2013 11 12 Medwetsky Larry 2nd Year Reappointment Dre

Resume: Larry Medwetsky, Ph.D.
Summary
Dr. Larry Medwetsky graduated with a M. Sc. in Audiology from McGill University and
a Ph.D. in Speech and Hearing Sciences in 1994 from the Graduate Center, City
University of New York. He has served as an educational audiologist, VP of clinical
Services in a large speech and hearing clinic, and is presently an associate professor at
Gallaudet University in the Department of Hearing, Speech and Language Sciences.
Dr. Medwetsky has published and presented on many different topics with a special focus
on the underlying speech processes and deficits in both individuals with normal hearing
and hearing loss.
Academic Achievement
1. 1994 Ph.D. in Speech and Hearing Science:
City University New York, Graduate Center
2. 1977-1979 M.Sc. in Audiology and Aural Rehabilitation: McGill

University
3. 1974-1977 B.Sc. in Abnormal Psychology: McGill University
4. 1972-1974 C.E.G.E.P. (College) Diploma: McGill University
Recent Professional Experience

1. 2012- Associate Professor- Audiology program of the
Department of Hearing, Speech, and Language Sciences
2. 2011-2012 Director of Quality Assurance and Special Projects

Rochester Hearing and Speech Center
3. 2008- Vice President of Clinical Services

(including overseeing audiology and speech-language
departments)
4. 1997-2007 Vice President: Research and Development

Responsibilities:
i. Program development ii. Clinical research
iii. Presentations/Publications (clinical/public education)
iv. Develop treatment protocols
v. Resource- both internally and externally
5. 1992- 1997 Director of Audiology:
Responsibilities:
i. Direct clinical staff in five programs including:
diagnostic audiology, dispensing (hearing aids), nursing
homes, mobile unit, and assistive device program
ii. Program development iii. Budgeting
iv. Community outreach v. Research
6. 1990-1992 Research Associate

Rehabilitation Engineering Center
Lexington Center, N.Y.
Responsibilities:
i. Develop new hearing aid systems for individuals
with profound hearing loss
ii. Develop diagnostic and prescriptive instruments and
criteria to facilitate appropriate use of amplification
systems by individuals with hearing loss
Recent Committee Experience

1. 2008-2010 ASHA Committee Member of task force to examine SLPs
role in diagnosing and managing CAPD
2. 200-2009 AAA Committee Member of task force to develop

guidelines for audiologists in diagnosing and managing
CAPD
Recent Affiliated Activities

1. 2010- Board of Directors- Audiology Representative. New York
State Speech Language Hearing Association.
2. 2008-2010 ASHA Committee Member of task force to examine SLPs

role in diagnosing and managing (C)APD
3. 2008-2010 AAA Committee Member of task force to develop

guidelines for audiologists in diagnosing and managing
(C)APD
4. 2002-2003 Professional Advisory Board Member: SONUS
5. 1993-1995 Professional Advisory Board Member:

Unitron Hearing Aid Company
Research Endeavors
Principal Investigator of a four year research project examining hearing intervention
programs for the elderly. Funded by Atlantic Philanthropic Service.
Publications
1. Medwetsky L (2013) Utilizing Computer Software as a Management Tool for
Addressing CAPD. In: Geffner D and Swain D, eds. Auditory Processing Disorders:
Assessment, Management and Treatment, 2nd edition. San Diego: Plural Publishing
2. Medwetsky L, Musiek F (2011) Spoken-language processing model: A more

expansive view of examining auditory processing of spoken language. The Hearing
Journal, 64(6): 8-9.
3. Medwetsky L, Scherer M, Frisina R (2011) Factors influencing individuals'

decisions to access hearing related services. Hearing Review; 18(5): 24-32.
4. Medwetsky L (2011) A case study. SSW Reports (33:1).
5. Medwetsky L (2011) Spoken language processing: Bridging auditory and language

processing to guide diagnosis and intervention. Language, Speech, and Hearing
Services in Schools; 42(3): 286-296.
6. Fey ME, Richard GJ, Geffner G. Kamhi AG, Medwetsky L, Paul D, Ross-Swain D,
Wallach G, Frymark T, Schooling T (2011) Auditory processing disorders and
auditory/language interventions: An evidence-based systematic review.
Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools; 42(3): 246-264.
7. Musiek FE, Baran JA, Bellis TJ, Chermak GD, Hall III JW, Keith RW, Medwetsky
L, West KL, Young M (2010) Guidelines for the diagnosis, treatment and
management of children and adults with central auditory processing disorder.
http://www.audiology.org/resources/documentlibrary/Documents/CAPD%20Guideli
nes%208-2010.pdf
8. Medwetsky L (2009) Associate Editor of the Handbook of Clinical Audiology.
Baltimore: Lippincott Williams and Wilkins.
9. Medwetsky L (2009) Mechanisms underlying central auditory processing. In: Katz

J, ed. Handbook of Clinical Audiology, 6th edition. Philadelphia: Lippincott
Williams and Wilkins.
10. Medwetsky L, Riddle L, Katz J (2009) Management of central auditory processing

disorders. In: Katz J, ed. Handbook of Clinical Audiology, 6th edition. Philadelphia:
Lippincott Williams and Wilkins.
11. Medwetsky L (2008) Utilizing computer software as a management tool for
addressing CAPD. In: Geffner D and Swain D. San Diego: Plural Publishing.
12. Medwetsky L (2007) Rethinking hearing aids Six obsolete objections. Hearing
Health; 23(2): 6-13.
13. Medwetsky L (2007) The impact of hearing loss on peoples lives and effective
management approaches. In Duthrie, Katz, and, Malone, eds. Practice of Geriatrics.
WB Saunders, Elsevier.
14. Medwetsky L (2006) Spoken language processing: A convergent approach to

conceptualizing (central auditory processing). The ASHA Leader, June 2006.
15. Scherer M, Medwetsky L, Frisina RF (May 2005) The Hearing Technology

Predisposition Assessment (HTPA): Personal characteristics and satisfaction with
hearing technologies. Audiology Online.
16. Medwetsky L (2005) APD, CAPD, or SLPD?: FYI-Tidbits. SSW Reports (27:1).
17. Medwetsky L (2002) Central auditory processing. In: Katz J, ed. Handbook of
Clinical Audiology, 5th edition. Lippincott Williams and Wilkins, Philadelphia; 495-
509.
18. Medwetsky L (2002) Central auditory processing testing: A battery approach. In:
Katz J, ed. Handbook of Clinical Audiology, 5th edition. Lippincott Williams and
Wilkins, Philadelphia; 510-524.
19. Hixson PK, Toleman CF, Benedict LA, Riddle LS (2000) Articulation Severity
Index. Rochester Hearing & Speech Center, Rochester NY.
20. Medwetsky L, Sanderson D, Young D (1999) A national survey of audiology

clinical practices, Part 1. Hear Rev (6);11:24-34.
21. Medwetsky L, Sanderson D, Young D (1999) A national survey of audiology

clinical practices, Part 2. Hear Rev (6);12:14-23.
22. Medwetsky L (1998) Memory and attention processing deficits. In: Masters G,
Stecker NA, and Katz J, eds. Central Auditory Processing Disorders: Mostly
Management. Allyn and Bacon, Boston; 63-88.
23. Boothroyd A, Erickson F, and Medwetsky L (1994) The hearing aid input: A
phonemic approach to assessing the spectral distribution of speech. Ear and
Hearing.
24. Medwetsky, L (1994). Educational audiology. In Katz, J., ed. Handbook of Clinical
Audiology, 4th Edition.
25. Boothroyd A, and Medwetsky L (1992) Spectral distribution of /s/ and the
frequency response of hearing aids. Ear and Hearing.
26. Katz J, Yeung E, and Medwetsky L (1988). SSW C-I-R, a Computer Program to
Calculate, Interpret and Make Recommendations. Jimm Co.; N.Y.
27. Hnath-Chisolm T, and Medwetsky L (1988). Perception of frequency contours via

temporal and spatial tactile transforms. Ear and Hearing; 9:322-328
Recent Presentations
1. 2013 Deborah Moncrieff, PhD; Teri James Bellis, PhD;
Jay R. Lucker, PhD; and Larry Medwetsky, PhD. Online
Presentation for American Academy of Audiology. Title:
Grand Rounds on Auditory Processing.
2. 2013 Presentation at Hearing Loss Association of America

convention in Portland, Oregon. Topic: Gallaudets Peer-
Mentoring program.
3. 2013 . Presentation to the North Carolina Speech, Language and

Hearing Convention. Topic: A Comprehensive Approach
to Understanding Spoken-Language Processing Deficits.
4. 2013 Presentation to the North Carolina Speech, Language and

to Assessing/Managing Auditory Spoken-Language
Processing Disorders.
5. 2012 Presentation at the New Jersey Speech, Language and

to Diagnosing and Managing "Auditory" Processing
Disorders.
6. 2012 Presentation to the New Jersey Academy of Audiology.

