A Model of Bilingual Speech-Language Assessment
A Model of Bilingual Speech-Language Assessment Teresa M. Gillespie, M.S., C.C.C., Bilingual Speech-Language Pathologist Carla Dominguez, M.A., C.C.C., Bilingual Speech-Language Pathologist Denver Public Schools Special Education Assessment Services (SEAS) November 14, 2015 American Speech-Language-Hearing Association Convention
Disclosure: Financial – Both presenters are employed by the Denver Public Schools. Non-Financial – No relevant non-financial relationship exists.
Learner Outcomes
Discuss state and federal laws and professional organization guidelines regarding appropriate speechlanguage assessment of English Learners
Collect a speech-language body of evidence
Conduct culturally and linguistically appropriate speechlanguage assessment of English Learners
Rationale for Development of the Assessment Model
Limited norm-referenced and standardized assessments for monolingual Spanish and bilingual Spanish-English speakers from a variety of dialectical variations
Cultural, linguistic, and content biases in available norm-referenced and standardized assessments for monolingual Spanish and bilingual SpanishEnglish speakers
Rationale for Development of the Assessment Model
Differences in language acquisition trajectories between simultaneous versus sequential bilingual Spanish-English speakers can affect performance on norm-referenced and standardized assessments
High volume of referrals in Denver Public Schools for assessments in Spanish with a limited number of Bilingual Speech-Language Pathologists to conduct those assessments
Research Behind Development of the Assessment Model
Conducted a study to establish the level of English language proficiency necessary for School-based monolingual English-speaking SpeechLanguage Pathologists (SLPs) to conduct meaningful informal speechlanguage assessment in English
Conducted a study to determine the effectiveness of the assessment model in identifying native Spanish-speaking students who would or would not benefit from speech-language assessment in Spanish
Currently conducting a study to determine the concordance among different Bilingual SLPs who utilize the assessment model in identifying native Spanish-speaking students who would or would not benefit from speechlanguage assessment in Spanish
STATE AND FEDERAL LAWS THAT SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT MODEL
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA)
Section §300.304 states that the public agency must “use a variety of assessment tools and strategies to gather relevant functional, developmental, and academic information about a child, including information provided by the parent . . . ”
Section §300.304 further states to “not use any single measure or assessment as the sole criterion for determining whether a child is a child with a disability ...”
Section §300.305 states that “as part of an initial evaluation (if appropriate) and as part of any reevaluation under this part, the IEP Team and other qualified professionals, as appropriate, must review existing evaluation data on the child, including evaluations and information provided by the parents of the child; current classroom-based, local, or State assessments, and classroom-based observations; and observations by teachers and related service providers . . . ”
Exceptional Children’s Educational Act (ECEA)
Section 4.02 states that “The requirements and procedures for initial evaluations shall be in accordance with . . . §300.304 and §300.305 (IDEA) . . . ”
PROFESSIONAL ORGANIZATION GUIDELINES THAT SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT MODEL
American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA)
Per the Preferred Practice Patterns for the Profession of Speech-Language Pathology (November 2004) 1, Comprehensive Speech-Language Assessment, “Assessment . . . includes the following: . . . Standardized and/or nonstandardized measures of specific aspects of speech, spoken and nonspoken language, cognitive-communication, and swallowing function . . . ”
Per the same document, Speech-Language Assessment for Individuals Who Are Bilingual and/or Learning English as an Additional Language, “Assessment . . . includes the following: . . . “Selection, administration, and interpretation of standardized assessment tools and/or nonstandardized sampling (e.g., interviews and observation in varied settings and multiple activities) conducted with recognition of the unique characteristics of the individual’s linguistic community . . . ”
National Association of School Psychologists (NASP)
Per the National Association of School Psychologists Position Statement (July 2009) 2, School Psychologists’ Involvement in Assessment, “School psychologists consider, accommodate, and provide appropriate modifications for all aspects of diversity that might impact assessment results, such as . . . cultural differences. School psychologists interpret and report outcomes in a manner that communicates the limitations of their assessments, data, and interpretations”
Per the same document, school psychologists “use a multimethod, multisource, . . . approach to assessment. The multiple methods of assessment include, but are not limited to, the use of record reviews, observations, interviews, and various forms of formal and informal testing. The multiple sources of information include, but are not limited to, parents, teachers, administrators, peers, students, curriculum materials, instructional procedures, . . . ”
Turn~n~Talk!
For the next ten minutes, please turn to your neighbor or neighbors and discuss the questions in the next column:
Questions: Do you assess English Learners? Do you use a trained Interpreter? Is there a bilingual assessment team in your work setting? What kinds of assessments do you use?
Speech-Language Body of Evidence Definition: Information collected from a variety of sources (i.e., parental report, teacher report, in-classroom observations, medical records, student records, results from previous assessments, completed questionnaires/checklists, collected language samples, literature review, results of current informal/formal assessments, speech-language therapeutic progress monitoring data, etc.) that describes the current speech and language skills of a student, any progression/regression of those skills over time, and the possible causes of any observed speech and/or language difficulties (i.e., Autism, traumatic brain injury, Down Syndrome, hearing loss, verbal apraxia, etc.).
