Efektifitas Sosialisasi Deteksi Dini Gangguan Bicara dan Bahasa untuk Guru di Lingkungan Sekolah Inklusi Kota Surakarta

This study explores the role of companions of children with specific special needs, such as autism, ADHD, or physical disabilities, in supporting learning in inclusive elementary schools in Surakarta City. The research method used is qualitative, with data collection techniques through in-depth interviews, participatory observation, and documentation. The study subjects included students accompanying children with these specific special needs who participated in the internship program for students accompanying children with special needs in inclusive schools (MAPING-AKSI) in Surakarta City. The study results show that companions for children with special needs are crucial in supporting the learning process. Companions mediate between teachers and students and provide emotional support, such as comforting a child during a meltdown, and motivation, such as encouraging a child to participate in class activities, to children with special needs. In addition, companions also help in the preparation and implementation of individual learning programs that are tailored to the needs of each child. Challenges include a lack of special training, a high workload, and less-than-optimal coordination with teachers and parents. This study concludes that to improve the effectiveness of inclusive learning, more excellent support is needed from schools and the government in the form of regular training for assistants, provision of adequate resources, and strengthening cooperation between assistants, teachers, and parents. The practical implications of this study are the importance of developing training programs and policies that support the role of assistants for children with special needs in inclusive schools.

The purpose of this study was to investigate the motor profile of 125 children with developmental speech and language disorders and to test for differences, if any, in motor profile among subgroups of children with developmental speech and language disorders. The participants were 125 children with developmental speech and language disorders aged 6 to 9 years from 2 special schools for children with communication problems in the northern Netherlands. They were tested with the Movement Assessment Battery for Children. The children were classified by the schools' speech and language therapists into 3 subgroups on the basis of language tests, oral motor tests, and clinical examinations: children with speech disorders (n = 14), language disorders (n = 46), or both (n = 65). Compared with the norms of the Movement Assessment Battery for Children, children with developmental speech and language disorders performed significantly less well. Results showed that 51% of the children with developmental speech and language disorders had borderline or definite motor problems. Children with language disorders had significantly lower scores (ie, better performance) on the ball-skills subtest and the total test than children with speech disorders and children with both speech and language disorders. Furthermore, children with language disorders had significantly better performance on the balance subtest than children with both speech and language disorders. The findings of this study support the idea that developmental speech and language disorders are frequently associated with motor problems and that the kind of developmental speech and language disorders affects motor performance differently. Speech and language disorders seem to have more impact on motor performance than only language disorders, and it seems that when speech production is affected, motor problems are more pronounced. The findings support the need to give early and more attention to the motor skills of children with developmental speech and language disorders in the educational and home setting, with special attention to children whose speech is affected.

The old paradigm which states that speech disorders in children are normal so that when they become a disorder, it will have an impact on the process of language development of children to adulthood. The number of cases of speech disorders found in children caused by the delay in early detection by parents. This is due to the lack of information regarding children's speech disorders. The purpose of writing this article is 1) to find out the stages of children's language development, (2) to find out the causes of speech and language disorders in children and (3) to find out the symptoms and the process of handling speech and language disorders in children. The article writing methodology uses a systematic literature review approach to 39 articles. The results of the writing obtained four stages of children's language development, namely the babbling stage (the babbling stage), the holophrastic stage (the one-word one-phrase stage), the two-word one-phrase stage (telegraphic) and the differentiation stage. Every child has a different range of stages. Factors that cause children's speech disorders that can be caused by medical factors, physiological factors and environmental factors. Children's speech disorders can be in the form of delays in language development, aphasia, speech organ disorders, hearing problems, autism, emotional and behavioral disorders. Treatment of speech disorders can be done with speech therapy, oral motor therapy and melodic intonation therapy. The implications of writing this article can be used as a reference by parents and health practitioners to carry out early detection and the process of handling speech disorders.