Topic: Spoken-Language Processing: A Different Way to
Conceptualize "Auditory" Processing Disorders.
7. 2011 Presentation at the New York State Speech-Language

Hearing Association Convention. Title: Spoken-Language
Processing Model: A New Way to Conceptualize and
Manage "Auditory" Processing Disorders
8. 2008 Presentation at the American Speech-Language Hearing
Association Convention, Chicago Illinois. Title: Spoken
Language Processing: A Convergent Approach to
Diagnosing and Managing CAPD.
9. 2008 L Medwetsky and L Riddle. Presentation at the American

Speech-Language Hearing Association Convention,
Chicago Illinois. Title: An Interdisciplinary Approach to
Assessing/Managing CAPD.
10. 2008 D Geffner, L Medwetsky and D Swain. Presentation at the

American Speech-Language Hearing Association
Convention, Chicago Illinois. Title: Assessments from
Other Specialties: Guiding CAP Test Selection/Expected
Findings.
11. 2008 Workshop at the New Jersey Speech-Language Hearing

Association Annual Convention. Topic: A Convergent
Approach to Conceptualizing Central Auditory Processing
Disorders and Its Management.
12. 2008 Presentation at the American Academy of Audiology

annual Convention, Charlotte North Carolina. Title:
A new Approach to Diagnosing and Managing Children
with Processing Disorders.
13. 2007 Panel Discussion on Auditory Processing Disorders at the

American Academy of Audiology convention, Denver
Colorado.
14. 2006 Presentation at the Montana Speech and Hearing

Convention. Title: Spoken language Processing Disorders:
Its Assessment and Management
15. 2005 Presentation at the American, Speech, Language, Hearing

Association- San Diego. Invited Speaker. Spoken
Language Processing: A Convergent Approach to
Assessing APD.
16. 2005 Presentation at the American, Speech, Language, Hearing

Association convention- San Diego. Title: Further Insight
Into Factors Influencing Individuals Accessing Hearing
Related Services
Honors
1. 1995 Editors Award, Outstanding Research Award in
Audiology and Hearing Sciences from Editorial Board of
Ear and Hearing Journal for Boothroyd, A., Erickson, F.
and L. Medwetsky. The hearing aid input: A phonemic
approach to assessing the spectral distribution of speech.
Ear & Hearing: December 1994.
2. 1989 Awarded the "Dr. Vera B. Douthit Memorial Award" in

recognition of outstanding scholarship and service.
3. 1988 Awarded "Certificate of Appreciation" in recognition of

significant contribution to the American Speech-Language
Hearing Association at the annual convention
Central Auditory Processing Disorders Course
Hearing, Speech and Language Sciences 862
Fall 2013 3 Credits
Open to HSLS majors only or permission of the instructor/department chair
Class Schedule: Wednesdays, 6:00-8:50 pm: Room #: SLCC 1304

Instructor: Larry Medwetsky, Ph.D.
Office Location: SLCC 2220
Office Hours: Walk-in or appt.
Telephone: 202.448.6965
Fax: (202) 651-5324
E-mail: larry.medwetsky@gallaudet.edu
Course Description:
This course will provide knowledge of central auditory processing disorders and how
they are assessed and managed in home, school, work, and therapeutic environments.
Areas to be addressed include differential diagnosis, the collaborative model,
counseling, and advocacy. The course will have an interdisciplinary focus.
Course Objectives/Student Learning Outcomes:

By the end of this course students will be able to:
OUTCOME LEARNING ASSESSMENT METHODS

OPPORTUNITIES
1. Define central auditory Lectures, Class Exams, Case Study
processing disorder and Discussions,
spoken-language Presentations
processing disorder
2. Summarize basic anatomy Lectures, Class Exams, Case Study
and physiology of the Discussions,
central auditory nervous Presentations
system
3. Identify the processes Lectures, Class Exams, Case Study
engaged in central auditory Discussions
processing & auditory
spoken-language
processing
4. Identify characteristics of Lectures, Class Exams, Case Study
individuals with disorders Discussions,
of auditory spoken- Presentations, Case
language processing Study
CAPD: Fall 2013
Page 2 of 21
5. Correctly perform Lectures, Case Study, CAPD Test Results and

commercially available Practice CAPD Test Reports, Practical Exam
CAPD tests as well as Assignments (Lab)
related tests
6. Develop a basic
understanding of
electroacoustic and Lecture, Case Study, Exams, Case Study
electrophysiologic Guest Speaker
assessments of CAPD
7. Correctly interpret CAPD Lectures, Class Exams, CAPD Test Results
test results Discussions, and Reports, Practical
Presentations, Case Exam
Study
8. Describe the different Lectures, Class Exams, Case Study
management approaches Discussions
used with CAPD
This course meets the 2011 ASHA Audiology Certification Standards listed below:
Standard IV-A: Foundations of Practice - knowledge of:

A1. Embryology and development of the auditory and vestibular systems, anatomy
and physiology, neuroanatomy and neurophysiology, and pathophysiology.
A7. Effects of hearing loss on communication and educational, vocational, social,

and psychological functioning.
A9. Patient characteristics (e.g., age, demographics, cultural and linguistic

diversity, medical history and status, cognitive status, and physical and
sensory abilities) and how they relate to clinical services.
A10. Pathologies related to hearing and balance and their medical diagnosis
and treatment.
Standards IV-B: Prevention and Identification:
B3. Screen individuals for hearing impairment and disability/handicap using clinically
appropriate, culturally sensitive, and age- and site-specific screening measures.
Standard IV-C: Assessment:

C2. Assessing individuals with suspected disorders of hearing, communication,
balance, and related systems.
C3. Evaluating information from appropriate sources and obtaining a case history to
facilitate assessment planning.
CAPD: Fall 2013
Page 3 of 21
C4. Performing otoscopy for appropriate audiological assessment/management

decisions, determining the need for cerumen removal, and providing a basis for
medical referral.
C5. Conducting and interpreting behavioral and/or electrophysiologic methods to
assess hearing thresholds and auditory neural function.
C6. Conducting and interpreting behavioral and/or electrophysiologic methods to
assess balance and related systems.
C7. Conducting and interpreting otoacoustic emissions and acoustic immittance
(reflexes).
C8. Evaluating auditory-related processing disorders.
C9. Evaluating functional use of hearing.
C10. Preparing a report, including interpreting data, summarizing findings, generating
recommendations, and developing an audiologic treatment/management plan.
C11. Referring to other professions, agencies, and/or consumer organizations.
Standards IV D: Intervention (Treatment):
D1. The provision of intervention services (treatment) to individuals with hearing loss,
balance disorders, and other auditory dysfunction that compromises receptive
and expressive communication
D5. Provision of treatment services for infants and children with hearing loss;
collaboration/consultation with early interventionists, school based professionals,
and other service providers regarding development of intervention plans (i.e.,
individualized educational programs and/or individualized family service plans)
D7. Evaluation of the efficacy of intervention (treatment) services
Standard IV-E: Advocacy/Consultation:

E1. Educating and advocating for communication needs of all individuals that may
include advocating for the programmatic needs, rights, and funding of services for
those with hearing loss, other auditory dysfunction, or vestibular disorders
E2. Consulting about accessibility for persons with hearing loss and other auditory
dysfunction in public and private buildings, programs, and services
E3. Identifying underserved populations and promoting access to care
Standard IV-F: Education/Research/Administration
F1. Measuring functional outcomes, consumer satisfaction, efficacy, effectiveness,

and efficiency of practices and programs to maintain and improve the quality of
audiologic services
F2. Applying research findings in the provision of patient care (evidence-based
practice)
F3. Critically evaluating and appropriately implementing new techniques and
technologies supported by research-based evidence
Texts: Bellis, T.J. (2003). Assessment and Management of Central Auditory
CAPD: Fall 2013
Page 4 of 21
Processing Disorders in the Educational Setting From Science to Practice.

(2nd Ed.). San Diego, CA: Singular Press, Inc. (Required)
Geffner D. & Ross-Swain, D (2013). Auditory Processing Disorders:

Assessment, Management, and Treatment, 2nd ed. San Diego: Plural
Publishing, Inc. (Required)
Katz, J., Medwetsky, L. Burkard, R., Hood, L. (2009) Handbook of Clinical

Audiology, 6th ed. Baltimore, MD: Lippincott, Williams, and Wilkins.
(Required)
Musiek, F.E. & Chermak, G.D. (2007). Handbook of (Central) Auditory

Processing Disorder: Auditory Neuroscience and Diagnosis, Volume I.
San Diego: Plural Publishing, Inc. (Recommended)
Chermak, G.D. & Musiek, F.E (2007). Handbook of (Central) Auditory

Processing Disorder: Comprehensive Intervention, Volume II. San Diego:
Plural Publishing, Inc. (Recommended)
Additional Readings:
In addition to chapters in texts, there will be additional required readings that will
supplement class lectures. The student is responsible for reading all required
materials in preparation for class, with mini-quizzes consisting of a few questions
administered at the start of each class. These readings will be available on
Blackboard.
References
American Academy of Audiology. (August 2010). Practice Guidelines for the
Diagnosis, Treatment, and Management of Children and Adults with Central
Auditory Processing Disorder (CAPD). Available on Blackboard and
http://www.audiology.org/resources/documentlibrary/Pages/
CentralAuditoryProcessingDisorder.aspx
Tremblay, K.L. (2003). Central auditory plasticity: Implications for auditory
rehabilitation. Hearing Journal, 56(1), 10, 12, 14, 15.
Fey ME, Richard GJ, Geffner G. Kamhi AG, Medwetsky L, Paul D, Ross-Swain
D, Wallach G, Frymark T, Schooling T (2011) Auditory processing disorders
and auditory/language interventions: An evidence-based systematic review.
Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools; 42(3): 246-264.
CAPD: Fall 2013
Page 5 of 21
University Policies: All may be found in the Graduate Catalog or the following
link: http://www.gallaudet.edu/Documents/Grad/Gallaudet-Graduate-Catalog-
2012-2013.pdf
A. Academic Integrity
This course will adhere to all University Academic Integrity policies as
outlined in the Graduate Catalog. These may be found at the above link or
the printed catalog.
B. Standards of Professional Behavior and Communication

Knowledge of the theories and methodologies of a profession and their
application to professional practice are major components of graduate study. In
addition to academic accomplishments, which are evidenced in a student's
grades, graduate students must also demonstrate behavior and communication
skills that are consistent with professional standards. The principal elements of
professional behavior vary by discipline, but include tact; sensitivity to the
needs and interests of clients, colleagues, and supervisors; good judgment;
and attention to professional responsibilities. Moreover, student conduct must
conform to the codes of ethics established by the particular professional
associations that certify practitioners and govern their professional behavior.
The principal elements of required communication skills include, but are not
limited to written, oral, and signed communication.
Adherence to these professional standards of behavior and communication
are essential elements of professional competence. Failure to meet these
standards reflects adversely upon the individual's suitability for professional
service and may be grounds for dismissal from the Graduate School.
C. Students with Disabilities

Students needing accommodations to succeed in class or clinic must formally
request them through the Office for Students with Disabilities (OSWD) at the
beginning of the semester or as soon as the disability is documented.
Detailed information is available in the Graduate Catalog or the above link.
D. Compliance with ADA

