Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

A Survey of Neuroanatomy/Neurological Function Instruction in ...

477 views

Published on

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

A Survey of Neuroanatomy/Neurological Function Instruction in ...

  1. 1. CONTEMPORARY ISSUES IN COMMUNICATION SCIENCE AND DISORDERS • Volume 28 • 9–19 • Spring 2001 © NSSLHA 9 1092-5171/01/2801-0009 ABSTRACT: The number of presentations with speech/ language content at the annual meetings for the Society for Neuroscience over the past 9 years is reported along with the percentages of neurologically based articles appearing in three speech-language pathology journals over that same time period. A survey was conducted to identify the number of speech-language pathology training programs that provide a neuroanatomy/neurologi- cal function course and to identify the course content offered. Results obtained from 86 institutions yielded a return rate of 43%. Seventy-three percent (73%) of respondents reported offering such a course. Class time spent in a neurological section of head and neck anatomy courses was calculated to be a mode category of 16–20%. The need for higher response rates and the necessity of emphasis on neurological instruction is addressed. KEY WORDS: neuroanatomy/neurological instruction, ASHA-accredited programs I A Survey of Neuroanatomy/ Neurological Function Instruction in ASHA-Accredited Training Programs Christy L. Thompson University of Wyoming, Laramie n 1993, Tallal reported that although the 1990s were declared the “Decade of the Brain” by the U.S. Congress, in 1992, few entries regarding the topics of speech or language were found in the abstract publications of the annual meeting of the Society for Neuroscience. Further investigation into this matter reveals that topics on speech and language were found to appear in increasing numbers in ensuing years, although the percent- age of speech or language entries for the past 9 years continues to be roughly 1/10 of one percent, totaling only .1124% or approximately one entry for every 889 abstracts. Abstracts for 1992 totaled 6, or .0634% of the total abstracts listed for that year. Abstracts for 1993 totaled 16 (.1458%); for 1994, 15 (.1416%); for 1995, 17 (.1367%); for 1996, 17 (.1341%); for 1997, 18 (.1260%); and for 1998, 16 (.1261%). Table 1 presents a complete listing of the number of abstract entries for the annual meeting of the Society of Neuroscience from 1990 to 1998. Although the number of 1998 speech and language entries quadrupled the 1990 total, the numbers remain small. This brings up the question: Is the profession of speech-language pathology contributing enough to the neuroscience literature and to neuroscience training? At this point, a look at neuroscience research within the profession is warranted. Due to (a) the overwhelming number of papers presented at the Annual American Speech- Language and Hearing Association (ASHA) Convention, (b) a lack of sufficient information in the convention abstracts, and (c) the lack of a classification scheme suited to the purpose of detecting all presentations involving neuroscience content, I opted not to count and categorize ASHA Conven- tion presentations from the last decade in a manner compa- rable to that performed for the Society for Neuroscience convention abstracts. I did, however, review professional journals from speech-language pathology. An investigation into the number of neuroscience articles appearing in major speech and language journals reveals the percentage to be much higher than the speech and language percentages determined from the annual conven- tion of the Society for Neuroscience, though it appears that the number of articles could be augmented. In order to demonstrate more specifically the inclusion of neuroscience content, three speech and language journals will be
  2. 2. 10 CONTEMPORARY ISSUES IN COMMUNICATION SCIENCE AND DISORDERS • Volume 28 • 9–19 • Spring 2001 described in terms of the number of neurologically based articles appearing in each volume during the past decade. The periodicals chosen for review were the Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research (JSLHR), Journal of Medical Speech-Language Pathology (JMSLP), and American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology (AJSLP). For purposes of totaling the number of articles containing neuroscience content, the following criteria were used. To be considered an article that addressed neuroscience, one or more of the following categories had to be met: • Subjects could be either normal or disordered speak- ers, but the paper had to be designed to study the neural processes underlying those normal or disor- dered speakers. Studies that included neural implica- tions in the discussion were also included. • Service delivery papers were counted if the authors specifically stated how