Week 6

Date: 4-10-12

Arrival Time: 10:00 a.m.

Departure Time: 11:00 a.m.

Total Time This Day: 1.0 hrs

Total Time to Date: 16.0 hrs

Activities/Observations:

• The first session consisted of group instruction; both children are 4 years of age.  Both students are working on improving their articulation skills.
• The session began with a craft with making a bunny. The speech pathologist would say a phrase targeting sounds to be focused on and the child would then have to repeat the sentence that the speech pathologist had just said five times.  The speech pathologist has the child repeat the sentence this many times in order to make sure that the child knows how to say the sentence correctly using targeted sounds.  If the exercise is done correctly, then the child gets to glue a part of the bunny together.  The speech pathologist records the results by tallying the number of correct productions for each child.  Both children did quite well with this activity. 

Analysis:

• Activities
• I thought that the activity utilizing the bunny craft was a new and interesting approach to treatment, which I hadn’t seen with the previous speech pathologist, but I thought it was effective and something I would probably use myself one day. 
• As far as instructional approaches go, the students’ session in a group, but the children are working with the speech pathologist one at a time.
• I do think that the child who is not working with the speech pathologist needs something to do as they are quickly done putting their piece of the craft together and are simply sitting and waiting; this works with some children, but not all children will sit nicely, not to mention they are not gaining much from sitting. 
   
• The classroom management used was effective.
• This speech pathologist used a sticker system for classroom management.  Each child has a sticker “board” and if the child works hard during the session with the speech pathologist, then they get to put a sticker on their “board.”  Once their “board” is full they get to take it home with them. 
• In the activity that was done with the children, the speech pathologist used the craft as a reward; which is a great idea for children who love to do crafts.  She used the craft to drive students to practice correct use of sound production, and then the student would get to put a piece of the craft together as a reward. 
• Assessments
• There were a few forms of assessment used today’s sessions.  One of the main forms of assessment was observation; the speech pathologist and the speech pathologist’s para-professional would observe the student’s and their participation in the activities in addition to their ability to work on their target sounds or other goals made before the activity. 
• Another form of assessment used today was when the pathologist recorded the findings of each student’s performance and participation with other notes into a log in the student’s file. 
• The other form of assessment used today was when the speech pathologist tallied the correct production of a target sound for each student per round. 
  
  
• Reflection
• It was very interesting for me to observe today, as I was observing a new speech and language pathologist; as opposed to when I started out with the previous speech pathologist, I now had something to compare the new experience to.  I learned about new approaches that could be used for activities and materials within a treatment session with children in an early childhood center setting.  I also learned about some alternative, but also good assessment and classroom management techniques.  Now observing two speech pathologists in schools, I have learned that the pathologists often have limited space to utilize as they work with children. This pathologist as well as the last has advised me to get a wide range of experiences within speech and language pathology and through the observations I have begun to see why; there are so many different clients with variety in diagnosis’ within simply one area of speech and language pathology, such as early childhood education in schools.   
   
• NOTE:  As previously mentioned in other posts, there are no official state issued standards that are used in the schools for speech pathology curricula. .

Week 5

Date: 2-29-12

Arrival Time: 8:30 a.m.

Departure Time: 11:30 a.m.

Total Time This Day: 3.0 hrs

Total Time to Date: 15.0 hrs

Activities/Observations:

• The first session consisted of group instruction; both children are 7 years of age.  One student was working on improving their artic skills and the other student was working on improving their artic expressive language skills.
• The first child was to focus on oral nasal contrast and /r/ sound; the second child was to focus on /l/ and /v/ sound, as well as syntax noun-verb agreement. 
• For the student that is working on /r/ sound, the speech pathologist starts out by saying an /r/ sound word and the student does their best to repeat the word with the correct production of the sound.  The beginning of the sound is prolonged (i.e. rrrr), but this is necessary to get the child’s tongue used to the new position for the /r/ sound.  The student does well with this exercise.  The second student , whom is working on production of /l/ and /v/ sounds, is looking at a book with lots of pictures, which is supposed to help create conversation using the targeted sounds for the child.  The student works well with her /v/ sound production in conversation.  She had good production of a majority of the time; the student probably had a finishing percentage of 70% accuracy. 
• The second session consisted of group instruction; one child is 5 years old and the other child is six years old.  One student was working on their artic language skills and the other student was working solely on their artic skills. 
• At this session, the students did an activity with a bingo card.  The students began by picking a picture card out of the bucket, provided by the speech pathologist, and they then would verbalize what they drew and then they also had to verbalize where the picture card was to do (i.e. fish is classified as an animal on the bingo card).  In summary, students used classification to match similar pictures together incorporating the use of verbalization of words/sounds. 
• The third session also consisted of group instruction; both children are ten years old.  One student was working on their articulation skills and the other student was working on their oral motor skills. 
• The first student is working on the /r/ sound in conversation; the second student is working on /s,z/ sounds in conversation and the speech pathologist is to watch for jaw deviating to the side. 
• Students both use conversation, for which they each get to select a topic of their choice, to work on and use their target sounds with.  The speech pathologist uses the “taking a sample” chart/sheet to record correct and incorrect articulation of student’s target sounds within words that are spoken.  The student who isn’t currently speaking, is in charge of tallying the correct production of the target sound that their peer makes; this is good for the student because it helps to improve their listening skills overall and so that they are better able to detect their own correct or incorrect production of a sound when they are verbalizing. 

Analysis:

• Activities
• I thought that all of the activities were handled well.  I used to not think that the opposing student tallying the other student’s correct production of the target sound was all that helpful for the child who is tallying, but I now see the importance of the task, as it greatly benefits the student in their listening skills concerning others that they are conversing with as well as their own independent listening skills; this task will only further benefit the student in their ability to hear and understand correct production of a sound.  I thought that the bingo activity was very creative and the children really seemed to enjoy the game; I also think that this activity could be adapted and used with quite a large range of ages and objectives for treatment.  I also thought that having one of the students in the first session prolong the /r/ sound in order to initiate correct production, is a good idea; but I think that this should only be used as a last result, as it could be hard to phase the child out of this habit. 
• The classroom management used was effective.
• As I was observing the same speech pathologist, all of the classroom management techniques and implementations that were recorded in the previous observations still hold true.
• A task that was used in many of the sessions, but can also be noted as part of the class management, would be the tally system, where the child who is not working on their targeting sounds focus on tallying the number of correct production of target sounds that their peer makes; this keeps the student busy and engaged.   
• Assessments
• There were a few forms of assessment used today’s sessions.  One of the main forms of assessment was observation; the speech pathologist and the speech pathologist’s para-professional would observe the student’s and their participation in the activities in addition to their ability to work on their target sounds or other goals made before the activity. 
• Another form of assessment used today was when the pathologist recorded the findings of each student’s performance and participation with other notes into a log in the student’s file. 
• The other form of assessment used today was the “taking a sample” sheet that the students in the third session were in charge of keeping track of their correct, incorrect, and almost correct production of sounds/words. 
  
  
• Reflection
• I thought that today had a good variety in activities and techniques for treatment through the sessions.  I was able to gain more ideas and examples of different materials and activities that I could utilize in my future as a speech and language pathologist.  Furthermore, I found it very interesting to observe a student who has a jaw deviation, which influenced his production of his language, which almost went unnoticed; it was great to see the variety in diagnosis’ and treatments in order to expose me to different treatments of diagnosis’ that I may encounter and learn about as a speech and language pathologist. 
   
• NOTE:  As previously mentioned in other posts, there are no official state issued standards that are used in the schools for speech pathology curricula. .

Week 4

Date: 2-22-12

Arrival Time: 8:30 a.m.

Departure Time: 11:30 a.m.

