Early in my clinical fellowship, I didn’t fully appreciate how much intervention design I would be responsible for in my work as a therapist.   In retrospect, I think I worried too much about evaluation and too little about intervention.  I thought quite a bit about which standardized, norm-referenced measures and which criterion-referenced measures would help me understand a specific client’s speech and language strengths and weaknesses.  Over time, I began to realize how much teaching and engineering we do as therapists.

Recently, I have been thinking quite a bit about how incorporate this idea into my teaching.  Of course, students need to develop robust evaluation skills.    But what if they also saw themselves as teachers of skills and engineers of intervention?

As SLPs we apply scientific knowledge to deliver intervention.  The ultimate goal is to increase a person’s communication abilities and participation in daily life.  Interventions must be driven by data.  If we are continually monitoring how a client is doing, we are able to make small adjustments in the strategy.  These adjustments may accelerate progress, expand generalization, or influence the likelihood of long-term maintenance.

Clearly, this is not a fully fleshed-out analogy or plan for incorporation into coursework.   Nevertheless, I like thinking about engineering intervention.  It seems like another way to engage students in discussions about the importance of using evidence (i.e., client data and empirical studies) to inform their professional work.