their method/protocol affected neuromotor or sensory motor functions for speech and language. Table 1. Percentage of speech/language abstracts in Society for Neuroscience Abstracts, 1990–1998. Total Total number Percentage of speech and neuroscience speech/language Year Language entries Speech entries language entries abstracts abstracts 1990 1 3 4 7,994 .0500 1991 2 2 4 9,498 .0421 1992 2 4 6 9,460 .0634 1993 9 7 16 11,066 .1458 1994 10 5 15 10,405 .1416 1995 10 7 17 12,438 .1367 1996 10 7 17 12,673 .1341 1997 18 0 18 14,287 .1260 1998 16 0 16 12,684 .1261 Total 78 35 113 100,505 .1124 Table 2. Percentage of neurologically based speech-language entries in the Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research (JSLHR), 1990–1998. Number of Percentage of neurological Total number articles with Year articles of articles neurological content 1990 15 91 17 1991 18 158 11 1992 15 158 10 1993 12 121 10 1994 16 139 12 1995 12 125 10 1996 19 124 15 1997 15 119 13 1998 10 124 8 Total 132 1159 11 Note. The 1990 volume contained four issues total. The 1991–1998 volumes each contained six issues per year. Table 3. Percentage of neurologically based speech-language entries in the Journal of Medical Speech-Language Pathology (JMSLP), 1993–1998. Number of Percentage of neurological Total number articles with Year articles of articles neurological content 1993 6 26 23 1994 4 32 13 1995 7 23 30 1996 8 26 31 1997 5 25 20 1998 2a 22 9a Total 32 154 21 Note. This journal began in 1993. Each volume contains four issues annually. a One of the issues in this year filled the entire issue with one neurologically based article, resulting in a reduced percentage but actually a greater amount of neuroscience content. • Papers that studied neurologically disordered patients but did not directly relate their findings to neuro- science or neural processes underlying these disorders were not considered. • Articles that related to professional or training issues were not included. • Articles designed to study the nature of neuromotor function, or language, or altered neurological function, as a result of treatment, were included. Over the past nine years, JSLHR contained a range of from 8% to 17% of the articles meeting the above-specified criteria. The results from each volume are presented in Table 2. JMSLP, first published in 1993, was determined to contain a range of from 9% to 31% of the entries as neurologically based articles (Table 3). AJSLP, first published in September of 1991, demonstrated a range of from 0% to 15% as neurologically based articles during the years 1991–1998 (Table 4). Although the journals described
  3. 3. Thompson: Survey of Neurological Instruction in ASHA Programs 11 herein contain a credible number of such articles, it appears that some of the percentages could and should be in- creased. Other journals that may be consulted on this same topic are Brain and Language and Journal of the Acousti- cal Society of America (JASA). A focus on neuroscience issues is of essence in the profession. Expanded knowledge will improve understand- ing of the nature of speech and language issues, including etiological factors and service delivery. Tallal (1993) stated that although major advances had been made in the areas of cognitive neuroscience, the amount of neuroscience research in the area of speech and language appeared to have decreased from the previous two decades. Tallal based this comment on personal experience, recalling that in the 1970s, when she began her scientific career as an experi- mental neuropsychologist, a majority of the research published focused on the study of speech and language. Tallal asserted that the abundance of such research had since declined, stating that “speech and language scientists have virtually missed the ‘Neuroscience Revolution’” (p. 67). A comparison of the numbers of neuroscience articles found in various sources during the previous 30 years was not deemed to be within the breadth of the present article. In light of the purported decrease, Tallal (1993) sug- gested various possibilities for such an occurrence. Among them was the failure of speech-language pathology, and to a lesser extent, audiology curricula to incorporate the field of neuroscience into the academic plan of training pro- grams. Tallal also suggested that the resulting decrease in the number of professionals with a strong neuroscience background may also lead to a lack of such specialization among peer reviewers of grants in the field of speech- language pathology, which could further reduce the possibilities for research in this area. Of additional importance is the need for a solid knowl- edge base in neuroscience for clinical practice in educa- tional and medical settings. Although speech language pathologists have treated neurologically involved patients since the early days of the profession (Frank & Montgom- ery, 