Chapter 5:Assessment of Children with

Language Impairments: Basic Principles

I. Preliminary Components of Assessment**

• Screening refers to the process of quickly and efficiently obtaining a general view of a child’s language skills

• Screening can result in one of two decisions:– More, in-depth evaluation is needed– No further assessment is needed at this time

Owens 2014—the purposes of a full language evaluation are to

determine:

A case history…**• Is important to gather when

a child is going to undergo an in-depth language evaluation

• Can be supplemented by an examination of the student’s “cum file,” or cumulative file to see if there are patterns to his school performance over time

Paul & Norbury, 2012:

The Pre-Evaluation Process**

• After gathering a case history, the SLP needs to:– Obtain a comprehensive teacher evaluation of the

student’s classroom performance– Conduct one or more classroom observations of the

student– Assess the student’s language proficiency in L1 and L2– Examine the student’s school records– Ascertain whether or not there are medical, emotional,

or social variables that are impacting the student’s language and academic performance

Examples of variables:**

Divorce, family issues (e.g., death)

Peer teasing, bullying

Childhood illnesses (including OME)

• ADHD, drugs, alcohol

• Cultural factors

ASHA:

II. The use of Standardized (Norm-Referenced) Tests**

• Assessment of children’s language skills can take place through the use of standardized or formal tests

• Standardized tests give SLPs a quantitative means of comparing a child’s performance to the performance of large groups of children in a similar age category

• Most standardized tests are norm-referenced

• Standardized tests should not be used to create treatment goals and objectives

Test reliability must be considered:**

• Interjudge reliability (vs. intrajudge reliability)

• Test-retest reliability

III. Considerations in Using Standardized Tests

with CLD and low-SES Students**(called “diverse” students)

• Development of standardized tests has grown out of a middle class, literate, Western framework

• Some assumptions underlying standardized tests do not apply to these students

There are sources of bias in the use of standardized tests with diverse

students:**• Cultural-linguistic bias

• Value bias

• Situational/format bias

• Examiner bias

There are ways to modify standardized tests for use with diverse students**

• Though use of standardized tests with diverse students is not ideal, many SLPs use these tests anyway

• Any modifications of standardized language tests with diverse students must be explained in detail in the diagnostic report

IV. Language Samples**

• Language samples should be representative

• Culturally and linguistically appropriate strategies should be used when language samples are collected

• The SLP can calculate the child’s mean length of utterance

• Language samples can also be analyzed through use of type token ratio

To calculate type-token ratio:**

• Number of different words in the sample

• Total number of words in the sample

• For example:

• 100 different words in the sample

• 300 total words in the sample

• =TTR of 1:3

For children 3-8 years of age:**

• The average TTR is 1:2

• This indicates performance within normal limits

Remember to evaluate the student’s use of:**

• Questions and requests

• Complex and compound sentences

• Declarative sentences

• Negatives

Evaluate pragmatics skills:**

• Nonverbal skills (body language)

• Turntaking

• Ability to stay on topic with no nonsequiters

• Contingency (relatedness of an utterance to a previous utterance)

• Ability to add information

Informal evaluation of language use can also be implemented:**

• The SLP needs to analyze student interactions in natural communication situations with peers from similar cultural and linguistic backgrounds

V. Other Alternatives to Standardized Assessment**

• Diverse students are overrepresented in special education programs around the US

• One reason for this is that there are very few nonbiased assessment instruments and methods for assessing the possible presence of language impairments in diverse children

Legal considerations in nonbiased assessment include:**

• Mandates of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA, 2004)

• The IDEA 2004 emphasizes the prevention of inappropriate identification and mislabeling of diverse students for special education

According to the IDEA 2004:**

• Testing and evaluation materials and procedures must be selected and administered in a nondiscriminatory manner

• Testing and evaluation materials must be provided and administered in the language or other mode of communication in which the child is most proficient

Nonbiased, informal assessment alternatives include:** (explained in

next slides)• Dynamic assessment

• Assessment of information processing skills

• Assessment of narrative skills

• Portfolio assessment

Assessment of information processing skills:

In dynamic assessment:

Recent research:

Assessment of narrative skills…**

• Has become increasingly popular these days

• There are formal tests for this

• I generally use pictures or story-retell tasks and ask the questions on page 173 (e.g., does the child include the major details of the story)

Portfolio assessment…**

• Collect student’s work samples over time, evaluate how much (or little) progress has been made

Interpreters can be used in assessment of the language skills of

diverse students…**• Interpreters must be appropriately

trained for their roles

• They need to be shown how to administer assessment tasks

• The SLP needs to remain present during all testing that is conducted with an interpreter

VI. Diverse Students: Language Difference or

Language Impairment?**

• When diverse students struggle in school, teachers often refer them for special education testing

• Diverse students should never be labeled “language impaired” if problems are observed only in English and not in L1

Statistics: **

• This is very important, because by the year 2030, it is projected that 43% of U.S. citizens will be culturally and linguistically diverse (CLD)

• In approximately 20 years, children from culturally diverse backgrounds will constitute the majority of children attending U.S. schools

When assessing a diverse student for a possible language impairment…**

• It is very important to rule out the impact of environment

• We must ask if there is a mismatch between the child’s background and the school’s expectations

If we can successfully do this…**

• We will prevent mislabeling of diverse students with language impairments when they are merely manifesting language differences

• We will help them to fulfill their potential academically, socially, and vocationally