People with disabilities are people who experience physical, mental, intellectual, or sensory limitations that are experienced for a long period of time. These limitations can cause obstacles and difficulties in participating fully and effectively with society. Physical disabilities experience impaired motor function including amputation, paralysis or stiffness, paraplegia, cerebral palsy, due to stroke. Intellectual disabilities, in this case children with disabilities experience impaired thinking function because their intelligence level is below average so that it can cause language and speech disorders. This community service activity was carried out at the CG-YPPCG Bina Sejahtera Special School in Surakarta City with the aim that parents and teachers have the knowledge and skills in carrying out early detection and intervention in children with disabilities. This community service method uses a counseling and training approach for teachers and parents of students about early detection in children with language and speech disorders. Results: This community service was attended by 50 people consisting of parents of students and school teachers, more than 70% of community service participants have understood how to carry out detection and intervention in children with language and speech disorders

To identify the main risk factors related to children and their parents, associated with speech and language disorders. A prospective descriptive study conducted with 170 children and their parents assisted at a school clinic in the period between March 2010 and July 2012. A protocol was developed for this study in order to identify risk factors for language and speech disorders. Data were tabulated and analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics by the χ² and Student's t-test . The demographic profile is composed of male children aged between 4 and 5 years old, ethnicity declared by parents as being white, residents of the western region of the city of São Paulo, and whose parents had completed high school. The factors related to family and considered as risks for language impairment were being an only child and having a family history of speech and language disorders. As for the children' s health, prematurity, hospitalization for a long period, and the presence of deleterious oral habits were also considered as risk factors. The protocol allows establishing the main risk factors related to children with speech and language disorders. It is suggested that children who present with one or more of the aforementioned risk factors should be regularly monitored for speech and language development and, if necessary, referred for early intervention.

It is crucial to describe language development and socio-emotional behavior in children with speech delays. Many cases of speech delays in children are caused by the use of gadgets. Early detection of language and speech development problems, intervention programs carried out, and academic and socio-emotional development of children with speech and language disorders will greatly help overcome these problems. This study was conducted to describe language development and socio-emotional behavior in children with speech delays caused by the use of gadgets, early detection of language and speech development problems, intervention programs carried out, and academic and social-emotional development of children with speech and language disorders. The research was based on observations of a 9-year-old child, conducted from September 2018 to January 2019, with data collection since 2012 when language and speech disorders were early detected. The research applied a qualitative approach, with a case study method, while the data collection was through observation, interviews, and documentary studies. This study’s findings showed that the socio-emotional behavior caused by the influence of the gadget use had a major effect on children's development with speech delay problems; thus, an appropriate intervention program is needed for the family and environment. These results have implications for helping children with language and speech problems, not only being strictly allowed to use gadgets but also directed to obtain stimuli to reduce excessive socio-emotional levels in these children.

This study aimed to identify the psychological and social effects of students with speech and language disorders from the point of view of specialists and ways to address them in the West Bank governorates, as well as to identify the role of the study variables, and to achieve the goal of the study a questionnaire was developed and its sincerity and stability factor were confirmed, and after an operation the collection of questionnaires was encoded and entered to the computer. The computer was used to analyze the data by the statistical packages program. The study reached the following results: 1. The stability coefficient (93%), which is an excellent stability coefficient that meets the objectives of the study. 2. The size of the study sample for speech therapy centers was 25 3. The percentage of psychological and social effects on students with speech and language disorders from the point of view of specialists and ways of treating them in the Nablus governorate (74%) is high. 4. It was found that there are no statistically significant differences in there are no statistically significant differences at the level of significance (a≤0.05) psychological and social effects on students with speech and language disorders from the point of view of the specialists and ways to address them in the Nablus governorate due to the variable of gender, age, specialization Scientific. Based on the Results of the Study, the Researcher Recommends the Following Recommendations: 1. The need to pay attention to the role of parental treatment methods in developing linguistic development among children as a priority, by holding courses for parents, to train them on how to deal with their children in building linguistic growth. 2. The teacher education programs in universities include courses related to the detection of speech and speech disorders, and how to deal with them. 3. Caring for group school activities, especially in the field of sports activities, committees, and school radio

The purpose of this study is to determine the implementation of the adaptive curriculum in inclusive schools in Surakarta. The adaptive curriculum is a curriculum developed to accommodate the needs of children with special needs with various backgrounds and abilities, with the aim that the curriculum pays more attention to the diversity of students and can create learning that is relevant to their abilities and needs. This research was conducted at four inclusive schools in the city of Surakarta, namely SDN Bromantakan, SDN Pajang I, SDN Kartodipuran, and SDN Wiropaten I. The research subjects were teachers who taught at inclusive schools totaling 33 respondents. Data collection techniques used are interviews and closed questionnaires. The data analysis technique used in this study is qualitative data analysis according to Miles and Huberman. This analysis model consists of three steps, namely data reduction, data presentation, and concluding. The findings of this study indicate that teachers at inclusive schools in the city of Surakarta have implemented an adaptive curriculum in the form of duplication, modification, omission, and substitution models, while escalation is not enforced because schools providing inclusive education in the city of Surakarta do not have students gifted and talented.

