VIDBE-Q Volume 65 Issue 3
contribute to why some children with VI may have speech sound production
deficits not fully established, but the available descriptions of the clinical
presentation of speech sound production of children with VI are limited to the
characterizations offered in just a few studies (e.g., Bambring, 2007; House, 2007;
LeZak & Starbuck, 1964; Mills, 1987a, 1987b). In one of the more recent studies
Brouwer, Gordon-Pershey, Hoffman, & Gunderson (2015) surveyed 18 teachers of
students with VI who together served 120 children in five states with VI with
typical intelligence or mild intellectual deficits. The survey results found that the
percentage of students with VI who received speech sound production
interventions, as reported by the teachers surveyed, was higher than expected when
compared to prevalence figures for the percentage of students in the general
population who receive speech sound production interventions. Subsequently,
Gordon-Pershey, Zeszut, & Brouwer (2018) observed speech error patterns in
children with VI that were different in sequence from established norms in children
without VI. In addition, Gordon-Pershey and colleagues (2018) suggested the
saliency of visual cues could reasonably be hypothesized as a factor in these
different developmental patterns. In addition, the majority of children with VI in
Gordon-Pershey and colleagues study exhibited imprecise speech articulation
patterns, supporting earlier findings by Mills (1987).