African American Preschoolers' Performance on Norm-Referenced Language Assessments: Examining the Effect of Dialect Density and the Use of Scoring Modifications

PURPOSE

We investigated and compared the outcomes from two standardized, norm-referenced screening assessments of language (i.e., Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals Preschool-Second Edition [CELFP-2], Diagnostic Evaluation of Language Variation-Screening Test [DELV-ST]) with African American preschoolers whose spoken dialect differed from that of General American English (GAE). We (a) described preschoolers' performance on the CELFP-2 Core Language Index (CLI) and its subtests with consideration of degree of dialect variation (DVAR) observed, (b) investigated how the application of dialect-sensitive scoring modifications to the expressive morphology and syntax Word Structure (WS) subtest affected CELFP-2 CLI scores, and (c) evaluated the screening classification agreement rates between the DELV-ST and the CELFP-2 CLI.

METHOD

African American preschoolers (N = 284) completed the CELFP-2 CLI subtests (i.e., Sentence Structure, WS, Expressive Vocabulary) and the DELV-ST. Density of spoken dialect use was estimated with the DELV-ST Part I Language Variation Status, and percentage of DVAR was calculated. The CELFP-2 WS subtest was scored with and without dialect-sensitive scoring modifications.

RESULTS

Planned comparisons of CELFP-2 CLI performance indicated statistically significant differences in performance based on DELV-ST-determined degree of language variation groupings. Scoring modifications applied to the WS subtest increased subtest scaled scores and CLI composite standard scores. However, preschoolers who demonstrated strong variation from GAE continued to demonstrate significantly lower performance than preschoolers who demonstrated little to no language variation. Affected-status agreement rates between assessments (modified and unmodified CELFP-2 CLI scores and DELV-ST Part II Diagnostic Risk Status) were extremely low.

CONCLUSIONS

The application of dialect-specific scoring modifications to standardized, norm-referenced assessments of language must be simultaneously viewed through the lenses of equity, practicality, and psychometry. The results of our multistage study reiterate the need for reliable methods of identifying risk for developmental language disorder within children who speak American English dialects other than GAE.

SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL

https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.26017978.

Grammaticality Judgments of Tense and Agreement by Children With and Without Developmental Language Disorder Across Dialects of English

PURPOSE

Within General American English (GAE), the grammar weaknesses of children with developmental language disorder (DLD) have been documented with many tasks, including grammaticality judgments. Recently, Vaughn et al. replicated this finding with a judgment task targeting tense and agreement (T/A) structures for children who spoke African American English (AAE), a dialect that contains a greater variety of T/A forms than GAE. In the current study, we further tested this finding for children who spoke Southern White English (SWE), another dialect that contains a greater variety of T/A forms than GAE but less variety than AAE. Then, combining the SWE and AAE data, we explored the effects of a child's dialect, clinical group, and production of T/A forms on the children's judgments.

METHOD

The data were from 88 SWE-speaking children (DLD, n = 18; typically developing [TD], n = 70) and 91 AAE-speaking children (DLD, n = 34; TD, n = 57) previously studied. As in the AAE study, the SWE judgment data were examined both with A' scores and percentages of acceptability, with comparisons between dialects made on percentages of acceptability.

RESULTS

As in AAE, the SWE DLD group had significantly different A' scores and percentages of acceptability than the SWE TD group for all sentence types, including those with T/A structures. Additional analyses indicated that the judgments of the TD but not the DLD groups showed dialect effects. Except for verbal -s, overt production and grammaticality judgments were correlated for the TD but not for the DLD groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Children with DLD across dialects of English present grammar difficulties that affect their ability to make judgments about sentences. More cross-dialectal research is needed to better understand the grammatical weaknesses of childhood DLD, especially for structures such as verbal -s that are expressed differently across dialects of English.

Grammaticality Judgments of Tense and Agreement by Child Speakers of African American English: Effects of Clinical Status, Surface Form, and Grammatical Structure

PURPOSE

We examined the grammaticality judgments of tense and agreement (T/A) structures by children with and without developmental language disorder (DLD) within African American English (AAE). The children's judgments of T/A forms were also compared to their judgments of two control forms and, for some analyses, examined by surface form (i.e., overt, zero) and type of structure (i.e., BE, past tense, verbal -s).

