As a paediatric speech pathologist, I have witnessed parents and carers feeling overwhelmed by their child’s communication difficulties. In clinical and educational settings, questions often arise: “Is my child the only one who struggles with speech?” and “How can I be sure therapy makes a difference?” These concerns, while profoundly emotional, are entirely valid. A growing body of evidence, including the 2010 observational study by Mullen and Schooling, underscores the reality that thousands of children require speech-language support. Yet the same ongoing research also offers hope: carefully measured outcomes clearly demonstrate that intervention can foster noticeable gains in communication.
How Does the National Outcomes Measurement System Work?
The National Outcomes Measurement System (NOMS) was developed by the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA) in the late 1990s. It aims to capture the functional outcomes of speech-language pathology services across various ages and settings. Specifically for school-based contexts, speech-language pathologists (SLPs) rate a student’s functional communication abilities at both the beginning and the conclusion of services using ASHA’s Functional Communication Measures (FCMs). These FCMs provide crucial, data-driven insights into each child’s unique communication challenges.
The study by Mullen and Schooling (2010) indicates that NOMS collects an array of data, from language comprehension to speech sound production, all of which help track progress over time. This standardised approach not only validates clinical decision-making but also allows clinicians to compare data with other school-based settings, promoting evidence-based practices that resonate well beyond individual classrooms.
Why Are the Findings from This Article Important for School-Based Interventions?
Documenting the beneficial impact of services is vital when resources, time, and personnel may be limited in school systems. The Mullen and Schooling research collated data from over 2,000 preschool students and over 14,000 primary and secondary students. These figures are meaningful because they represent a broad range of speech and language issues, including articulation, phonological, and expressive or receptive language difficulties.
Below is a simple summary of the data provided in NOMS:
| Data Category | Number of Students |
|---|---|
| Pre-K (Preschool) | Over 2,000 |
| K-12 (Primary/Secondary) | Over 14,000 |
Such extensive data underscores the prevalence of communication issues and the importance of tracking therapy outcomes: if you know which interventions work best, you can tailor sessions to the individual child, making therapy as efficient and transformative as possible.
What Do These Findings Mean for Parents, Carers, and Clinicians?
Parents and carers often look to speech pathologists for clear and reliable answers regarding their child’s development. The NOMS framework offers a transparent metric, showing that systematic data collection can corroborate whether a child’s communication is improving. As a result, it can reassure and empower parents to remain fully engaged in the therapy process. Additionally, for clinicians, having consistent outcome measures promotes reflective practice—clinicians can refine or pivot their therapeutic approach depending on how children progress according to the Functional Communication Measures.
Beyond the immediate therapeutic context, these quantitative insights also assist school administrators and policymakers. Documenting measurable results can justify appropriate funding, staffing, and training. The upshot: more efficient use of resources that directly target children’s needs, especially in regional or remote areas where professional support might be more challenging to access.
How Does This Translate to Real-World Practice for Australian Speech Pathologists?
Although the original study was conducted in the United States, the core principle—documenting functional communication gains—is universally applicable, including here in Australia. By integrating a similar outcomes-based approach, Australian speech pathologists, like those of us at Speech Clinic, can deliver evidence-based services more confidently. Outcomes data can be shared among professionals, administrators, and stakeholders, ensuring that interventions are as impactful as possible for children from diverse linguistic, cultural, and socio-economic settings.
Moreover, when using telehealth or mobile services—platforms that continue to grow in Australiа—consistent documentation via outcome measures ensures therapy plans remain both flexible and accountable. If a child is not progressing, clinicians can adjust goals or explore alternative interventions, all while basing decisions on quantifiable data.
Can NOMS Inspire Future Research and Clinical Practice?
The 2010 study showcased the potential of NOMS to strengthen the credibility of speech pathology interventions. Future research might delve even deeper: perhaps exploring specific subgroups of children with complex communication needs, or linking outcomes more closely to academic performance, social participation, and emotional wellbeing. For practitioners, this fosters a cycle of continuous improvement, with each new set of data informing the next generation of therapy innovations.
Using NOMS Insights for Meaningful Change
The Mullen and Schooling study highlights how robust data-collection methods—like those offered by NOMS—can profoundly influence the ways we design, deliver, and evaluate speech-language pathology services in schools. By systematically tracking a child’s progress, parents and carers receive tangible proof of progress that builds trust and hope, while clinicians gain a reliable framework for refining best practices.
If you or your child need support or have questions, please contact us at Speech Clinic.
Can NOMS be used in Australian schools directly, or should it be adapted?
Although developed in the United States, the principles behind NOMS can be adapted to align with the Australian education system. Many of its core features—such as structuring baseline and discharge data—can integrate seamlessly with local practices.
How can I tell if my child’s therapy is working without formal measures like NOMS?
Observing daily interactions, tracking changes in vocabulary and clarity, and consulting regularly with your speech pathologist remain key indicators. While formal measures like NOMS offer quantitative data, ongoing informed observations are also highly valuable.
Do telehealth sessions produce measurable outcomes similar to in-person services?
Emerging evidence suggests telehealth can be equally effective, provided it is delivered consistently and systematically monitored. Using outcome measures helps to ensure progress is tracked accurately, whether sessions are held in person or remotely.
Will applying outcomes measurement systems make therapy more complicated?
With the right training and practice, outcomes measurement tools become a natural extension of standard clinical routines. They provide structure and clarity, ensuring each therapy moment has a measurable goal and evaluation plan.
Are outcome measures, such as FCMs, different for children of varying ages?
Yes. Measurement tools and targets often vary depending on a child’s developmental stage and communication goals. However, the underlying principle—collecting data to verify progress—remains the same across all ages.