Gillespie, 2014
Collection of a Speech-Language Body of Evidence
Completed by the School-based Speech-Language Pathologists (SLPs), whether they are bilingual or not
Utilization of native Spanish-speaking professionals in the schools to assist with the collection of the body of evidence if the SLPs are not bilingual
Five guiding documents to employ when collecting the body of evidence
Guiding Document 1
Guiding Document 2
Guiding Document 3
Guiding Document 4
Guiding Document 5
EXAMPLES OF A SUFFICIENT SPEECH-LANGUAGE BODY OF EVIDENCE
Example # 1 “Fulana is a . . . native Spanish speaker . . . She was initially staffed, following testing in her native language, for a severe articulation, mild receptive, and moderate expressive language impairment. At this time, Fulana is judged to be 100% intelligible in continuous speech and no articulation concerns are present. Her current speech/language goals target expressive language abilities, particularly sequencing her thoughts and words to express ideas/messages clearly. Fulana has met this goal and is able to tell a four-part story, in sequence, with appropriate transitions, given visual pictures, with minimal prompts . . . She also has demonstrated progress toward her goal of taking conversational turns and maintaining a topic of conversation . . . Her teacher reports no further concerns regarding communication.”
Example # 2 Fulano was referred for an observation/screening . . . His teacher reported that his current communication skills are impacting Fulano's ability to participate in the classroom . . . Fulano's articulation was informally screened in Spanish and English . . . Commonly observed errors heard in Fulano's native language of Spanish and in his secondary language of English were as follows: final consonant deletion e.g., /n/, cluster reduction, syllable deletion of both weak and strong stressed syllables, bilabial errors, inconsistent /l/ productions, /s/ deletion or /h/ substitution . . . Volume of voice and range of motion used when independently naming pictures was limited. He also had some difficulties in labeling pictures in Spanish and English as well . . . Fulano's progress has been limited with respect to increasing his overall speech intelligibility. Most growth has been achieved in increasing volume with prompting and vocabulary . . . In sessions, he is able to label some basic categories with picture representations . . . and receptively he is able to sort and add on to groupings. He follows directions and novel activities with . . . strategies. No receptive language concerns have been reported . . . in Spanish.”
Example # 3 “Fulano transferred to . . . this year. Records from initial evaluation report student was first assessed for a disability in Kindergarten and results were he did not qualify. Then, in first grade, he was tested again using standardized scores from formal English language testing . . . with "disclaimers," and he was identified with a severe language impairment. A bilingual questionnaire form was filled out by the teacher and responses indicated "social language" peer behavior difficulty. Specific problems listed were - slower to respond (yes, that is typical when processing information and speaking in your 2nd language), paying attention, remembering things, and staying on topic . . . Struggles in English are clearly documented but questionable in differentiating a language difference from a disorder.”
ANALYSIS OF A SPEECHLANGUAGE BODY OF EVIDENCE
The SEAS Bilingual SLP determines if the speech-language body of evidence (BOE) is sufficient. It is considered to be sufficient if it contains:
The last reported ACCESS 3 (Assessing Comprehension and Communication in English State-to-State for English Language Learners) Speaking Subtest score
Information about receptive and expressive language, and articulation, skills in Spanish, based on information gained from a speech-language probe in Spanish, collection of a language sample in Spanish, parent interview, teacher report, results from previous speech-language assessment in Spanish, etc.
Information about receptive and expressive language, and articulation, skills in English, if the student is bilingual, based on observation, informal speech-language assessment in English, speech-language therapeutic progress monitoring data, completed checklist, parent interview, teacher report, etc.
Information about pragmatic language skills
Information about fluency and voice skills
The SEAS Bilingual SLP analyzes the BOE by comparing the student’s current speech-language skills with what is known in the research literature about:
Spanish language development Simultaneous/Sequential bilingualism Spanish speech sound development Speech-language disorders in the bilingual population Stages of Second Language Acquisition Second Language Acquisition Processes BICS - Basic Interpersonal Communication Skills CALP - Cognitive Academic Language Proficiency
The SEAS Bilingual SLP also researches information in various district databases, to which the school-based SLPs may not have access, to gain information about the student’s:
subject grades performance on various district and state assessments inclusion in any special academic programs
The SEAS Bilingual SLP analyzes:
the student’s progress on the current speech-language objectives with respect to the appropriateness of the objectives the rate of progress the results of previous speech-language assessments the mobility of the student between schools/countries the student’s involvement with any private speech-language, physical, occupational, and/or other therapeutic services history of language of content/literacy instruction, acculturation, therapeutic use of strategies to help make content comprehensible, etc.
