4 American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA) journal articles per year on either assessment or intervention topics. CONCLUSION: Use of ASHA online resources and engagement in EBP activities were documented to be low. However, results also revealed that school-based SLPs have high interest in additional training and resources to support scientifically based practices. Suggestions for enhancing EBP support in public schools and augmenting knowledge transfer are provided.
Keywords:
education; evidence-based practice; regulatory issues; scholarship of teaching and learning; school-based services