Examining the Associations Between Parent Concerns and School-Age Children's Language and Reading Abilities: A Comparison of Samples Recruited for In-School Versus Online Participation

Caregivers' Perceptions of COVID-19 Educational Disruptions on Children With Developmental Language Disorder and Typically Developing Peers

PURPOSE

Understanding the experiences of families of children with developmental language disorder (DLD) during COVID-19 educational disruptions is essential for designing responsive supports during pandemic recovery efforts and beyond. This qualitative study describes the experiences of families of first- and second-grade children with DLD during the pandemic as compared to the experiences of families of typically developing (TD) peers.

METHOD

A conventional content analysis approach was used to analyze caregivers' written responses to open-ended questions regarding their perceptions of COVID-19 educational disruptions. Responses were analyzed separately by group: caregivers of children with DLD (n = 23) and caregivers of TD children (n = 22).

RESULTS

Four categories of caregiver responses were generated for each group: impacts on children, remote learning challenges, impacts on caregivers, and protective factors. For both groups, concerns about the child's well-being and literacy learning were most prevalent and prevailed over concerns about oral language. Most caregivers in each group described negative impacts of educational disruptions on their cdhildren. As compared to caregivers of TD children, caregivers of children with DLD reported higher rates of remote learning challenges and more negative impacts on literacy learning, speech and/or language, and education in general. DLD caregivers also shared fewer positive comments and remarks related to protective factors.

CONCLUSIONS

Results indicate that families of children with DLD may have experienced more challenges during COVID-19 educational disruptions as compared to families of TD peers. Thus, responsive research and supports for these families is essential.

Reliability and Feasibility of Administering a Child Language Assessment via Telehealth

PURPOSE

Despite the speed with which telehealth use advanced during the COVID-19 pandemic, evidence is needed to support the remote delivery of standardized assessments. This study investigated the reliability and feasibility of administering a standardized language assessment administered in real-world telehealth scenarios compared to in-person administration.

METHOD

A total of 100 children between the ages of 3 and 12 years were administered one of three versions of the Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals (CELF). Children were administered the CELF by the same licensed speech-language pathologists (SLPs) in person and using telehealth, with the order counterbalanced. Means for Core Language standard scores were compared between conditions and among devices. Descriptive statistics summarized the behavior and technology disruptions during administration as well as the results of parent and SLP telehealth perception surveys.

RESULTS

In-person and telehealth mean scores on all three versions of the CELF revealed no systematic differences of one condition under- or overestimating another. The incidence of child behavior disruptions was similar for both test administration conditions. Adaptations compensated for the rare technology disruptions. Despite no significant language score and behavior differences between testing conditions, parents reported they continued to prefer in-person assessments. SLP participants viewed telehealth overall positively but identified conditions in which they continued to prefer in-person delivery.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides evidence of minimal or no differences in scores and behavioral or technological disruptions between remote and in-person administration of the CELF core language assessments. SLP and parent participants' attitudes toward remote delivery of standardized tests appear to be evolving in a positive direction compared to previous studies.

SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL

https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.25292752.

A Review of Screeners to Identify Risk of Developmental Language Disorder

PURPOSE

This review aims to comprehensively summarize, compare, and evaluate screeners used to identify risk for developmental language disorder (DLD), a common learning disability that is underidentified. Screening for DLD is a cost-effective way to identify children in need of further assessment and, in turn, provides much needed supports.

METHOD

We identified 15 commercially available English language DLD screeners in North America. We then characterized each screener on 27 aspects in three domains, including (a) accessibility information (acronym, subtest, website, cost, materials included, publish year, examiner qualification, age range, administration time, and administration format), (b) usability features (dialect compatibility, progress monitoring function, actionable follow-up instruction, group assessment capability, and online administration availability), and (c) technical standards (the availability of a technical manual, conceptual definition, the sample size used in classification accuracy calculation, sample distribution, year of sample collection, outcome measure, sample base rate, cutoff score, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value).

RESULTS

We obtained sufficient accessibility information from 14 out of 15 (93%) screeners. In contrast, none of the screeners (0%) included comprehensive usability features. Ten screeners (67%) included a range of classification accuracy (70%-100% sensitivity and 68%-90% specificity). We provided areas of strength and weakness for each screener as a quick reference for users and generated screener recommendations for five practical scenarios.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings presented some DLD screeners that meet most standards and highlight numerous areas for improvement, including improving classification accuracy and clarifying follow-up instructions for children who are identified with DLD risk. Screening for DLD is critical to provide timely early identification, intervention, and classroom support, which in turn facilitates student outcomes.

Communication in Daily Life of Children With Developmental Language Disorder: Parents' and Teachers' Perspectives

PURPOSE

This study explores limitations in communication in daily life of children with developmental language disorder (DLD) from their parents' perspective as well as communicative abilities and social functioning in the classroom from their teacher's perspective. Furthermore, differences between children with mixed receptive-expressive disorder and children with expressive-only disorder in communication in daily life and social functioning are studied.

METHOD

Data were collected through questionnaires completed by parents and teachers of children (5-6 years old) who attended schools for special education for DLD. Language test scores were retrieved from school records. Parents of 60 children answered open-ended questions about situations and circumstances in which their child was most troubled by language difficulties. Teachers of 83 children rated communicative abilities, social competence, and student-teacher relationship.

RESULTS

Parents reported communication with strangers as most troublesome and mentioned the influence of the mental state of their child. Parents considered limitations in expressing oneself and being understood and not being intelligible as core difficulties. Teachers rated the children's communicative abilities in the school context as inadequate, but their scores concerning social competence and the quality of teacher-child relationships fell within the normal range. Children with receptive-expressive disorder experienced limitations in communication in almost all situations, whereas those with expressive disorder faced limitations in specific situations. Children with receptive-expressive disorder were also significantly more limited in their communicative abilities and social competence at school than children with expressive disorder. No differences were found between the two groups in the quality of the teacher-child relationship.

CONCLUSIONS

The results confirm that children with DLD face significant challenges in a variety of communicative situations. We found indications that children with receptive-expressive disorder experience more severe limitations than children with expressive disorder. The involvement of parents and teachers in evaluating a child's communicative ability provides valuable and clinically relevant information.

Can You See My Screen? Virtual Assessment in Speech and Language

PURPOSE

This introduction presents the LSHSS Forum: Can You See My Screen? Virtual Assessment in Speech and Language. The goals of the forum are to document reliability and validity of assessment results conducted virtually, identify characteristics of measures that are suitable for online assessment, and provide clinical and research guidance for interpreting diagnostic results obtained in virtual settings.

METHOD

In this introduction, we provide an overview of the research completed by nine teams, who submitted research articles and notes on a variety of topics pertinent to the theme of telehealth assessments. Of these, seven teams investigated the validity and reliability of 14 different assessment tools, while two teams described training and experience issues.

CONCLUSION

The nine studies presented in this forum will provide speech-language pathologists with insight into a range of issues regarding telehealth assessment, including the breadth of suitable assessment tools; practical strategies for assessing children with a diverse range of ages, languages, skills, and abilities; and the unexpected challenges and opportunities of conducting clinical work and research during a global pandemic.