CSD 9612 – 1
WESTERN UNIVERSITY
School of Communication Sciences and Disorders
CSD 9612 – Fluency Disorders
1.0 COURSE INFORMATION
Instructor: Professor Lori Holmes, M.Sc., Reg. CASLPO
Class location and times: Rm 1548, Elborn College
Monday & Friday 8:30 to 10:00
Office Hours: tba
Teaching Assistant: Cynthia Mancinelli
2.0 TEXTBOOK AND COURSE MATERIALS
Required: Guitar, B.G. (2014). Stuttering: An integrated approach to its nature and treatment, 4th ed.
Baltimore, MA: Lippincott, Williams, & Wilkins.
Additional readings are listed below, and are made available on webCT whenever possible.
3.0 COURSE OBJECTIVES
Goal of the Course: To provide sufficient knowledge and basic clinical skills to begin practice
in the area of fluency disorders.
Objectives
1. To review the profession's current knowledge base regarding stuttering, including its
development, genetic, behavioural, affective, and cognitive components. 2. To differentiate among developmental stuttering, cluttering, neurogenic fluency disorders,
and psychogenic fluency disorders. 3. To provide basic knowledge of age appropriate assessment protocols for fluency disorders in
children, youth and adults suspected of having a fluency disorder. 4. To provide basic knowledge of age appropriate treatment protocols for children, youth, and
adults who stutter. 5. To develop a personalized understanding of the impact of a fluency disorder on quality of
life.
4.0 EVALUATION
Reflection on role of stuttering in a person’s life 10% due Sept. 25th
Assessment Report* 15% due Oct. 16th
Fluency Intervention Report* 15% due Nov. 24th
Question and Answers – 30 min. on webCT 30% available Sep28th – Oct.2nd;
Oct. 26th - Oct 30th;
(3 @ 10% each) Nov 30th– Dec.4th
Discussion contributions 10% by Dec. 15th
Final Exam 20% to be scheduled
CSD 9612 – 2
5.0 POLICIES
Participation / Attendance
Attendance and participation in all aspects of the course is an expectation of the course. Students are
responsible for material covered in the course should an absence occur. Students wishing to
document a medical reason for missing classes, assignments, or exams should present such
documentation to the Office of the Dean / Counseling office.
Grading
The aim of this course is that all students learn information necessary for clinical practice. Graded
material is primarily structured to provide some indication of how students are progressing in
learning this clinically applicable material. This course does contain group work (indicated
above with an *). To pass this course you must obtain an overall grade of at least 60%
according to the grade weighting given above AND you must attain a grade of at least 60%
across the individual (non-group) work elements. If your grade on individual work is lower
than 60%, your submitted grade will be the lower of: a) 59% and b) your grade calculated as
usual according to the grade weighting given above. That is, the highest grade possible if
individual work is not passed would be 59%. The policy of the CSD program is that the
assigned course grade is the instructor’s final assessment of a student’s performance and
already includes any and all grade rounding an instructor has chosen to implement. Assigned
grades “close to” 60% or other letter-grade boundaries will not be further rounded up, with
the exception that grades submitted with decimal percentages are rounded up or down to the
nearest integer by the Registrar before appearing on the student’s record.
Cheating and Academic Misconduct
Students are responsible for understanding the nature of, and avoiding the occurrence of, plagiarism and
other academic offenses. Scholastic offences are taken seriously and students are directed to read the
appropriate policy, specifically, the definition of what constitutes a Scholastic Offence, at the following
Web site: http://www.uwo.ca/univsec/pdf/academic_policies/appeals/scholastic_discipline_grad.pdf
Note that such offenses include plagiarism, cheating on an examination, submitting false or
fraudulent assignments or credentials, impersonating a candidate, or submitting for credit in any
course, without the knowledge and approval of the instructor to whom it is submitted, any academic
work for which credit has previously been obtained or is being sought in another course in the
University or elsewhere. In writing scholarly papers, students must keep firmly in mind the need to
avoid plagiarism. Students must write their essays and assignments in their own words. Whenever
students take an idea or a passage from another author, they must acknowledge their debt both by
using quotation marks where appropriate, and by proper referencing such as footnotes or citations.