1996), the practice of speech-language pathology has continued to develop an even greater need for “expanded and deepened knowledge bases in neurological sciences” (Frank & Montgomery, 1996, p. 27). The participation by speech-language pathologists as significant members of multidisciplinary teams in medical centers dealing with a variety of disorders, including traumatic brain injury, vascular accidents, degenerative neurological diseases, cognitive deficits, and so on, and the complex neurologi- cally involved patients now seen in educational and vocational training settings, require an ever increasing understanding of neuroanatomy/neurological function (Frank & Montgomery, 1996). A fundamental change in the curriculum of training programs that includes an increased emphasis on training in neuroscience was recommended by Tallal (1993). Tallal stated that this is vital for preparation of the “next genera- tion of communication scientists” (p. 69). The availability of non-invasive brain imaging techniques and discoveries in the field of molecular genetics afford the field of speech- language pathology new opportunities for advancement in understanding the nature of communication disorders (Tallal, 1993) and in identifying efficacious treatment. Tallal (1993) suggested that a survey be undertaken to determine the scope of neuroscience content available in various training programs in the field of speech-language pathology and audiology in order to provide information to prospective students interested in neuroscience research. The author stated, “If our field is to move effectively into the 21st century, we must provide the next generation of communication specialists with the tools they will need to play a leadership role in the future development of our science” (p. 74), and further contended that “a significant part of this arsenal of tools must include fundamental training in basic neuroscience” (p. 74). Following a 1991 survey of graduate programs by the Academy of Neurologic Communication Disorders and Sciences (ANCDS), a distinct need for curriculum enhance- ment in “basic neuroscience and neurologically based disorders” (Frank & Montgomery, 1996, p. 27) was identified. In 1997, Hallowell, Bhatnagar, and Kirshner presented rationale and solutions for enhancing neuro- science training across the curricula of speech-language pathologist training programs. The survey presented herein was undertaken to obtain information regarding the number of ASHA-accredited programs that include a specific neuroanatomy/neurological function course in their curricu- lum as well as to provide information regarding course content of such academic offerings. METHOD A 23-item questionnaire concerned with neuroscience instruction at the undergraduate and graduate levels was sent to the department chairpersons of 198 universities in the United States. The topic focused on the amount of and Table 4. Percentage of neurologically based speech-language articles in the American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology (AJSLP), 1991–1998. Number of Percentage of neurological Total number articles with Year articles of articles neurological content 1991 0 10 0 1992 6 39 15 1993 1 38 3 1994 1 44 2 1995 2 64 3 1996 0 35 0 1997 1 48 2 1998 1 39 3 Total 12 317 4 Note. This journal began in September, 1991. Year 1991 had only one issue; years 1992–1994 had three issues annually; years 1995– 1998 had four issues annually.
  4. 4. 12 CONTEMPORARY ISSUES IN COMMUNICATION SCIENCE AND DISORDERS • Volume 28 • 9–19 • Spring 2001 nature of neuroscience content included in the academic curricula of the programs surveyed. Of particular interest was whether the programs offered a separate course in neuroanatomy/neurological function and/or whether such content is included in head and neck anatomy courses of the various programs. Department chairpersons were asked to elicit information from the appropriate instructors to complete the survey. See the Appendix for a copy of the survey. Upon return of the questionnaires, the information was categorized and tallied. Data reported from programs based on a quarter system were converted to a semester time schedule. RESULTS A total of 86 recipients (43%) completed and returned the questionnaire. Questionnaires were received back from 40 of the 47 states that have programs accredited by ASHA and from the District of Columbia. In accordance with ASHA regional divisions (ASHA Internet website, http:// www.professional.asha.org/students/caa_programs/ caaprog.htm), 17% of the programs that responded were from the western states; 17% were from the southwestern states; 24% were from the central states; 15% were from the southern states; 14% were from the Mid-Atlantic states, and 15% were from the northern states. See Table 5 for a complete listing of the states containing programs that participated. The respondents’ answers to questionnaire items are presented in Tables 6 through 11. The following para- graphs present a summary of the findings of the survey. Programs Offering a Separate Neurological Course Regarding programs that offer a separate neuroanatomy/ neurological function course: • Seventy-three percent (73%) of the programs stated that they offer a separate neuroanatomy/neurological function course. Thirty-one percent (31%) of such programs offer the course at the undergraduate level; 41% offer the course at the graduate level. Twenty eight percent (28%) of the respondents that do offer a neurological course provided no information regarding the undergraduate/graduate status of their course. • Twenty-eight percent (28%) of the programs that offer a separate neurological function course stated that the course was required at the undergraduate level. Thirty-seven percent (37%) stated that such a course was required for graduate students. Six percent (6%) replied that a neurological course is offered, but that it is not a required course. Twenty nine percent (29%) did not state whether their course was required or optional. • The number of semester credit hours that programs allotted for their neuroanatomy/neurological function course ranged from 1 to 4 credits, with a mean of 2.9 credit hours, a median of 3, and a mode of 3. See Table 6 for specific information. • Course content for separate neuroanatomy courses included the following: neurology and physiology of the peripheral and central nervous systems, basic neuroanatomy for communication, embryology of the nervous system, blood supply, synaptic transmission, subcortical structures including the basal ganglia and thalamus, the limbic system, reticular system, ven- tricular system, brain imaging, pathological reflexes, motor system, sensory system, auditory pathway, disorders including lesions of the right hemisphere, apraxia, the dysarthrias (child and adult), and trau- matic brain injury. See Table 7 for a complete listing of the topics covered. The most common topics listed were central nervous system, gross and fine brain anatomy, spinal cord, cranial nerves, neurophysiology, blood supply, and motor control. • Regarding the separate neuroanatomy courses: Content that various instructors stated they were not able to cover due to time constraints (but would like to) included pain and temperature tracts in the spinal cord, genetics, brain imaging, primitive reflexes, Table 5. States with programs that responded to the questionnaire (n = 86); listed in accordance with ASHA regional divisions. Western Southwestern Central Southern Mid-Atlantic Northern states states states states states states California Arizona Illinois Georgia District of Columbia Connecticut Idaho Colorado Indiana Alabama Kentucky Massachusetts Nevada Kansas Iowa Arkansas Maryland New Jersey Oregon New Mexico Michigan Florida North Carolina New York Utah Oklahoma Minnesota Louisiana Ohio Pennsylvania Washington Texas Missouri South Carolina Rhode Island Wyoming Nebraska Mississippi North Dakota South Dakota Wisconsin
  5. 5. Thompson: Survey of Neurological Instruction in ASHA Programs 13 sensory systems, neurotransmitters, links between testing and neural organization, neuropharmacology, more in-depth information pertaining to the limbic system, higher mental functions, neuropathology, more brain specimens, autonomic nervous system, embryology of the developing nervous system, more in-depth coverage of cranial nerves, language and the nervous system, clinical cases, cerebral palsy, and all topics in greater depth. See Table 8 for a complete listing. Thirteen (13%) percent of the respondents that do teach a separate neuroanatomy course stated that they are pleased with the course as is and would not add more information. • Regarding programs that require neurological courses from other departments: Sixty-three percent (63%) of the programs that include a neurological course in their curriculum teach the course within their depart- ment. Twenty percent (20%) of the programs that include a neurological course use a course from another department as opposed to teaching the course within their own department. (Fourteen percent [14%] include the neurological course from another department as a required part of their undergraduate program; six percent [6%] include the neurological course from another department as a required part of their graduate program.) Seventeen percent (17%) of the programs that do include a neurological course within their curriculum did not respond as to whether the course was taught within or outside of their department. Inclusion of a Neurological Section in Head and Neck Anatomy Courses Regarding programs that include a neuroanatomy/neurologi- cal function section in their anatomy/physiology of speech or the head and neck anatomy course: • Based on a semester system, time spent