Total Time This Day: 3.0 hrs

Total Time to Date: 12.0 hrs

Activities/Observations:

• The first session consisted of individual instruction, one child who is four years of age and was working on improving their artic expressive language skills.
• At this session, the child worked on marking final position consonants, syllables, and words; /s/ and /z/ in syllables and pronunciation of two syllable words.  The speech pathologist began by taking stickers (which included a variety of pictures) and pointed to that sticker to have the student utilize target sounds (i.e. leaf).  Next, the student verbally picks a sticker and verbally tells what the sticker is and where the student is going to place it (the student was to put the sticker on a body part of another person in the room).  I noticed that the student was able to identify when she said a sound correctly that has been a target sound for them.  In conjunction with this activity, the speech pathologist brought out a stuffed animal in order to target sounds and create conversation with the student.  Next, the student went around the room to each person and asked, “You want it off?” and then the student proceeded to remove the stickers from the people and the stuffed animal.  The next activity that the student participated in consisted of drawing lines on a dry erase board.  The student would make a sound while erasing; /sh/ was the target sound.  Colored lines were used in this activity to create conversation and focus on /sh/ and /sp/ sounds.  I noticed that the child can easily correct sounds produced when the student is able to slow down.  However, when the student gets to talking quickly, her words are not enunciated well and the sounds seem to blur together. 
• The second session consisted of individual instruction, one child who is six years of age and has been diagnosed with speech language. 
• At this session, the child worked on completing the SPELT-3 Test, which standards for Structured Photographic Expressive Language Test, and the Goldman Fristoe 2, which is known as the test of articulation.  The Goldman Fristoe test starts out with the speech pathologist showing the student a picture and then the student has to say what the picture is (i.e. This is a house).  The speech pathologist looks for correct articulation of specific indicated sounds.  The student did well and only made 9 errors.  Next, the student worked on the SPELT-3.  The speech pathologist began by showing the student a picture and asked the student questions (i.e. “What is this?” or “Where is the girl?”).  The student also did well with this and only made three errors. 

Analysis:

• Activities
• I thought that the speech path handled the activities well with the student who was unintelligible in conversation; in just that session I could already see her production of words becoming more clear and recognizable when she slowed her speech down.  Also, when the student was not interacting well with an activity, then the speech pathologist did a good job of changing it so that she could receive more effort from the child; I thought this was both very creative and effective, particularly due to the child’s age.  I also thought that all of the testing was handled well.
• The classroom management used was effective.
• As I was observing the same speech pathologist, all of the classroom management techniques and implementations that were recorded in the previous observations still hold true. 
• Assessments
• There were a couple forms of assessment used today. One of these forms of assessment was testing. As the student tested using non-verbal and verbal communication, the speech pathologist recorded the results on a form. 
• Another form of assessment used today was observation for the child in the first session; as she did her activities, the speech pathologist observed and at the end of the session, the pathologist recorded her findings and other notes into a log in the student’s file. 
• Reflection
• What I love about observing this speech pathologist is that I always seem to learn something new or experience something exciting whether the activities are similar or different from my previous observations.  This visit I learned about different techniques and strategies that can be used to keep the younger children engaged in activities (such as switching up the materials or lesson to fit the child’s current interests).  Also, I learned how important slowing a child’s speech down can be in the treatment process; this makes sense, but to understand this and to see it in action are two different experiences.  Furthermore, I was given a couple more examples of materials that can be used for activities in speech and language pathology, which is always helpful, as I know teachers “steal” ideas from one another often. 
   

NOTE:  As previously mentioned in other posts, there are no official state issued standards that are used in the schools for speech pathology curricula.

Week 3

Date: 2-17-12

Arrival Time: 8:40 a.m.

Departure Time: 11:40 a.m.

