Understanding Speech-Language Pathology from the Standpoint of Families: A Systemic Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Inclusive Early Childhood Service System (IECSS) project is a longitudinal institutional ethnography that studies disability services in early childhood, and the interactions between these services and other systems, from the standpoint of families. In this paper, we examine speech-language services as part of a system of services and a site of participation for disabled children. We use longitudinal data from annual interviews with 117 informants to map Speech and Language services over the first six years of children’s lives. We report that speech and language pathology (SLP) as a professional discourse holds cultural significance and influences the organization of disabled children and their families. The analysis of the data illustrates the pervasiveness, organizational structure, and governance of speech and language pathology (SLP) in early childhood, leading to professional discourses of childhood and disability in early intervention, preschool, and school-based services which reinforce individualized pathology as the dominant way of understanding development. We discuss how the professional practices of SLP-related services could help to disrupt disabling constructs of childhood development and colonial practices in early childhood disability services. We emphasize how speech and language development emerges in relationship with individuals and socio-political contexts. We suggest possibilities for SLP to operate within community contexts where speech and language services contribute to reducing family workload, increasing the participation of all children, and disrupting ableism in practice.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".