Specialty Recognition Specialty recognition has long been discussed among speech-language pathologists and audiologists. The first evidence of specialty recognition within the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA) can be traced back to the introduction of clinical certification. Prior to clinical certification, ASHA had two levels of membership (basic and advanced) that recognized a ... Viewpoint
Viewpoint  |   October 01, 2001
Specialty Recognition
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Dennis L. Burrows
    ASHA Council for Clinical Specialty Recognition
Article Information
Audiologic / Aural Rehabilitation / Viewpoints
Viewpoint   |   October 01, 2001
Specialty Recognition
SIG 7 Perspectives on Aural Rehabilitation and Its Instrumentation, October 2001, Vol. 9, 5-6. doi:10.1044/arii9.1.5
SIG 7 Perspectives on Aural Rehabilitation and Its Instrumentation, October 2001, Vol. 9, 5-6. doi:10.1044/arii9.1.5
Specialty recognition has long been discussed among speech-language pathologists and audiologists. The first evidence of specialty recognition within the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA) can be traced back to the introduction of clinical certification. Prior to clinical certification, ASHA had two levels of membership (basic and advanced) that recognized a member's level of preparation and experience. With the introduction of clinical certification, specialization in “hearing” or “speech” was introduced and the two levels of membership were eliminated. This change in membership established the precedent for our two professions and for specialty recognition.
The long road to finally establishing ASHA specialty recognition within the two professions is littered with ad-hoc committees and ASHA Legislative Council (LC) resolutions. The first of these resolutions called for establishing an ad-hoc committee on specialty recognition in 1978. Nonetheless, the introduction of specialty recognition was not without controversy, which led to several more ad hoc committees and LC resolutions. As noted in the 1994 Report of the Ad Hoc Committee on Specialty Recognition, “the arguments for a recognition program center around the right of the public to be able to identify practitioners prepared by specialized education and experience to meet particular clinical needs and the right of practitioners to define more precisely the nature of their clinical practice.”
First Page Preview
First page PDF preview
First page PDF preview ×
View Large
Become a SIG Affiliate
Pay Per View
Entire SIG 7 Perspectives on Aural Rehabilitation and Its Instrumentation content & archive
24-hour access
This Issue
24-hour access
This Article
24-hour access
We've Changed Our Publication Model...
The 19 individual SIG Perspectives publications have been relaunched as the new, all-in-one Perspectives of the ASHA Special Interest Groups.