Gallaudet University is in compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act
and this statement can be found in the Graduate Catalog or the above link.
Course Requirements:
CAPD: Fall 2013
Page 6 of 21
A. Attendance Policy:
On time or early attendance is expected at every scheduled class.
Students may have two excused absences during the semester. Excused
indicates that arrangements were made BEFORE the scheduled class
start time. Email and voice mail messages are acceptable in the case of
illness or accident. Recurrent late arrivals or early departures will result in
a drop of your assignment grade.
B. Reading Materials:
As discussed earlier, all students are required to complete assigned
reading materials prior to class sessions. Participation in class
discussions regarding the course materials is expected.
C. Examinations:
Two in class examinations will be given during the semester; material will
cover information presented during class sessions, class discussions,
course readings, and assigned text material. In addition, mini-quizzes
based on that weeks assigned readings will be administered prior to each
class lecture.
D. Assignments
1. Each student will be part of a team of two students and will be the
examiner or subject for all commercially available CAPD and related tests
that are owned by Gallaudet University HSLS. For each test
performed, each team will submit the test results and interpretation of
the results, along with any insights that the students obtained by being an
examiner/subject for the test. Tentative due dates are listed on the
tentative course schedule. (See Bb for the detailed assignment and tests).
2. Each student will complete a comprehensive auditory spoken-language

processing assessment on any selected individual as long as (a) that
individual has normal hearing and cognitive capacity; and (b) is older than
five years of age but less than 65 years of age. Test administration and
report format will follow the guidelines discussed in class as well as
highlighted in Bb.
3. For a bonus of 1%, each team will prepare two notebooks (one for
each member) that includes all of the CAPD Test reports assigned
throughout the semester. CAPD tests will be organized by each of the six
categories described below, alphabetically within each category. The goal
of this assignment is that each student will have a packet that they can
refer to going forward.
Please note that all written assignments must conform to the APA style, 6th ed.
CAPD: Fall 2013
Page 7 of 21
CAPD
TESTS
Screening Monaural Dichotic Temporal Binaural
Tests Low- Speech Processing Interaction
Redundancy Tests Tests Tests
Tests
SCAN-3 for Low-Pass DDT FPT MLD
Children Filtered
Speech
SCAN-3 for Time SSW DPT Binaural
Adults Compressed Fusion
Speech
ACPT SSI-ICM SSI-CCM RGDT
Speech-in- DSI GIN
Noise
RELATED TESTS
Test of Auditory Processing Skills- 3
Phonemic Synthesis Test
Grading
A. Weighting System
Final course grades will be based on a calculation of percentage correct out of a
potential 100%. The following grade scale and weighting systems will be used in
determining final course grades.
Exam 1 30%
Exam 2 30%
Assignments 30% (20% for test completion, 10% for
client assessment)
Mini-Quizzes 10%
Bonus 1% Completion of Notebook
CAPD: Fall 2013
Page 8 of 21
B. Grade Scale
Letter Grade Numerical Equivalent Quality Point Descriptor

Value
A+ 97 100 4.0 Exemplary
A 94 96 4.0 Outstanding
A- 90 93 3.7 Commendable
B+ 87 89 3.3 Exceeds Course requirements
B 84 86 3.0 Satisfactory achievement
B- 80 83 2.7 Marginal satisfactory
achievement
C+ 77 79 2.3 Unsatisfactory achievement
C 70 76 2.0 Unsatisfactory achievement
F Below 70 0.0 Failure
F represents failure (or no credit) and signifies that the work was either (1) completed
but at a level of achievement that is not worthy of credit or (2) was not completed and
there was no agreement between the instructor and the student that the student would
be awarded an incomplete. Academic dishonesty in any portion of the academic
work for a course shall be grounds for awarding a grade of F for the entire
course.
CAPD: Fall 2013
Page 9 of 21
Tentative Course Schedule

The schedule may change due to university closure, instructor decision, or
student request. Any changes to this schedule will be documented in writing by
the instructor and will be posted to the class site on BlackBoard.
Date Topic Assignment/Reading Out of Class Time
August 28 Introduction, Weihing et al.- Chapter 1 Readings = 4 hours

Overview of CAPD (Geffner & Swain)
Lucker- Chapter 2 (Geffner &
Swain)
Bellis Chapter 2 (pages 51-56)
September Neuroanatomy and Bellis Chapter 1 Reading = 3 hours

4 Neurophysiology
September Neuromaturation and Bellis Chapter 3; Tremblay Bb Readings = 3.5 hours

11 Neuroplasticity
September Overview of Bellis- Medwetsky, Chapter 25 (Katz Readings = 3.0 hours

18 Ferre and Katz Handbook, pages 584-601) on
Models; In depth- Bb
Spoken-Language
Processing Model Tillery, Chapter 27 (Katz
Handbook, pages 627-634) on
Bb
September Screening: A Bellis Chapter 4; Martin et al. Readings = 4 hours

25 Multidisciplinary (Chapter 5, pages 120- 124;
Approach & Geffner & Swain)
Screening Tests for Keith & Farah (Chapter 6,
CAPD Geffner & Swain)
October 2 Mid-Term Quiz Study = 10 hours

CAPD: Fall 2013
Page 10 of 21

October 9 Monaural Low Bellis Chapter 2 (56-65), Readings = 3.0 hours
Redundancy Speech Chapter 5 (pages 204-209;
& 213-218) & Chapter 6 (241- Lab Assignment/Report =
Dichotic Listening 249; 253-258) 6 hours
Tests
- SCAN-3 outlined subtests
(Adult) & ACPT Due
October 16 Temporal Processing/ Rawool- Chapter 10 (Geffner & Readings = 3.5 hours
Patterning & Swain)
Binaural Interaction Lab Assignment/Report =
Tests Bellis Chapter 5 (204-212) and 6 hours
Chapter 6 (249 -253; 258-261)
- Monaural Low-Redundancy
Tests Due
October 23 Electrophysiological Kraus (Chapter 7, Geffner & Readings = 4 hours

tests of CAP Swain)
Lab Assignment/Report =
Articles TBA (Bb) 6 hours
- Dichotic Speech Tests

Due
October 30 SSW Test and PST Katz Articles- TBA (Bb) Readings = 3 hours
- Temporal Processing Lab Assignment/Report =

Tests Due 6 hours
November 6 Related Tests (TAPS- Bellis: Chapter 7 Readings = 3 hours

3, LAC) Medwetsky, Chapter 25 (Katz
Interpretation of Handbook, pages 601-607)
Results Lab Assignment/Report =
- Binaural Interaction Tests 6 hours
Due
November General Principles of Bellis, Chapter 8 Readings = 3.0 hours

13 CAPD Management Medwetsky, Chapter 28 (Katz
Handbook, pages 642-649) Lab Assignment/Report =
6 hours
- SSW & PST Due
CAPD: Fall 2013
Page 11 of 21

November CAPD Management & Fey et al. (Bb) Readings = 4 hours
20 Reports: Case Bellis, Chapter 9
Studies Medwetsky et al. (Chapter 28, Lab Assignment/Report =
648 -655) 6 hours
- TAPS-3 and LAC due
November Thanksgiving Break NO CLASS

27
November Service Delivery: Bellis Chapter 10; Johnson & Readings = 3 hours
28 Schools & Adults Seaton Chapter 5 (Bb)
CAPD Notebook Due
December 5 CAPD Research at Last Class !! Lab Assignment =

the NIH Client Assessment Due 2 hours
(Tentative)
Wrap-up
December Final Exam Travel Safely and See you in Study = 10 hours
12 January!!
TOTAL # HOURS =
108.0 HOURS
Suggested Additional Readings
Multidisciplinary Assessment
Bellis, T.J. and Ferre, J.M. (1999). Multidimensional approach to the differential
diagnosis of central auditory processing disorders.
Chermak, G.D. (2003). Pathways: It takes a team to differentially diagnose
APD. Hearing Journal, 56(4), 71.
APD Tests (Selected References)
Bornstein, S.P., Wilson, R.H. and Cambron, N.K (1994). Low- and high-pass
filtered Northwestern University Auditory Test No. 6 for monaural and binaural
evaluation. Journal of American Academy of Audiology, 5(4), 259-264.
CAPD: Fall 2013
Page 12 of 21
Hurley, R.M. and Musiek, F.E. (1997). Effectiveness of three central auditory
processing (CAP) tests in identifying cerebral lesions. Journal of American
Academy of Audiology, 8, 257-262.
Lipsky, F.I., & Emanuel, D.C. (2003). College Students with Self-Perceived
Listening Difficulties. Poster presented at the AAA Convention in San Antonio,
TX.
Musiek, F.E. (1994). Frequency (pitch) and duration pattern tests. Journal of
American Academy of Audiology, 5, 265-268.
Musiek, F.E., Baran, J.A. and Pinheiro, M.L. (1990). Duration pattern recognition
in normal subjects and patients with cerebral and cochlear lesions. Audiology,
29, 304-313.
Noffsinger, D., Martinez, C.D. and Wilson, R.H. (1994) Preliminary data for digits,
sentences, and nonsense syllables. Journal of American Academy of Audiology,
5(4), 248-254.
Singer, J., Hurley, R.M. and Preece, J.P. (1998). Effectiveness of central auditory
processing tests with children. American Journal of Audiology, 7(2), 73-84.
Stuart, A. and Phillips, D.P. (1998). Deficits in auditory temporal resolution
revealed by a comparison of word recognition under interrupted and continuous
noise masking. Seminars in Hearing, 19(1), 333-344.
Taylor, B. (2003). Speech-in-noise tests: How and why to include them in your
basic test battery. Hearing Journal, 56(1), 40, 42-46.
Wilson, R.H., Moncrieff, D.W., Townsend, E.A., & Pillion, A.L. (2003).
Development of a 500 Hz masking-level difference protocol for clinical use.
Journal of American Academy of Audiology, 14(1), 1-8.
Wilson, R.H., Preece, J.P., Salamon, D.L., Sperry, J.L., and Bornstein, S.P.
(1994). Effects of time compression and time compression plus reverberation on
the intelligibility of Northwestern University Auditory Test No. 6. Journal of
American Academy of Audiology, 5(4), 269-277.
CAPD: Fall 2013
Page 13 of 21
Appendix 1. CAPD Test Assignments
Value: 20% of your grade
Form teams of 2 members each and keep these teams for the remainder of the CAPD
assignments
Because CAP test norms are based on normal hearing individuals, individuals serving as
test subjects must have normal hearing; in the event that one member of the team does
not have normal hearing acuity, then seek normal hearing individual(s) to ensure that the
normal hearing partner also has the opportunity to conduct CAP tests
Divide the assigned test role among the two team members (i.e., serve as tester for equal
# of tests)
For EACH test:
o The person assigned the test is the audiologist
Responsible for setting up audiometer, finds the proper test form, performs
the test correctly, and scores the test according to protocol, scoring the
results, and determining if they are within normal limits or not
(make test copies if needed prior to test session)
Makes a summary of your reactions to the test (including observations of
client behavior) and the testing experience
Submits a copy of the rubric (top part completed, see 3rd page), and the
test score form along with all summaries stapled together to
Dr. Medwetsky (no emails)
o The person who is the client
Cooperates fully, giving true results
Makes a summary of his/her reactions to the test and the testing
experience
Gives that summary to the tester BEFORE it is due in class
o Dr. Medwetsky will score each assignment packet and return it to the team
Rubric for grading is at the end of this instruction sheet.
KEEP THESE IN A SAFE PLACE AS THEY WILL BE NEEDED
LATER!!!
CDs of the tests and the notebook with the test forms will be in the 3rd sound booth.
THEY MUST STAY THERE as we have CAPD clients. Also, remember not to take the
last test form without making copies!!
Keys are available if you need to do this testing outside the clinic hours. They may be
obtained from Vicky.
Plan ahead and communicate with each other so this can be a good experience for all!
There are 21 tests assigned with teams of 2 you would be responsible for @ 10 tests in each
category..
CAPD: Fall 2013
Page 14 of 21
Tests Divided Per Assignment Area