METHOD

The judgments were from 91 AAE-speaking kindergartners (DLD = 34; typically developing = 57), elicited using items from the Rice/Wexler Test of Early Grammatical Impairment. The data were analyzed twice, once using General American English as the reference and A' scores and once using AAE as the reference and percentages of acceptability.

RESULTS

Although the groups differed using both metrics, the percentages of acceptability tied the DLD T/A deficit to judgments of the overt forms, while also revealing a general DLD weakness judging sentences that are ungrammatical in AAE. Judgments of the overt T/A forms by both groups correlated with their productions of these forms and their language test scores, and both groups showed structure-specific form preferences ("is": overt > zero vs. verbal -s: overt = zero).

CONCLUSION

The findings demonstrate the utility of grammaticality judgment tasks for revealing weaknesses in T/A within AAE-speaking children with DLD, while also calling for more studies using AAE as the dialect reference when designing stimuli and coding systems.

SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL

https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.22534588.

An examination of 3rd and 5th grade students' use of dialect specific forms during a written editing task

PURPOSE

The goal of the current study was to examine the role of variety and frequency of dialectal features in relation to General American English (GAE) editing ability. This study focused on speakers of dialect-specific forms and their ability to edit to GAE. To gain insight into this relation, the following research questions were posed: (1). How do third and fifth-grade students differ in the variety of features of dialect-specific forms they use, the frequency of their use, and their editing ability to GAE? (2). Is there a significant relation between dialect use and editing ability?

METHODS

Participants included 68 third and fifth-grade students who produced at least one dialect-specific form. We measured students' ability to edit to GAE during a written editing task. Frequency and variety of dialect use were based on an oral language sample where students were asked to share their favorite game or sport.

RESULTS

Fifth-grade students are significantly better at editing written dialect specific forms to reflect GAE writing conventions as compared to third-grade students. However, there was not a significant difference in the dialect specific form usage between the two grades. Finally, there was not a significant relation between dialect specific form use and editing ability.

CONCLUSIONS

These results offer relevant clinical and educational implications for increasing cultural responsivity and promote the use of multiple measures across modalities to gain relevant information when assessing students who use dialect specific forms. Further, the results from this study provide further insights into how written editing ability exhibited through the awareness of GAE conventions improves with age despite the influence of dialect specific forms.

Bidialectal and monodialectal differences in morphosyntactic processing of AAE and MAE: Evidence from ERPs and acceptability judgments

INTRODUCTION

African American English (AAE) has never been examined through neurophysiological methods in investigations of dual-language variety processing. This study examines whether contrastive and non-contrastive morphosyntactic features in sentences with and without AAE constructions elicit differing neural and/or behavioral responses in bidialectal speakers of AAE and Mainstream American English (MAE), compared to monodialectal MAE speakers. We compared electroencephalographic (EEG) and behavioral (grammatical acceptability judgment) data to determine whether two dialects are processed similarly to distinct languages, as seen in studies of bilingual codeswitching where the P600 event related potential (ERP) has been elicited when processing a switch between language varieties.

METHODS

Bidialectal AAE-MAE speakers (n = 15) and monodialectal MAE speakers (n = 12) listened to sentences in four conditions, while EEG was recorded to evaluate time-locked brain responses to grammatical differences between sentence types. The maintained verb form in the present progressive tense sentences (e.g., The black cat lap/s the milk) was the morphosyntactic feature of interest for comparing P600 responses as an indicator of error detection. Following each trial, responses and reaction times to a grammatical acceptability judgment task were collected and compared.

RESULTS

Findings indicate distinct neurophysiological profiles between bidialectal and monodialectal speakers. Monodialectal speakers demonstrated a P600 response within 500-800ms following presentation of an AAE morphosyntax feature, indicating error detection; this response was not seen in the bidialectal group. Control sentences with non-contrasting grammar revealed no differences in ERP responses between groups. Behaviorally, bidialectal speakers showed greater acceptance of known dialectal variation and error (non-contrastive) sentence types compared to the monodialectal group.