BackgroundA patient suffering from a neurodegenerative disease may demonstrate various combinations of dysarthria, aphasia, and apraxia. Besides, a speech disorder can be a primary and dominant sign (primary progressive aphasia or apraxia), or can develop secondarily as part of general clinical picture. No unified approach to classification and diagnostics of various speech disorder forms has been developed to date. Aim: to study speech disorders in various forms of neurodegenerative diseases, to assess common structure, clinical‐neuroimaging heterogeneity, and to develop a unified algorithm for differential diagnosis.Method1008 patients with neurodegenerative diseases were included in the study by continuous sampling of consultant practice specializing in neurodegenerations: 234 AD, 118 DLB, 62 FTD (behavior and language variants), 366 PD, 22 PSP, 14 CBS, and 292 patients with unspecified and other forms of neurodegenerative pathology. All patients were screened for cortical speech disorders (pure dysarthria was not considered). Patients demonstrating speech and language disorders were tested using the speech disorder assessment test battery we have developed. Structural MRI was performed for all the patients with speech and language disorders to assess ROI.Resultspeech and language disorders were identified in 41% of patients in aggregate group, 78% of AD, 48% of DLB, 31% of PD, 82% of FTD, 64% of PSP, and 96% of CBS patients. Based on the detailed speech assessment battery in aggregate group of all the neurodegenerative diseases 7 subtypes of speech and language disorders were highlighted by means of cluster analysis (Figure 1), principal component method allowed to identify the most significant tests for differentiation of these forms. Aphasia forms and neurodegenerative diseases forms were matched using multinomial logistic regression (Figure 2). We identified the main ROI for all subtypes (Figure 3)Conclusionspeech disorders in patients with neurodegenerative diseases have a specific structure with clinical‐neuroimaging heterogeneity, which allowed to develop a unified algorithm for differential diagnosis.

Distance education is an organized educational process that bridges the separation between students and educators mediated by the use of technology and minimal face-to-face meetings. Distance education evolved from correspondent education to education through e-learning across time and space. Currently, in Indonesia, even in all countries in the world there is an outbreak of Covid-19 which results in learning in the field of education having to change from face-to-face learning to distance learning. The purpose of this study was to determine how the effect of distance learning for children with special needs in inclusive schools in the new era of normality. The method used in this research is qualitative research with online interview data collection techniques, documentation, and literature studies related to children with special needs during the COVID 19 pandemic. Qualitative data analysis was carried out through the stages of data reduction, data presentation, concluding, and verification. Based on the purposive random sampling technique, this study involved 15 informants consisting of classroom teachers and Special Advisors from 12 inclusive schools in all districts in the Special Region of Yogyakarta. The results of the study revealed that distance learning which is applied in inclusive elementary schools in Yogyakarta is learning that is carried out online by utilizing various learning media both using the internet network and not Course materials are distributed online, communicated also carried out online, and all forms of examinations are also carried out online. The result of implementing distance learning in inclusive elementary schools is that learning the Indonesian language that is carried out remotely has a positive effect in the form of increased mastery of reading, listening, writing, and speaking competencies for children with special needs during the Covid-19 pandemic. The learning component that has the most influence is the selection of the learning media used. The more interactive the media used, the more effective the learning outcomes obtained by students. Even though online learning also encountered some obstacles, teachers continued to strive to improve the effectiveness of distance learning for children with special needs by collaborating with parents or guardians of students.