Plagiarism is a major academic offence. The University of Western Ontario uses software for
plagiarism checking. All required papers may be subject to submission for textual similarity review
to the commercial plagiarism-detection software under license to the University for the detection of
plagiarism. All papers submitted for such checking will be included as source documents in the
reference database for the purpose of detecting plagiarism of papers subsequently submitted to the
system. Use of the service is subject to the licensing agreement, currently between The University of
Western Ontario and Turnitin.com (http://www.turnitin.com) The penalties for a student guilty of a
scholastic offense include refusal of a passing grade in the assignment, refusal of a passing grade in
the course, suspension from the University, and expulsion from the University.
Appealing academic evaluations
In the first instance, all appeals of a grade must be made to the course instructor (informal
consultation). If the student is not satisfied with the decision of the course instructor, a written appeal
CSD 9612 – 3
must be sent to the Program Director. If the response of the department is considered unsatisfactory
to the student, he/she may then appeal to the Dean of the Faculty in which the course of program was
taken. Only after receiving a final decision from the Dean, may a student appeal to the Senate
Review Board Academic. A Guide to Appeals is available from the Ombudsperson's Office.
Rules of Conduct in the Classroom
Students are expected to maintain the same high standards of conduct and moral judgment in the
classroom as will be expected when they become Speech-Language Pathologists/Audiologists.
Therefore, they are asked to comply with the following reasonable expectations for classroom
conduct: 1. Students and the instructor will behave in a manner that is welcoming, supportive, and
respectful of cultural and individual differences at all times. 2. Students are expected to participate in the course by asking questions and contributing
comments during lectures.
3. Conduct that could distract fellow students or the instructor during a lecture must be
avoided. This includes but is not limited to talking when others are speaking, passing notes,
sleeping, and overt inattention. 4. Please arrive on time for class. If you are unavoidably late, please enter quietly and take the
nearest seat.
5. Cell phones, iPods, MP3 players, and the like are to be turned off during class. Receiving
and sending text messages should not be undertaken during the lecture. 6. Computers may be used solely for course purposes, e.g., taking notes. Students must not
browse the web, use email or engage in instant messaging during class.
Support Services
As part of a successful graduate student experience at Western, we encourage students to make their
health and wellness a priority. Western provides several on campus health-related services to help you
achieve optimum health and engage in healthy living while pursuing your graduate degree. For example,
to support physical activity, all students, as part of their registration, receive membership in Western’s
Campus Recreation Centre. Numerous cultural events are offered throughout the year. Please check out
the Faculty of Music web page http://www.music.uwo.ca/, and our own McIntosh Gallery
http://www.mcintoshgallery.ca/. Information regarding health- and wellness-related services available to
students may be found at http://www.health.uwo.ca/
Students seeking help regarding mental health concerns are advised to speak to someone they feel
comfortable confiding in, such as their faculty supervisor, their program director (graduate chair), or other
relevant administrators in their unit. Campus mental health resources may be found at
http://www.health.uwo.ca/mental_health/resources.html
To help you learn more about mental health, Western has developed an interactive mental health learning
module, found here: http://www.health.uwo.ca/mental_health/module.html. This module is 30 minutes in
length and provides participants with a basic understanding of mental health issues and of available
campus and community resources. Topics include stress, anxiety, depression, suicide and eating
disorders. After successful completion of the module, participants receive a certificate confirming their
participation.
CSD 9612 – 4
TENTATIVE LECTURE AND LAB SCHEDULE
*indicates online reference
Date Topic and Readings Readings
September
8 & 11
Introduction to the course
Overview of the nature of stuttering
Practical: Simulation 1(on your own)
Guitar ch. 1, 6, 7; *DeNil (1998); Bernstein-
Ratner (2004); Ryan (2001)
Supplemental readings on genetics and stuttering
are posted on webCT
September
15 & 18
Overview of the nature of stuttering
cont’d
Assessment and diagnosis
Practical: Simulation 2
Practical: Counting disfluencies
Guitar ch. 8, 9; Shenker (2006); Susca (2006);
Smits-Bandstra (2005)
Bring to class: SSI; Systematic Disfluency
Analysis; Assessment transcription (handouts on
webCT)
Also, see ‘Assessment Materials’ on webCT
(described below under ‘Assessment Report’
assignment).
