Search

Background: Assessing the speech production of multilingual children is challenging for speech‐language therapists (SLTs) around the world. Scientific recommendations to improve clinical practice are available, but their implementation has mostly been described in studies from English‐speaking countries. Aims: This survey aimed to describe the perspectives and practices of SLTs in assessing the speech production of multilingual children in French‐speaking Belgium. Methods & Procedures: An online survey was completed by 134 SLTs in French‐speaking Belgium. Outcomes & Results: SLTs predominantly used norm‐referenced assessment approaches, which are not recommended for use with multilingual children, and lacked necessary training and resources to implement recommended practices in the assessment of speech production of multilingual children. The shift towards more appropriate practices with multilingual children seems to be in its infancy among SLTs in French‐speaking Belgium. Some challenges identified by the SLTs were common to those in other countries and languages, such as the difficulty to distinguish between speech differences and speech disorders. Other challenges were specific to the French language and/or the Belgian context, such as the lack of appropriate tools in French. Conclusions & Implications: Action is required to improve clinical practice in assessing the speech production of multilingual children in French‐speaking contexts: better training for SLTs regarding linguistic diversity, more implementation research in the field of SLT, and advocacy for linguistic diversity with decision makers. What this paper adds: What is already known on this subject: Existing research indicates that assessing the speech production of multilingual children is challenging for speech‐language therapists (SLTs). Scientific recommendations for best practices have been published, and the shift to more appropriate assessment practices may be progressing differently across countries. SLTs' practices have been described in surveys, mostly conducted in English‐speaking countries. Although French is the fifth most spoken language in the world, data about SLTs' perspectives and practices in French‐speaking regions are scarce. What this study adds: The implementation of recommended practices in assessing multilingual children's speech production was limited among SLTs in French‐speaking Belgium. The norm‐referenced approach to assessment was predominant and few SLTs used recommended practices (e.g., criterion‐referenced measures, dynamic assessment, assessment of the child's speech production in the home language). Some challenges were identified that related specifically to practices in French‐speaking contexts (e.g., lack of French tools) and Belgian context (e.g., health policies unfavourable to multilingualism). These findings confirm that specific understanding of a situation is needed to develop context‐ and/or language‐specific solutions—and ultimately improve clinical practice. What are the clinical implications of this work?: SLTs in French‐speaking Belgium require specific training and support to provide appropriate assessment of speech production in multilingual children. Efforts to improve practices in French‐speaking contexts should focus on increasing understanding and consideration of cultural and linguistic diversity at all levels of the child's environment. Evidence‐based knowledge, assessment tools and multilingual resources are available to SLTs on websites in French and in English. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study assessed implementation of the Computer-based Instrument for Low-motor Language Testing (C-BiLLT). The C-BiLLT is an accessible language comprehension assessment tool originally developed for children with cerebral palsy and complex communication needs. The purpose of the current study was to understand the clinical contexts in which the C-BiLLT is used in the Netherlands, Belgium, and Norway and assess barriers and facilitators to implementation. An online survey was distributed to rehabilitation clinicians working in the Netherlands, Dutch-speaking parts of Belgium, and Norway. A total of 90 clinicians reported their training in and use of the C-BiLLT; assessed its acceptability, appropriateness, and feasibility; and commented on perceived barriers as well as advantages of the tool. Acceptability, appropriateness, and feasibility were all rated highly. The C-BiLLT was used with various populations and age groups but most often with children who were younger than 12 years of age, and those with cerebral palsy. The main implementation facilitator was clinicians' motivation; the main barriers were related to resources and complexity of cases. Findings suggest implementation of new assessment tools is an ongoing process that should be monitored following initial training, in order to understand clinical contexts in which the tools are being used. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]