CONCLUSIONS

ERP and behavioral responses are presented as preliminary evidence of dual-language representation in bidialectal speakers. Increased consideration of AAE language processing would enhance equity in the study of language at large, improving the work of clinicians, researchers, educators and policymakers alike.

Language Variation in the Writing of African American Students: Factors Predicting Reading Achievement

Purpose This study aims to examine the predictive relation between measures obtained from African American students' written narrative language samples and reading achievement, as measured by standardized academic assessments. Method Written language samples were elicited from 207 African American students in Grades 1-8. The samples were examined for morphosyntactic variations from standardized written Generalized American English (GAE). These variations were categorized as either (a) specific to African American English (AAE) or (b) neutral across AAE and standardized written GAE (i.e., considered ungrammatical both in AAE and in standardized written GAE). Structural equation modeling was employed to then examine the predictive relation between the density of AAE-specific forms in students' writing and their performance on standardized assessments of literacy and reading vocabulary. This relation was examined while accounting for the density of dialect-neutral morphosyntactic forms, reported family income, age, and written sample length. Results The written samples were highly variable in terms of morphosyntax. Younger students and those from lower income homes tended to use AAE-specific forms at higher rates. However, the density of AAE-specific forms did not significantly predict standardized literacy scores or reading vocabulary after accounting for dialect-neutral variations, income, and sample length. Conclusions These results support the ongoing need to better understand the language, literacy, and overall academic development of students from all backgrounds. It may be essential to focus on dialect-neutral language forms (i.e., morphosyntactic forms that are consistent across both AAE and standardized written GAE) in written samples to maximize assessment validity across students who speak varying dialects of English. Supplemental Material https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.16879558.

Language Use and Development in Third-Person Singular Contexts: Assessment Implications

Purpose The purpose of this assessment-focused clinical focus article is to increase familiarity with African American English (AAE)-speaking children's pattern of language use in third-person singular contexts and to discuss implications for speech-language assessments of developing AAE-speaking children. Method The clinical focus draws on descriptive case study data from four typically developing child speakers of AAE who are between the ages of 3 and 5 years. The children's data from three different sources-sentence imitation, story retell, and play-based language samples-were subjected to linguistic analyses. Results The three sources of linguistic data offered different insights into the children's production of -s and other linguistic patterns in third-person singular contexts. Conclusions This study underscores the importance of exploring developing child AAE from a descriptive approach to reveal different types of information about patterns of morphological marking in different linguistic contexts, which is crucial in assessing developing AAE. Implications for language assessment are discussed.

Perceptions of Black Children's Narrative Language: A Mixed-Methods Study

Purpose In this mixed-methods study, we address two aims. First, we examine the impact of language variation on the ratings of children's narrative language. Second, we identify participants' ideologies related to narrative language and language variation. Method Forty adults listened to and rated six Black second-grade children on the quality of 12 narratives (six fictional, six personal). Adults then completed a quantitative survey and participated in a qualitative interview. Results Findings indicated that adults rated students with less variation from mainstream American English (MAE) more highly than students with greater variation from MAE for fictional narratives, but not for personal narratives. Personal narratives tended to be evaluated more favorably by parents than teachers. Black raters tended to assign higher ratings of narrative quality than did White raters. Thematic analysis and conversation analysis of qualitative interviews supported quantitative findings and provided pertinent information about participants' beliefs. Conclusion Taken together, quantitative and qualitative results point to a shared language ideology among adult raters of variation from MAE being more acceptable in informal contexts, such as telling a story of personal experience, and less acceptable in more formal contexts, such as narrating a fictional story prompted by a picture sequence.