Dichotic Tests Temporal Tests
Auditec CD VA CD Auditec CD VA CD
SSI-CCM DD 3 pair Pitch Patterns Duration Patterns
DD 2 pair Random Gap
Detection Test
Precision Acoustics Gaps-in-Noise Test
Competing Sentences
Test
(a) Selective Auditory
Attention
(b) Divided Auditory
Attention
Monaural Low Redundancy Tests Binaural Interaction Tests

Auditec CD VA CD Auditec CD VA CD
SSI-ICM NU-6 65% TC with Binaural Fusion,
Reverberation tracks 12 or 13
Precision Acoustics NU-6 Low Pass Spondaic Words
MLD
Speech-in-Noise
Miscellaneous Tests Screening Tests

Precision Acoustics Mayer-Johnson Pearson Publishing Pearson Publishing
SSW TAPS-3 SCAN-3 ACPT
Phonemic Synthesis (Counts as 3 tests)
Competing Words
Free Recall
Competing Words
Directed Ear
Competing Sentences
CAPD: Fall 2013
Page 15 of 21
Grading Rubric
(21 tests)
Test Overview 2 pts
Score sheet correctly 1 pts
completed
Correct test interpretation 2 pts
Observations about the test 2 pts
experience (audiologist)
Observations about the test 2 pts
experience (Client)
Total Available for Each Test 10 pts
Total Available for this 210 pts

Section
CAPD: Fall 2013
Page 16 of 21
Grading Rubric
Turn one of these in (with the top portion completed) for EACH test listed
above
Test:
Audiologist:
Client Name:
Point Totals
Test Overview /2
Audiometric Settings /2
Score sheet correctly completed and correct /2
test interpretation
Observations about the test experience /2
(audiologist)
Observations about the test experience /2
(Client)
Total for this Test /10
CAPD: Fall 2013
Page 17 of 21
Rubric Rating Key
SCORING Satisfactory (2) Fair (1) Unsatisfactory (0)

CATEGORY
Test Overview Provides a comprehensive Provides a general Insufficient detail to
overview of the test, its overview of the test, regarding test
purpose, how administered, some information description, unclear
and target population (age concerning its purpose, regarding test purpose,
range) details about some not clear how the test is
aspects of how test is administered, nor any
administered and target mention of target
population (age range) population (age range)
Audiometric Settings All audiometric settings are Audiometric settings are Audiometric settings
accurately described generally accurate, poorly described or not
though one aspect erred discussed
Scoring Test form is included; all Test form is included, Test form not included;
items scored correctly, and items scored correctly if included, many items
correct interpretation of test except for an error or scored incorrectly,
results provided two, interpretation of wrong interpretation of
test findings is in test findings
ballpark
Audiologist Describes in thorough detail Description of (a) (e) Description of (a) (e)
Observations regarding: generally thorough generally insufficient
(a) observations concerning though some and superficial, lacking
test administration, information lacking in much detail or reflection
(b) ease in writing down 1-2 categories
client responses, (c) ease in
scoring responses; (d) ease
in interpreting test findings;
and (e) client behaviors
during testing
Client Observations Describes in thorough detail Describes in some detail Describes in minimal
regarding ease in regarding the ease to detail regarding the ease to
understanding test which instructions were which instructions were
instructions and degree to understood and the degree understood as well as the
which they found the test to to which they found the degree to which they
be difficult test to be difficult found the test to be
difficult
CAPD: Fall 2013
Page 18 of 21
Assessment Report Format

Name of Test:
Audiologist:
Client Name:
Brief Overview of Test:
Include:
assignment test category,
test purpose and information gleaned from the test,
client age range,
length of test,
standardized scores or standard deviation norms
Audiometric Settings:
Include:
# channels used,
whether earphones/loudspeakers,
dB levels each channel *
administered monaurally/diotically/dichotically)*
Test Form: Include test form with scored results

Test Result Scoring/Interpretations:
List:
results,
norms for the clients age,
conclude if findings within normal limits or significant, and
your interpretation of test findings
Audiologist Observations:
ease of following test guidelines,
ease of recording the results,
ease of scoring and interpreting test results,
personal observation of client behaviors during testing
Client Observations:
ease in understanding test instructions,
description of ease/difficulty in taking test
* Note that for the test that does not use an audiometer (TAPS-3), please indicate administered via live
voice in test suite, and indicate presentation rate/delivery as specified in the manual.
CAPD: Fall 2013
Page 19 of 21
Appendix 2. Individual Client Spoken-Language Processing (SL-P)

Assessment/Report
Value: 10%
Students will be provided with the Gallaudet Spoken-Language Processing Report template as
well as Medical History and Spoken-Language Processing Questionnaires. Students will be
expected to complete each the various sections, which generally follows the S.O.A.P format.
Students are expected to provide:
a comprehensive review of the clients relevant medical history, presenting concerns, and
overview of clients perception of processing related issues, social history, use of
compensatory strategies, and academic profile (if adult, the latter when attended school)
clients audiometric results (attach audiogram)
results from each of the spoken-language processing tests and statistical significance
relative to norms
a summary of major auditory and processing related findings and their implications in
everyday life settings
suggested interventions to address any apparent deficits (specific intervention(s)/
recommendation(s) for further testing, environmental strategies/accommodations, general
strategies)
CAPD: Fall 2013
Page 20 of 21
Grading Rubric
Category Superior Satisfactory Poor

(9.4 -10 points) (8.4 9.3 points) (7.0-8.3 points)
Subjective (Case Addresses all key Addresses most Leaves out many
History) aspects related to aspects related to important details
15 points medical history and medical history/SL-P pertaining to medical
SL-P questionnaires questionnaires but history/SL-P
leaves out 1-2 questionnaires
important details
Objective Includes all test Includes all test Omits some test
findings in the report findings in the report findings/does not
35 points (as well as (as well as include accompanying
accompanying score accompanying score score sheets, and
sheets), and sheets), and makes significant
accurately accurately number of errors in
scores/interprets all scores/generally scoring/interpreting
test findings interprets all test test findings
findings correctly
except for 1 -2 errors
Assessment Accurately interprets Generally interprets Interprets most of the
(Interpretation) the impact of test the impact of test test findings
25 points findings on everyday findings on everyday incorrectly in how they
performance performance will impact the
(listening, academics, (listening, academics, individual in everyday
socially) socially), though with life
some erred
information
Recommendations Presents a Presents most of the Leaves out key
comprehensive, list of key recommendations
25 points recommendations that recommendations that and/or includes # of
accurately addresses accurately addresses recommendations that
the needs of the the needs of the are inappropriate to
individual relative to individual relative to clients needs
findings obtained and findings obtained and
lifestyle lifestyle
CAPD: Fall 2013
Page 21 of 21
Appendix 3. Onsite Class Quizzes

Value: 10% of your grade
On-site, mini-quizzes will be administered at the onset of each class where readings have been
assigned for that day (commencing with the second lecture). These quizzes will be
approximately 10 minutes in duration, though if more time is needed this will be provided.
Approximately 2-3 questions will be posed. Quiz questions may take the format of multiple-
choice, fill in the blanks, true/false, logical or ordering of choices.
The goal of these quizzes is to prepare you prior to class presentation so that you will be better
prepared to follow the presentation and be an active participant- be it in class discussions or
posing questions based on the material that you have read/been presented.
1
HSL 834: Diagnostic Audiology (4 credits)

Fall Semester 2013
Course Syllabus
Class Schedule: Monday & Wednesday, 4:00-5:50 pm Room #: SLCC 1303

Instructor: Larry Medwetsky, Ph.D.
Office Location: SLCC 2220
Office Hours: Walk-in or apt.
Telephone: (202) 448.6965
Fax: (202) 651-5324
E-mail: larry.medwetsky@gallaudet.edu
Course Description
This course examines the principles of audiologic evaluation, including consideration of pure-tone
and speech audiometry, clinical masking, acoustic immittance battery, calibration and standards,
behavioral site-of-lesion testing, OAEs, and various pathologies that affect auditory-vestibular
systems.
Prerequisite: Open to HSLS majors only, or permission of the instructor or department chair.
Co-requisites: HSL815, HSL817, HSL840
Student Learning Outcomes

