Fluency, articulation, and voice disorders are different from each other as follows: Fluency disorders reflect gaps in timing and degree of rhyme or meter in which one flows with words; it does not reflect difficulty creating intelligible sounds or relate to sound quality. Articulation disorder is illustrated by how one does not independently put the smallest units of sounds known as phonemes, and differing combinations of them together when attempting to speak to others; timing, and rhythm are not inherently problematic to this issue. Voice disorders involve deficiencies in resonance, pitch, and intensity; fluency, and articulation may or may not be deficits when this disorder is the case (Vaughn, & Bos 2007).
Fluency, articulation, and voice disorders are similar in that they all, when deficient, impede language; each aspect is interdependent when trying to make meaningful vocalization. Speech, irrespective of different causality, results in disruption of normal expression of verbal language in oral form. These speech disorders often present at age 3 and frequently, with the right speech therapy are no longer issues by age seven. Fluency, articulation, and voice disorders are more common among boys than girls (Vaughn, & Bos 2007).
Students who have fluency, articulation, and voice disorders often feel inferior to those who do not have them in the classroom; they also under perform on an academic basis. Peers usually have less communication with those who are impeded in their oral communication, which leads to isolation from their classmates. Pupils who do not have proper fluency lack the timing in speech necessary to hold listeners’ attention; improper articulation confuses peers as to what they are trying to say to them; poor sound quality of verbal vocalization is often irritating for the listeners. Fluency, articulation, and voice disorders lend themselves to less acceptance of their classmates (Vaughn, & Bos 2007).
Instructors who ignore English as a second language, ESL, or locution from those of different culture, and from far away will tend to wrongly diagnose them with speech disorders. Those who have different fluency, articulation, voice, and other anomalies to their normal language or way of speaking will often struggle with English, or most other secondary languages because the fundamental verbal structure is relatively unfamiliar to them. Those who are not locally raised with English as their primary language may be talking correctly if it were not for needing a new language or locution; teachers where they were from would rightly negate them as having speech disorders. For example, rhythm when speaking in Italian is different than English. While articulation of creating phonemes is different between languages, and parts of the United States, it is new, rather than etiologically caused by incomplete neurological development. Resonance, pitch, and intensity may have appealing prosody of speech in other languages or areas of this nation, while discordant with a given teacher’s oral vocalization (Vaughn, & Bos 2007).
Speech therapists should be invited into classrooms of students who need review as to whether they have speech disorders; teachers of the respective students should invite them into the settings. If students present as having gaps in their ability to speak, an auditory listening screening is recommended by a given speech therapist as standard of practice. Further, people who appear to be deficient in vocal expression should have their parents or guardians consulted about this; instructors should find an agreement with them as to whether further testing and speech therapy should take place. Sample recordings, made by the teacher, of speech and attempts to communicate with other students should take place in the classroom. Instructors who spend proportionately more time correcting communication shortcoming of learners, should also have them reviewed with a speech therapist . Lack of focus, inability to answer lesson questions, and not presenting as having a general sense of what is being taught as a subject are all shortcomings in language that should be core parts to the basis in which teachers identify communication disorders (Vaughn, & Bos 2007).
References
Vaughn, S., & Bos, C. (2007). Response to Intervention: Developing Success for All Learners. In Teaching students who are exceptional, diverse, and at risk in the general education classroom (4th ed., p. 182to 188). Boston: Pearson Allyn & Bacon.
Vaughn, S., & Bos, C. (2007). Response to Intervention: Developing Success for All Learners. In Teaching students who are exceptional, diverse, and at risk in the general education classroom (4th ed., p. 182to 189). Boston: Pearson Allyn & Bacon.
Vaughn, S., & Bos, C. (2007). Response to Intervention: Developing Success for All Learners. In Teaching students who are exceptional, diverse, and at risk in the general education classroom (4th ed., p. 182to 188). Boston: Pearson Allyn & Bacon.
Vaughn, S., & Bos, C. (2007). Response to Intervention: Developing Success for All Learners. In Teaching students who are exceptional, diverse, and at risk in the general education classroom (4th ed., p. 185to 189). Boston: Pearson Allyn & Bacon.
Vaughn, S., & Bos, C. (2007). Response to Intervention: Developing Success for All Learners. In Teaching students who are exceptional, diverse, and at risk in the general education classroom (4th ed., p. 185 to 204). Boston: Pearson Allyn & Bacon.
Vaughn, S., & Bos, C. (2007). Response to Intervention: Developing Success for All Learners. In Teaching students who are exceptional, diverse, and at risk in the general education classroom (4th ed., p. 194 to 197). Boston: Pearson Allyn & Bacon.