Wait! What?
When I provide professional development seminars to fellow speech & language therapists, I always say these words:
“I do not think I can remember the last time I counted the stutters of any of my students.”
Don't get me wrong, I have felt pressured to do so by administrators (and others) who did not have a clear understanding of stuttering - or of federal guidelines for providing special services in the public schools. Even when "forced"to provide frequency counts, I only did so for initial and triennial evaluations because of the so-called "requirements." I knew that SLPs were supposed to have “data” to support our recommendations, and - at that time in the school setting - most people thought that this included fluency counts.
Over time, it became evident to me (and to many other SLPs) that the number of observable stutters in any specific speaking sample had no functional value for eligibility or for therapy purposes. The "counts" certainly didn't have any value for crafting meaningful communication goals for students who stutter
I am keenly aware that these blunt statements may be surprising (or concerning) to many SLPs. But we must shake out--and cease--the historical assessment practices that value counts of observable moments of stuttering more than the speaker's actual experience of stuttering.
Can we really stop counting stutters?
The short answer is "yes!" Counting stutters is not a reliable measure. We can move away from counting stutters for these primary reasons:
1. What you see is not what you get. What a listener can see or hear in a student’s speech does not capture the internal struggle or effort experienced by the person who stutters.
2. Stuttering is variable. You may have heard this phrase before:
“The only consistent thing about stuttering is that it is always inconsistent.”
Keeping this fact about stuttering in mind helps everyone understand that a student's feeling of "stuckness" can fluctuate significantly from moment to moment, day to day, and even situation to situation.
3. Perceived fluency can be false. During evaluations or progress monitoring sessions, when students know you are counting stutters (and yes, they know), students may subconsciously or deliberately avoid stuttering, change words, or hold back on saying what they want to say. These understandable reactions can result in artificially low frequency counts that do not reflect a student’s everyday communication challenges.
4. Stuttering is complex. Counting stutters reduces a multifaceted communication difference to a mere number, ignoring qualitative aspects like underlying social-emotional factors that influence stuttering. Emphasizing fluency counts oversimplifies (and misses) the multitude of factors that impact the speaker's experience of stuttering.
Importantly, we are not saying that communication samples have no value. Observing a student’s speech can add to the saliency of the overall stuttering assessment process by allowing us to observe a person's struggle, avoidance, circumlocutions, withdrawal, and other potential reactions. We just need to recognize that this does not tell the whole story or give the full picture of a student's communication experience.
So by all means, continue to observe your students’ speech and collect data about your own perceptions and observations as well as the perceptions and observations of others. This data will not need to include a frequency count. Above all, be sure that you discover how stuttering impacts the life and communication of your students who stutter. [For more on how to do this, see the Overall Assessment of the Speakers Experience of Stuttering - OASES™].
It is incumbent on us to collect, report, and utilize relevant data that informs our recommendations and therapy planning for each individual person who stutters. Frequency counts alone just don’t cut it.
What if I am required to do "fluency counts?"
Certainly, you may have to count observable stutters when you are actually required to provide that information. Put simply, we recommend that you do not use those frequency counts in eligibility or clinical decision-making processes. Instead, you can align your assessments with the broader understanding of what stuttering is, and how it affects students who stutter. This means that you can report the snapshot of observable stuttering behaviors, but that you will make certain to explain that these numbers are not given the importance they once held in the past. Instead, you will provide information from comprehensive evaluations and report much more than just observable behaviors.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
We have written on this topic many times.
Related resources
Early Childhood Stuttering Therapy: A Practical Guide
School-Age Stuttering Therapy: A Practical Guide Second Edition, 2026 Fully revised and expanded
Related blogs
If I don't count stutters, how can I qualify people for therapy?
Shifting Perspectives about Stuttering
Challenging Eligibility Criteria in the Public Schools
Measuring Adverse Impact in a Child Whose Stuttering Seems to be "Mild"
Related articles
Horton, S., Jackson, V., Boyce, J., Franken, M.-C., Siemers, S., St John, M., Hearps, S., van Reyk, O., Braden, R., Parker, R., Vogel, A. P., Eising, E., Amor, D. J., Irvine, J., Fisher, S. E., Martin, N. G., Reilly, S., Bahlo, M., Scheffer, I., & Morgan, A. (2024). Self-reported stuttering severity is accurate: Informing methods for large-scale data collection in stuttering. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 67(10S), 4015–4024.
Johnson, C. A., Gerwin, K. L., Tichenor, S. E., Boyle, M. P., & Walsh, B. (2024). Evaluating stuttering self-stigma and its relationship to adverse impact in children and adolescents with the Child Stuttering Self-Stigma Scale. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 67(9), 2920–2934.
Lei, X., Nguyen-Feng, V. N., & Sasisekaran, J. (2024). Stuttering severity and social anxiety among adults who stutter: A multilevel analysis. Journal of Fluency Disorders, 82, Article 106088.
Ortiz-Alvarez, A., & Arenas, R. (2025). A phenomenological exploration of the contextual variability of stuttering. Journal of Fluency Disorders, 84, Article 106120.
Rasoli Jokar, A. H., Karimi, H., & Yaruss, J. S. (2026). Addressing stuttering variability in assessment and treatment: Perspectives of speech-language pathologists. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 35(1), 180–198.
Reeves, N. A., Flynn, T. W., & Schuff, R. Z. (2023). Ableism to Empowerment: Navigating School Structures When Working With Students Who Stutter. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 1–19.
Tichenor, S. E., & Yaruss, J. S. (2024). Development and validation of a research version of the Overall Assessment of the Speaker's Experience of Stuttering–Adult (OASES-A-R). Journal of Fluency Disorders, 80, Article 106060.
Treleaven, S., Rubsam, S., Sheppard, M., Yaruss, J. S., & Chang, S.-E. (2025). Assessing childhood stuttering recovery: Incorporating self-identification and caregiver/clinician reports through adolescence. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 68(5), 2218–2235.