Total Time This Day: 3.0 hrs

Total Time to Date: 9.0 hrs

Activities/Observations:

• The first session consisted of individual instruction, one child who is six years of age and was working on improving their artic and language skills.
• At this session, the child worked on completing the CELF-4 Test, which stands for Clinical Evaluation of Language Function Test.  The speech pathologist begins by starting with the first section of the test, which consisted of her giving directions to the student and the student was to follow those directions to the best of their ability.  For the portion of the test, there is a picture on the student’s page and the directions are associated with this picture, which usually included an object or people.  The student struggled with this; they had an easier time with the questions that included shorter directions.  The next portion of the test focused on finishing sentences.  The speech pathologist would point to a picture (there are two pictures on a page) and would say a sentence and then she pointed to the next picture and would start another sentence and the student would have to finish it.  For example, “This bird is blue.  This bird is_____.”  The student did well with the portion of the test; they understood what was going on in the picture and was able to verbalize it (sometimes the sentence structure was incorrect).  The next portion of the test is called copy cat.  The speech pathologist says a sentence and the student is supposed to repeat exactly what the pathologist says to the best of their ability.  The focus of this is sentence structure.  For each sentence the student gets a rating:  ok results in a 3, one error results in a 2, two to three errors results in a 1, and four or more errors results in a 0.  The student started out with mostly threes and as the sentences got harder, the student got twos and then further down the student received mostly ones and zeros.  The next portion of the test is a picture that is given to the student.  The speech pathologist then gives the student a word to make a sentence with (i.e. play).  The student looks at the picture to help them think of what to say.  The student did well in verbalizing pictures for the most part; sentence structure showed difficulty, though some were good. The next part of the test focuses on word classification.  There are three pictures on a page; the speech pathologist says the names of each picture and then asks the student which two words go together the best.  The student also tells why they go together.  The student either gets a 1 or 0 for both receptive and expressive language.  Student also has to say the names of the two pictures to receive credit and also the reasoning for their similarity.  Student does well with recognizing the pictures that are related.  Student did well overall with this; part of the time the student struggled with the sentence structure and the other part the student did well with it.  The next part of the test focuses on vocabulary.  The speech pathologist shows the student a picture and asks what it is and the student has to give the correct name.  The student did this portion with about 50 percent accuracy.  For the last part of the test, the speech pathologist tells the student to point to a picture; she forms the directions into a sentence.  There are several pictures and the student has to pick the picture that best describes the sentence.  For example, “The girl took some flowers to her mother.”  The student did 100% accuracy. 
• The second session consisted of individual instruction, one child who is seven years of age and has been diagnosed with behavior disorder (IEP team is considering adding speech and language to the child’s diagnosis). 
• At this session, the child worked on completing the CELF-4 Screen, which consisted of 3 sub tests.  This testing session began with a sub test that worked with finishing sentences.  The speech pathologist would point to a picture (there are two pictures on a page) and would say a sentence and then she pointed to the next picture and would start another sentence and the student would have to finish it.  For example, “This box is blue.  This box is_____.”  The student did well with the portion of the test.  The next sub test consisted of showing the student two pictures and asking the student how the two pictures are related.  The student did well with this test.  The last sub test targeted directions.  There is a picture on the student’s page and the directions are associated with this picture, which usually included an object or people (the directions are verbally given by the speech pathologist).  The student did all but one of these correctly.    

Analysis:

• Activities
• I thought that all of the testing was handled well.  When there was a student who wasn’t on task or had a hard time focusing, the speech pathologist found a good way to engage and motivate the student in the testing. 
• The classroom management used was effective.
• As I was observing the same speech pathologist, all of the classroom management techniques and implementations that were recorded in the previous observations still hold true. 
• When a student tries to look at the answers to the test while taking it repeatedly, the speech pathologist takes away the skittle that is given to the student for good reward.  Since this is a long test, the student has the opportunity to earn a skittle for each section of the test; this allows for further motivation to refrain from cheating to take place. 
• Assessments
• There was one main form of an assessment used today. This form of assessment was testing. As the student tested using non-verbal and verbal communication, the speech pathologist recorded the results on a form. 
• Reflection
• Again, I learned much from this observation opportunity.  I learned about different techniques and strategies that can be used when issuing lengthy tests to keep students engaged.  Also, I learned that you have to pay attention to students’ engagement when testing; if they are not performing to their capability due to whatever factors, that should be weighed in comparison with the length remaining of the test to determine whether or not they should be tested another time.  Furthermore, I learned about a test that is often used in speech and language pathology to test children for an overall clinical evaluation, which is often used to assist in determining whether a child needs to be given speech and language services through session of treatment or whether a child is no longer in need of speech and language services. 
   