on the neurological section in the head and neck anatomy course was organized into categories, each with a range of 5%, that is, 1–5%, 6–10%, and so on. As noted in the Methods section, all data reported on a quarter system were converted to a semester basis. The amount of class time devoted to the neurological section within anatomy courses was reported to range from 6% to greater than 36% (see Table 9). The mode category was 16–20% of the time, as reported by 16% Table 6. Number of credit hours (computed on a semester basis) devoted to the neuroanatomy/neurological function course (in programs offering such a course; n = 86). Number of programs that Credit hours assigned devote the specified credit to the neurological course hour amounts to this course 1 2 2 2 2.66 7 3 48 3.33 1 4 1 5+ 0 No response to the credit hour question 25 Note. Credit hours for programs based on a quarter system were converted to semester hours, thus the explanation for the appear- ance of fractions in credit hour totals. Table 7. Topics covered in the neuroanatomy/neurological function courses. Most common topics covered: • Central nervous system • Gross and fine brain anatomy • Spinal cord • Cranial nerves • Neurophysiology • Blood supply • Motor control Other topics covered: • Neurology and physiology of the peripheral and central nervous system • Basic neuroanatomy for communication • Embryology of the nervous system • Blood supply • Synaptic transmission • Subcortical structures, including basal ganglia and thalamus • Limbic system • Reticular system • Ventricular system • Brain imaging • Pathological reflexes • Motor system • Sensory system • Auditory pathway • Disorders including lesions of the right hemisphere • Apraxia • The dysarthrias (child and adult) • Traumatic brain injury Table 8. Topics not covered, by various instructors, in the neuroanatomy/neurological function course, due to time constraints. Topics not covered: • Pain and temperature tracts in the spinal cord • Genetics • Brain imaging • Primitive reflexes • Sensory systems • Neurotransmitters • Links between testing and neural organization • Neuropharmacology • More in-depth information pertaining to the limbic system • Higher mental functions • Neuropathology • More brain specimens • Autonomic nervous system • Embryology of the developing nervous system • More in-depth coverage of cranial nerves • Language and the nervous system • Clinical cases • Cerebral palsy • All topics in greater depth
  6. 6. 14 CONTEMPORARY ISSUES IN COMMUNICATION SCIENCE AND DISORDERS • Volume 28 • 9–19 • Spring 2001 of the respondents. Fourteen percent (14%) of the respondents reported spending 11–15% of their course time on this subject. Three category groups, each comprising 8% of the respondents, reported spending the following amounts of time on the neurological section of this course: 6–10%, 21–25%, and 31–35% of the time. Unfortunately, 35% of the respondents did not reply to this particular question. • Fifty-two percent (52%) of the programs reported that they offer a neuroanatomy/neurological function section in their head and neck anatomy course in addition to providing a separate neuroanatomy/ neurological function course. • Course content reported for the neuroanatomy section in the head and neck anatomy course included the following: overview of neurological function, central nervous system gross anatomy, peripheral nervous system, cranial nerves, spinal cord, general brain stem anatomy, reflex circuits, basal ganglia, speech processing, and neurological function. The most common topics were gross anatomy of the central and peripheral nervous systems, information regarding the cranial nerves, and an overview of neurological function. See Table 10 for a listing of topics. • Regarding neuroanatomy sections taught within head and neck anatomy courses, instructors listed the following topics that they were not able to cover due to time constraints: motor speech and cognition, neurological mechanisms, neurochemistry, sensory and motor systems, cranial nerve function, more in-depth coverage of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and computerized tomography (CT) scans, experience with actual specimens, speech perception, and more in- depth coverage of all information. Twenty-one percent (21%) of the respondents stated that they are pleased with the neurological section of the head and neck anatomy course as is and would not add more information. Table 9. Time spent on the neurological section in the head and neck anatomy course (based on a semester system). Percentage of class time, per semester, devoted to a neurological section of the anatomy course (organized into Percentage of programs categories based on 5% increments) fitting into each category 6–10 8 11–15 14 16–20 16 21–25 8 26–30 3 31–35 8 > 36 7 No response to this question 35 Note. Credit hours for programs based