Upon successful completion of this course, students will be able to: Each course SLO is aligned with
the following program SLOs:
1. Select, describe, and provide rationale for use of appropriate 2 (prevention & identification)
diagnostic procedures given case history and presenting symptoms. 3 (evaluation)
2. Accurately interpret diagnostic test results and state 3 (evaluation)
recommendations. 4 (treatment)
3. Search, locate, and retrieve text chapters and scientific journal 3 (evaluation)
articles that are relevant in audiologic diagnoses. 4 (treatment)
This course will detail diagnostic procedures in clinical audiology. Commonly used clinical tests
will be highlighted along with test interpretation and case studies. It is expected that students will
simultaneously be completing a clinical practicum and actively participating in its labs and staffing
meetings.
Upon successful completion of this course, students will fulfill all or a portion of the 2007 ASHA
Audiology Certification Standards listed below:
Standard IV-B: Foundations of Practice

B1. Professional Code of Ethics and credentialing.
B2. Patient characteristics and how they relate to clinical services.
B8. Normal aspects of auditory physiology and behavior over the life span.
834- Syllabus- 2013 year.docx

2
B16. Medical/surgical procedures for treatment of disorders affecting auditory and vestibular
systems.
Standard IV-C: Prevention and Identification

C3. Identify individuals at risk for hearing impairment.
C4. Screen individuals for hearing impairment and disability/handicap using culturally sensitive
procedures.
Standard IV-D: Evaluation & IV-E: Treatment

D3. Obtain a case history.
D4. Perform an otoscopic examination.
D5. Determine the need for cerumen removal.
D6. Administer clinically appropriate and culturally sensitive assessment measures.
D7. Perform audiologic assessment using physiologic, psychophysical and self-assessment
measures.
D8. Perform electrodiagnostic test procedures.
D9. Perform balance system assessment and determine the need for balance rehabilitation.
D11. Document evaluation procedures and results.
D12. Interpret results of the evaluation to establish type and severity of disorder.
D13. Generate recommendations and referrals resulting from the evaluation process.
D14. Provide counseling to facilitate understanding of the auditory or balance disorder.
D15. Maintain records in a manner consistent with legal and professional standards.
D17/E18. Use instrumentation according to manufacturers specifications and
recommendations.
D18/E19. Determine whether instrumentation is in calibration according to accepted
standards.
Required Texts Suggested Texts

1. Katz, J., Medwetsky, L., Burkard, R., & Hood, 1. Publication Manual of the American
L. (2009). Handbook of Clinical Audiology, Psychological Association, 6th ed. ISBN:
th
6 ed. Baltimore, MD: Lippincott, Williams& 978-1-4338-0561-5
Wilkins. ISBN: 978-0-7817-8106-0.
2. Gelfand, S. (2009). Essentials of Audiology, 2. Mastering APA Style: Students Workbook

3rd ed. NY, NY: Thieme. ISBN: 978-1- and Training Guide. ISBN: 978-1-4338-
60406-044-7. 0557-8

3
Additional Readings:
In addition to chapters in texts, there will be additional required readings that will
supplement class lectures. The student is responsible for reading all required materials in
preparation for class, with mini-quizzes consisting of a few questions administered at the
start of each class. These readings will be available on Blackboard.
References
Blackwell, K.L., Oyler, R.F., Seyfried, D.N. (1991). A clinical comparison of Grason Stadler insert
earphones and TDH-50P standard earphones. Ear and Hearing, 12(5): 361-362.
Braanstrom, K.J., Lantz, J. (2010), Interaural attenuation for Sennheiser HAD 200 circumaural
earphones. International Journal of Audiology, 49(6): 467-471.
Lubinski, R., Golper, L.C., Fratalli, C.M. (2007). Professional Issues in Speech-Language
Pathology and Audiology, 3rd ed. Clifton Park, NJ Delmar/Cengage Learning, Chapter 1.
Martin, F.N., Clark, J.G. (2012). Introduction to Audiology. Upper Saddle, NJ: Allyn & Bacon,
pp 21-25.
Moore, B.C.J. (2010). Testing for Cochlear Dead Regions: Audiometer Implementation of the
TEN(HL) Test. Hearing Review. http://www.hearingreview.com/practice-
management/16935-testing-for-cochlear-dead-regions-audiometer-implementation-of-the-
tenhl-test
Munro, K.J., Agnew, N. (1999). A comparison of interaural attenuation with the Etymotic insert
ER-3A earphone and the Telephonics TDH-39 supra-aural headphone. British Journal of
Audiology, 33: 259-262.
Shabon, S.S., Cohn, E.R. (2011). The Communication Disorders Casebook: Learning by Example.
Upper Saddle, NJ: Allyn & Bacon, pp 1-5.
Sklare, D.A., Denenberg, L.J. (1987). Interaural attenuation for tubephone insert earphones. Ear
and Hearing, 8(5): 298-300.
Stach, B.A. (2009) Clinical Audiology: An Introduction, 2nd ed. Clifton Park, NJ: Delmar/Cengage
Learning, Chapter 1.

4
Also Utilized:
Blackboard (my.gallaudet.edu) will be used heavily in this course. Please be sure that you have
frequent and consistent access to internet.
Access to Otis, a virtual patient computer software, is available in the HSLS computer lab.
Learning Opportunities and Evaluative Methods

The following learning opportunities are provided during this course to achieve each outcome. In
addition, rigorous doctoral level standards will be employed to assess your achievement. Commitment
to academic excellence is expected and is characterized by: (1) completion of all assigned readings,
(2) consistent class and lab attendance, (3) active and meaningful class participation, and (4) the
practice of independent learning, which is the hallmark of a doctoral student. Refer to the course
schedule for the unit topics.
Outcome Learning Opportunities Assessment Methods

1. Select, describe, and provide rationale Lectures & Class - Exams
for use of appropriate diagnostic Discussions - Case Presentation
procedures given case history and Rubric
presenting symptoms. Case-based problem - Assignments
solving exercises
Case presentations
2. Accurately interpret diagnostic test Lectures & Class - Exams
results and state recommendations. Discussions - Case Presentation
Rubric
Case-based problem - Assignments
solving exercises
Case presentations
3. Orally communicate clinical - Case Presentation
information. Case presentations Rubric
Evaluative Tools (Further descriptions below)

1. Exams (50%)
2. Assignments (30%)
3. Mini-Quizzes- Readings (10%)
4. Case Presentation (10%)
Exams (50% of the grade) There will be two exams, Midterm (25%) and Final (25%). Final exam
is cumulative. The knowledge and skills tested include the materials covered in class, lab and other
exercises, and your readings. Your ability to synthesize information from various sources will also be
tested. Study guides will not be provided; however, you may refer to the unit objectives.

5
Assignments (30% of the grade) Several lab, case-based, and virtual patient exercises will be
assigned to reinforce concepts covered in class or readings. All written assignments must conform to
the APA style, 6th ed. Late submissions will generally not be accepted unless professor granted
extension. See Appendices, A & B.
Case Presentation (10% of the grade) Students will be paired and present on a case based on an
assigned pathology. Presentation must be between 30 and 40 minutes (See Appendix C).
Mini-Quizzes (10% of the grade)- Readings are assigned prior to each class. To ensure that students
have read material prior to class, mini-quizzes consisting of a few questions will be administered prior
to the first class for that week. Each mini-quiz will be administered during the first 10 minutes of class
and consist of 2-3 questions, except for the first week of the course when no mini-quizzes will be
administered (See Appendix D).
Attendance A specific percentage is not assigned for attendance; however, poor attendance will
likely lead to a less-than-satisfactory grade. It is each students responsibility to obtain and learn the
materials discussed in each class. Note that there will be no make-up opportunities for missed in-class
exam and exercises, regardless of the reasons for the absence.
Computation of Final Grade

Letter Grade Numerical Equivalent Quality Point Value Descriptor
A+ 97 100 4.0 Exemplary
A 94 96 4.0 Outstanding
A- 90 93 3.7 Commendable
B+ 87 89 3.3 Exceeds Course requirements
B 84 86 3.0 Satisfactory achievement
B- 80 83 2.7 Marginal satisfactory achievement
C+ 77 79 2.3 Unsatisfactory achievement
C 70 76 2.0 Unsatisfactory achievement
F Below 70 0.0 Failure

6
Academic Integrity
Academic Integrity Policy can be found in the current Graduate Catalog, and is also posted on Blackboard
under Syllabus. It can also be found at http://aaweb.gallaudet.edu/graduate-catalog.xml (Page 27). All
allegations regarding violations of the Universitys Policy on Academic Integrity will be investigated and
treated with utmost seriousness. Please read the Gallaudet University Policy on Academic Integrity, as you
will be responsible for its content. If you are unsure as to any part of the Policy, please discuss it with the
instructor or your academic advisor. Please familiarize yourself with the concept of due process. Violations
of the Academic Integrity Policy (e.g., cheating, plagiarism, abuse of computers) will result in a failing grade
for the course (i.e., grade of XF on transcript), and/or expulsion from the University.
BE SURE TO READ THE SCHEDULE CAREFULLY FOR TOPICS, TIMES, AND ASSIGNMENTS. DIRECTIONS FOR
ASSIGNMENTS CAN BE DOWNLOADED FROM BLACKBOARD.
Other University Policies

All University Policies can be found in the current copy of the Graduate Catalog
(catalog.gallaudet.edu). Special attention should be paid to the following:
1. Standards of Professional Behavior and Communication

Knowledge of the theories and methodologies of a profession and their application to professional
practice are major components of graduate study. In addition to academic accomplishments,
which are evidenced in a student's grades, graduate students must also demonstrate behavior and
communication skills that are consistent with professional standards. The principal elements of
professional behavior vary by discipline, but include tact; sensitivity to the needs and interests of
clients, colleagues, and supervisors; good judgment; and attention to professional responsibilities.
Moreover, student conduct must conform to the codes of ethics established by the particular
professional associations that certify practitioners and govern their professional behavior. The
principal elements of required communication skills include, but are not limited to written, oral,
and signed communication.
Adherence to these professional standards of behavior and communication are essential elements
of professional competence. Failure to meet these standards reflects adversely upon the
individual's suitability for professional service and may be grounds for dismissal from the
Graduate School.
2. Students with Disabilities

Students needing accommodations to succeed in class or clinic must formally request them
through the Office for Students with Disabilities (OSWD) at the beginning of the semester or as
soon as the disability is documented. Detailed information is available in the Graduate Catalog.
3. Compliance with ADA

Gallaudet University is in compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act and this
statement can be found in the Graduate Catalog.

