The researchers’ method and procedure involve the use of a case study, surveys, and interview techniques. Specifically, five SLTs presented their experiences of working with five assistant SLTs over a period of a school year. A research intervention study was designed to guide the process on how the five SLTs provided their intervention. This was under the study “A Randomised Controlled Trial and Economic Evaluation of Direct Versus Indirect and Individual Versus Group Modes of Speech and Language Therapy for Children with Primary Language Impairment (PLI).” Through the questionnaires and formal interview procedures, it was easy to stimulate views on the impact of working through assistants. After this, a content analysis was conducted to scrutinize the varied opinions of the SLTs through their experiences. The outcomes had dissimilar conclusions. The respondents reported seeing value in the assistants, although they reported complications of acclimatising and apprising therapy procedures when working indirectly. In addition, they stressed the time required to suitably coordinate their efforts with the assistants. In its conclusion, the article affirms that there is a need for considerable research to determine the necessary factors to make the relationship of SLTs and their assistants fruitful, although it presents several essential factors.
In the main, the assistants, who are not workwise qualified, work under the direction of SLTs who are certified and qualified. For this reason, an assistant must always be under supervision of an SLT, such as decisions pertaining to choice of client for therapy, admittance to the caseload, and discharges. Most of the assistant SLTs do not view their job as permanent; they only view it as a way to proceed their careers in other fields. Pertaining to the SLTs, they may be predisposed to work in a different way that may not be according to their formally trained