You have accessThe ASHA LeaderFeature1 Dec 2008Speech and Language “Mythbusters” for Internationally Adopted Children Sharon GlennenPhD, CCC-SLP Sharon Glennen Google Scholar More articles by this author , PhD, CCC-SLP https://doi.org/10.1044/leader.FTR1.13172008.10 SectionsAbout ToolsAdd to favorites ShareFacebookTwitterLinked In Eleven years ago the adoption of my 17-month-old son from Russia started an unexpected journey into international adoption research. His initial attempts to learn English were perplexing. Words were often unintelligible with a unique phonological rule system that didn’t match any textbook patterns. Although his language comprehension developed rapidly, his expressive language was unusual. Despite having more than 150 words in his vocabulary, he rarely combined them. As a concerned mother I combed the literature for information about speech and language development in internationally adopted children. Back then most of the “evidence” was a collection of anecdotal reports that painted a less-than-rosy, and at times quite scary, picture of his future. Evidence-based information was limited to studies of children adopted from Romania that were conducted by Eleanor Ames and her colleagues, and Michael Rutter and his colleagues. Although the information was important, their studies did not specifically examine speech and language. Thus my son’s issues planted the seeds that led to a line of research focused on speech and language development in internationally adopted children (Glennen, 2005; Glennen 2007; Glennen in press; Glennen & Masters, 2002). Since then, other colleagues including Jennifer Roberts, Kathleen Scott, Deborah Hwa-Froelich, Karen Pollock, Rena Krakow, and Jennifer Windsor have added to the growing body of research about speech and language development and disorders in internationally adopted children. Many professionals, however, aren’t familiar with this information. In our house the Discovery Channel series “Mythbusters” is a family favorite. Each episode takes popular myths based in history, legend, movies, or news and uses evidence to prove the myths as true, plausible, or busted. With 10 years of research regarding the speech and language abilities of internationally adopted children, it’s time to do some “myth-busting” of our own. What follows is a list of common myths about international adoption and speech and language. I confess that I once believed most of them, provided professional advice based on them, and wrote about some of them in early publications (Glennen, 2002). However, it’s time to set the record straight. We need to use evidence, not myths, to make clinical decisions about speech and language for internationally adopted children. Myth 1: Internationally adopted children need many years to fully “catch up” in English language acquisition. Evidence: The majority of internationally adopted children have rapid language-learning that begins within a few days of arriving home. After one year home, children adopted under the age of 24 months develop English language comprehension, production, and articulation abilities that are well within normal limits using standard norms (Glennen, 2007; see Figure 1 [PDF]). This rate of progress does not mean it takes only one year to develop full language potential; in fact, skills keep improving during the preschool years, especially in the area of expressive syntax. However, the initial surge of language “catch-up” occurs rapidly within the first year home. We know less about children adopted at older ages, but preliminary data indicate equally rapid rates of language learning. Within one year of adoption, most children adopted as 2-year-olds score within normal limits on English language tests of comprehension and expression (Glennen, in press; see Figure 2 [PDF]). Children adopted as 3- and 4-year-olds also score within normal limits on English language comprehension measures after one year, but take more time to develop expressive language abilities fully in English. More research is needed to fully understand these issues; significant English language delays after the first two years home, however, appear to be rare and should be treated as true language or speech disorders. Myth 2: Early environmental deprivation results in severe, lifelong language-learning disorders. Evidence: Adoption helps to counteract the effects of orphanage care. Orphanages are not good places to raise children. Children who remain in orphanages have significant language delays and the length of stay correlates highly with poor cognitive and language abilities (Johnson, 2000; O’Connor et al., 2000; Rutter et al., 1998; Miller, 2005; Windsor, Glaze, Koga, & the Bucharest Early Intervention Project Core Group, 2007). At birth the range of potential language abilities for all children falls along the normal curve. Some children have the potential to develop exceptional language skills; others have less potential. When children enter orphanages, environmental and nutritional deprivation gradually erodes their potential. The poorer the level of care, and the longer the length of institutionalization, the more potential in the area of language ability is lost. The result is a group of children who still have language abilities arrayed into a normal curve, but the curve has shifted downward. While many children will still fall within the “normal range,” lost potential translates into proportionately more children falling below average. Once potential is lost, the more important question is whether it can be regained when the environment improves. Research indicates that many children raised in orphanages have permanent neurobiological changes related to chronic stress within their environment (Gunnar & Quevedo, 2007; Miller, 2005). Chronic abnormal stress reactions lead to overproduction of cortisol and high levels of glucocorticoids in the brain. Prolonged exposure to glucocorticoids leads to structural changes in the brain, primarily the hippocampus, which is important for memory storage and retrieval. Other areas of the brain affected by abnormal regulation of glucocorticoids include the frontal lobe, responsible for executive function and abstract thinking; the cingulate gyrus, responsible for attention and self-control; and the amygdala, responsible for processing emotions. However, some children are genetically more resilient to the neurobiological effects of stress and are not as affected by the orphanage environment (Gunnar & Quevedo). In addition, the neurobiology of stress reactions responds to improvements in the environment, such as adoption into a nurturing home with consistent caregivers (Gunnar & Quevedo). Adoption goes a long way to counteract lost potential resulting from environmental deprivation. The majority of infants and toddlers adopted into American homes have mild to low-average delays when they first arrive, but make incredible progress during the first years at home (Glennen, 2005; Glennen 2007; Roberts et al., 2005). The incidence of speech and language disorders in children adopted before age 2 is 22% (Glennen, 2007). Although this rate is higher than the 2%–8% reported in the general preschool population (Law, Boyle, Harris, Harkness, & Nye, 2000), the overwhelming majority of internationally adopted children who are adopted before age 2 have normal English language abilities after one year home (Glennen, 2007; Roberts et al., 2005). Internationally adopted children who do not meet this benchmark have true disorders, and need to be diagnosed and treated. Myth 3:The child’s first language will affect aspects of learning the new adopted language. Evidence: Studies of internationally adopted children under age 2 have found that the first language has no inhibitory or facilitory effect on learning a new language or its phonology. Young children transitioning from Russian to English learned English-language morphological structures in the same developmental sequence as children who spoke English their entire lives (Glennen, Rosinsky-Grunhut, & Tracy, 2005). Children transitioning from Mandarin to English developed the English sound system similarly (Pollack & Price, 2005). Finally, children adopted from China learned vocabulary in patterns typical for children who spoke