Comparison of the Diagnostic Evaluation of Language Variation-Screening Test Risk Subtest to Two Other Screeners for Low-Income Prekindergartners Who Speak African American English and Live in the Urban South

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 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.

Exploratory Examination of Speech Disfluencies in Spoken Narrative Samples of School-Age Bidialectal Children

PURPOSE

This study examined the relationship between school-age children's speech disfluencies and the use of and variation of Mainstream American English (MAE) and African American English (AAE). Given that bilingual children may present with notably more speech disfluencies than monolingual children, it was hypothesized that bidialectal speaking children (i.e., those that use both MAE and AAE) may exhibit higher speech disfluencies, as compared to children who speak mainly MAE and those who mainly speak AAE. It was also hypothesized that bidialectal speaking children would exhibit a greater variety of speech disfluency types when compared to the other two dialect groups (i.e., MAE and AAE).

METHOD

School-age children (n = 61) with typical development and fluency were classified into three dialect groups: MAE speakers (n = 21), bidialectal MAE-AAE speakers (n = 11), and AAE speakers (n = 29). Tell-retell narrative samples were elicited from each participant using a wordless picture book. Speech disfluencies exhibited during these narrative samples were examined for frequency of stuttering-like and nonstuttering-like speech disfluencies and type of speech disfluency.

RESULTS

Findings indicated that bidialectal speaking children do not present with a higher frequency of speech disfluencies when compared to children who speak MAE and children who speak AAE. Additionally, there were no differences in the types of speech disfluencies exhibited by the different dialect groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Unexpected findings of this study nullify both hypotheses and suggest that bidialectalism, in comparison to bilingualism, has less of an impact on speech fluency. Findings provide evidence that bidialectal speaking children are not at an increased risk for a misdiagnosis of stuttering. Clinically, these preliminary findings provide some scientific validity and specification to the appropriateness of using already established diagnostic criteria commonly used for stuttering with dialect speakers.