Title

Simultaneous Feedback Versus Oral-Written Feedback: A Comparison of Two Supervisory Procedures

Date of Award

8-1-1981

Document Type

Thesis

Degree Name

Master of Science (MS)

Department

Communication Sciences & Disorders

Abstract

The need for quality supervision in th» field of speech- language pathology has ling been recognized. "There is a lack of information regaiding use of simultaneous feedback as a supervisory approach in clinical training in speech-language pathology. The purpose of this study was to compare the generalization by student clinicians of supervisory training provided under two methods of supervisory feedback, simultaneous feedback and oral-written feedback.

Two qualified, experienced clinical supervisors applied simultaneous supervisory feedback to two clinician-supervisor relationships and oral-written feedback to two other supervisor- clinician relationships. The clinicians were evaluated and trailed in the use of antecedent and subsequent stimuli and the adequacy and appropriateness of these stimuli during the individual therapy sessions. Each clinician conducted four one-hour sessions of group language intervention during which generalization of antecedent and subsequent stimuli and their adequacy and appropriateness were measured. No supervisory feedback was provided during the generalization sessions. The data were submitted to analysis of variance of treatment and time effects to determine if significant differences existed between behaviors of the clinicians trained using simultaneous feedback and those trained using oral-written feedback over the four generalization sessions.

Although there were scattered findings of significant differences related to the main effects of treatment and time, when frequency of occurrence and proportion data were analyzed, no pattern of significant difference occurred between those behaviors of clinicians receiving simultaneous feedback and those receiving oral- written feedback. Further, there were scattered significant differences across the four sessions for the groups combined, but the differences did not consistently reveal improved performance. Therefore, it is concluded that under the conditions of the present study neither of the two modalities of supervision was revealed to be superior in promoting the generalization of improved clinician behavior.

This document is currently not available here.

Share

COinS