English (Snedecker, Geren, & Shafto, 2007). The children in these studies were all adopted under the age of 2 and likely did not have a well-developed first-language base to affect English-language learning. Based on my clinical experience, children adopted at older ages do show signs of interference and facilitation between the birth and adoptive languages. However, it is unknown whether they follow the same patterns as bilingual children or if they transition differently from one language to another. Functional MRI studies of adults who were internationally adopted as children confirm that adult adoptees no longer recognize nor understand their first language, even those who were adopted at school age (Pallier et al., 2003). However, the same fMRI studies also confirm that internationally adopted adults process their new adopted language using different areas of the brain than those of native-language speakers. Myth 4: Internationally adopted children are bilingual and should be treated like other second-language learners. Evidence: Internationally adopted children are bilingual only for a short period of time after adoption. Because most adoptive parents do not speak the child’s birth language (L1), children quickly lose their abilities in that language. According to Gindis (2003), children adopted at ages 3–4 lose most expressive use of L1 within six to 12 weeks of adoption; receptive abilities are lost within 16–22 weeks. At that point, internationally adopted children are monolingual in English, but the language is not yet fully acquired. Children who are adopted at older ages are especially affected because they begin school soon after arriving home. If they struggle academically, it is difficult to assess speech or language disorders validly until English develops further. By then, valuable intervention time is lost. Parents adopting children older than 3 years are advised to gather information about their child’s speech and language development during the adoption process. If there are reported concerns in the birth country, the educational team should consider conducting an assessment and begin to provide supports within the classroom soon after the child arrives home. Myth 5: Most internationally adopted children do well at young ages but have language-related academic difficulties in the elementary grades. Evidence: Most children adopted before age 2 have normal language abilities during the preschool years, and continue to have normal literacy and academic language abilities at school age; data on speech and language are mixed in school-age internationally adopted children. Initial teacher survey data by Dalen and Rygvold (2006) found that internationally adopted children from poor countries with third-world health care systems had worse “academic language” than nonadopted children. In contrast, children adopted from countries with good health care and economic resources were equal to—if not better than—nonadopted children. Recent assessments of children adopted at young ages from China indicate that by school age, most are performing at average to above-average levels on literacy measures (Scott, Roberts, & Krakow, 2008). Similarly, parent-reported data on children adopted at young ages from Eastern Europe found that by school age, 80% were in regular education classrooms without accommodations (Glennen& Bright, 2005). However, the same parents reported that 27% of the children were receiving speech and language intervention. One crucial factor across all studies of school-age children is the child’s age at adoption. Parent-reported data on children adopted at 3–6 years of age from Eastern Europe found that after five years home, 57% of girls and 82% of boys were diagnosed with communication disorders (Beverly, McGuiness, & Blanton, 2008). Similarly, Dalen and Rygvold (2006) found that children adopted from Colombia at older ages were more likely to have poor academic language abilities at school age than children adopted at younger ages. It is clear that children adopted at older ages are more susceptible to risk factors that impede speech and language development; more longitudinal data will help determine whether those risk factors cause a temporary gap in speech and language development or indicate a real difference in language abilities. The important fact is that most children adopted before age 2 have normal language abilities during the preschool years, and continue to have normal literacy and academic language abilities at school age. Internationally adopted children who experience difficulty with higher-level academic language tasks should be assessed and provided with appropriate supports and services based on assessment results. Myth 6: Internationally adopted children require unique speech and language diagnosis and intervention methods. Evidence: When children first arrive home, they should be assessed using methods based on guidelines developed for internationally adopted children (Glennen, 2007). Newly arrived infants and toddlers can be assessed reliably using measures of prelinguistic abilities such as vocalizations, gestures, and social pragmatic abilities (see Table 1 [PDF]). Children adopted at 12–24 months of age who initially scored within normal limits on the Communication and Symbolic Behavior Scales-Developmental Profile (Wetherby&Prizant, 2002) did well when reassessed one year later. Conversely, all but one of the children who initially scored below normal limits continued to have poor language and speech abilities one year later. The rate at which a child learns to comprehend new words is also important to consider when assessing newly arrived children (Glennen, 2007). Children who learn to comprehend new words rapidly do better than children who learn new words at a slower rate. Surprisingly, the rate of learning to express new words is not as predictive when children first arrive home. The guidelines in Table 1 [PDF] are useful for newly arrived children; however, after one year at home children adopted before age 2 can be assessed using standard English language procedures. The exception is measures of expressive syntax such as mean length of utterance (MLU). We have found that expressive syntax and morphology require additional time to develop in internationally adopted children and are not reliable measures of language abilities until children are age 4 (see Figure 1 [PDF]). Although the children catch up quickly in vocabulary—including expressive vocabulary—measures of MLU, sentence repetition, and morphology elicitation tasks indicate that expressive syntax and morphology take longer to develop to English-language norm levels. We can rule out processing difficulties as the cause of these delays because the same children score well on tasks that assess comprehension of complex directions and that test syntax and morphological comprehension. In contrast to infants and toddlers, children adopted at older ages are difficult to assess when they first arrive. Although solid guidelines for younger children help differentiate English language-learning issues from speech-language disorders, there are no similar guidelines for older children. The spoken language abilities of older children can’t be validly assessed because there is no proficient language. However, preliminary evidence based on a small number of children who were adopted between the ages of 2 and 4 indicates they can be assessed using most standard English-language comprehension measures after one year home (Glennen, in press). Expressive language emerges more slowly; children adopted at ages 3 and 4 can be assessed using expressive language measures two years after adoption (see Figure 2 [PDF]). If it is determined that a child has a speech or language delay, the process of making a diagnosis and developing intervention plans is identical to that for any other child. The internationally adopted children I follow (Glennen, 2005, 2007) provide an example of this process. One year after adoption, 22% of the children had delays in speech, language, or both. They had a variety of diagnoses including global developmental delays, expressive language delay, receptive language delay, autism, and phonological disorders. In summary, there was no unique “international