September
22 & 25
Assessment and diagnosis cont’d
Practical: Describing disfluencies;
Assessing severity
September
29 &
October 2
October 6
Other Disorders of Fluency
(differential diagnosis)
Practical: Review assessment reports
Shapiro, ch. 4; *Matney (2005); *Seidel (2005);
Van Zaalen-op’t Hof et al., (2009); Guitar, ch. 13
Bring to class: Daly - Cluttering inventory
October 9 NO CLASS
October 13
& 16
General therapy considerations Guitar ch. 10; Gregory, ch. 8; Manning, ch. 6;
Bothe et al. (2006); Plexico et al. (2005); Logan &
LaSalle (2003); Plexico & Sandage (2011)
October 20
& 23
Therapy for preschool children who
stutter
Guitar ch. 11, 12; Mallard (1991); Bernstein-
Ratner (1997); Curlee & Yairi (1997); Zebrowski
(1997); Zebrowski & Schum (1993); Hammer &
Yaruss (1999); Harris et al. (2002); Jones et al.
(2005); Lincoln & Onslow (1997); *Packman
(2003)
October 27
& 30
November
3 & 6
November
10 & 13
Therapy for the intermediate and
advanced stutterer
Guitar ch. 13, 14; Zebrowski (2002); Zebrowski
& Wolf (2011) *Langevin (2001); Bray & Kehle
(1998); Kamhi (2003); Lincoln et al. (2006);
Tellis & Tellis (2003)
Supplemental readings on pharmacological
treatment of stuttering available on webCT
Training in ‘The Essential Pause’
Program (Professor Moosa)
*subject to change of date
Practice with Essential Pause
Bring a hardcopy of the Essential Pause manual to
class. November
17
November
20
Nov. 24
&27
In class presentations of assignment, ‘Fluency Intervention Report’
Dec. 1, 4 &
8
CSD 9612 – 5
Course Assignments
Reflection on role of stuttering in a person’s life 10% due Sept. 25th
Assessment Report 15% due Oct. 16th
Fluency Intervention Report 15% due Nov. 24th
Question and Answers – 30 min. on webCT 30% available Sep28th – Oct.2nd;
Oct. 26th - Oct 30th;
(3 @ 10% each) Nov 30th– Dec.4th
Discussion contributions 10% by Dec. 16th
Final Exam 20% to be scheduled
SCORING RUBRICS FOR EACH OF THE ASSIGNMENTS APPEAR AT THE END OF THE
COURSE OUTLINE.
Reflection on role of stuttering in a person’s life
The purpose of this assignment is to investigate the role that stuttering has played in the life of a
person who stutters. Read a biography or autobiography about someone who stutters, poetry or
picture books written about the experience of stuttering, or you may choose to interview a person who
stutters or watch a video featuring someone who stutters. Aim for something for which the purpose is
nonclinical. Reflect on the role stuttering has played in this person’s life, and relate this person’s
experiences to what you already know about stuttering. (It is understood that your knowledge will
vary widely.)
The paper will be up to 5 typed, double spaced pages. Include a reference list outlining the works you
found useful or insightful. Use APA style to refer to these sources in your text, where appropriate.
Primarily, your reflection should be about your understanding of the experience of stuttering. The
following questions may encourage your reflections. Your paper does not need to address all of these
questions, or indeed any of them – this is your reflection. In a reflection, you want to provide more of
your thought process and the impact the experience has had on your learning, and less on a
description of the events. Remember, the focus of a reflection is you and your learning - how you have
come to understand the experience of stuttering?
1. Who is this person and what is her/his current place in life? Why has he/she written this
work?
2. How does the person describe the experience of stuttering?
3. How was the person’s life shaped by experiences with…..
a. early life experiences with stuttering
b. later life experiences with stuttering
c. therapy of any kind
4. Does the person feel she/he has succeeded despite stuttering? What factors have been
important in this success?
a. a transforming event leading to a change in the view of stuttering or self
b. other personal characteristics or experiences
5. How might this work help others understand stuttering? How has this reflection changed your
understanding of stuttering, communication disorders, or life?
