Language Outcomes of Contextualized and Decontextualized Language Intervention: Results of an Early Efficacy Study Purpose The purpose of this early efficacy study (Fey & Finestack, 2009) was to determine whether a new contextualized language intervention (CLI) or an existing decontextualized language intervention (DLI) resulted in greater changes in children’s language and narration in comparison to a no-treatment condition (CON). Method Sixteen children ... Research Article
Research Article  |   July 01, 2012
Language Outcomes of Contextualized and Decontextualized Language Intervention: Results of an Early Efficacy Study
 
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Sandra Laing Gillam
    Utah State University, Logan
  • Ronald B. Gillam
    Utah State University, Logan
  • Kellie Reece
    Billingsley School, Billingsley, AL
  • Correspondence to Sandra L. Gillam: sandi.gillam@usu.edu
  • Editor: Marilyn Nippold
    Editor: Marilyn Nippold×
  • Associate Editor: Phyllis Schneider
    Associate Editor: Phyllis Schneider×
Article Information
Language Disorders / Research Articles
Research Article   |   July 01, 2012
Language Outcomes of Contextualized and Decontextualized Language Intervention: Results of an Early Efficacy Study
Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, July 2012, Vol. 43, 276-291. doi:10.1044/0161-1461(2011/11-0022)
History: Received April 7, 2011 , Revised August 3, 2011 , Accepted December 14, 2011
 
Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, July 2012, Vol. 43, 276-291. doi:10.1044/0161-1461(2011/11-0022)
History: Received April 7, 2011; Revised August 3, 2011; Accepted December 14, 2011
Web of Science® Times Cited: 13

Purpose The purpose of this early efficacy study (Fey & Finestack, 2009) was to determine whether a new contextualized language intervention (CLI) or an existing decontextualized language intervention (DLI) resulted in greater changes in children’s language and narration in comparison to a no-treatment condition (CON).

Method Sixteen children between the ages of 6;0 (years;months) and 9;0 were randomly assigned to the CLI and DLI groups. Eight similar-age children from the no-treatment phase of a separate study acted as a control group. Children in the CLI and DLI conditions received 50-min group intervention sessions 3 times per week for 6 weeks. Sentence-and discourse-level measures were administered to assess intervention outcomes.

Results Both interventions were associated with statistically significant gains on sentence- and discourse-level measures when compared to a no-treatment condition. Effect size analyses demonstrated that the CLI group outperformed the DLI group on all outcome measures.

Conclusion The results revealed signs of efficacy in an intervention approach in which clinicians treated multiple linguistic targets using meaningful activities with high levels of topic continuity. With some minor revisions, this intervention should be ready to be tested in a larger, more costly, and more internally valid efficacy study.

Acknowledgments
This work was supported in part by a grant (Award R324A100063) to the first two authors from the U.S. Department of Education, Institute for Educational Sciences, National Center for Special Education Research.
The authors would like to thank Karen Steckol and Betty Carver at the University of Alabama for their assistance with this project. Our thanks go to the administrators, teachers, and students at Billingsley School in Billingsley, AL, for their participation and flexibility. We would also like to thank Kim Jaynes, Deanna Shealey, Katherine Christensen, Doug Petersen, Laura Hendricks, and the graduate research assistants who administered tests and analyzed language samples at the University of Alabama and Utah State University.
Order a Subscription
Pay Per View
Entire Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools content & archive
24-hour access
This Article
24-hour access