Teacher Report of Students' Dialect Use and Language Ability

Purpose For many school-age children, teachers are the first professionals to refer for speech/language services. However, many speech-language pathologists note that students without language disorders who speak non-mainstream American English (NMAE) dialects are referred to speech/language evaluation. This research note presents results of a preliminary study exploring teachers' ability to report student dialect use and how teacher reports of language ability depend on their perception of the student's dialect use. Method Teachers completed a brief two-question survey about students' dialect use and a standardized questionnaire about students' language and literacy skills for 254 students (K‑second grades). A subset of 30 students completed a standardized screener of dialect use and language ability. Results Teachers reported that 12.2% of students spoke an NMAE dialect, whereas 77.2% did not. In sharp contrast, the Diagnostic Evaluation of Language Variation-Screening Test indicated that 63% of students spoke an NMAE dialect, and 37% spoke MAE, suggesting a discrepancy between teachers' perceptions of dialect use and children's dialect use. Written responses suggested teachers may confuse NMAE dialect use and bilingualism or speech/language difficulties. Interestingly, teachers reported lower language skills among students they believe speak an NMAE dialect (p = .021). Conclusions These results provide preliminary evidence that teachers may have difficulty determining student dialect use and may report lower language skills for students they believe speak an NMAE dialect. Interprofessional collaborations between teachers and speech-language pathologists may be able to reduce the likelihood of misdiagnosis of language disorders among students who speak NMAE dialects.

Rare Vocabulary Production in School-Age Narrators From Low-Income Communities

Purpose This study was designed to assess the utility of a tool for automated analysis of rare vocabulary use in the spoken narratives of a group of school-age children from low-income communities. Method We evaluated personal and fictional narratives from 76 school-age children from low-income communities (M _age = 9;3 [years;months]). We analyzed children's use of rare vocabulary in their narratives, with the goal of evaluating relationships among rare vocabulary use, performance on standardized language tests, language sample measures, sex, and use of African American English. Results Use of rare vocabulary in school-age children is robustly correlated with established language sample measures. Male sex was also significantly associated with more frequent rare vocabulary use. There was no association between rare vocabulary use and use of African American English. Discussion Evaluation of rare vocabulary use in school-age children may be a culturally fair assessment strategy that aligns well with existing language sample measures.

Production of Morphosyntax Within and Across Different Dialects of American English

Purpose This study examined the production of morphosyntactic markers by school-age children with and without developmental language disorder. Comparisons were made between students who speak mainstream American English (MAE) dialects and nonmainstream American English (NMAE) dialects. Method First- and second-grade students (N = 82) completed assessments of dialect use and language ability, which are designed for students who speak NMAE dialects. Students also completed an experimental production task targeting three morphosyntactic features: past tense -ed marking, third-person singular -s marking, and plural -s marking. Past tense marking and third-person singular are produced differently across MAE and NMAE dialects, whereas plural marking is produced more similarly across dialects. Results When comparing across dialects, children with typical language skills who spoke NMAE dialects overtly marked past tense and third-person singular less often compared to MAE peers. However, when comparing to same-dialect peers with language disorders, children with typical language skills who spoke NMAE dialects overtly marked these morphosyntactic markers more often than peers with developmental language disorder. Conclusion The results underscore the importance of considering a child's dialect use when assessing language ability, in particular with measures that include features that are variable in NMAE dialects. At the same time, within-dialect comparisons suggest that a broader set of morphosyntactic features may provide useful information for evaluations of language ability. Future research should investigate the source of these differences, including the extent to which students with language disorders have acquired the social and linguistic factors that condition the use of variable features.

Survey of assessment and intervention practices for students who speak African American English

Speech-Language Pathologists (SLPs) working with students from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds are encouraged to be "familiar with nondiscriminatory testing and dynamic assessment procedures" (ASHA, 2003). Little is known, however, about the extent to which SLPs implement these methods into their clinical practice. The current study explores the assessment and intervention practices used by SLPs in two states in the US for students who speak African American English (AAE), including the types and frequency of clinical practices. 247 SLPs completed an online survey regarding clinical practices for students who speak AAE as well as a questionnaire regarding their knowledge of the linguistic features of AAE. Half of SLPs reported using modified or alternative assessment practices the majority of the time or some of the time for students who speak AAE; however, SLPs reported using modified or alternative treatment practices less often. Modified scoring of standardized assessments and selecting different intervention strategies were the most commonly reported clinical practices. Knowledge of linguistic features of AAE was a significant predictor of the frequency with which SLPs report implementing modified or alternative assessment and intervention practices and SLPs with the highest levels of knowledge of AAE utilize different clinical practices than those with lower levels of knowledge of AAE. Additional information is needed about the most effective clinical practices for students who speak AAE and the barriers SLPs face to implementing nondiscriminatory clinical practices.