CSD 9612 – 6
Here is a list of some possible works you could read/watch for this assignment…
At the Western library…
James Earl Jones, Voices and Silences.
Bob Love, The Bob Love Story: If it’s gonna be, it’s up to me.
Jock Carlisle, Tangled Tongues.
Lon Emerick and Larry Jupin, That’s easy for you to say.
Jerry Halvorson, Abandoned: Now stutter my orphan.
Fred Murray, A stutterer’s story.
Tim Newark, Not good at talking.
Kenneth St. Louis, Living with stuttering (a collection of stories from people who stutter).
Unspeakable (video)
The Flimflam Man (see Logan, 2008 listed below for description of these items)
Tending to Grace
The only outcast
Ben has something to say
Jason’s Secret
At the London Public Library (look for full listing in Logan, 2008)
Secret heart
Sports mystery series: Cobra threat
The treasure bird
The very worst thing
Mary Marony and the snake
Mary Marony hides out
Mary Marony mummy girl
Mary Marony and the chocolate surprise
Gold in the hills
A matter of trust
The silent spillbills
Give Maggie a chance
The following is available from the Instructor George Helliesen, 40 years after therapy: One man’s story.
There is a published paper listing children’s books featuring individuals who stutter.
Logan, K.J., Saunders Mullins, M., Jones, K.M. (2008). The depiction of stuttering in contemporary
juvenile fiction: Implications for clinical practice. Psychology in the Schools, 45, 609-626.
There are several excellent websites with book chapters, poetry or picture books about stuttering. Check the ‘Just for Kids’ or ‘Just for Teens’ links…
http://www.mnsu.edu/comdis/kuster/stutter.html
http://www.stutteringhelp.org/
http://www.mnsu.edu/comdis/kuster4/part60.html
Jeremy and the Hippo (search on this title)
Marty Jezer, Stuttering: A life bound up in words. (Some chapters from this book are available through
the first website listed above. Click on ‘The Library’ link.)
CSD 9612 – 7
Assessment Report
This assignment gives you an opportunity to complete assessment activities and integrate results into
an assessment report. Please do this assignment in pairs with each pair handing in ONE assignment.
Assessment reports should be about 3 pages but not exceed 5 pages. Assessment reports will normally
include the following information: identification, background information, history of presenting
problem, results, summary, conclusions, and recommendations. The report should appear to have
come from a "true clinic". Examples of assessment reports are available on webCT. A report outline is
also included.
Choose one of the following cases: George, Joe or Peter, whose videos are available on the The
Stuttering Home Page, for an individual fluency assessment. From the video, calculate fluency
measures, describe secondary behaviours, and assess severity. Report this data in the results section of
your report. Make up hypothetical information for all of the remaining material required for the
report. Do NOT use the case history provided. The hypothetical information should be based on what
you have learned about stuttering in this course and from other sources. Attach to the report any
completed forms for which you made up hypothetical data such as a case history, self-reports, and
questionnaires. You are looking to make a complete file. Make appropriate recommendations based on
your results.
Note: that in order to begin this assignment both students completing the report must have agreed to
the conditions set forth in the Recordings Agreement (under Quizzes & Tests on WebCT) prior to
receiving the password to access the recording. Please complete the agreement prior to September
18th.
Scored transcripts for all of the samples will be available on webCT.
Assessment Materials available on webCT
Andrews, G., & Cutler, J. (1974). Stuttering therapy: The relation between changes in symptom level
and attitudes. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 39, 312-319.
-provides background and interpretation of the Erickson’s Modified S-scale
Communication Attitude Test.
Craig, A.R., Franklin, J.A., & Andrews, G. (1984). A scale to measure locus of control of behaviour.
British Journal of Medical Psychology, 57, 173-180.
-provides background and interpretation of the locus of control of behaviour scale
Keogh, B.K.K., Pullis, M.E., & Cadwell, J. (1982). A short form of the teacher temperament
questionnaire. Journal of Educational Measurement, 19, 323-329.
McClowry, S.G. (1960). The development of the school-age temperament inventory. Merrill-Palmer
Quarterly, 41, 271-285.
Modified Erickson Scale of Communication.
Perceptions of Stuttering Inventory.
