Speech Language Pathology Research

Speech Language Pathology Research Language and speech are some of the most important human characteristics that differentiate people from other living organisms. Unfortunately, there are sometimes developmental abnormalities that cause children to have significant problems in recognizing and using language and speaking.Advertising We will write a custom critical writing sample on Speech Language Pathology Research specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More An article titled â€Å"The Efficacy of Fast ForWord Language Intervention in School-Age Children with Language Impairment: A Randomized Controlled Trial† talks about the research that was produced to aid this problem, and what sort of outcomes came to be. The article describes several possible treatments and then, analyzes their effectiveness and longevity. There were four conditions set up: 1-Fast ForWord Language (FFW-L), 2-academic enrichment (AE), 3-computer-asssited language intervention (CALI), 4-individual lang uage intervention (ILI). All the methods had the same amount of repetitions and hours. All had a significant influence on the skills and learning, but FFW-L and CALI were most effective and earned higher scores in the follow up testing (Gillam et al., 2008). The article discusses outcomes, methods used and randomization. Most importantly, how children responded to a specific study is an appropriate start for future research. The rationale for conducting such a study is rather necessary to evolve the offered treatment and properly diagnose the condition. The interactions that a child experiences are much more influential at a younger age, so the intervention must be offered early. The article fails to mention that children are more observant than adults, and are mostly watching and making conclusions in their learning process. Thus, adults play a significant role in the way children perceive and use speech and language. The repetition of behaviors and mimicking are observed in many i nstances. Evidence from an experimental study has shown improvement, but it is not related to other instances in life. How well children write, use their imagination, crafts and regular behavior are not implemented into the study. It is possible that at some moments children might have a better predisposition or ability to speak, than at others. This might be related to the mood or attitude towards a specific situation or a general physical condition. In order to properly study the effectiveness of the research and improvement methods, many more aspects of the individual characteristics and social life must be taken into consideration.Advertising Looking for critical writing on linguistics? Let's see if we can help you! Get your first paper with 15% OFF Learn More Control group and conditions were rather reliable. The fact that examiners were blindfolded excluded some form of bias and implication of the results. But nonetheless, the process of generalizing sp ecific rules and schemes from the observed behavior and conditions present in a test setting is questionable. In order to learn, a person must acquire knowledge about a certain concept and thus, develop a response to adequately deal with a situation. Recognition and cognitive processing of information is learned through participation in various activities, and the more social interaction there is, the better a child will adjust to the environment. As such, the rate of progress for a child in a test setting, home setting or social situation, as well as school, will be different. Randomization was varied according to the schools and assignments to a particular group and test setting. This is rather effective, as there were children who were placed into an examination directly, and those who were assigned randomly (Gillam et al., 2008). This allowed seeing the difference in the results according to the learning rate and retention. But, the unique nature of children had to be taken into account. Children will often have more connection with children of their own age, as they are able to relate to common themes. To make the study even more random, there must have been different settings with both adults and children. Some tests could even be conducted by older children or those who have the ability to participate in the study, but are of the same age. The measures were valid and reliable only to the study and conditions that were present in this particular examination. The repetition of the study and the examination of children within the 6 month period are not as reliable because the circumstances within that amount of time are not taken into consideration. Some children might have been resting more; there could have been extensive amounts of practice and study, as well as unnoticeable stimuli, such as parent’s affection, the influence of peers or environmental factors. There is no doubt that the study can be the basis for further research, but careful exam ination of a number of other factors must be conducted. The reported effect size varied according to each individual study. Posttest was highest for ILI and FFW-L treatments, whereas after 6 months, AE was highest with 1.34 and lowest for FFW-L with 0.93. Backward masking was the highest for CALI-post test 0.71 and 6 months at 1.14. Token test had FFW-L as most effective. And blending words show very close result with FFW-L being the highest at 0.79 and AE the lowest at -0.11 posttest, and 0.46 in 6 months (Gillam et al., 2008).Advertising We will write a custom critical writing sample on Speech Language Pathology Research specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More The findings were important on both social and personal level. As this is a problem that can be improved, awareness and proper programs must be set in place to permit children to learn and adapt to their issue and the surrounding conditions. This type of research is aimed to underst and how the human brain works, and how people can help themselves in becoming more educated and skilled. Reference Gillam et al. (2008). The Efficacy of Fast ForWord Language Intervention in School-Age Children with Language Impairment: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research. 51, 97-119.

History of Canadas Death Penalty

History of Canada's Death Penalty Capital punishment was removed from the Canadian Criminal Code in 1976. It was replaced with a mandatory life sentence without possibility of parole for 25 years for all first-degree murders. In 1998 capital punishment was also removed from the Canadian National Defence Act, bringing Canadian military law in line with the civil law in Canada. Here is a timeline of the evolution of capital punishment and the abolition of the death penalty in Canada. 1865 Crimes of murder, treason, and rape carried the death penalty in Upper and Lower Canada. 1961 The murder was classified into capital and non-capital offenses. Capital murder offenses in Canada were premeditated murder and murder of a police officer, guard or warden in the course of duty. A capital offense had a mandatory sentence of hanging. 1962 The last executions took place in Canada. Arthur Lucas, convicted of the premeditated murder of an informer and witness in racket discipline, and Robert Turpin, convicted of the unpremeditated murder of a policeman to avoid arrest, were hanged at the Don Jail in Toronto, Ontario. 1966 Capital punishment in Canada was limited to the killing of on-duty police officers and prison guards. 1976 Capital punishment was removed from the Canadian Criminal Code. It was replaced with a mandatory life sentence without possibility of parole for 25 years for all first-degree murders. The bill was passed by a free vote in the  House of Commons. Capital punishment still remained in the Canadian National Defence Act for the most serious military offenses, including treason and mutiny. 1987 A motion to reintroduce capital punishment was debated in the Canadian House of Commons and defeated on a free vote. 1998 The Canadian National Defence Act was changed to remove the death penalty and replace it with life imprisonment with no eligibility for parole for 25 years. This brought Canadian military law in line with the civil law in Canada. 2001 The  Supreme Court of Canada ruled, in United States v. Burns, that in extradition cases it is constitutionally required that in all but exceptional cases the Canadian government seek assurances that the death penalty will not be imposed, or if imposed not carried out.