if the student has previously been identified with a Speech-Language Impairment (SLI)
• The SEAS Bilingual SLP also consults with other professionals on SEAS who may have evaluated the student in additional areas, e.g., education, cognition, social-emotional, and/or health
The SEAS Bilingual SLP consults with the School-based SLP if the speechlanguage BOE is insufficient to determine: if additional information can be obtained, and to provide guidance about what additional information needs to be gathered if the SEAS Bilingual SLP needs to proceed with a speech-language assessment in Spanish because the usual means of obtaining additional information have been exhausted
Guiding Document for Bilingual Speech-Language Pathologists
CONDITIONS UNDER WHICH SPEECH-LANGUAGE ASSESSMENT IN SPANISH IS COMPLETED
If there are verified speech-language concerns, then speech-language assessment in Spanish is warranted
If there are any discrepancies or gaps in, or any unanswered questions about, the BOE or information gathered that cannot be resolved or answered through the collection of additional evidence or information
If there is a specific parent request for a speech-language assessment by a Spanish-speaking diagnostician
If there are NOT any verified speech-language concerns, then speechlanguage assessment in Spanish is unwarranted
Articulation-Only Concerns
• Initial Eligibility
Students receive speech assessment in Spanish
• Re-Evaluation Eligibility
Students receive informal speech re-evaluation in English by the Schoolbased SLP
Receptive and/or Expressive Language Concerns • Initial Eligibility
Students receive assessment in Spanish if: The concerns have been verified – sufficient BOE Their ACCESS Speaking Subtest scores are Level 1 or 2
• Re-Evaluation Eligibility
Students receive assessment in Spanish if: Their ACCESS Speaking Subtest scores are Level 1 or 2 There are discrepancies or gaps in, or unanswered questions about, the BOE or information gathered
Receptive and/or Expressive Language Concerns • Initial Eligibility
Students first receive informal assessment in English by the Schoolbased SLP if their ACCESS Speaking Subtest scores are Level 3, 4, or 5: If the results of the informal assessment in English indicate speech-language skills within the low-average-to-average range, then assessment in Spanish is NOT completed If the results of the informal assessment in English indicate speech-language skills below the low-average range, then assessment in Spanish IS warranted
Receptive and/or Expressive Language Concerns • Re-Evaluation Eligibility
Students receive informal assessment in English by the School-based SLP if their ACCESS Speaking Subtest Scores are Level 3, 4, or 5: If the results of the informal assessment in English indicate speech-language skills below the low-average range, then assessment in Spanish IS warranted If there are discrepancies or gaps in, or unanswered questions about, the BOE or information gathered, then assessment in Spanish IS warranted
Receptive and/or Expressive Language Concerns • Speech-language re-evaluation in Spanish is not completed for students at
any ACCESS Speaking Subtest score level if a review of the sufficient BOE indicates that: The student continues to benefit from speech-language therapeutic services The student can be exited from speech-language therapeutic services without prejudice, pending parental and Special Education Team input/discussion at the Individualized Education Program (IEP) meeting
Transfers • If a student has received previous comprehensive speech-language
assessment in Spanish, and has been identified as presenting with SpeechLanguage Impairment (SLI): AND . . . there are no discrepancies or gaps in, or any unanswered questions about, the BOE or information gathered, then additional speech-language assessment in Spanish is NOT warranted BUT . . . there are discrepancies or gaps in, or any unanswered questions about, the BOE or information gathered, then additional speech-language assessment in Spanish IS warranted
If a student has not received previous comprehensive speech-language assessment in Spanish, and has been identified as presenting with SLI, then speech-language assessment in Spanish IS warranted
TYPES OF SPEECH-LANGUAGE ASSESSMENT
Formal – the test or tests utilized are standardized and norm-referenced
Informal – the test or tests utilized are not standardized or norm-referenced
Comprehensive – includes assessment in the areas of receptive language, expressive language, pragmatic language, articulation/phonology, fluency, voice, and oral mechanism
Targeted – assessment is limited to a few speech-language areas
Criterion-referenced – standards-based assessment which measures how well specific skills have been mastered
Play-based – assessment of young individuals in a naturalistic environment of structured and unstructured play
Dynamic – an assessment identifies the skills that individuals possess as well as their learning potential
• SEAS Bilingual SLPs conduct the different types of speech-language assessments as follows:
Formal assessment
Informal assessment
The student is monolingual Spanish-speaking An appropriate assessment exists that has been norm-referenced and standardized on a monolingual Spanish-speaking population The student is not exposed to the English language in the home environment or enrolled in content and literacy instruction in English
The student is bilingual Spanish/English-speaking An appropriate assessment that has been norm-referenced and standardized on a bilingual Spanish/English-speaking population does not exist the student benefits from readministration in English of test items initially administered in Spanish and failed
Comprehensive assessment - when the BOE demonstrates that the student would benefit from assessment in most or all speech-language areas
Targeted assessment - when the BOE demonstrates that the student would benefit from assessment in only one or two speech-language areas
Criterion-referenced – helps to distinguish a language difference from a language disorder for both structural and functional communication tasks by comparing a student’s performance on specific developmental language and/or content/literacy skills to predetermined criteria
Play-based – when the student is young, or when the BOE indicates that the student is significantly low-functioning and may not respond well to complex test administration directions
Dynamic – helps to distinguish a language difference from a language disability by acquiring information about a student’s best performance through the utilization of a system of hierarchal cues/supports
Think~Pair~Share!
For the next ten minutes, please think about one of the topics in the next column, pair up with one of your neighbors, and share your thoughts/ideas!