adoption speech and language disorder” or unique intervention. Speech and language intervention should target each child’s diagnosis and symptoms, not the adoption status. Myth 7: Now that evidence-based information is available, professionals are making better decisions about speech and language in internationally adopted children. Evidence: Some SLPs are unaware of current research and do not use it in making treatment decisions. From 54% to 68% of internationally adopted children are referred for speech and language assessments, and 35%–50% receive intervention (Glennen, 2007; Glennen& Masters, 2002; Mason &Narad, 2005), a rate higher than the incidence of disorders in this population (22%). During the first year home, 17 of 27 (68%) newly adopted toddlers followed in my research were assessed for speech and language by early intervention teams (Glennen, 2007). Thirteen of the children (48%) were then seen for speech and language intervention. This group included five of the six children who were later diagnosed with language and speech delays—but it also included eight children who developed normal language. According to prelinguistic language assessments conducted when the children were first adopted, these eight did not need treatment; however, their parents sought services anyway. Although those children surely benefited from the intervention, many of them were functioning at the top of their peer group when they were first adopted, and continued to develop language at a rate that surpassed their peers. Reports about services for older internationally adopted children also cause concern. One child in my longitudinal study was adopted from Eastern Europe at age 4. By second grade she was struggling academically and her parents requested a school-based assessment. School officials insisted the child be tested in her birth language. The parents protested this decision, as the child had neither heard nor spoken the language for four years. They noted that the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act requires assessment in the child’s primary language and maintained that the birth language was no longer primary. Their protest delayed the assessment process until the case was finally brought to the attention of the head of English as a second language services, who asked the school to proceed with English-language testing. My son had a true expressive language and phonological disorder that required treatment, and he received the early language intervention he needed. However, some internationally adopted children are put on “wait and see” protocols for extended periods of time, or referred to programs for non-English speakers that fail to meet their extensive language-learning needs. Conversely, other children receive services even when they excel on every language measure given (Glennen, 2007). It’s time to stop providing services based on anecdotes and myths, and instead to make clinical decisions for internationally adopted children based on research. Portions of this article were previously published as Glennen, S. (2007). International adoption speech and language mythbusters. Perspectives on Communication Disorders and Sciences in Culturally and Linguistically Diverse Populations: American-Speech-Language Hearing Association Division 14 Newsletter, 14(3), 3–8. Additional References Ames E. (1997) The Development of Romanian Children Adopted into Canada: Final Report. Burnaby, B.C.: Simon Fraser University. Funded by National Welfare Grants. Google Scholar Beverly B., McGuiness T., & Blanton D. (2008). Communication and academic challenges in early adolescence for children adopted from the former Soviet Union.Language, Speech and Hearing Services in Schools, 39, 303–313. Google Scholar Dalen M., & Rygvold A. L. (2006). Educational achievement in adopted children from China.Adoption Quarterly, 9, 45–58. CrossrefGoogle Scholar Gindis B. (2003). What should adoptive parents know about their child’s language-based school difficulties?, Retrieved May 28, 2007, from Post-Adoption Learning Center, Retrieved May 28, 2007, from http://www.adoptionarticlesdirectory.com/Article/What-should-adoptive-parents-know-about-their-children-s-language-based-school-difficulties---Part-1-/5. Google Scholar Glennen S. (2002). Language development and delay in international adoption: A review.American Journal of Speech Language Pathology, 11, 333–339. LinkGoogle Scholar Glennen S. (2005). New arrivals: Speech and language assessment for internationally adopted infants and toddlers within the first months home.Seminars in Speech and Language, 26, 10–21. Google Scholar Glennen S. (2007). Predicting language outcomes for internationally adopted children.Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 50, 529–548. LinkGoogle Scholar Glennen S. (in press). Speech and language guidelines for children adopted from abroad at older ages.Topics in Language Disorders. Google Scholar Glennen S., & Bright B. (2005). Five years later: Language in school-age internationally adopted children.Seminars in Speech and Language, 26, 86–101. CrossrefGoogle Scholar Glennen S., & Masters G. (2002). Typical and atypical language development in infants and toddlers adopted from Eastern Europe.American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 11, 417–433. LinkGoogle Scholar Glennen S., Rosinsky-Grunhut A., & Tracy R. (2005). Linguistic interference between L1 and L2 in internationally adopted children.Seminars in Speech and Language, 26, 64–75. CrossrefGoogle Scholar Johnson D. E. (2000). Medical and developmental sequelae of early childhood institutionalization in Eastern European adoptees.In Nelson C.A. (Ed.), The Minnesota symposia on child psychology:The effects of early adversity on neurobehavioral development (Vol. 31, pp.113–162). Minnesota Symposium on Child Psychology. Google Scholar Law J., Boyle J., Harris F., Harkness A., & Nye C. (2000). Prevalence and natural history of primary speech and language delay: Findings from a systematic review of the literature.International Journal of Language and Communication Disorders, 35(2),165–188. CrossrefGoogle Scholar Mason P., & Narad C. (2005). International adoption: A health and developmental prospective.Seminars in Speech and Language, 26, 1–9. CrossrefGoogle Scholar Miller L. (2005). The Handbook of International Adoption Medicine. New York: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar O’Connor T. G., Rutter M., Beckett C., Keaveney L., Kreppner J. M., & theEnglish and Romanian Adoptees Study Team (2000). The effects of global severe privation on cognitive competence: Extension and longitudinal follow-up.Child Development, 71, 376–390. Google Scholar Pallier C., Dehaene S., Poline J., LeBihan D., Argenti A., Dupoux E., & Mehler J. (2003). Brain imaging of language plasticity in adopted adults: Can a second language replace the first?.Cerebral Cortex, 13, 155–161. Google Scholar Pollock K., & Price J. R. (2005). Phonological skills of children adopted from China: Implications for assessment.Seminars in Speech and Language, 26, 54–63. CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar Roberts J., Pollock K., Krakow R., Price J., Fulmer K., & Wang P. (2005). Language development in preschool-aged children adopted from China.Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 48, 93–107. LinkGoogle Scholar Rutter M., & The English and Romanian Adoptees Study Team (1998). Developmental catch-up and deficit following adoption after severe global early privation.Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 39, 465–476. Google Scholar Scott K., Roberts J., & Krakow R. (2008). Oral and written language development of children adopted from China.American Journal of Speech Language Pathology, 17, 150–160. LinkGoogle Scholar J., J., & C. (2007). International adoption as a natural in language CrossrefGoogle Scholar A., & B. (2002). Communication and Developmental Google Scholar Windsor J., L., S., & Early Intervention Project Core (2007). Language with limited Romanian and of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 50, LinkGoogle Scholar Sharon Glennen, PhD, is and of the of Speech Language and Studies at University. adopted two children from her at Additional to in Dec times & American