Clinical Implications for Working With Nonmainstream Dialect Speakers: A Focus on Two Filipino Kindergartners

Purpose

The purpose of this clinical focus piece is to increase familiarity with Philippine English (PE) and highlight clinical implications for working with nonmainstream dialect speakers.

Method

The clinical focus draws on descriptive case study data from 2 Filipino kindergarten boys who live in the United States. Multiple ethnographic data sources were subjected to contrastive analyses regarding nonmainstream features in the children's speech that might be consistent with PE.

Results

The 2 boys demonstrated grammatical and phonological features consistent with their home dialect, PE, and individualized variation relative to one another. We utilize these findings to illustrate 2 key implications for providing culturally competent clinical services when working with nonmainstream dialect speakers: (a) validate and support all Mainstream American English Learners in the classroom and (b) recognize that variance within a dialect is not always indicative of disorder. Explicit recommendations for clinical practice are provided.

Conclusion

Understanding and validating the diversity of nonmainstream dialect speakers within the U.S. schools are critical to providing culturally competent speech-language services.

Prologue: Toward Accurate Identification of Developmental Language Disorder Within Linguistically Diverse Schools

Purpose

Although the 5 studies presented within this clinical forum include children who differ widely in locality, language learning profile, and age, all were motivated by a desire to improve the accuracy at which developmental language disorder is identified within linguistically diverse schools. The purpose of this prologue is to introduce the readers to a conceptual framework that unites the studies while also highlighting the approaches and methods each research team is pursuing to improve assessment outcomes within their respective linguistically diverse community.

Method

A disorder within diversity framework is presented to replace previous difference vs. disorder approaches. Then, the 5 studies within the forum are reviewed by clinical question, type of tool(s), and analytical approach.

Conclusion

Across studies of different linguistically diverse groups, research teams are seeking answers to similar questions about child language screening and diagnostic practices, using similar analytical approaches to answer their questions, and finding promising results with tools focused on morphosyntax. More studies that are modeled after or designed to extend those in this forum are needed to improve the accuracy at which developmental language disorder is identified.

The Impact of Dialect Density on the Growth of Language and Reading in African American Children

Purpose

The goal of the current study was to examine the impact of dialect density on the growth of oral language and reading skills in a sample of African American English (AAE)-speaking children reared in urban communities.

Method

Eight hundred thirty-five African American children in first through fifth grades participated. Using an accelerated cohort design, univariate and bivariate growth models were employed to examine dialect density, oral language and reading, and the relationships between these variables.

Results

For the univariate models, results indicated that (a) dialect density decreased over time by approximately 5% per year beyond first grade, (b) language skills improved approximately 0.5 SD per year, and (c) reading comprehension increased significantly from first to second grade and slowed 23% per year in second through fifth grades. Results from the bivariate models revealed that (a) dialect density and language ability are negatively associated, although dialect density did not affect change in language over time, and (b) higher dialect density is related to slower growth in reading.

Conclusions

Findings from this investigation provide converging evidence for accounts in the extant literature particularly supporting a negative relationship between dialect density and oral language and between dialect density and reading while also contributing novel longitudinal evidence that suggests that changes in dialect use over time may be driven by oral language skills and that reading and dialect have a reciprocal relationship.

Language Assessment With Children Who Speak Nonmainstream Dialects: Examining the Effects of Scoring Modifications in Norm-Referenced Assessment

Purpose

We compared outcomes from 2 measures of language ability in children who displayed a range of dialect variation: 1 using features that do not contrast between mainstream American English (MAE) and nonmainstream dialects (NMAE), and 1 using contrastive features. We investigated how modified scoring procedures affected the diagnostic accuracy of the measure with contrastive features.

Method

Second-grade students (N = 299; 167 White, 106 African American, 26 other) completed measures of language variation and ability (the Diagnostic Evaluation of Language Variation-Screening Test and the Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals-Fourth Edition [CELF-4]). The CELF-4 was scored with and without the recommended scoring modifications for children who spoke African American English.

Results

Partial correlations controlling for socioeconomic status revealed small to moderate correlations between measures of language ability and the use of NMAE features. Modified scoring yielded higher scores for children who spoke African American English and a reduced association between the use of NMAE features and CELF-4 scores. Modified scoring also affected the diagnostic accuracy of the CELF-4, resulting in a lower positive likelihood ratio and a higher negative likelihood ratio.