Topics:
Language difference versus language disorder
Linguistic/cultural biases in speech-language assessment tools Conceptual scoring Basic Interpersonal Communication Skills (BICS)and Cognitive Academic Language Proficiency (CALP) Skills
APPROPRIATE SPEECH-LANGUAGE ASSESSMENT OF ENGLISH LEARNERS Speech-Language Assessment Tools
There are several speech-language assessment tools that are standardized and norm-referenced on individuals who speak a language other than English; however, the standardization samples may not take into account the following:
the educational levels of the individuals in the standardization samples the acculturation levels the background experiences the bilingual abilities the particular dialects
Speech-language assessment tools contain linguistic and cultural biases: Vocabulary use Some cultures do not teach the labeling of objects; they teach the description of objects Some cultures utilize language forms that must be used in accordance with the speaker’s and the listener’s rank, social status, age, and degree of acquaintance
Some speech-language assessment tools are only translations of the original versions in English, and retain the standardization samples of the English versions
Formal speech-language assessment tools may be administered informally: When they are administered to individuals who are not represented in the standardization samples When the content/wording of the assessment items is changed The test items are repeated when repetition is disallowed Only one or two Subtests from the assessment tools are administered
The speech-language assessment tools available in languages other than English may not portray the full language abilities of the test takers because they may only allow for responses provided in the native language
Conceptual scoring 5 allows English Learners to demonstrate the full range of their language abilities. English Learners are able to draw upon their skills in both their native languages and English, and receive credit for correct responses to the test items administered regardless of the language used for the responses
APPROPRIATE SPEECH-LANGUAGE ASSESSMENT OF ENGLISH LEARNERS Use of a Trained Interpreter for Speech-Language Assessment
Per the Clinical Management of Communicatively Handicapped Minority Language Populations 4, a Position Statement issued by the AmericanSpeech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA) in 1985, Interpreters and/or Translators can be utilized with speakers of minority languages under the following circumstances:
the “certified speech-language pathologist or audiologist . . . does not meet the recommended competencies to provide services to limited English-proficient speakers;” the “individual who needs services speaks a language which is uncommon for that local area;” and/or, there aren’t “any trained professionals readily available with proficiency in that language . . . ”
Per the same document, individuals who can serve as Interpreters and/or Translators are: “Professional Interpreters from language banks or professional interpreting services;” “Bilingual professional staff from a health or education discipline other than communication disorders;” or, “Family friend or friend of the client”
Successful utilization of an Interpreter requires careful planning, which includes meeting with the Interpreter both before (briefing) and after the assessment (debriefing), and adhering to pre-established guidelines during the assessment
Some important considerations for the briefing are purpose of the assessment, type of assessment to be used, cultural and linguistic appropriateness of test items, testing procedures, and the Interpreter’s questions and/or concerns
Some important considerations for the pre-established guidelines are the SLP is present during the testing, the SLP speaks directly to the student, the SLP monitors the student’s behaviors, and the Interpreter must provide an exact translation of the student’s responses
Some important considerations for the debriefing are discussion of the student’s testing performance, any difficulties encountered during the assessment, and any difficulties encountered during interpretation
If utilizing an Interpreter for a speech-language assessment: Become as familiar as possible with the grammatical and syntactical structures, and phonemic inventory, of the particular language of the test taker Allow plenty of time for the briefing and debriefing
The written report of the speech-language assessment should include the following information:
The SLP utilized an Interpreter for the speech-language assessment The student’s native language The student’s language of content/literacy instruction The student’s current level of English language proficiency The language that the student used for responses to the test items administered Any deviation from the test administration guidelines, and the reasons for the deviation
Report converted, or derived, scores when: a trained Interpreter is utilized during the speech-language assessment the speech-language assessment is standardized and norm-referenced on the population of individuals that speak the same language as the Interpreter and the test taker the Interpreter follows the test administration guidelines of the speechlanguage assessment tool the test taker is represented in the standardization sample of the speech-language assessment tool
Do not report converted, or derived, scores when:
a trained Interpreter is not utilized to administer a speech-language assessment a speech-language assessment is not standardized and normreferenced on the population of individuals that speak the same language as the Interpreter and the test taker the test taker is not represented in the standardization sample of the speech-language assessment tool
APPROPRIATE SPEECH-LANGUAGE ASSESSMENT OF ENGLISH LEARNERS
Stages of Second Language Acquisition
SLPs, whether they are bilingual or not, need to know the Stages of Second Language Acquisition 6 so as not to misidentify normally-occurring circumstances for English Learners as a language disorder or a languagelearning disability
All individuals learning a second language pass through the Stages of Second Language Acquisition; however, the amount of time that they remain in each of these stages is highly variable
There are five Stages of Second Language Acquisition: Silent and Receptive Stage - students do not verbally respond to communication in the second language although there is receptive processing Early Production Stage - students begin to respond verbally using one or two words Speech Emergence Stage - students begin to respond in simple sentences when they are comfortable in the setting and engaged in activities they understand Intermediate Fluency Stage - students gradually make the transition to more elaborate speech Advanced Fluency Stage - students begin to engage in non-cued conversation and to speak fluently using social and academic language
Progression through the Stages of Second Language Acquisition is affected by the following factors:
First/native language development Motivation to learn a second language Access to the second language Personality and learning style Age Level of acculturation Anxiety level Language distance
Movement from one Stage of Second Language Acquisition to the next is uneven due to the complexity of language acquisition/development
Individuals moving through the Stages of Second Language Acquisition exhibit varying levels of ability with respect to different language skills
The skills required to move through the beginning Stages of Second Language Acquisition are more limited than those required to move through the later Stages of Second Language Acquisition
APPROPRIATE SPEECH-LANGUAGE ASSESSMENT OF ENGLISH LEARNERS
Second Language Acquisition Processes
SLPs, whether they are bilingual or not, need to know the Second Language Acquisition Processes 7 so that the language errors associated with each process are not mistakenly attributed to a language disorder or languagelearning disability
Individuals learning a second language may manifest one or more of the Second Language Acquisition Processes
The Second Language Acquisition Processes are not indicative of a language disorder
There are seven Second Language Acquisition Processes: Silent Period - the individual focuses on comprehension of the second language, and responses may be non-verbal or limited to one or two words Language Loss - occurs when an individual spends more time learning the second language; the individual's skills in the first language diminish from lack of use and reinforcement Reduced Exposure - the underlying conceptual development may be underdeveloped in the first and second languages due to reduced exposure to both languages Codeswitching - changing from one language to another in the same sentence or paragraph
Interlanguage - a temporary language system which fluctuates as the individual tests hypotheses about language, and modifies language rules as a result Interference - the individual makes errors in the second language due to the direct influence of language structures in the first language; morphology and syntax errors are common Fossilization - the individual has achieved a level of good fluency in the second language but continues to make certain specific errors in the second language
APPROPRIATE SPEECH-LANGUAGE ASSESSMENT OF ENGLISH LEARNERS
Basic Interpersonal Communication Skills (BICS) and Cognitive Academic Language Proficiency (CALP) Skills
Basic Interpersonal Communication Skills (BICS) 8 - the language needed to function in everyday interpersonal or social contexts
Typically attained within one to three years after an individual is consistently and sufficiently exposed to the second language
Not related to academic achievement
Cognitive Academic Language Proficiency (CALP) Skills 9 - the language needed to function proficiently in an academic setting
Typically attained within five to seven years after entering the school environment, with consistent and sufficient exposure to the second language
Can take possibly more than five to seven years to attain
The language needed for reading, speaking about, writing, and listening to subject area content material
BICS should not be used to gauge an individual’s CALP Skills
BICS are cognitively undemanding activities, such as face-to-face conversations, buying lunch at school, telephone conversations, and notes on a refrigerator
CALP Skills are cognitively demanding activities, such as demonstrations/experiments, basic math computations, reading/writing in content areas, and taking standardized tests
APPROPRIATE SPEECH-LANGUAGE ASSESSMENT OF ENGLISH LEARNERS Language Difference and Language Disorder
Language Difference - result of the normal process of second language acquisition, and its impact on the development of the second language. The first/native language is developing normally.