7
CLASS SCHEDULE (TENTATIVE: SUBJECT TO CHANGE)
Readings will be added to the list throughout the semester. For the updated list of readings, see
Blackboard under Readings as well as under Discussion Board. Assignments are due Sunday night
unless otherwise indicated.
Please note that the schedule may change due to university closure, instructor decision, or student
request. Any changes to this schedule will be documented either via email or by announcements on
BlackBoard.
WEEK DATE TOPIC READING & ASSIGNMENTS DUE OUT OF CLASS TIME
Introductions Bb: Stach Ch1; Katz Ch.1; Readings = 4 HOURS
Scope of Practice Lubinski Ch1 (1-32);
1 8/28 History/Overview of
Audiology
Code of Ethics
Hz & dB; Equipment & Gelfand Ch. 4; Katz Ch. 2 (7-22- Readings = 4.5 hours
Calibration not ancillary eqpt; 26-27 test room
2 9/4 Otoscopy and Visual standards); Gelfand Ch. 2 (38-40) Bb= 1.0 hours
Inspection Bb: reference sites for visual
inspection and otoscopy
Tuning Fork test Gelfand Ch. 5; Katz Ch. 3; Katz Readings = 5 hours
Pure Tone Audiometry Ch. 4 (up to Testing
3 9/11 Air and Bone Considerations- page 52)
Audiogram Bb: Martin and Clark (21-25)
Interpretation- part 1
Audiogram Gelfand Ch.9 (274-278) Readings = 4 hours
Interpretation- contd Bb: Four articles on Interaural
Cross Hearing/ Interaural Attenuation, specifically articles by: Lab/Report = 6 hours
Attenuation (1) Brnnstrm KJ, Lantz J; (2)
Blackwell et al.; (3) Sklare &
4 9/18 Denenberg; and (4) Monro and
Agnew
Due 9/22: Ascending vs.

Descending Methods Assignment
Masking for PT testing Katz: Ch. 6 (80-88; 93-105) Readings = 3 hours

Speech Audiometry: Gelfand: Ch. 9 (279-297)
- Threshold Testing Lab/Report = 6 hours
5 9/25 - Word Recognition Due 9/29: Crossover and Cross
Testing Hearing Assignment
- PIPB Functions
Speech Audiometry- Katz: Ch.5; Gelfand Ch.8 Chapter Readings =

contd: Gelfand: Speech Masking (298-299) 4 hours
6 10/2
- Phonetic Katz: Speech Masking (105-114)
Feature/Phoneme Bb: Articles by Boothroyd (to be Bb articles = 3 hours
8
tests assigned)
Speech Audiometry-
contd (Masking for
Speech)
Mid-Term Exam Study

= @ 10 hours
Review
10/7
7
10/9 Midterm Exam
Chapter Readings = 2.5

Immittance Measures Tympanometry- Gelfand Ch.7 hours
Tympanometry (205-222); Katz Ch.9 (165-168)
10/16 Immittance Measures Bb: Articles to be assigned Bb articles = 3 hours
8
Advanced
Due 10/20: PIPB Functions Lab/Report = 6 hours
Immittance Measures Chapter Reading = 2.5

Advanced (contd) Katz Ch. 10 hours
9 10/23
Acoustic Reflexes
Nonorganic Hearing Gelfand Ch 11 (346-353); Katz Chapter readings =
Loss/Otoacoustic Ch 21 4.5 hours
Emissions Katz: Ch. 31
10 10/30
Due 11/3: Comprehensive Lab/Report = 7 hours
Acoustic Immittance Test Battery
Case History Katz Ch 7 Chapter Reading = 2

Presenting a Case Study, hours
and Case-Based Problem Bb: Cohn and Chabon: Making the
11 11/6
Solving Case for Case-Based Learning Bb Reading = 1 hour
Other excellent diagnostic Bb: Moore article on TEN test, Bb Readings = 2 hours
tools: Killion article on Quick SIN (to be
Quick SIN/ assigned)
12 11/13 TEN tests Lab/Report = 6 hours
Due 11/17: Otoacoustic
Emissions Assignment
Case Presentations Case Presentation Prep:

- 6 hours reading
13 11/20
- 8 hours PP prep

9
Thanksgiving Break
14 11/27 No class

Case Presentations,
Contd
15 12/4 Wrap-Up; Complete
Case-Based Problem
Solving; Review
Finals TBA Final Exam Study = 10 hours
Total Student Contact Total Outside
Time: 56 hours Assignments # = 111.5
hours

10
Appendix A(i). Grading Criteria (Rubric ) for Lab Assignments (Appendix B:
Labs 1-3)
Each lab is based on a total of 25 points, which are described in detail below:
Lab Planning/Design (maximum of 10 points)
Lab Reflections (maximum of 10 points)
Data Collection (5 points)
Lab Planning/Design (Encompasses the Hypothesis and Method sections)

In general, points are assigned as follows:
7.0 - 8.0 gaps in design and makes it hard to possibly conduct lab successfully
8.5 pts - good enough to carry out the lab
9.5 pts - no apparent problems with the procedures
10 pts - brilliant ideas are incorporated
Your lab plan must earn at least 8 pts in order to continue with the lab exercise.
What "good enough" means:

- the procedure that was conducted provides answer(s) to the lab questions
- the plan demonstrates your understanding of the topic and equipment functions
What's more than "good enough"

- the procedure is systematic and efficient
- the plan demonstrates your ability to see the interactions of various elements (topic matter,
equipment, environmental factors) and how they affect the outcome
Lab Reflections (Results, Conclusions/Discussion)

In general, points are assigned as follows:
Basics:
- Describe how the lab results answer the lab question(s) posed
- Explain how you determine whether your hypothesis was correct or not
7.0 -8.0 left out some basic aspects of assignment

8.5 pts - covered the basics
9.5 pts - covered the topic well
10 pts - exceptional coverage of the topic
Beyond Basics:
- Thorough analyses
- Absence of any conceptual errors (this does not mean errors of the lab execution, but
rather errors on how you analyze the lab)
- Insightful ideas (such as the implications of the findings for the clinic setting)
- Provision of supporting evidence (i.e., citation from the book or articles)

11
** A long reflection does not mean it is superior. You should be able to write up a lab reflection in
1-2 pages.
Data Collection:
3.0 or less- some relevant data missing in MS EXCEL
4 pts - All relevant data collected and recorded
5 pts - Data are logically organized and the results can be interpreted easily

12
Appendix A(ii). Lab Planning
Lab Title:
Student Name:
Question(s) to be answered during this lab:
Hypothesis (i.e., What do you expect your results to reveal and why- use citations as
appropriate?)
Outline Your Methods (equipment used, techniques(s) deployed, # and type of

subjects, etc.)
Rationale for your Methods (use citations as appropriate)
Results (What did you find? Indicate your results in either tables, EXCEL
spreadsheets, whichever can best describe the results)
Conclusions and Discussion: Did the results confirm your hypothesis or did they
reveal different findings? If different, what do you think may explain what may
account for this? What are the implications of these findings for you relative to the
clinic setting?
Cite your sources in APA style. Also, try to write in an organized fashion with well-constructed
sentences, as these Lab Plans will ultimately lead you to be better prepared when you must present
papers on future assignments.

13
Appendix B. LAB ASSIGNMENTS
Lab Assignment #1: Ascending/Descending Lab Assignment

Goal of Assignment: To (a) practice ascending and descending techniques for seeking pure-tone
thresholds and (b) determine if one obtains different thresholds via the two techniques.
Assignment Specifics: To seek thresholds for any three frequencies in the range 250 -8,000 Hz in
either the right or left ear in two different individuals using both the ascending and descending
techniques. On an EXCEL spreadsheet indicate the (a) Client #; (b) ear chosen; (c) air or bone
conduction; (d) procedure chosen, (e) frequencies presented and (f) levels presented and the listeners
response at each level. For threshold determination, use the ASHA 2005 guideline for the
Descending Approach and ANSI 2005 for the Ascending Approach.
Questions You Should Be Thinking About as You Approach this Lab:

1. How is the audibility of pure tones different when measured using the ascending method versus
descending method?
2. Based on the literature and your findings, which method (if any) do you feel that should be used
in the clinic setting to evaluate most clients?
3. What did you do to ensure that there was no learning effect? Describe this in the Method Section.
Before proceeding to conduct the experiment, use the Lab Planning/Reporting document to
guide your thought process prior to commencing the lab.

14
Lab Assignment # 2. Cross Over and Cross Hearing (Overmasking)
In this lab, you are asked to answer the following questions:

1. In persons with relatively normal hearing, how much noise causes over masking?
2. How are the over masking levels different if you tested using headphones vs. inserts?
3. How are the over masking levels different if you tested using 250 Hz vs. 3k Hz?
Methodology
1. Three students will collaborate in this assignment (each student will test the other two students).
Please confirm that all of you participating in this project have normal hearing acuity. Note that
two groups will consist of two members and will seek a third individual to serve as a second
subject.
2. You will assess each of your two colleagues by presenting 250 Hz and 3,000 Hz tones to one ear
via (i) supra-aural as well as (ii) insert phones.
3. Determine the threshold level at each frequency for each transducer.
4. Once thresholds have been obtained, present narrow band (NB) masking noise to the contralateral
ear. The initial masking level will commence at 10 dB above the threshold obtained in the test
ear. For each increase in masking level (increase in 5 dB steps), reassess if the subject can still
hear the presentation tone in the test ear. Continue to increase the masking level until the subject
is no longer able to hear the test tone. Then decrease noise once more (10 dB down steps) until
the test tone once more and then increase noise once more (5 dB up steps), until ascertain twice
the NB level that just masks out the test tone.
5. Do step # 4 for 250 Hz and 3,000 Hz for both the supra-aural and insert phones for each of your
two subjects.
Results
1. Plot (a) the thresholds, (b) NB noise level that results in overmasking, (c) masking-threshold
difference values for each of the supra-aural and insert phone conditions across all three subjects.
2. Describe the patterns observed relative to group/individual findings as a function of frequency

assessed and transducer applied.
Discussion
Present your conclusions and implications of these findings. Relate these findings to the literature.

