style="font-size:15px;"> 150 Rolison, M. A., & Medway, F. J. (1985). Teachers’ expectations and attributions for student achievement: Effects of label performance pattern, and special education intervention. American Educational Research Journal, 22, 561–573.151 Rosenfeld, S. (1997). Labeling mental illness: The effects of received services and perceived stigma on life satisfaction. American Sociological Review, 62, 660–672.
152 Ruiz‐de‐Velasco, J., & Fix, M. (2000). Overlooked and underserved: Immigrant students in U.S. secondary schools. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute.
153 Rutter, M., & Tuma, A. H. (1988). Diagnosis and classification: Some outstanding issues. In M. Rutter, A. H. Tuma, & I. S. Lann (Eds.), Assessment and diagnosis in child psychopathology (pp. 437–452). New York, NY: Guilford.
154 Schuster, T. L., & Butler, E. W. (1986). Labeling, mild mental retardation, and long‐range social adjustment. Sociological Perspectives, 29(4), 461–483.
155 Scott, W. J. (1990). PTSD in DSM‐III: A case of the politics of diagnosis and disease. Social Problems, 37, 294–310.
156 Searight, H. R., & McLaren, A. L. (1998). Attention‐deficit hyperactivity disorder: The medicalization of misbehavior. Journal of Clinical Psychology in Medical Settings, 5, 467–495.
157 Shotter, J. (1993). Conversational realities. Constructing life through language. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
158 Shuell, T. J. (1986). Cognitive conceptions of learning. Review of Educational Research, 56, 411–436.
159 Silverman, C. (2004). A disorder of affect: Love, tragedy, biomedicine, and citizenship in American autism research (Unpublished PhD Dissertation). University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA.
160 Skrtic, T. M. (1991). The special education paradox. Harvard Educational Review, 61, 148–206.
161 Sleeter, C. E. (1996). Radical structuralist perspectives on the creation and use of learning disabilities. In T. M. Skrtic (Ed.), Disability and democracy: Reconstructing (special) education for postmodernity (pp. 153–165). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
162 Sternberg, R. J., & Grigorenko, E. L. (2002). Difference scores in the identification of children with learning disabilities: It’s time to use a different method. Journal of School Psychology, 40, 65–83.
163 Sutcliffe, J., & Simons, K. (1993). Self advocacy and people with learning difficulties. Leicester, UK: NIACE.
164 Thelen, E., & Smith, L. (1998). Dynamic system theories. In R. M. Lerner (Ed.), Handbook of child psychology: Vol. 1: Theoretical models of human development (5th ed., pp. 563–634). New York, NY: Wiley.
165 Thoits, P. A. (2005). Differential labeling of mental illness by social status: A new look at an old problem. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 46(1), 102–119.
166 Thompkins, C. A., Marshall, R. C., & Phillips, D. S. (1980). Aphasic patients in a rehabilitation program: Scheduling speech and language services. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 61, 252–254.
167 Trent, S. C., Artiles, A. J., & Englert, C. S. (1998). From deficit thinking to social constructivism: A review of theory, research, and practice in special education. Review of Research in Education, 23, 277–307.
168 Trueba, H. T. (1988). Culturally based explanations of minority students’ academic achievement. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 19, 270–287.
169 Ukrainetz McFadden, T. (1996). Creating language impairments in typically achieving children: The pitfalls of normal normative sampling. Language, Speech and Hearing Services in Schools, 27, 3–9.
170 van Geert, P. (1998). A dynamic systems model of basic developmental mechanisms: Piaget, Vygotsky, and beyond. Psychological Review, 104, 634–677.
171 Van Kraayenoord, C. E. (2010). Review: Response to intervention: New ways and wariness. Reading Research Quarterly, 45, 363–376.
172 Waterhouse, L. (2013). Rethinking autism: Variation and complexity. Waltham, MA: Academic Press.
173 Waterhouse, L., & Gillberg, C. (2014). Why autism must be taken apart. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 44, 1788–1792.
174 Wilkinson, C. Y., & Ortiz, A. A. (1986). Characteristics of limited English proficient learning disabled Hispanic students at initial assessment and at Reevaluation. Austin, TX: Handicapped Minority Research Institute on Language Proficiency.
175 Williams, S. J., & Calnan, M. (1996). The “limits” of medicalization: Modern medicine and the lay populace in “late modernity”. Social Science and Medicine, 42, 1609–1620.
176 Wilson, J. (2000). “Learning difficulties,” “disability” and “special needs”: Some problems of partisan conceptualisation. Disability and Society, 15(5), 817–824.
177 Worley, J. A., & Matson, J. L. (2012). Comparing symptoms of autism spectrum disorders using the current DSM‐IV‐TR diagnostic criteria and the proposed DSM‐5 diagnostic criteria. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 6, 965–970.
178 Zametkin, A. J., Nordahl, T. E., Gross, M., King, A. C., Semple, W. E., Rumsey, J., … Cohen, R. M. (1990). Cerebral glucose metabolism in adults with hyperactivity of childhood onset. New England Journal of Medicine, 323, 1361–1366.
179 Zola, I. K. (1972). Medicine as an institution of social control. The Sociological Review, 20, 487–504.
180 Zola, I. K. (2009). The medicalization of American society. In P. Conrad (Ed.), The sociology of health & illness. Critical perspectives (pp. 470–479). New York, NY: Worth Publishers.
2 Diversity Considerations in Speech and Language Disorders: A Focus on Training
ELENA BABATSOULI
University of Louisiana at Lafayette, LA, USA
2.1 Introduction
Five percent of any population has difficulties with language (Hyter & Salas‐Provance, 2019). About 1 billion people (15% of the human population) show a type of disability, some of whom (2–4%) also experience difficulties with functioning (World Health Organization [WHO], 2019a). There is a new international migrant to the United States every 34 seconds (US Census). What an international migrant brings into any country is a generous amount of diversity that builds on already existing societal diversity. Diversity encompasses the variety of experiences, skills, knowledge, and attributes that shape every one of us (American Speech and Hearing Association [ASHA], 2019a) and it “can refer to gender, race, ethnicity, socio‐economic status and so on” (Goldstein & Horton‐Ikard, 2010, p. 38). Diversity also denotes difference; difference is what makes each of us unique. These terms further implicate cultural and linguistic variables that ought to be seen both at a micro‐ (individual) and at a macro‐level (society). Understanding and coping with cultural and linguistic diversity relies on both innate skills and developed core capabilities like sensitivity, awareness, knowledge, and competence. This is especially germane when such practice involves culturally and linguistically diverse (CLD) populations in need of speech and language rehabilitation, where difference may interfere with accurate diagnosis and treatment of disorder.
Multicultural