Language Disorder - characterized by deficits in language comprehension and/or production in both the native language and the second language.
The indicators of a possible language disorder are: Difficulty correctly following oral directions Difficulty responding correctly to questions Difficulty formulating sentences Difficulty understanding or using vocabulary Use of predominantly gestures to communicate Difficulty with correct sentence repetition Difficulty with the correct use of grammar
The language characteristics shared by English Learners and individuals with a language disorder: Use predominantly gestures to communicate Poor comprehension Poor vocabulary Speak in single words and/or phrases Poor syntax Speak infrequently Provide inappropriate responses to questions
For English Learners without a language disorder: The shared language characteristics will appear only when the second language is used. They do not appear in the first/native language The shared language characteristics are typical in the normal process of second language acquisition
For English Learners with a language disorder: The shared language characteristics appear in both the first/native language and the second language
To determine a language difference from a language disorder: Review the background information of the individual suspected of having a language disorder for language development and/or language concerns in the first/native language Conduct observations of the individual across a variety of settings Collect information regarding the individual’s current English language proficiency skills Collect information regarding the individual’s current level of acculturation
Conduct parent/teacher interviews regarding any language concerns
Collect basic information regarding the individual’s receptive and expressive language skills, in both the first/native language and the second language, if possible, through record review, language sampling, teacher/parent report, etc.
Conduct informal/formal language evaluation in the first/native language
Conduct an informal language evaluation in the second language, if possible
QUESTIONS AND DISCUSSION!
Resources 1.
2. 3.
4.
5.
Preferred Practice Patterns for the Profession of Speech-Language Pathology (November 2004), “Speech-Language Assessment for Individuals Who Are Bilingual and/or Learning English as an Additional Language,” issued by the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA). National Association of School Psychologists (2009); “School Psychologists’ Involvement in Assessment” (Position Statement). Assessing Comprehension and Communication in English State-to-State for English Language Learners (ACCESS), 2003, World Class Instructional Design and Assessment (WIDA) Consortium. Clinical Management of Communicatively Handicapped Minority Language Populations (1985), issued by the American Speech-LanguageHearing Association (ASHA). Bedore, Lisa M., Peña, Elizabeth D., García, Melissa, and Cortez, Celina; Conceptual Versus Monolingual Scoring: When Does It Make a Difference; Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools; 2005; 36; 188-200.
Resources 6. 7.
8.
9.
Terrell, Tracy D., PhD, and Krashen, Stephen, PhD; The Natural Approach: Language Acquisition in the Classroom; 1983. Roseberry-McKibbin, Celeste; Assessment and Intervention for Children With Limited English Proficiency and Language Disorders; American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology; 1994; 3; 77-88. Cummins, Jim, PhD; 1979; Cognitive/academic language proficiency, linguistic interdependence, the optimum age question and some other matters. Working Papers on Bilingualism, No. 19, 121-129. Cummins, Jim, PhD; 1979; Cognitive/academic language proficiency, linguistic interdependence, the optimum age question and some other matters. Working Papers on Bilingualism, No. 19, 121-129.
Contact Information
[email protected]
[email protected]
http://teresa-gillespie.wikispaces.dpsk12.org
Disclosure: Financial – Both presenters are employed by the Denver Public Schools. Non-Financial – No relevant non-financial relationship exists.
Learner Outcomes
Discuss state and federal laws and professional organization guidelines regarding appropriate speechlanguage assessment of English Learners
Collect a speech-language body of evidence
Conduct culturally and linguistically appropriate speechlanguage assessment of English Learners
Rationale for Development of the Assessment Model
Limited norm-referenced and standardized assessments for monolingual Spanish and bilingual Spanish-English speakers from a variety of dialectical variations
Cultural, linguistic, and content biases in available norm-referenced and standardized assessments for monolingual Spanish and bilingual SpanishEnglish speakers
Rationale for Development of the Assessment Model
Differences in language acquisition trajectories between simultaneous versus sequential bilingual Spanish-English speakers can affect performance on norm-referenced and standardized assessments
High volume of referrals in Denver Public Schools for assessments in Spanish with a limited number of Bilingual Speech-Language Pathologists to conduct those assessments
Research Behind Development of the Assessment Model
Conducted a study to establish the level of English language proficiency necessary for School-based monolingual English-speaking SpeechLanguage Pathologists (SLPs) to conduct meaningful informal speechlanguage assessment in English
Conducted a study to determine the effectiveness of the assessment model in identifying native Spanish-speaking students who would or would not benefit from speech-language assessment in Spanish
Currently conducting a study to determine the concordance among different Bilingual SLPs who utilize the assessment model in identifying native Spanish-speaking students who would or would not benefit from speechlanguage assessment in Spanish
STATE AND FEDERAL LAWS THAT SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT MODEL
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA)
Section §300.304 states that the public agency must “use a variety of assessment tools and strategies to gather relevant functional, developmental, and academic information about a child, including information provided by the parent . . . ”
Section §300.304 further states to “not use any single measure or assessment as the sole criterion for determining whether a child is a child with a disability ...”
