Design of the SLP Questionnaire

The first section of the questionnaire generated demographic information about participants, including school district of employment, qualification, training institution, service delivery model, number of children on caseload, and number of these children receiving both speech and early childhood special education services. Participants were invited to answer these

questions by either placing a check in one the pre-defined responses or by writing in the “other” space provided.

The second section asked participants to answer questions concerning their roles and responsibilities as an SLP. Participants were invited to describe their role as an SLP within the five sub-categories; consultant to other adults, assessor/monitor, team member; and direct service provider. They were encouraged to answer these questions by placing a check next to all pre-defined responses that applied to them. This was followed by two questions asking participants to re-direct their thinking and consider their role in supporting children with early childhood special educational needs, rather than children with only speech and language-related disorders. They were encouraged to answer this by describing these experiences as “not at all”, “a little”, “quite a lot” or “I’m not sure”. These questions were adapted from the categories used in a study by Dinnebeil et al., (2016) which was aimed at understanding the roles and responsibilities of itinerant ECSE teachers. These were then compared to ASHA’s document; “scope of practice” for SLP’s, (www.asha.org, 2016) to ensure cohesion between the two professions. From personal experiences of working as a member of special education team with SLPs, the categories from the Dinnebeil et al., (2016) study were judged to be relevant to employer job descriptions, day to day tasks and the overall role of an ECSE’s and SLP’s. The third section of this questionnaire asked questions concerning pre and post qualification training the participants had received in relation to early childhood DDs. They were reminded of the difficulty to remember exact details of training that happened several years ago and were encouraged to complete the questions to the best of their recollection. The items within this section invited participants to indicate the amount (hours) of pre and post-qualification training they received, and by whom delivered it. This was followed with a table-form question asking participants to indicate the level of coverage they received for the following three subcategories of early childhood DDs; social/emotional development, cognitive development and adaptive/coping skills development, by checking either “not at all”, “briefly”, “in depth” or “n/a”. Participants were then invited to answer questions concerning how they perceive their training needs in the area of early childhood DDs using a five-point Likert scale (Strongly Disagree to Strongly Agree). Finally, participants are asked to describe their level of confidence in supporting children with early childhood DDs by placing a check next to “confident”, “quite

confident”, “not at all confident” or “I am not familiar with this term”. These questions were generated from material found on an assessment tool commonly used throughout the state of Colorado, Teaching Strategies Gold (teachingstrategies.com, 2018). Whilst this assessment covers all areas of child development; the present study chooses to focus on those most relevant to the practice of ECSE’s.

The fourth section of this questionnaire was designed to collect baseline information regarding the SLP’s knowledge of early childhood DDs. This section included five examples of children who may display characteristics of early childhood developmental disabilities with four pre- defined answers; social/emotional delay, cognitive delay, adaptive/coping skills delay or developmentally appropriate. Participants were probed to imagine that these children had just joined their setting and they had made observations over a few weeks. They were encouraged to answer these questions based on their knowledge of early development in young children. These examples were generated by referencing various preschool screening, and assessment tools (DIAL-4, 2001 and Ages and Stages, 2018) used to identify and diagnose children with DDs. The DIAL-4 (2001) and Ages and Stages (2018) are both screening tools used to asses a large group of students, quickly and efficiently. I have personally used the Ages and Stages as a screening tool for children during the preschool enrolment process. The Ages and Stages tool was designed as a screening tool to be completed by a child’s parent, whilst the DIAL-4 is administered by educational staff. Both the DIAL-4 and Ages and Stages screeners include various questions in different categories of early childhood. This includes skills in motor, cognition, social/emotional, communication, and self-help (www.pearsonclincal.com, 2018; www.agesandstages.com, 2018). Once completed, a calculated score is used to aid in the identification process of young children “at risk” for DDs.

The final section of the questionnaire was designed to provide an opportunity for participants to express their interest in volunteering for the second phase of the study; individual interviews. This section asks for the name, contact telephone and email address for all those willing to participate in phase two.

Participants for this study were qualified Early Childhood Special Educators (ECSE) and SLP’s working within a public preschool, in the state of Colorado. Preschools were chosen based on

two main principals; publicly funded and operated through local and federal agencies, and who provide special education services to children between the ages of 3 and 5 years.

According to the Colorado Department of Education (www.cde.state.co.us, 2018), the state of Colorado has a total of 179 public school districts. However, smaller school districts are often combined into what is known as Boards of Cooperative Educational Services (BOCES), in which special education staff (ECSE’s and SLP’s) provide services to several school districts. Twenty-two BOCES are serving a total of 138 school districts, leaving the remaining 41 school districts that provide special education services internally (www.coloradoboces.org, 2017). From personal working experience, each school district or BOCES’s employs on average 3 ECSE’s and two early childhood SLP’s. Therefore, 63 school districts/BOCES would provide approximately 190 ECSE’s and 125 SLP’s working in Colorado preschools.