Jayne Newbury1,2, Angelik Bartoszewicz Poole3, Catherine Theys1,2. 1. School of Psychology, Speech and Hearing, University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand. 2. New Zealand Institute of Language, Brain and Behaviour, University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand, and. 3. Explore Specialist Advice, Auckland, New Zealand.
Abstract
Purpose: This study aimed to identify the current practices of New Zealand speech-language pathologists (SLPs) working with multilingual children, to compare these with best practice guidelines and make recommendations for training and service development.Method: An online survey was sent to SLPs working with children in New Zealand, asking questions about their training, languages spoken and management of multilingual children.Result: Responses from 146 SLPs were analysed. While 28% reported over 25% of children on their caseloads were multilingual, most SLPs felt under-trained to work with these clients. In accordance with best practice guidelines, SLPs supported retention of home languages for their multilingual children. Half of the children seen were assessed and treated in all languages, despite the majority of SLPs being monolingual English speakers. However contrary to best practice recommendations, parents were used as interpreters more frequently than professional interpreters. The SLPs reported a lack of resources for assessment and treatment of multilingual children. Informal assessments were frequently used, but dynamic assessment and peer-child comparisons were under-utilised. Conclusion: There were marked differences between SLPs' current practice with multilingual children and best practice guidelines. Increased training opportunities along with resource development in languages commonly spoken in New Zealand are required.
Purpose: This study aimed to identify the current practices of New Zealand speech-language pathologists (SLPs) working with multilingual children, to compare these with best practice guidelines and make recommendations for training and service development.Method: An online survey was sent to SLPs working with children in New Zealand, asking questions about their training, languages spoken and management of multilingual children.Result: Responses from 146 SLPs were analysed. While 28% reported over 25% of children on their caseloads were multilingual, most SLPs felt under-trained to work with these clients. In accordance with best practice guidelines, SLPs supported retention of home languages for their multilingual children. Half of the children seen were assessed and treated in all languages, despite the majority of SLPs being monolingual English speakers. However contrary to best practice recommendations, parents were used as interpreters more frequently than professional interpreters. The SLPs reported a lack of resources for assessment and treatment of multilingual children. Informal assessments were frequently used, but dynamic assessment and peer-child comparisons were under-utilised. Conclusion: There were marked differences between SLPs' current practice with multilingual children and best practice guidelines. Increased training opportunities along with resource development in languages commonly spoken in New Zealand are required.