CSD 9612 – 8
Review of Vanryckeghem, M., & Brutten, G. (2007). KiddyCat: Communication attitude test for
preschool and kindergarten children who stutter. Canadian Journal of Speech-Language Pathology
and Audiology, 31, 194-195.
Riley, G.D. (1972). A stuttering severity instrument for children and adults. Journal of Speech and
Hearing Disorders, 37, 314-322.
-provides background and interpretation for Stuttering Severity Instrument
Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (1965)
Rowe, D.C., & Plomin, R. (1977). Temperament in early childhood. Journal of Personality
Assessment, 41, 150-156.
Scale for Rating Stuttering Severity.
Self-Efficacy Scaling for Adult Stutterings (Ornstein & Manning, 1985) from Manning, W. (2000).
Clinical decision-making in fluency disorders, 2nd ed. San Diego, Singular Thomson Learning.
Stutterer’s reactions to speech situations.
Stuttering Prediction Instrument.
Willoughby Personality Schedule.
Woolf, G. (1967). The assessment of stuttering as struggle, avoidance, and expectancy. International
Journal of Language and Communication Disorders, 2, 158-171.
-provides background and interpretation of the Perceptions of Stuttering Inventory
Fluency Intervention Report
In this assignment, you will become familiar with the rationale and procedures of a specific
intervention approach, and provide a critical analysis of the method. You may do this assignment in
groups of three or four (maximum of 15 groups).
Locate a fairly thorough description of a therapy approach. The source may include a journal article or
articles, a website, or a published program available in the HALeeper Clinic or from the Instructor.
The Instructor must approve your source/intervention method either through direct discussion with
you or in response to an email sent by you to the Instructor. You should have the Instructor’s approval
no later than November 3rd, 2017.
The assignment will consist of the following:
(1) A 20-minute oral presentation describing the rationale, therapy procedures, and your evaluation;
(2) A 1-page summary to be posted on webCT for all class members summarizing the intervention
rationale and procedures, giving examples and your evaluation, and providing relevant references.
This summary may be in point form/outline format. It should be a user-friendly document that would
serve as a quick reference for SLPs needing ideas/resources about fluency intervention.
The summary is due November 24th regardless of your presentation date.
You will present your report in class (Nov 24th to Dec 8th) with the presentation order being chosen
randomly.
CSD 9612 – 9
Your report may address the questions listed below. It is not necessary to address all of the questions
listed, nor only these questions.
Rationale/Philosophy
What is the rationale behind the approach?
Who would be most suitable for this program?
Are there assessment considerations? What are they?
Therapy Procedures
Describe the components of the therapy program.
Describe the techniques taught in the program.
What are the timelines for progress through therapy?
Measurement
How is progress monitored?
What is the measure of success?
Who completes the measurements?
Evidence/Evaluation
Is the program effective?
Is there independent, empirical evidence of program effectiveness?
What are the strengths and weaknesses of the program?
Question and Answers
The purpose of this assignment is to practice providing information about fluency disorders to
individuals who stutter and family members. You will be provided with a list of 3 or 4 questions that
are commonly asked of SLPs, and your task is to develop an oral response of no more than 250 words
for each question. Write out each of these responses and have them ready at the time the assignment is
due. When the assignment is available, log on to the webCT site for the course and sign in to the
assignment. You will be assigned one of the questions. You will have 30 minutes to upload your
response.
Important: Should you miss the quiz for any reason, email me as soon as possible attaching your word
document with the answers to ALL questions for that quiz.
Questions
For October 2nd
Q&A 1. What causes stuttering?
Q&A 2. Do you think my child stutters because we’ve been too hard on him?
Q&A 3. Why can’t I stop squeezing my eyes shut when I stutter?
Q&A 4. Why is my stuttering so much worse when I try to speak to girls at my high school?
For October 30th
Q&A 5. Don’t you think my child is too young to start therapy?
Q&A 6. Don’t you think my child is going to just outgrow the stuttering?
Q&A 7. Isn’t there anything I can do to help my child right now?
For December 4th
Q&A 8. How can I stop children from teasing this student in my classroom?
CSD 9612 – 10
Q&A. 9. Will I talk like everybody else when I finish therapy?