Developmental speech and language disorders are common, seen in one in 20 preschool children, in the absence of frank neurological deficits or intellectual impairment. They are a key reason parents seek help from paediatricians. Complex neurogenetic and environmental contributions underpin the disorders, yet few specific causes are known. With the advent of quantitative brain imaging, a growing number of studies have investigated neural contributions. Here, we discuss current MRI approaches and recent findings (January 2014-June 2016) in the field. Five relevant studies were identified (n = 3 - speech disorder and n = 2 - language disorder). Significant variability in MRI approaches and heterogeneity of participant phenotypes was seen. Children with speech disorder had structural and functional anomalies in the left supramarginal gyrus and functional anomalies in the posterior cerebellum bilaterally - regions critical for sensory-motor integration or feedback. Children with language disorder showed increased mean and radial diffusivity of the left arcuate fasciculus, although a widespread cortical and subcortical network of regions was implicated. Limited evidence exists for specific regional brain anomalies in this population. MRI prognostic markers of speech and language ability are not currently available at an individual level. Further work is required to disentangle neurobiological contributions to speech and language disorders for affected children.

The main obstacle of children with special needs to advance is access to education as high as possible not to the disability, but to social acceptance of the community. This study aims 1) To determine the acceptability of children with special needs in the inclusive elementary school environment. It includes principals, teachers, learners, and parents. 2) To determine the factors those influence the acceptance of children with special needs in the inclusive elementary school environment. This is an interactive qualitative research. The research site is Wirosaban Elementary School, Yogyakarta City. Data collection techniques are interviews, observation and documentation. Data analysis technique is analytic descriptive data analysis. The results show: 1) Acceptability of children with special needs in inclusive school environment is quite good after going through various processes. School trying to accept children with special needs even though the school realized its service on some things still not maximal 2) There are four factors that affect the school environment perception of children with special needs. These factors are: knowledge and insight factor on inclusive education, b. environmental support factor outside the school, c. facilities factor, d. the persistence factor of the guardians of the special needs students.