• NOTE:  As previously mentioned in other posts, there are no official state issued standards that are used in the schools for speech pathology curricula. .

Week 2

Date: 1-1-12

Arrival Time: 8:30 a.m.

Departure Time: 11:40 a.m.

Total Time This Day: 3.0 hrs

Total Time to Date: 6.0 hrs

Activities/Observations:

• The first session consisted of individual instruction, one child who is four years of age and was working on improving their artic expressive language skills.
• During the first activity in this session, the pathologist used the student’s completed homework papers to verbally address what is on the paper.  On these papers, the student vocalized what was on the paper with the speech pathologist’s guidance.  The goal sound was in working on /sp/ blends.  The student would get to make a paint dot on the paper once she vocalized the blend. 
• The second activity that was done in this session consisted of using a coloring paper that had 6 words, which all started with the same sound, /g/.  The pathologist would point to each individual word and verbalize it and the student would correctly repeat the word.  If they word was repeated incorrectly, the speech pathologist would repeat the word again and encourage the student to try again and say it correctly.  After completing this activity, the student got to color the coloring page as a reward as this is something that the student really enjoys.   
• The third activity that was done consisted of the speech pathologist vocalizing a sound and then the student would put her finger on the speech pathologist’s hand and repeat the sound.  This process continues until the student moves across all of the fingers on her hand.  Several sets of these are done.  The finger aspect of this activity is used to keep the student busy. 
• The second session consisted of group instruction, 2 children who are seven years of age and are working on improving their articulation skills and artic expressive language skills.
• The first activity done in this session was structured conversation using a poster of a community based scene.  The students had to tell about the picture; the goal was to have the student work on verbalizing the appropriate forms or /l and r/.  This activity was targeted at only one of the students.
• The second activity, which was targeted at the second child, used a grid help the student discriminate the good/bad production of /r/.  The activity was held by having the speech pathologist making the bad /r/ sound and then also says the correct sound and the student had to point to the correct sound on a sheet of paper.  The student was able to discriminate between the correct and bad sound quite well.  Next, it becomes the student’s turn.  Each time that the student makes the bad sound, he points it out to the pathologist; accuracy still isn’t very high.  This activity was also only target at one student, which was the student who did not take part in the previous activity. 
• The third session consisted of group instruction, with two children who are five and six years of age and one student was working on improving their artic language skills while the other student was working on solely improving their articulation skills.
• The first activity consisted of working with /g/ in phrases using a poster of a scene.  Using the poster, the pathologist had kids say something that they see in the picture and then the pathologist finds the picture and puts a chip on it.  The pathologist made sure to have the students say words with the correct use of sounds.  After a while, the activity was reversed and the pathologist named something on the poster while the kids pointed to the object, person, or thing; the pathologist would have the kids verbalize what they had found and then put a chip on it. 
• The second activity included spontaneous speech while using Play-Do while targeting s-blends.  Students would play with the Play-Do, but the students had to use their words to say what tools they need and what they are going to do. 
• The third activity consisted of a coloring paper that had different short sentences to work on sounds.  The speech pathologist says a phrase and then the student repeats the phrase.  If the student doesn’t do it correctly, then they try a couple more times.  Next, the student uses different colored chips and practices saying “I’m gonna get this candy” and then says the color of chip that they are putting on the candy (on the worksheet).  Lastly, the student takes a magnetic stick to pick up the chips and as they are doing so, they will verbalize their actions. 
• The fourth session consisted of group instruction, with children who are ten years of age and one was working on improving their articulation skills while the other was working on their oral motor skills.
• The activity done in this session targeted sound in conversation and the students tallied their peer’s sound accuracy when it was not their turn. 