Section §300.305 states that “as part of an initial evaluation (if appropriate) and as part of any reevaluation under this part, the IEP Team and other qualified professionals, as appropriate, must review existing evaluation data on the child, including evaluations and information provided by the parents of the child; current classroom-based, local, or State assessments, and classroom-based observations; and observations by teachers and related service providers . . . ”
Exceptional Children’s Educational Act (ECEA)
Section 4.02 states that “The requirements and procedures for initial evaluations shall be in accordance with . . . §300.304 and §300.305 (IDEA) . . . ”
PROFESSIONAL ORGANIZATION GUIDELINES THAT SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT MODEL
American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA)
Per the Preferred Practice Patterns for the Profession of Speech-Language Pathology (November 2004) 1, Comprehensive Speech-Language Assessment, “Assessment . . . includes the following: . . . Standardized and/or nonstandardized measures of specific aspects of speech, spoken and nonspoken language, cognitive-communication, and swallowing function . . . ”
Per the same document, Speech-Language Assessment for Individuals Who Are Bilingual and/or Learning English as an Additional Language, “Assessment . . . includes the following: . . . “Selection, administration, and interpretation of standardized assessment tools and/or nonstandardized sampling (e.g., interviews and observation in varied settings and multiple activities) conducted with recognition of the unique characteristics of the individual’s linguistic community . . . ”
National Association of School Psychologists (NASP)
Per the National Association of School Psychologists Position Statement (July 2009) 2, School Psychologists’ Involvement in Assessment, “School psychologists consider, accommodate, and provide appropriate modifications for all aspects of diversity that might impact assessment results, such as . . . cultural differences. School psychologists interpret and report outcomes in a manner that communicates the limitations of their assessments, data, and interpretations”
Per the same document, school psychologists “use a multimethod, multisource, . . . approach to assessment. The multiple methods of assessment include, but are not limited to, the use of record reviews, observations, interviews, and various forms of formal and informal testing. The multiple sources of information include, but are not limited to, parents, teachers, administrators, peers, students, curriculum materials, instructional procedures, . . . ”
Turn~n~Talk!
For the next ten minutes, please turn to your neighbor or neighbors and discuss the questions in the next column:
Questions: Do you assess English Learners? Do you use a trained Interpreter? Is there a bilingual assessment team in your work setting? What kinds of assessments do you use?
Speech-Language Body of Evidence Definition: Information collected from a variety of sources (i.e., parental report, teacher report, in-classroom observations, medical records, student records, results from previous assessments, completed questionnaires/checklists, collected language samples, literature review, results of current informal/formal assessments, speech-language therapeutic progress monitoring data, etc.) that describes the current speech and language skills of a student, any progression/regression of those skills over time, and the possible causes of any observed speech and/or language difficulties (i.e., Autism, traumatic brain injury, Down Syndrome, hearing loss, verbal apraxia, etc.).
Gillespie, 2014
Collection of a Speech-Language Body of Evidence
Completed by the School-based Speech-Language Pathologists (SLPs), whether they are bilingual or not
Utilization of native Spanish-speaking professionals in the schools to assist with the collection of the body of evidence if the SLPs are not bilingual
Five guiding documents to employ when collecting the body of evidence
Guiding Document 1
Guiding Document 2
Guiding Document 3
Guiding Document 4
Guiding Document 5
EXAMPLES OF A SUFFICIENT SPEECH-LANGUAGE BODY OF EVIDENCE
Example # 1 “Fulana is a . . . native Spanish speaker . . . She was initially staffed, following testing in her native language, for a severe articulation, mild receptive, and moderate expressive language impairment. At this time, Fulana is judged to be 100% intelligible in continuous speech and no articulation concerns are present. Her current speech/language goals target expressive language abilities, particularly sequencing her thoughts and words to express ideas/messages clearly. Fulana has met this goal and is able to tell a four-part story, in sequence, with appropriate transitions, given visual pictures, with minimal prompts . . . She also has demonstrated progress toward her goal of taking conversational turns and maintaining a topic of conversation . . . Her teacher reports no further concerns regarding communication.”
Example # 2 Fulano was referred for an observation/screening . . . His teacher reported that his current communication skills are impacting Fulano's ability to participate in the classroom . . . Fulano's articulation was informally screened in Spanish and English . . . Commonly observed errors heard in Fulano's native language of Spanish and in his secondary language of English were as follows: final consonant deletion e.g., /n/, cluster reduction, syllable deletion of both weak and strong stressed syllables, bilabial errors, inconsistent /l/ productions, /s/ deletion or /h/ substitution . . . Volume of voice and range of motion used when independently naming pictures was limited. He also had some difficulties in labeling pictures in Spanish and English as well . . . Fulano's progress has been limited with respect to increasing his overall speech intelligibility. Most growth has been achieved in increasing volume with prompting and vocabulary . . . In sessions, he is able to label some basic categories with picture representations . . . and receptively he is able to sort and add on to groupings. He follows directions and novel activities with . . . strategies. No receptive language concerns have been reported . . . in Spanish.”