Conclusions

The decision to apply scoring modifications affects both the false positive and false negative rates. Implications for language assessment for children who speak NMAE dialects are discussed, including the need for further investigation.

Observed and Parent-Report Measures of Social Communication in Toddlers With and Without Autism Spectrum Disorder Across Race/Ethnicity

PURPOSE

This study investigated whether measures of early social communication vary among young children of diverse racial/ethnic status with and without autism spectrum disorder (ASD).

METHOD

Participants were 364 toddlers between ages 18 and 36 months with a diagnosis of ASD confirmed (n = 195) or ruled out (n = 169), from 3 racial/ethnic categories: non-Hispanic White (n = 226), non-Hispanic Black (n = 74), and Hispanic (n = 64). Group differences in social communication were examined using an observational measure-the Communication and Symbolic Behavior Scales Behavior Sample (CSBS-BS; Wetherby & Prizant, 2002)-and a parent-report measure, the Early Screening for Autism and Communication Disorders (Wetherby, Woods, & Lord, 2007).

RESULTS

Controlling for maternal education, children with ASD scored significantly lower on the CSBS-BS than children without, indicating poorer social communication skills, and higher on the Early Screening for Autism and Communication Disorders, indicating more ASD features. Racial/ethnic groups did not differ on 6 CSBS-BS clusters, but Non-Hispanic White toddlers scored significantly higher than both other groups on the Understanding cluster. There were no significant Diagnosis × Race/Ethnicity interactions.

CONCLUSION

These findings indicate good agreement between observed and parent-report measures in this sample. Results suggest that the CSBS-BS and Early Screening for Autism and Communication Disorders could be viable tools in the detection process for toddlers with ASD in these racial/ethnic groups.

Examining the use of spoken dialect indices with African American children in the southern United States

PURPOSE

To examine the utility of different dialect indices that have been used to characterize the Non-Mainstream American English (NMAE) dialect of African American children. The relationships among 4 popular dialect indices were examined and compared with the results of a standardized tool used to classify the language variation of child speakers at 3 different grade levels.

METHOD

The authors used listener judgment ratings, 2 dialect density measures obtained from a narrative sample, a standardized tool (Part 1 of the Diagnostic Evaluation of Language Variation-Screener Test [DELV-ST; Seymour, Roper, & deVilliers, 2003]), and dialect variation scores (DVAR) obtained from the DELV-ST to characterize 113 African American children's spoken production of NMAE.

RESULTS

Grade-level effects on NMAE varied depending on the index used to measure dialect production. All of the dialect indices under investigation were related to one another. DELV-ST classification group effects were present on all but 1 of the indices used to capture NMAE.

CONCLUSIONS

Newer measures of NMAE, such as the DELV-ST and DVAR scores, are comparable to older measures such as dialect density measures and listener judgment ratings. Like listener judgment ratings, the DELV-ST and DVAR scores offer clinicians and researchers alike a quicker alternative to dialect density measures for confirming and quantifying the spoken production of NMAE dialect. The present findings confirm that, depending on the type of data collected and questions posed, researchers and clinicians alike are able to choose from multiple, valid, and reliable measures of non-mainstream dialect use.

Seeking a valid gold standard for an innovative, dialect-neutral language test

PURPOSE In this study, the authors explored alternative gold standards to validate an innovative, dialect-neutral language assessment. METHOD Participants were 78 African American children, ages 5;0 (years;months) to 6;11. Twenty participants had previously been identified as having language impairment. The Diagnostic Evaluation of Language Variation-Norm Referenced (DELV-NR; Seymour, Roeper, & J. de Villiers, 2005) was administered, and concurrent language samples (LSs) were collected. Using LS profiles as the gold standard, sensitivity, specificity, and other measures of diagnostic accuracy were compared for diagnoses made from the DELV-NR and participants' clinical status prior to recruitment. In a second analysis, the authors used results from the first analysis to make evidence-based adjustments in the estimates of DELV-NR diagnostic accuracy. RESULTS Accuracy of the DELV-NR relative to LS profiles was greater than that of prior diagnoses, indicating that the DELV-NR was an improvement over preexisting diagnoses for this group. Specificity met conventional standards, but sensitivity was somewhat low. Reanalysis using the positive and negative predictive power of the preexisting diagnosis in a discrepant-resolution procedure revealed that estimates for sensitivity and specificity for the DELV-NR were .85 and .93, respectively. CONCLUSION The authors found that, even after making allowances for the imperfection of available gold standards, clinical decisions made with the DELV-NR achieved high values on conventional measures of diagnostic accuracy.