Q&A 10. How long will my husband be in therapy?
Q&A 11. Is there a cure for stuttering?
Discussion Contributions
The purpose of this assignment is to review and discuss your reactions to some excellent videos
produced by the Stuttering Foundation of America and often shared with clients by SLPs during
therapy. The videos can be viewed at http://www.stutteringhelp.org/Default.aspx?tabid=535. After you
view each video, add a comment to the class discussion of the respective video on webCT. You may
comment on your reaction to the video or your thoughts on its therapeutic utility. Two marks will be
awarded for participation in the discussion of each video (2 marks x 5 videos = 10 marks) that is
relevant, on topic, and reflects viewing of the video. Contributions must be provided by December
15th, 2017.
The videos include the following:
Stuttering and Your Child: Help for parents
Stuttering: For kids by kids
Stuttering: Straight talk for teens
If you stutter: Advice for adults
Stuttering: Straight talk for teachers
Final Exam
The final exam will be comprised of short answer questions, and designing a therapy plan. The short
answers will encourage you to think through your philosophy and rationale for the things you do in
assessment and therapy for people who stutter. For the therapy plan, you will be given assessment
details for a client and asked to design an appropriate therapy program. You will have a choice of
questions/cases for all components of the paper.
CSD 9612 – 11
References
Bernstein Ratner, N.E. (1997). Leaving Las Vegas: Clinical odds and individual outcomes. American
Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 6, 29-33.
Bernstein Ratner, N. (2004). Caregiver-child interactions and their impact on children’s fluency:
Implications for treatment. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 35, 46-56.
Bothe, A.K., Davidow, J.H., Bramlett, R.E., & Ingham, R.J. (2006) Stuttering treatment research
1970-2005: I. Systematic review incorporating trial quality assessment of behavioral, cognitive, and
related approaches. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 15, 321-341.
Bothe, A.K., Davidow, J.H., Bramlett, R.E., Franic, D.M., & Ingham, R.J. (2006) Stuttering treatment
research 1970-2005: II. Systematic review incorporating trial quality assessment of pharmacological
approaches. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 15, 342-352.
Bray, M.A., & Kehle, T.J. (1998). Self-modeling as an intervention for stuttering. School Psychology
Review, 27, 587-598.
Changsoo, K., Riazuddin, S., Mundorff, J., Krasnewich, D., Friedman, P., Mullikin, J., & Drayna, D.
(2010). Mutations in the lyosomal enzyme-targeting pathway and persistent stuttering. The New
England Journal of Medicine, 362, 677-685.
Curlee, R.F., & Yair, E. (1997). Early intervention with early childhood stuttering: A critical
examination of the data. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 6, 8-18.
Daly, D.H. (1996). Inventory of reported differences between cluttering and stuttering. The Source for
Stuttering and Cluttering, p. 167. LinguiSystems Inc.
De Nil, L. (1998). Some thoughts on the multidimensional nature of stuttering from a
neurophysiological perspective. Paper contributed to the International Stuttering Awareness Day
online conference, http://www.mnsu.edu/comdis/isad/papers/denil.html. Accessed on Sept. 3, 2013.
Donaher, J. (2011). Preschool Stuttering Screen for Healthcare Professionals.
Gregory, C.B., (2002). Counseling and stuttering therapy. In Gregory, H.H., ed. Stuttering therapy:
Rationale and Procedures, p. 263-209. Boston: A and B.
Hammer, D.W., & Yaruss, J.S. (1999). Helping parents learn to facilitate young children’s speech
fluency. Stuttering Center of Western Pennsylvania.
Harris, V., Onslow, M., Packman, A., Harrison, E., & Menzies, R. (2002). An experimental
investigation of the impact of the Lidcombe Program on early stuttering. Journal of Fluency
Disorders, 27, 203-214.
Jones, M., Onslow, J., Packman, A., Williams, S., Ormond, T., Schwarz, I., & Gebski, V. (2005).
Randomised controlled trial of the Lidcombe programme of early stuttering intervention. British
Medical Journal, 331, 659-664.
Kamhi, A.G. (2003). Two paradoxes in stuttering treatment. Journal of Fluency Disorders, 28, 187-
196.