Example # 3 “Fulano transferred to . . . this year. Records from initial evaluation report student was first assessed for a disability in Kindergarten and results were he did not qualify. Then, in first grade, he was tested again using standardized scores from formal English language testing . . . with "disclaimers," and he was identified with a severe language impairment. A bilingual questionnaire form was filled out by the teacher and responses indicated "social language" peer behavior difficulty. Specific problems listed were - slower to respond (yes, that is typical when processing information and speaking in your 2nd language), paying attention, remembering things, and staying on topic . . . Struggles in English are clearly documented but questionable in differentiating a language difference from a disorder.”
ANALYSIS OF A SPEECHLANGUAGE BODY OF EVIDENCE
The SEAS Bilingual SLP determines if the speech-language body of evidence (BOE) is sufficient. It is considered to be sufficient if it contains:
The last reported ACCESS 3 (Assessing Comprehension and Communication in English State-to-State for English Language Learners) Speaking Subtest score
Information about receptive and expressive language, and articulation, skills in Spanish, based on information gained from a speech-language probe in Spanish, collection of a language sample in Spanish, parent interview, teacher report, results from previous speech-language assessment in Spanish, etc.
Information about receptive and expressive language, and articulation, skills in English, if the student is bilingual, based on observation, informal speech-language assessment in English, speech-language therapeutic progress monitoring data, completed checklist, parent interview, teacher report, etc.
Information about pragmatic language skills
Information about fluency and voice skills
The SEAS Bilingual SLP analyzes the BOE by comparing the student’s current speech-language skills with what is known in the research literature about:
Spanish language development Simultaneous/Sequential bilingualism Spanish speech sound development Speech-language disorders in the bilingual population Stages of Second Language Acquisition Second Language Acquisition Processes BICS - Basic Interpersonal Communication Skills CALP - Cognitive Academic Language Proficiency
The SEAS Bilingual SLP also researches information in various district databases, to which the school-based SLPs may not have access, to gain information about the student’s:
subject grades performance on various district and state assessments inclusion in any special academic programs
The SEAS Bilingual SLP analyzes:
the student’s progress on the current speech-language objectives with respect to the appropriateness of the objectives the rate of progress the results of previous speech-language assessments the mobility of the student between schools/countries the student’s involvement with any private speech-language, physical, occupational, and/or other therapeutic services history of language of content/literacy instruction, acculturation, therapeutic use of strategies to help make content comprehensible, etc.
if the student has previously been identified with a Speech-Language Impairment (SLI)
• The SEAS Bilingual SLP also consults with other professionals on SEAS who may have evaluated the student in additional areas, e.g., education, cognition, social-emotional, and/or health
The SEAS Bilingual SLP consults with the School-based SLP if the speechlanguage BOE is insufficient to determine: if additional information can be obtained, and to provide guidance about what additional information needs to be gathered if the SEAS Bilingual SLP needs to proceed with a speech-language assessment in Spanish because the usual means of obtaining additional information have been exhausted
Guiding Document for Bilingual Speech-Language Pathologists
CONDITIONS UNDER WHICH SPEECH-LANGUAGE ASSESSMENT IN SPANISH IS COMPLETED
If there are verified speech-language concerns, then speech-language assessment in Spanish is warranted
If there are any discrepancies or gaps in, or any unanswered questions about, the BOE or information gathered that cannot be resolved or answered through the collection of additional evidence or information
If there is a specific parent request for a speech-language assessment by a Spanish-speaking diagnostician
If there are NOT any verified speech-language concerns, then speechlanguage assessment in Spanish is unwarranted
Articulation-Only Concerns
• Initial Eligibility
Students receive speech assessment in Spanish
• Re-Evaluation Eligibility
Students receive informal speech re-evaluation in English by the Schoolbased SLP
Receptive and/or Expressive Language Concerns • Initial Eligibility
Students receive assessment in Spanish if: The concerns have been verified – sufficient BOE Their ACCESS Speaking Subtest scores are Level 1 or 2
• Re-Evaluation Eligibility
Students receive assessment in Spanish if: Their ACCESS Speaking Subtest scores are Level 1 or 2 There are discrepancies or gaps in, or unanswered questions about, the BOE or information gathered
Receptive and/or Expressive Language Concerns • Initial Eligibility
Students first receive informal assessment in English by the Schoolbased SLP if their ACCESS Speaking Subtest scores are Level 3, 4, or 5: If the results of the informal assessment in English indicate speech-language skills within the low-average-to-average range, then assessment in Spanish is NOT completed If the results of the informal assessment in English indicate speech-language skills below the low-average range, then assessment in Spanish IS warranted
Receptive and/or Expressive Language Concerns • Re-Evaluation Eligibility
Students receive informal assessment in English by the School-based SLP if their ACCESS Speaking Subtest Scores are Level 3, 4, or 5: If the results of the informal assessment in English indicate speech-language skills below the low-average range, then assessment in Spanish IS warranted If there are discrepancies or gaps in, or unanswered questions about, the BOE or information gathered, then assessment in Spanish IS warranted
Receptive and/or Expressive Language Concerns • Speech-language re-evaluation in Spanish is not completed for students at
any ACCESS Speaking Subtest score level if a review of the sufficient BOE indicates that: The student continues to benefit from speech-language therapeutic services The student can be exited from speech-language therapeutic services without prejudice, pending parental and Special Education Team input/discussion at the Individualized Education Program (IEP) meeting
Transfers • If a student has received previous comprehensive speech-language
