SHS 431 1st EditionFinal Study Guide Week: 1-13Ten principles of grammatical intervention for children with SLI.1. The basic goal of all grammatical interventions should be to help the child to achieve greater facilityin the comprehension and use of syntax and morphology in the service of conversation, narration, exposition, and other textual genres in both written and oral modalities.2. Grammatical form should rarely, if ever, be the only aspect of language and communication that is targeted in a language intervention program.3. Select intermediate goals in an effort to stimulate the child’s language acquisition processes rather than to teach specific language forms.4. The specific goals of grammatical intervention must be based on the child’s “functional readiness” and need for the targeted forms.5. Manipulate the social, physical, and linguistic context to create more frequent opportunities for grammatical targets.6. Exploit different textual genres and the written modality to develop appropriate contexts for specific intervention targets.7. Manipulate the discourse so that targeted features are rendered more salient in pragmatically felicitous contexts.8. Systematically contrast forms used by the child with more mature forms from the adult grammar, using sentence recasts. 9. Avoid telegraphic speech, always presenting grammatical models in well-formed phrases and sentences.10. Use elicited imitation to make target forms more salient and to give the child practice with phonological patterns that are difficult to access or produce.Cleave and Fey (1997)Existing structures/New structures:-For an existing structure to be considered as a direct target for treatment (i.e., a specific goal), it had to have been omitted in more than half of the contexts in which it was judged to be obligatoryor rarely or never used in contexts in which it could have been used to positive effect. -For a new structure to be considered, the child minimally had to provide evidence of a cognitive/semantic readiness and a communicative need for the structure. This typically came in the form of sentences in which a required form was consistently omitted or in failure to use developmentally appropriate forms judged to be important for communicative success, such as phrasal and clausal post modifiers (e.g., the dog in the window; the dog that barks).Focused Stimulation:-Focused stimulation was the basic approach used in both the clinician-directed and parent-directed treatment programs. With focused stimulation, the interventionist provides a high density of a targetlanguage form or operation in a variety of semantically and pragmatically appropriate contexts. The child is not required to respond at any point in time. However, efforts are made to arrange the linguisticand non-linguistic contexts to encourage the child to attempt the target form. -In both programs, natural conversation between the child and the intervention agent was the contextfor intervention. Care was taken to ensure that the various procedures were used in pragmaticallyappropriate contexts. In addition, target structures were contrasted with related structures to highlightthe semantic and syntactic features of the target. For example, when targeting nominative case pronouns, accusative case forms would be modeled in close proximity (e.g., Give it to him. He needs it). The goal of intervention was for the children to learn the underlying language rule(s) that governthe use of their target structures, rather than isolated language behaviors. To achieve this, it was necessary to demonstrate the critical circumstances under which a target form is and isnot used. By presenting both target and contrasting forms together, these circumstances werehighlighted, thus (potentially) simplifying the rule induction for the child.-Modeling the Targets. There were many ways in which the correct use of a target was demonstrated to the child. Simple modeling involved the use of a target by the adult that was not contingent on a child’s attempt at the target. It was used to demonstrate the range of appropriate uses of target structures. The linguistic context was manipulated so that the target was modeled in contexts in whichit might be most readily perceived and analyzed, for example, sentence initial position or elliptical contexts. The following exchange demonstrates modeling of the target will while mixing up some juice.Child: We need water.Adult: Will you get some?Child: Yeah.Adult: You will?Good. Then I will get the glasses.Cyclical Goal Attack:-Under this approach, one goal is worked on for a specified period of time, for example, 1 or 2 weeks. Then, regardless of whether any progress is demonstrated, the second goal is targeted in the second period. Goal 3 is the focus of the third period, goal 4 the fourth, and so on, until all goals have been targeted. After completion of the first cycle, a second cycle is begun with goal 1. When a goal is attained, it is dropped or combined with an existing target and a new goal may beadded to the cycle.-There were three rationales for the choice of a cyclical goal attack strategy. First, this strategy is basedon the assumption that progress on any language goal will be gradual. Children can be taught to produce a new form in a relatively short period of time. However, the net result of such teaching frequently is not the language rule the clinician intended to teach. Second, the cyclical goal attack strategy allows the child to be actively engaged in learning more than one target at a time. Not only is this how normal language acquisition occurs, it is also critical for the assumptions underlying the choice of intermediate goals. It seems more likely that a child will note the grammatical similarities and the semantic differences between two related specific goals if they are targeted together or in close temporal proximity rather than working on one goal to mastery before focusing on the related goal. The third rationale is that the cyclical goal attack strategy allows the clinician to present fairly concentrated “doses” of the target during the period when it is the focus. The fact that only one goal is focused on at a time also has some practical advantages. During group sessions, the clinician never has to target more than one goal per child in any one session. It also may be easier for parents learning new techniques to focus on one goal at a time rather than learning to employ the