Rate and phonological variation in preschool children: effects of modeling and directed influence

PURPOSE

To explore the effect of modeling and explicit elicitation of slow and accurately produced speech in typically developing preschool children. Optional phonological reductions (e.g., deleted final stops) and changes in speech rate were examined in response to an adult conversational speaker's speech style.

METHOD

Forty 3- and 4-year-olds (20 each) were tested in 3 tasks: (a) immediate repetition of a model, (b) spontaneous speech, and (c) directed speech style (cueing to correct "sloppy" speech). In Task 1, half of each group heard fast and hypoarticulated versus slow and hyperarticulated speech for a between-group response-to-model comparison. Tasks 2 and 3 were compared within subjects.

RESULTS

Task 1 demonstrated that both age groups aligned with the speaker's rate and phonological variants usage when repeating a model. Tasks 2 and 3 revealed that 4-year-olds varied phonological reduction patterns according to the task demands, whereas 3-year-olds maintained consistent patterns of usage. In addition, neither group successfully realigned with the rapid speech rate in Task 3.

CONCLUSIONS

These results contribute to an evidence base supporting the practice of modeling slow and clear speech to children with various production disorders. Further research is needed to explore the cognitive-linguistic processes underlying alignment before findings are applied to clinical populations.

The cultural appropriateness and diagnostic usefulness of standardized language assessments for Indigenous Australian children

Speech-language pathologists experience uncertainty about how to interpret standardized assessment results for Indigenous Australian children. There are risks for inappropriate diagnosis: both over- and under-diagnosis of language impairment may occur due to a convergence of linguistic features which causes difficulty in distinguishing between impairment and difference. While the literature suggests that standardized assessments are inappropriate for Indigenous Australian children, there is an absence of empirical documentation to show how Indigenous children perform on standardized tests of language ability. This study examined the performance of 19 Indigenous Australian children, aged 8;01-13;08, from one school on the Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals, Fourth Edition, Australian Standardized Edition. Standardized scores were compared with teacher ratings of children's oral language skills. Analysis showed poor alignment between teacher ratings and language assessment, and assessment scores were negatively influenced by features of Aboriginal English. Children rated with above average language skills presented with different linguistic profiles from the children rated with average and below average language abilities. The inappropriateness of current standardized language assessments for Indigenous children and the need for further research to guide appropriate assessment are discussed.

Effect of dialect on identification and severity of speech impairment in Indigenous Australian children

This study investigated the effect of dialectal difference on identification and rating of severity of speech impairment in children from Indigenous Australian backgrounds. The speech of 15 Indigenous Australian children identified by their parents/caregivers and teachers as having 'difficulty talking and making speech sounds' was assessed using the Diagnostic Evaluation of Articulation and Phonology. Fourteen children were identified with speech impairment on the Diagnostic Evaluation of Articulation and Phonology using Standard Australian English (AusE) as the target pronunciation; whereas 13 were identified using Australian Aboriginal English (AAE) as the target. There was a statistically significant decrease in seven children's severity classification and a statistically significant increase in all children's percentage of consonants, vowels and phonemes correct when comparing AAE with AusE. Features of AAE used by the children included /h/ insertion and deletion, primary stress on the first syllable and diphthongs alternating with short clear vowels. It is important that speech-language pathologists consider children's dialect as one component of culturally and linguistically appropriate services.

Language Sample Analysis With Children Who Speak Non-Mainstream Dialects of English

The following article provides an overview of the benefits of using Language Sample Analysis (LSA) for assessing language performance in non-mainstream dialect speakers, addresses the importance of establishing community reference databases for these speakers, and describes a set of strategies that can be useful for developing reference databases in local school districts.