on a quarter system were converted to semester hours. Table 10. Topics covered in the neuroanatomy/neurological function section in the head and neck anatomy course. Most common topics covered: • Gross anatomy of the central and peripheral nervous systems • Cranial nerves • Overview of neurological function Other topics covered: • Overview of neurological function • Central nervous system gross anatomy • Peripheral nervous system • Cranial nerves • Spinal cord • General brain stem anatomy • Reflex circuits • Basal ganglia • Speech processing • Neurological function Inclusion of Neurological Content in Various Disorder Courses and Time Allotments Required Programs that do not offer a separate neuroanatomy/ neurological function course were asked about the inclusion of neurological information within the content of various disorder courses. A listing of disorder courses that include a section devoted to teaching neuroanatomy/neurological function was requested along with the estimated amount of time that could be saved in these individual courses if a separate neurological course was available and mandated as a prerequisite. The estimated amount of time that could be saved in each individual course ranged from 0 to 32 hours. The mode was 3 hours, the mean was 5.08, and the median was 4 hours. See Table 11 for a complete listing. DISCUSSION It appears that many of the training programs accredited by ASHA are aware of the need to provide students with a strong background in neuroanatomy/neurological function, as demonstrated by the fact that 73% of the respondents to this survey reported that their programs provide a separate course for instruction of these aspects of neuroscience at either the undergraduate or graduate level. Semester hours for such courses ranged from 1–4 credits, with a mean of 2.9, a median of 3, and a mode of 3 credit hours. In addition, 52% of the programs that offer a separate neurological course also offer a section on neuroanatomy/ neurological function in their head and neck anatomy or structure and function course. This provides students with additional background in neurological topics. Programs that do not provide a neuroanatomy/neurological function course reported that they would be able to save from 0 to 32 hours of teaching time in disorder courses if such a course were offered elsewhere in their curriculum. The mean for class time that could be saved was reported to be 5.08 hours, the mode 3, and the median 4 hours.
  7. 7. Thompson: Survey of Neurological Instruction in ASHA Programs 15 Table 11. Hours of class time that respondents stated could be saved in various disorder courses if a neurological course was offered. Disorder courses that include a Hours of class time that could be section on neuroanatomy/neurological Undergraduate (UG) or saved in the listed course, if a function Graduate (G) level neurological course had been offered Adult language disorders UG & G UG-6, G-0, G-4, G-6, G-0, G-6 Traumatic brain injury G 0, 9, 1, 0 Motor speech G 0, 4.5, 9, 6, 8, 8, 32, 9 Aphasia G 0, 4, 2.5, 10, 6.5, 2, 32 Aphasia and right hemisphere G 4.5 Traumatic brain injury and dementia G 3 Communication disorders II UG 12 Voice G 2, 2, 5, 3, 1, 1 Dysphagia G 5, 3, 1 Medical audiology G 7 The dysarthrias G 4, 4 Organic disorders UG 2, 0 Apraxia and swallowing disorders G 2.5 Neuropathologies of speech G 10 Anatomy of speech & hearing for teaching of deaf G 2 Special tests in audiology G 3 Neurogenics G 5 Audiometry UG 3 Neuropathic disorders G 3 Seminar in cerebral palsy G 3 Language disorders in children G 3 Language disorders UG 6 Speech disorders UG 6 Auditory pathology G 6 Speech- and language-based learning disorders G 2 The findings of this survey suggest that neuroscience instruction is currently included in the curricula of many ASHA-accredited training programs. A high percentage of the responding programs reported that a specific course for neuroanatomy/neurological instruction is part of their curriculum at either the undergraduate or the graduate level. Unfortunately, only 43% of the questionnaires were returned, presenting the possibility that the actual percent- ages may be different if results from a higher percentage of the training programs were available. This topic should be investigated more thoroughly, possibly by ASHA, in order to obtain a higher percentage of responses. Subject material included in the neuroanatomy/neurologi- cal function courses appeared to be in alignment with a statement by Frank and Montgomery (1996), “Training in neuroanatomy requires an understanding of the central and peripheral nervous system terminology, individual compo- nents including relative structures, and the neurophysiologi- cal functions of individual units and systems” (p. 27). Although not elaborated on in this article, the use of computer-assisted technology to enhance instruction (Frank & Montgomery, 1996; Klinkhachorn & Altemus, 1999; Lovell & Hodgins, 1998; Millhouse & Stensaas 1993; Peterson, 1998; Slice of Brain, 1995) may provide addi- tional aids for visualization and more in-depth understand- ing of neurological principles. In consideration of the demands placed on speech- language pathologists, by a variety of work settings, to demonstrate a thorough understanding of neuroanatomy and neurological function, speech-language pathology training programs are encouraged to review the amount of neu- roanatomy, neurological function, and neurophysiology training that students are receiving at both the undergradu- ate and the graduate levels. Content in such courses may also be reviewed. Appropriately training students and academic personnel may also expand research and funding opportunities in the domain of neuroscience. In reference to speech physiology issues in dysarthria, Abbs and Rosenbek (1985) stated that, as scientists and as members of the speech-language pathology profession, we cannot afford to be generalists, warning that if we continue to use only our traditional approaches, neurologists and physiologists will conduct this same work without input from the field of speech- language pathology. The information provided by this survey suggests that ASHA-accredited training programs are providing neces- sary training in the area of neuroscience. Tallal’s (1993), proposal “for fundamental change in current speech- language pathology and audiology training programs, with increased emphasis on training in the basic sciences of the field, particularly from a neuroscience perspective, if we hope to provide the skills necessary for the next genera- tion of communication scientists” (p. 69) appears to be taking place. Further questions to address include: • Is neuroscience content comprehensive enough across all training programs?
  8. 8. 16 CONTEMPORARY ISSUES IN COMMUNICATION SCIENCE AND DISORDERS • Volume 28 • 9–19 • Spring 2001 • Do we need more consistent curricular requirements? • Do we need more interdepartmental collaboration? The results of this survey may be useful for programs undergoing curriculum review and/or curriculum changes. The information presented may also provide prospective students interested in gaining a strong background in neuroscience with questions to address as they investigate various graduate and undergraduate programs. It is believed that the results of this survey verify that a large number of speech-language pathology students are being trained in neuroscience, which will hopefully culminate in increased neuroscience research and graduates with strong clinical skills. REFERENCES Abbs, J., & Rosenbek, J. (1985). Some motor control perspectives on apraxia of speech and dysarthria. In J. Costello (Ed.), Recent advances in speech pathology (pp. 95–126). San Diego, CA: College-Hill Press. Frank, E., & Montgomery, A. (1996). The effectiveness of computer-assisted instruction in neuroscience for speech- language pathology students. Journal of Medical Speech- Language Pathology, 4, 27–32. Hallowell, B., Bhatnagar, S., & Kirshner, H. (1997, November). Enhancing neuroscience training across the curriculum. A poster session presented at the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association National Convention, Boston, MA. Klinkhachorn, P., & Altemus, J. (1999). Neurobiology links: Neuroanatomy brain slice tutorial. Internet address: http:// www.anatomy.hsc.wvu.edu Lovell, K., & Hodgins, M. (1998). Neuropathology Self-Instruc- tional Units: CD-ROM for medical students. East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University. Millhouse, O., & Stensaas, S. (1993). Neuroanatomy syllabus, HyperBrain [Computer software]. Salt Lake City, UT: University of Utah. Peterson, G. (1998, June). A highly successful approach to teaching neuroanatomy using active learning and “full spectrum technology” which is objective-oriented, interactive and text book based. A poster session presented at the Computers in Healthcare Education Symposium and Slice of Life Workshop on Interactive Media, Tampa, FL. Slice of Brain/Hyperbrain V. (1995). [Computer software]. Salt Lake City, UT: University of Utah. Tallal, P. (1993). The importance of neuroscience training in communication sciences and disorders. In N. Minghetti, J. Cooper, H. Goldstein, L. Olswang, & S. Warren (Eds.), Research mentorship and training in communication sciences and disorders: Proceedings of a national conference (pp. 67–76). Rockville, MD: American Speech-Language-Hearing Foundation, National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders, National Institutes of Health. Contact author: Christy L. Thompson, P.O. Box 3311, Depart- ment of Speech Language Pathology and Audiology, University of Wyoming, Laramie, WY 82071. Email: cthompsn@uwyo.edu