CSD 9612 – 12
Langevin, M. (2001). Helping children deal with teasing and bullying. Paper contributed to the
International Stuttering Awareness Day online conference,
http://www.mnsu.edu/comdis/isad4/papers/langevin.html. Accessed on Sept. 3, 2013.
Lincoln, M.A., & Onslow, M. (1997) Long-term outcome of early intervention for stuttering.
American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 6, 51-58.
Lincoln, M., Packman, A., & Onslow, M. (2006). Altered auditory feedback and the treatment of
stuttering: A review. Journal of Fluency Disorders, 31, 71-89.
Logan, K., & LaSalle, L.R. (2003). Developing intervention programs for children with stuttering and
concomitant impairments. Seminars in Speech and Language, 24, 13-19.
Macguire, G., Franklin, D., Vatakis, N.G., Morgenshtern, E., Denko, T., Yaruss, J.S., Spotts, C.,
Davis, L., Davis, A., Fox, P., Soni, P., Blomgren, M., Silverman, A., & Riley, G. (2010). Exploratory
randomized clinical study of Pagoclone in persistent developmental stuttering. Journal of Clinical
Psychopharmacology, 30, 48-56.
Mallard, A.R. (1991). Family intervention in stuttering therapy. Seminars in Speech and Language,
12, 265-278.
Manning, W.H. (2001). Clinical decision making in fluency disorders, 2nd ed. Vancouver: Singular
Publishing.
Matney, J.S. (2005). A decade of stuttering. Paper contributed to the International Stuttering
Awareness Day online conference, http://www.mnsu.edu/comdis/isad8/papers/matney8.html.
Accessed on Jan. 4, 2007.
Packman, A. (2003). When a young child stutters: To treat or not to treat. Paper contributed to the
International Stuttering Awareness Day online conference,
http://www.mnsu.edu/comdis/isad6/papers/packman6.html. Accessed on Sept. 3, 2013.
Plexico, L., Manning, W.H., & DiLollo, A. (2005). A phenomenological understanding of successful
stuttering management. Journal of Fluency Disorders, 30, 1-22.
Plexico, L., & Sandage, M. (2011). A mindful approach to stuttering intervention. Perspectives on
Fluency and Fluency Disorders, 21, 43-49.
Riaz, N., Steinberg, S., Ahmad, J., Pluzhnikov, A., Riazuddin, S., Cox, N.J., & Drayna, D. (2005).
Genomewide significant linkage to stuttering on chromosome 12. American Journal of Human
Genetics, 76, 647-651.
Ryan, B.P. (2001). A longitudinal study of articulation, language, rate, and fluency of 22 preschool
children who stutter. Journal of Fluency Disorders, 26, 107-127.
Seidel, D. (2005). This ain’t no fairy tale. Paper contributed to the International Stuttering Awareness
Day online conference, http://www.mnsu.edu/comdis/isad8/papers/seidel8.html. Accessed on Sept. 3,
2013.
CSD 9612 – 13
Shapiro, D. (1989). Stuttering intervention: A collaborative journey to fluency freedom. Austin, Tx:
ProEd.
Shenker, R.C. (2006). Connecting stuttering management and measurement: I. Core speech measures
of clinical process and outcome. International Journal of Language and Communication Disorders,
41, 355-364.
Shugart, Y.Y., Mundorff, J., Kilshaw, J., Doheny, K., Doan, B., Wanyee, J., Green, E.D., & Drayna,
D. (2004). Results of a genome-wide linkage scan for stuttering. American Journal of Medical
Genetics, 124A, 133-135.
Smits-Bandstra, S. (2005). Counting Stuttering. Handout prepared for CSD 620, University of
Western Ontario.
Susca, M. (2006). Connecting stuttering measurement and management: II. Measures of cognition and
affect. International Journal Language Communication Disorders, 41, 365-377.
Tellis, G., & Tellis, C. (2003). Multicultural issues in school settings. Seminars in Speech and
Language, 24, 21-26.
Van Zaalen- op’t Hof, Y., Wijnen, F., & De Jonckere, P.H. (2009). Differential diagnostic
characteristics between cluttering and stuttering – Part one. Journal of Fluency Disorders, 34, 137-
154.
