Date of this Version
Thesis (M.A.)—University of Nebraska—Lincoln, 1952. Department of Speech and Dramatic Art.
Numerous attempts have been made in the United States to diagnose and treat speech defective children. The work has been done largely through the facilities of University clinics and in the public and private schools. This is as true of Nebraska as it is throughout the nation. The University of Nebraska speech clinic, with records available since 1940, is the only one in the state that has been in continuous operation over a period of time. A historical analysis of the services rendered by the clinic should give a partial picture of the speech problems of Nebraska. It should also reveal what the University speech clinic has been able to do for the speech defective children of Nebraska.
This study has attempted (1) to record a history of the services given by the clinic; (2) to obtain a description of the type and incidence of the speech defective population served by the clinic; and (3) to assess what the clinic has been able to do for those whom it has served.
It was necessary to consult clinic files, bulletins, individuals, press reports and special publications to obtain the history of the University of Nebraska speech clinic. To obtain a description of the type and incidence of the speech defective population served by the clinic, the individual case records of 5,047 files were consulted. To assess the values or benefits received by those served in the clinic, a questionnaire was constructed and copies sent to one out of every three persons from an alphabetical list of those who were given therapy in the clinic. There were 1,009 persons who had been given therapy, so 337 questionnaires were sent, with 134 replies received.
More specifically, this study attempts to give not only a history of the clinic, but to answer the following questions: (1) How many persons have been referred to the University clinic for diagnosis and recommendations? (2) How many persons have been given therapy in the clinic? (3) What is the incidence of each type of defect? (4) What is the ratio of males and females with speech defects as served by the clinic? (5) What is the trend in the use of the clinic facilities? (6) To what extent did those receiving therapy feel that they had benefited from the therapy as shown on questionnaire returns? (7) Had those receiving questionnaires received other training? (8) Did persons receiving the questionnaires feel that their speech was satisfactory or needing further work at the present time? (9) What age represented in the questionnaire replies benefited most from work in the clinic? (10) What was the average amount of time spent in rehabilitation as represented in the replies, and (11) What type of defectives receiving questionnaires felt that they had received the most benefit from their work in the clinic?
Advisor: John Wiley