Analysis:

• Activities
• I thought that all of the activities used in the sessions today were good activities. Just as my last observation, the activities were creative, effective, well received, and mostly student-focused. In session two I think that the activities should have been activities that both students could have done at the same time, or to have the para-professional facilitate one of the activities while the speech pathologist facilitated the other. 
• The classroom management used was effective.
• As I was observing the same speech pathologist, all of the classroom management techniques and implementations that were recorded in the first observation still hold true. 
• When students have homework, as a motivator, they receive points for each page of homework that they do and when a certain number of points are obtained, then they get to pick an item out of the treasure chest. 
• Assessments
• There were several forms of assessments used today. The primary form of assessment was observation. The worksheets used and then kept in the student's file was also another form of an assessment used. Another popular assessment used throughout the sessions observed today was that the speech pathologist would record notes of the results of progress through activities of each individual student. Another assessment used was the "taking a sample" sheet; this sheet consisted of the progress of a child's individual sound articulation by date.
• Reflection
• Again, I learned much from this observation opportunity.  I learned about techniques that can be used to help keep the attention while simultaneously verbalizing a sound.  Also, I learned about body movements in conjunction with the production of a sound.  I learned that an individual’s facial position and the way in which they are using their mouths to produce a sound, can affect the articulation of a sound.  Additionally, I learned about using creative materials to grab students’ interest, which helps to initiate good use of speech and language within a session.  I also learned that sometimes the lesson you have prepared can be thrown out if a student is heavily focused on a particular subject, object, or action; rather, you can focus the lesson upon the thing that the student’s attention has gained.  I also got the opportunity to work more with my ability to differentiate between correct and incorrect articulation of a sound, as well as my ability to record all attempts at a sound verbalization by a student in conversation or through reading. 
   
• NOTE: I am unaware of the standards at this point. I will talk with the speech pathologist this week and update my post with the necessary information once I have the information on the standards.

Week 1

Date:  1-26-12

Arrival Time:  8:30 a.m.

Departure Time:  11:30 a.m.

Total Time This Day:  3.0 hrs

Total Time to Date:  3.0 hrs

Activities/Observations: 

• The first session consisted of group instruction, two children who are seven years of age and were both working on improving their articulation and expressive language skills. 
• During the first activity in this session, the students worked on their ability to change a statement into a question, as well as being able to turn a question into a statement using cards that were also used to target the correct syntax use in addition to noun and verb agreement.   At the start of the activity, the speech pathologist worked with the each of the students to help them understand what makes a sentence a question and what makes a sentence a statement.  The students were able to identify as well as demonstrate that it was the way you said a sentence that made it a question or a statement.  After a few examples and practices with the cards for each of the students, the speech pathologist turned the activity into a game to allow for additional practice with identifying a sentence as a statement or a question.  If one of the students couldn't identify the card correctly, then the other student got a chance to identify it and gain the points. 
• The second activity that was done in this session consisted of using a worksheet to target concepts of ordinal numbers (first, second, and third) with auditory memory tasks using shapes and locations.  This activity was conducted by the teacher reading a set of instructions and the students doing their best to act upon those instructions using the worksheet that they'd been given.  This activity is supposed to help children understand which picture is first, second, and third from the original picture displayed or the one indicated by the instructions. 
• The second session consisted of individual instruction, 1 child who is six years of age and is working on improving their articulation and language skills.
• This session consisted of the speech pathologist giving the student an assessment known as the SPELT-3, Structured Photographic Expressive Language Test.  This test has the participant look at pictures and verbally tell what they see.  The student answers questions that the teacher asks by looking at the picture and verbally responding. 
• The third session consisted of group instruction, with two children who are nine years of age and were both working on improving their articulation skills. 
•  The activity focused on articulation with sounds by reading a book of the students' choice.  The first student worked on the /s, z/ sounds while the second student worked on /r/ sounds.  While the student would read, the teacher would record all of the words that the student read that had the sound that the child was working on and then she would circle the sounds that the student had said incorrectly. 
• The fourth session consisted of individual instruction, with a child who is ten years of age and was working on improving their pragmatic language skills.
• The activity done in this session focused on talking with the child about their tendency to argue with their teachers, family, and peers and how that affected the child.  The speech pathologist discussed with the student why it is important to keep track of the number of times that they argued with others throughout the day.  This "activity" was being done by the student, the student's primary teacher, and the student's mother so that the speech pathologist could compare the student's comprehension of arguing throughout a day with his mother's and teacher's knowledge. 
• Moving forward from the discussion about arguing with others, the speech pathologist asked the student some questions about the argumentative issue.  The questions that she asked included:  1) Why do I argue?; 2) How can I stop?; and 3) What things can I think about to help?  The student answered these questions to the best of their ability and the speech pathologist offered guidance when needed. 
• The last activity that was done in this session consisted of the speech pathologist giving the student a scenario between two people.  The student was told to identify which person in the scenario was arguing. 