15
Lab Assignment #3: Performance Intensity Functions Assignment
1. Three (one case four) students will collaborate in this assignment. You can use either supra-
aural or insert phones and choose an ear to present the speech stimuli.
2. Materials to be used: (a) 36 spondees used in our clinic and (b) 15 AB-Isophonemic Word
Lists
3. Spondees and AB- Isophonemic words will be presented via live voice with the goal of
ascertaining % correct as a function of dB presentation level. Only normal hearing individuals
(ears) will be used to obtain data in this study.
Spondees:
Prior to carrying out the actual lab, using the 36 spondees, create a total of six randomized, 10
item spondee lists (i.e., 10 spondees per list, total of six lists).
In conducting the lab, first familiarize the subject to all of the 36 spondees. Then obtain the
subjects SRT as you would normally would do. Then, commencing at 5 dB below the SRT,
present 10 spondees and calculate # correct/10 and convert to its corresponding percentage.
Increase in 5 dB steps and present 10 spondees at each level until you get two levels in a row
where the subject gets all 10 spondees correct (i.e., 100%).
For each dB presentation level, write down the corresponding percentage correct score. Then
plot the results on a graph (EXCEL is likely your easiest way to do so) for each of the three
subjects assessed.
AB Isophonemic Word lists:

There are a total of 15 lists, each consisting of 10 words (30 phonemes). Commencing at 5 dB
below SRT, present each 10 item word list and derive both the % word correct score and %
phoneme correct score. Increase in 5 dB steps and present a new list each time. Continue to
increase levels until you get a word recognition score of at least 92%.
To best do this exercise and avoid any learning of the lists, I am asking you to do the
following:
(a) Student #1 evaluates Student #2, while Student #3 is not in the room (note that if the
presenter has used 7 lists and the subject still has not achieved a 92% score, then the presenter
should do lists #1 and #2 again since the subject likely would have repeated very few, if any,
of the items correctly from those lists when presented at 5 dB below or at SRT), ; (2) Student
#2 evaluates Student #3- using the same lists used when Student #2 was evaluated (follow the
same guidelines for when subject #2 was assessed); (3) Student # 3 can present the remaining
7-8 lists to Student #1 (i.e., lists not used in assessing subject #2 and # 3).
For each dB level, write down both the % word correct score and the % total phoneme
recognition score. Then plot the results on a graph (EXCEL is likely your easiest way to do
so) for each of the three subjects assessed.

16
4. Average and plot the results across all three subjects to obtain (a) the mean % spondees as a
function of dB level; (b) mean % word recognition score as a function of dB level; and (3)
mean % phoneme word recognition score as a function of dB level.
5. You will write each report individually, though obviously you will report on the same data
(but do not collaborate on how you will present the data). Using the APA lab format that you
have used in past assignments, present an:
Introduction to the topic- including what the research would suggest concerning the
slope of the PI functions for each of the different stimuli as well as your hypothesis to
what you expect to find
Indicate the methodology used to conduct this experiment
Go over the results, including tables that show the data, as well as the graphs per
individual/mean data for each type of stimuli
In the discussion, summarize the findings, how they relate to your hypothesis, and the
implications of these findings for everyday clinical usage.

17
Lab #4. Acoustic Immittance Test Battery Assignment (for Lab # 4 and #5, a
different grading rubric is utilized)
Value =35 points
This next assignment is somewhat different than the labs you have completed up to now. Rather than
it being an investigatory assignment, it is more of a practical experience in learning how to conduct a
full immittance test battery, and, the many ways it can assist the clinician. The value of this
assignment will be slightly higher than the three previous labs (worth 35 points versus 25 points,
though I will use the same format of 10 points for intro/method, 10 points for results/discussion, and 5
points for data collection/display but adjusting the weighting to equal 35 points).
I will first provide an overview of the assignment, then I will give clear guidelines as to what I would
like included in your report.
For this assignment, you will be:

a) conducting 226 Hz probe tympanograms as well multi-frequency tympanometry,
b) obtaining acoustic reflexes (both contralateral and ipsilateral) as well as
c) examining acoustic reflex decay
I am asking that you do the above test battery on two subjects. Specifically, the following measures
are to be obtained from both ears of each client:
Tympanometry
Physical Volume
Middle Ear Pressure
Static Acoustic Admittance
Tympanogram Type (A, B, C, etc.) for the 226 Hz probe tone
Middle ear Resonance Frequency
Description of the tympanogram at the resonance frequency (e.g. # of peaks observed)
Acoustic Reflexes
Contra Reflex Thresholds (.5K, 1K, 2K, and 4K Hz)
Ipsi Reflex Thresholds (.5K, 1K, and 2 KHz)
Acoustic Reflex Decay

Ipsi and Contra (.5K and 1K Hz)

18
Format of the Report
Introduction:
Please indicate the value of incorporating acoustic immittance measures into a clinical test battery and
how the various components listed above (tympanometry, acoustic reflexes and acoustic reflex decay)
can contribute to the audiological assessment (please examine the literature and cite references). That
is, what can the results from each of the various procedures help us better understand diagnostically
(please note that since this is not a research lab, you do not have to generate a hypothesis).
Method:
Please describe the equipment used and program parameters that allowed you to derive each of the
various results (e.g., what software features did you access and the specific methodology used- such
as what range of middle ear pressure was encompassed in deriving the tympanogram, how you went
about obtaining the acoustic thresholds, what guided you in determining the actual reflex threshold
levels that you conducted acoustic reflex decay, etc.) .
Results:
For each subject, create a table that lists the results you obtained for each of the various test measures.
Please include a printout of the results obtained.
Discussion:
Please interpret each of the two clients findings relative to normative values, and, indicate if they
were within norms, or, if any were deviant from what you would have expected relative to normative
values.
Conclusion:
Please discuss how the overall results would have assisted you relative to their diagnostic value had
they been included as part of an actual hearing assessment, such as: (a) what did the results indicate
relative to each clients middle ear status; (b) auditory nerve/lower auditory brainstem function;
(c) facial nerve status, etc.

19
Grading Rubric for Lab 4 (Acoustic Immittance Audiometry)

Introduction Thoroughly discusses Discusses a number of Omits many key points
25 points how each element of points for each acoustic relative to each
the acoustic immittance immittance procedure acoustic immittance
battery contributes to and their contribution procedure and cites
the audiological to the audiological either very few articles
assessment, citing assessment and cites without relating it to
supporting references some references but not the information
necessarily indicating presented/no articles
how supports points cited
made
Method Accurately describes Accurately describes Describes immittance
15 points immittance bridge, immittance bridge, and bridge but some errors,
software features most of the software and omits many of the
accessed, and features accessed/ software features
sequential steps for sequential steps for accessed with
each procedure each procedure procedural steps
omitted or presented in
a disorganized fashion
Results Results for all Results for most Some results missing
15 points measures clearly/ measures clearly/ or erroneous
accurately indicated in accurately indicated in presentation (e.g.,
the table the table value(s) that does not
concur with printout
Discussion Accurate interpretation Accurate interpretation Misinterpretation of
20 points of each of the test of most of the test findings for at least 2
findings relative to findings relative to of the measures
norms norms, though one obtained
error present
Conclusion Thoroughly and Provides good Does not clearly
25 points logically demonstrates explanation as to how describe the diagnostic
the diagnostic value of the test results would value of including
including these test have assisted the these test measures as
measures as part of a student had the part of a hearing
hearing assessment findings been part of a assessment- leaving out
hearing assessment but many details and/or
does leave out some unclear response
details/supporting
information

20
Assignment 5. Otoacoustic Emissions Assignment (TBD)
Value = 35 points
Similar to the acoustic immittance lab, this lab is more of a practical experience in learning how to
conduct OAE and how using this technique can assist the clinician.
Using the Otoacoustic Emissions equipment available at Gallaudet University, each student will
conduct both transient and distortion OAE assessments from either a normal hearing individual or one
with a hearing loss. Both ears are to be assessed.
The following is an overview of the assignment. Prior to conducting OAES, please:

Conduct an otoscopic evaluation,
Obtain the clients AC thresholds, and
Conduct tympanometry/obtain Ipsilateral acoustic reflexes at 1 KHz in each ear to ensure no
conductive component present
Subsequently, you will conduct both transient and distortion product omissions.
Information to be obtained and reported include:
Transient OAE
Please indicate:
Presentation level
# presentations in quiet versus noise
% Reproducibility (i.e., cross correlated power spectrums)
dB SPL difference between first and second response
Overall TEOAE SPL level
TEOAE/noise (i.e., S-N ratio)
Distortion Product OAE

General Information to be included for the assignment:
F2:F1 ratio
F1 and F2 dBSPL levels
Approximate dB S/N ratio at 1KHz, 1.5Kz, 2KHz, 3KHz, 4KHz, and 6KHz

21
Format of the Report
Introduction:
Briefly provide an overview of what OAE are. Then please indicate the value of incorporating
otoacoustic emissions into a clinical test battery; that is, for which populations would obtaining OAEs
be useful and what can the results from OAE help us better understand diagnostically relative to each
population (please examine the literature and cite references).
Method:
Please describe the equipment used and indicate the program parameters separately for the Transient
and Distortion Product OAEs. Please indicate:
Software features accessed
Transient OAE (presentation level)
DPOAE (F2:F1 ratio & F1 and F2 dBSPL levels)
Results:
For your client create a table that lists the following results you obtained:.
1. Client Related Information
Client Age
AC Thresholds
Tympanometry
Ipsilateral Acoustic Threshold 1KHz
2. Transient OAE findings