This study was conducted to examine speech and language disorders in preschool children and to reveal the problems encountered in this direction. The research was conducted with 34 preschool teachers working in Mardin in the 2023-2024 academic year, who were diagnosed with speech and language disorders in their classrooms. The study was conducted within the scope of phenomenological design, one of the qualitative research methods. According to the results of the study, it was concluded that speech and language disorders are more common in boys than in girls. It has been observed that language and developmental disorders in the preschool period are common in children between the ages of 60-71 months. In the study, it was determined that preschool teachers and families have a critical role in diagnosing children with speech and language disorders and monitoring the process. It was seen that it is critical to include all stakeholders in the process by implementing an accurate, effective intervention and support program, both at school and at home, for students with speech and language difficulties to overcome this problem. Early detection of speech and language disorders and timely intervention will contribute positively to language development and increase speaking skills by minimizing the effects of SLD. It was observed that the expert support received by students with SLD and the adaptations made by the teacher in the classroom had a positive effect on language development.

<p>The purpose of this study was to determine the differences in shadow teachers’ pedagogical competence in terms of academic qualification. This research method used is comparative quantitative. The research involved two groups: the special education graduate group and the non-Special Education graduate group. The subjects of this study were 15 Shadow teachers with Special Education graduates and 23 Shadow Teachers with non-Special Education graduates spread across 19 elementary schools, including the city of Surakarta.Data collection techniques using the saturated sample method. The instrument used is a pedagogic competency scale with a reliability value of 0.905. In the shadow teacher group with Special Education graduates, 14 respondents were in the very high category, and 1 respondent was in the high category, with the highest score being 179 points and the lowest score being 136 points. Whereas in the shadow teacher group with non-Special Education graduates, 13 respondents were in the high category, and 10 respondents were in the high category, with the highest score of 170 points and the lowest score of 130 points. The analysis in this study used the Man Whitney-U test. The Mann-Whitney-U test shows the value Ucount = 0.220, which is U<sub>Count</sub>>U <sub>table</sub> (U<sub>tabel </sub>= 0.05). Research results conclude that there is no significant difference between the pedagogical competence of teachers with special education and non-special education graduates.</p>