Analysis: 

• Activities
• I thought that all of the activities used in the sessions today were great.  They were creative, effective, well recieved, and student-focused.  There wasn't anything that I thought could be improved in terms of the activities. 
• The classroom management used was good and creative. 
• There is a system to encourage participation and hard work among students.  This system involves giving each student a small piece of candy, such as a skittle, at the end of the session as long as they participate and try their best.  What is so great about this reward system is that it creates another opportunity to work on correct articulation of sounds.  Students do not get skittle if they do not follow the teacher's directions, such as not being able to stay in their chair.   
• Hands are to stay in the students' lap in order to help keep them engaged.  Also, there is velcro under the table so that if a student needs something to do with their hands, then they have an outlet. 
• Another classroom management technique used is set up to keep the students in an interactive experience as well as to involve them in their own progress. There is a chart for each of the students and when they do an activity that works on sound articulation (focussing on one sound at a time), the student will record their performance on the articulation of a sound.  The student will record one of the following:  + for perfect, - for miss, and - with a circle around it for a miss and then corrected.   
• When two students are in the speech room at once and articulation is being worked on, the speech pathologist has the student that is not working on articulation at the time, work on keeping track of the number of times the student uses a sound correctly on a sheet of paper using tallies. 
• If a student is struggling to do their homework or to try during the session, then the teacher will talk to the student and have them come up with a way to help.  I like this because the speech pathologist is encouraging the child to see what the problem is and then ask their opinion on what they think would help them do what they are supposed to be doing; allows the child to take ownership. 
• Assessments
• There were many different forms of assessments used during my observation on this day.  The primary form of assessment was through observation.  The worksheets used and then kept in the student's file was also another form of an assessment used.  Another popular assessment used throughout the sessions observed today was that the speech pathologist would record notes of the results of progress through activities of each individual student.  Another assessment used was the "taking a sample" sheet; this sheet consisted of the progress of a child's individual sound articulation by date.  One of the sessions was devoted to an assessment known as the Structured Photographic Expressive Language Test (SPELT); the speech pathologist would record the student's verbal answers on a test sheet. 
• Reflection
• I gained/learned so much from my observation time with the speech and language pathologist.  I was able to gain insight on the skills most needed, such as listening skills and the ability to do two things at once to keep session flowing smoothly for the student.  I learned how to listen for correct sounds as well as how to correctly phonetically write them.  I learned how to identify a student's exact age to the day, as I was notified that this is an important task to be able to do as a speech pathologist.  I also witnessed several good examples of how to apply treatment/therapy to individuals with speech/language delays or difficulties.  Additionally I learned how to fill out a clinical form.  I was suprised that speech pathologists work with students two at a time rather than doing everything one-on-one.  I do see how it can work and be beneficial to have two students in at a time, as they can interact with each other and encourage one another as the grow in their language and speech abilities. 
• NOTE:  I am unaware of the standards at this point.  I will talk with the speech pathologist this week and update my post with the necessary information once I have the information on the standards.