# presentations in quiet versus noise
% Reproducibility (i.e., cross correlated power spectrums)
dB SPL difference between first and second response
Overall TEOAE SPL level
TEOAE/noise (i.e., S-N ratio
3. Distortion Product OAE

Approximate dB S/N ratio at 1KHz, 1.5Kz, 2KHz, 3KHz, 4KHz, and 6KHz
Discussion:
Please interpret each of the clients OAE findings relative to normative values. Indicate if they were
within norms or if results any were deviant from what you would have expected relative to normative
values (e.g., any frequency region where the evoked response was not at a +ve S/N ratio). Please also
report what the findings indicate relative to each ears cochlear status.
22
Grading Rubric for Lab 5 (OAE)

Introduction Provides an excellent Provides a good Minimalistic overview
35 points overview of OAE and overview OAE and of OAE and its
how OAE can how OAE can contribution to
contribute to the contribute to the diagnostic assessments
diagnostic test battery diagnostic test battery,(e.g., omitting many of
(e.g., populations however, leaving out a its applications) and
served and few key points- cites cites either very few
information that can some references but articles without
be gained), citing not necessarily relating it to the
supporting references indicating how information
supports the points presented/no articles
made cited
Method Accurately describes Accurately describes Describes OAE
15 points OAE equipment, OAE equipment and equipment but some
software features most of the software errors, and omits many
accessed, and features accessed/ of the software
sequential steps for sequential steps for features accessed with
each procedure each procedure procedural steps
omitted or presented
in a disorganized
fashion
Results Results for all Results for most Some results missing
15 points measures clearly/ measures clearly/ or erroneous
accurately indicated accurately indicated in presentation (e.g.,
in the table and the table and concurs value(s) that does not
concurs with printout with printout included concur with printout
included in report in report (or printout not
included in report)
Discussion Accurate Accurate interpretation Misinterpretation of
35 points interpretation of each of most of the test findings for at least 2
of the test findings findings relative to of the measures
relative to norms norms, though one obtained
error present

23
Appendix C. CASE PRESENTATIONS
Format
30 minute case study presentations involving adult subjects (real or imaginary; if real, please do
not use actual names)
PowerPoint; may use additional visual and audio aids
Group of 2 (pair up as you'd like) or individual; this is your choice but let me know what you
decide. I need to be informed at the latest by 3:00 on Wednesday, November 6th
Selection of dates for each presenter(s) will be conducted by randomized drawing in the 4:00 class
on 11/6
Presentations will commence on Monday, November 18th and subsequently held on Wednesday,
November 20th and Monday, December 2nd.
Content
Choose a pathology from the list of 12 provided at the end of this Appendix and inform this
instructor at the latest by Thursday, 11/7; in an effort to avoid duplication this will be done
first/come, first serve so please have a second alternative. If a pathology is already selected, then
I'll assign one to you. You will be informed of your topic as soon as possible (no later than this
Friday, November 8th ) on which pathology topic you will be presenting
Present a case real or fictional, but with the approved pathology
o Start with Case History Info
- Primary complaint(s)
- Medical and any relevant birth history; for the purpose of your presentation,
do not state any medical issues that would clearly give away the underlying
pathology (e.g., the client has had an ultrasound that has determined .)
- Ear/Hearing related issues
- Any relevant findings from elsewhere
o Present the audiometric findings (real or extracted from publications)
- Present other findings, as appropriate (such as previous audios)
o Summarize/integrate the test findings
Do not tell the class what the underlying pathology is until you have presented the case have
everyone guess.
Once you have presented the case and you have informed the class of the diagnosis, please:
Present on the typical presentation of this pathology, including:
o Descriptions
o Prevalence
o Symptoms
o Audiometric presentations
Other key findings youd expect
o Typical interventions that are implemented
Dont forget citations, and refer to them as you present in this portion of the presentation (rather than
one big list at the end)

24
Grading:
Content & Organization (10pts)
Presentation of case:
o Thoroughness of the case description (2.0pts)
o Accuracy/consistency of the audiometric findings (2.0pts)
Presentation of typical pathology representation:
o Thoroughness of the pathology description (1.5pts)
o Accuracy of the pathology information (1.5pts)
Clear organization (2pts)
Use of appropriate references (1pt)
Presentation Delivery (10pts)

Clarity of communication (4 pts)
o Pace and volume of speech
o Clear explanations of concepts
Quality of PowerPoint slides (2 pts)
o Font size
o Design choice
o Relevance and usefulness of visual aids
Professionalism/Ability to answer questions (2 pts)
Stayed within the time allotted (1pt)
Maintenance of audiences attention/interest (1pt)
List of Possible Pathologies:

Acoustic Schwannoma
Cholesteatoma
Discontinuity of the Ossicular Chain
Facial Nerve Disorder
Functional Hearing Disorder
Glomulus Jugulare Tumor
Menieres Disease
Noise Induced Hearing Loss
Otitis Media
Ototoxicity
Sudden (Idiopathic) Sensorineural Hearing Loss
Unilateral Stapes Fixation

25
APPENDIX D: ONSITE CLASS QUIZZES
On-site, mini-quizzes will be administered at the onset of the first class of that particular week for the
readings that have been assigned for that week. These quizzes will be approximately 10 minutes in
duration, though if more time is needed this will be provided. Quiz questions may take the format of
multiple-choice, fill in the blanks, true/false, logical or ordering of choices. A total of 2-3 questions
will be administered.
The goal of these quizzes is to prepare you prior to class presentation so that you will be better
prepared to follow the presentation and be an active participant- be it in class discussions or posing
questions based on the material that you have read/been presented.

2013 11 12 Medwetsky Larry 2nd Year Reappointment Dre

Transféré par

Informations du document

Description originale:

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

2013 11 12 Medwetsky Larry 2nd Year Reappointment Dre

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Resume: Larry Medwetsky, Ph.D.

2. 1977-1979 M.Sc. in Audiology and Aural Rehabilitation: McGill

3. 1974-1977 B.Sc. in Abnormal Psychology: McGill University

4. 1972-1974 C.E.G.E.P. (College) Diploma: McGill University

Recent Professional Experience

2. 2011-2012 Director of Quality Assurance and Special Projects

3. 2008- Vice President of Clinical Services

4. 1997-2007 Vice President: Research and Development

6. 1990-1992 Research Associate

Recent Committee Experience

2. 200-2009 AAA Committee Member of task force to develop

Recent Affiliated Activities

2. 2008-2010 ASHA Committee Member of task force to examine SLPs

3. 2008-2010 AAA Committee Member of task force to develop

4. 2002-2003 Professional Advisory Board Member: SONUS

5. 1993-1995 Professional Advisory Board Member:

2. Medwetsky L, Musiek F (2011) Spoken-language processing model: A more

3. Medwetsky L, Scherer M, Frisina R (2011) Factors influencing individuals'

4. Medwetsky L (2011) A case study. SSW Reports (33:1).

5. Medwetsky L (2011) Spoken language processing: Bridging auditory and language

9. Medwetsky L (2009) Mechanisms underlying central auditory processing. In: Katz

10. Medwetsky L, Riddle L, Katz J (2009) Management of central auditory processing

14. Medwetsky L (2006) Spoken language processing: A convergent approach to

15. Scherer M, Medwetsky L, Frisina RF (May 2005) The Hearing Technology

20. Medwetsky L, Sanderson D, Young D (1999) A national survey of audiology

21. Medwetsky L, Sanderson D, Young D (1999) A national survey of audiology

27. Hnath-Chisolm T, and Medwetsky L (1988). Perception of frequency contours via

2. 2013 Presentation at Hearing Loss Association of America

3. 2013 . Presentation to the North Carolina Speech, Language and

4. 2013 Presentation to the North Carolina Speech, Language and

5. 2012 Presentation at the New Jersey Speech, Language and

6. 2012 Presentation to the New Jersey Academy of Audiology.

7. 2011 Presentation at the New York State Speech-Language

9. 2008 L Medwetsky and L Riddle. Presentation at the American

10. 2008 D Geffner, L Medwetsky and D Swain. Presentation at the

11. 2008 Workshop at the New Jersey Speech-Language Hearing

12. 2008 Presentation at the American Academy of Audiology

13. 2007 Panel Discussion on Auditory Processing Disorders at the

14. 2006 Presentation at the Montana Speech and Hearing

15. 2005 Presentation at the American, Speech, Language, Hearing

16. 2005 Presentation at the American, Speech, Language, Hearing

2. 1989 Awarded the "Dr. Vera B. Douthit Memorial Award" in

3. 1988 Awarded "Certificate of Appreciation" in recognition of

Class Schedule: Wednesdays, 6:00-8:50 pm: Room #: SLCC 1304

Course Objectives/Student Learning Outcomes:

OUTCOME LEARNING ASSESSMENT METHODS

5. Correctly perform Lectures, Case Study, CAPD Test Results and

Standard IV-A: Foundations of Practice - knowledge of:

A7. Effects of hearing loss on communication and educational, vocational, social,

A9. Patient characteristics (e.g., age, demographics, cultural and linguistic

Standard IV-C: Assessment:

C4. Performing otoscopy for appropriate audiological assessment/management

Standard IV-E: Advocacy/Consultation:

Standard IV-F: Education/Research/Administration

F1. Measuring functional outcomes, consumer satisfaction, efficacy, effectiveness,

Processing Disorders in the Educational Setting From Science to Practice.

Geffner D. & Ross-Swain, D (2013). Auditory Processing Disorders:

Katz, J., Medwetsky, L. Burkard, R., Hood, L. (2009) Handbook of Clinical

Musiek, F.E. & Chermak, G.D. (2007). Handbook of (Central) Auditory

Chermak, G.D. & Musiek, F.E (2007). Handbook of (Central) Auditory

B. Standards of Professional Behavior and Communication

C. Students with Disabilities