  9. 9. Thompson: Survey of Neurological Instruction in ASHA Programs 17 APPENDIX. QUESTIONNAIRE I. TO BE FILLED OUT by the INSTRUCTOR of the STRUCTURE and FUNCTION/HEAD and NECK ANATOMY COURSE A. Is a section on neuroanatomy and/or neurological function included in the Head and Neck Anatomy/Structure and Function Course offered in your department? ____ Yes ____ No If answer is “yes,” please complete questions (B–E) below, then turn into Dept. Chair for mailing. If “no,” additional responses are not required, please give this sheet to department chair for mailing. Thank you. B. How many days of class do you spend on the topic of neuroanatomy/neurological function in the Head and Neck Anatomy/Structure and Function Course? _____ days C. Please mark the following items regarding the Head & Neck Anatomy/Structure & Function course you are referring to. 1. Is the course on a: ________ semester basis _________ quarter basis 2. How many weeks long is the course? _________________ 3. How many times a week does the course meet? _________________ 4. What is the time length of each class session? _________________ 5. Is the course an undergraduate or graduate level course? ______ undergraduate level ______ graduate level Comments___________________________________________________ 6. Is the course required for all undergraduates or graduates in your program? _____ yes _____ no Exceptions _____________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ D. What topics did you cover in this section of the course? _________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________ E. What would you like to cover in this section that you have not been able to? _________________________________________________________________________
  10. 10. 18 CONTEMPORARY ISSUES IN COMMUNICATION SCIENCE AND DISORDERS • Volume 28 • 9–19 • Spring 2001 II. TO BE FILLED OUT by the INSTRUCTOR of the NEUROANATOMY/NEUROLOGICAL FUNCTION COURSE A. Does your department offer a course on neuroanatomy/neurological function? _______ yes _____ no If the answer is “yes,” please answer questions (B–D below), then give to Dept. Chair for mailing. If answer is “no,” additional responses are not required. Please return to Dept. Chair for mailing. Thank you. B. Please answer the following questions regarding the neuroanatomy/neurological function course you are referring to: 1. Is the course on a: ________ semester basis _________ quarter basis 2. How many weeks long is the course? _________________ 3. How many times a week does the course meet? _________________ 4. What is the time length of each individual class session? _________________ 5. For how many credit hours is the course listed? _________________ 6. Is the course an undergraduate or graduate level course? ______ undergraduate level ______ graduate level Comments ___________________________________________________ 7. Is the course required for all undergraduates or graduates in your program? _____ yes, required for undergraduate level students _____ yes, required for graduate students _____ no, NOT required for undergraduate students _____ no, NOT required for graduate students Exceptions __________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________ C. What topics do you cover in this course? ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ D. What would you like to cover in this course that you have not been able to? ______________________________________________________________________________
  11. 11. Thompson: Survey of Neurological Instruction in ASHA Programs 19 III. TO BE FILLED OUT by the DEPARTMENT CHAIR Does your department require students to take a course on neuroanatomy/neurological function from another department? ____ yes, as part of the undergraduate program ____ yes, as part of the graduate program If yes, please list title of the course and the dept. through which it is offered. _____________________________________________________________________ ____ no IV. TO BE FILLED OUT or COORDINATED by the DEPARTMENT CHAIR A. If neither a section nor a course is offered in the area of neuroanatomy/neurological function, do the individual instructors of various courses teach neurologically related information that is required for particular disorder courses? ____ yes ___ no B. Please list the disorder courses offered in your department that include a section on neuroanatomy/neurological type information and the estimated amount of class time allotted to teaching the neurological information that could be saved if a separate course in the area of neuroanatomy/neurological function was taken as a prerequisite to the disorder course. DISORDER COURSES that Grad (G) or AMOUNT of CLASS TIME include a section on Undergrad (U) THAT COULD BE SAVED neuroanatomy/neurological function Level in the listed course, (Please list the title of the course.) if students had previously taken a neuroanatomy/neurological function course (in hours and/or minutes)

×