Objective: Evidence suggests that physical activity enhances learning, and currently there is a profusion of research confirming the correlation between movement and academic achievement. A comparison single-case design was implemented to determine if an active speech approach is more effective than a traditional articulation approach in remediating errored speech sounds. Method: Using a comparative single-subject design, the primary investigator recruited students between five and 10 year of age from a local elementary school in Utah. Three participants followed an A-B-C design, where A was the baseline phase, B was the traditional articulation approach, and C was the Active Speech Approach. Three participants followed an A-B-C design. A total of six students were identified for this 5-week investigation. The independent variables were the traditional articulation approach, a clinician-driven intervention that uses a seated hierarchical progression, and the Active Speech Approach, an innovative approach that utilizes gross motor movements during targeted speech sound drills. Results: All participants demonstrated a greater rate of change in the phase directly following the baseline phase, no matter the intervention employed. The results of this investigation indicated a stronger association between the traditional articulation approach and the change in behavior. Overall, participants one, three and four had greater slope values than the participants who initiated treatment with the Active Speech approach. Conclusion: Results confirm that all participants made significant improvements with their errored speech sound with both independent variables. While the Active Speech approach did not produce greater gains than a traditional articulation approach, the Active Speech approach did prove that participants made substantial gains while also being actively engaged.