Zebrowski, P.M. (1997). Assisting young children who stutter and their families: Defining the role of
the Speech-Language Pathologist. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 6, 19-28.
Zebrowski, P.M. (2002). Building clinical relationships with teenagers who stutter. Contemporary
Issues in Communication Sciences and Disorders, 29, 91-100.
Zebrowski, P.M., & Schum, R.L. (1993). Counseling parents of children who stutter. American
Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 2, 65-73.
Zebrowski, Pl., & Wolf, A. (2011). Working with teenagers who stutter: Simple suggestions for a
complex challenge. Perspectives on Fluency and Fluency Disorders, 21, 37-42.
CSD 9612 – 14
Assignment Scoring Rubrics
Reflection Scoring Rubric (10%)
Grade Ranges → Below 70 70-80 80-90 90-100
Content The material
chosen was about
stuttering but did
not explore the
experience of
stuttering.
The paper is
limited to a
description of the
material chosen.
The paper explores
the writer’s
understanding of
the experience of
stuttering and
draws on the
material chosen.
The paper describes
what the writer has
learned about the
experience of
stuttering illustrated
by the material
chosen, and the
development of
his/her
understanding of
stuttering.
Style Writing lacks
cohesion; poor
sentence
construction; poor
proofreading.
Cohesive and well
written.
Cohesive and well
written.
Excellent writing
style.
CSD 9612 – 15
Assessment Report Scoring Rubric (15%)
Grade Ranges
→
Below 70 70-80 80-90 90-100
Data History and
assessment
inaccurate and
incomplete.
History and/or
assessment may be
inaccurate or
incomplete.
History complete
but succinct.
Accurate
assessment of
stuttering severity,
feelings, and
attitudes.
Hypothetical data is
consistent and
reasonable.
Accurate and
thorough history
and assessment
data. Brief but
important
additional details
link information
but are not
overdone.
Format Deviates from
sample report in a
manner that makes
the presentation
less clear.
Follows report
format from
samples.
Follows report
format from
samples.
Follows report
format from sample
plans. Minor
deviations (e.g.,
additional
subheadings)
clarify information.
Interpretation Inappropriate
incomplete
summary,
conclusions, and/or
recommendations.
Appropriate but
incomplete
summary,
conclusions, and/or
recommendations.
Appropriate
summary,
conclusions, and
recommendations.
Appropriate
summary,
conclusions, and
recommendations.
Creative and/or
unique comments
matched to the
individual case.
Style Writing lacks
cohesion; poor
sentence
construction; poor
proofreading.
Cohesive and well
written.
Cohesive and well
written.
Excellent writing
style.
CSD 9612 – 16
Fluency Intervention Report Scoring Rubric (15%)
Grade Ranges → Below 70 70-80 80-90 90-100
Presentation Provides a
description of
some of the
components of the
therapy program
chosen.
Presentation goes
over the allotted
time.
Provides a
description of
some of the
components of the
therapy program
chosen.
Presentation stays
within allotted
time.
Provides a brief,
pertinent
description of each
component of the
therapy program
chosen.
Presentation stays
within allotted
time.
Provides a good
picture of the basic
elements of the
therapy program
while reviewing
each component of
the assignment.
Presentation stays
within allotted
time.
Written paper -
content
Detail lacking
throughout.
Inadequate use of
references.
Provides an
adequate reference
summarizing the
program with
some detail
lacking.
Uses a few key
references.
Provides a good
reference
summarizing the
program.
Uses a few key
references.
Provides an
excellent reference
summarizing the
program.
Additional
information
enhances the
paper.
Draws on a
number of key and
related references.
Written paper -
style
Writing lacks
cohesion; poor
sentence
construction; poor
proofreading.
Cohesive and well
written.
Cohesive and well
written.
Excellent writing
style.
CSD 9612 – 17
Question and Answer Quizzes (30% - 3 quizzes, each 10 marks)
Grade Ranges → Below 7 7 - 8 8 - 9 9 – 10
Inaccurate or
incomplete
response.
Provides adequate
information. Uses
complex language
or jargon.
Provides adequate
information using
accessible
language.
Provides enough
but not too much
information.
Empathic –
matches the tone of
the question,
recognizes
underlying
concerns.