assessment in Spanish, and has been identified as presenting with SpeechLanguage Impairment (SLI): AND . . . there are no discrepancies or gaps in, or any unanswered questions about, the BOE or information gathered, then additional speech-language assessment in Spanish is NOT warranted BUT . . . there are discrepancies or gaps in, or any unanswered questions about, the BOE or information gathered, then additional speech-language assessment in Spanish IS warranted
If a student has not received previous comprehensive speech-language assessment in Spanish, and has been identified as presenting with SLI, then speech-language assessment in Spanish IS warranted
TYPES OF SPEECH-LANGUAGE ASSESSMENT
Formal – the test or tests utilized are standardized and norm-referenced
Informal – the test or tests utilized are not standardized or norm-referenced
Comprehensive – includes assessment in the areas of receptive language, expressive language, pragmatic language, articulation/phonology, fluency, voice, and oral mechanism
Targeted – assessment is limited to a few speech-language areas
Criterion-referenced – standards-based assessment which measures how well specific skills have been mastered
Play-based – assessment of young individuals in a naturalistic environment of structured and unstructured play
Dynamic – an assessment identifies the skills that individuals possess as well as their learning potential
• SEAS Bilingual SLPs conduct the different types of speech-language assessments as follows:
Formal assessment
Informal assessment
The student is monolingual Spanish-speaking An appropriate assessment exists that has been norm-referenced and standardized on a monolingual Spanish-speaking population The student is not exposed to the English language in the home environment or enrolled in content and literacy instruction in English
The student is bilingual Spanish/English-speaking An appropriate assessment that has been norm-referenced and standardized on a bilingual Spanish/English-speaking population does not exist the student benefits from readministration in English of test items initially administered in Spanish and failed
Comprehensive assessment - when the BOE demonstrates that the student would benefit from assessment in most or all speech-language areas
Targeted assessment - when the BOE demonstrates that the student would benefit from assessment in only one or two speech-language areas
Criterion-referenced – helps to distinguish a language difference from a language disorder for both structural and functional communication tasks by comparing a student’s performance on specific developmental language and/or content/literacy skills to predetermined criteria
Play-based – when the student is young, or when the BOE indicates that the student is significantly low-functioning and may not respond well to complex test administration directions
Dynamic – helps to distinguish a language difference from a language disability by acquiring information about a student’s best performance through the utilization of a system of hierarchal cues/supports
Think~Pair~Share!
For the next ten minutes, please think about one of the topics in the next column, pair up with one of your neighbors, and share your thoughts/ideas!
Topics:
Language difference versus language disorder
Linguistic/cultural biases in speech-language assessment tools Conceptual scoring Basic Interpersonal Communication Skills (BICS)and Cognitive Academic Language Proficiency (CALP) Skills
APPROPRIATE SPEECH-LANGUAGE ASSESSMENT OF ENGLISH LEARNERS Speech-Language Assessment Tools
There are several speech-language assessment tools that are standardized and norm-referenced on individuals who speak a language other than English; however, the standardization samples may not take into account the following:
the educational levels of the individuals in the standardization samples the acculturation levels the background experiences the bilingual abilities the particular dialects
Speech-language assessment tools contain linguistic and cultural biases: Vocabulary use Some cultures do not teach the labeling of objects; they teach the description of objects Some cultures utilize language forms that must be used in accordance with the speaker’s and the listener’s rank, social status, age, and degree of acquaintance
Some speech-language assessment tools are only translations of the original versions in English, and retain the standardization samples of the English versions
Formal speech-language assessment tools may be administered informally: When they are administered to individuals who are not represented in the standardization samples When the content/wording of the assessment items is changed The test items are repeated when repetition is disallowed Only one or two Subtests from the assessment tools are administered
The speech-language assessment tools available in languages other than English may not portray the full language abilities of the test takers because they may only allow for responses provided in the native language
Conceptual scoring 5 allows English Learners to demonstrate the full range of their language abilities. English Learners are able to draw upon their skills in both their native languages and English, and receive credit for correct responses to the test items administered regardless of the language used for the responses
APPROPRIATE SPEECH-LANGUAGE ASSESSMENT OF ENGLISH LEARNERS Use of a Trained Interpreter for Speech-Language Assessment
Per the Clinical Management of Communicatively Handicapped Minority Language Populations 4, a Position Statement issued by the AmericanSpeech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA) in 1985, Interpreters and/or Translators can be utilized with speakers of minority languages under the following circumstances:
the “certified speech-language pathologist or audiologist . . . does not meet the recommended competencies to provide services to limited English-proficient speakers;” the “individual who needs services speaks a language which is uncommon for that local area;” and/or, there aren’t “any trained professionals readily available with proficiency in that language . . . ”
Per the same document, individuals who can serve as Interpreters and/or Translators are: “Professional Interpreters from language banks or professional interpreting services;” “Bilingual professional staff from a health or education discipline other than communication disorders;” or, “Family friend or friend of the client”
Successful utilization of an Interpreter requires careful planning, which includes meeting with the Interpreter both before (briefing) and after the assessment (debriefing), and adhering to pre-established guidelines during the assessment
Some important considerations for the briefing are purpose of the assessment, type of assessment to be used, cultural and linguistic appropriateness of test items, testing procedures, and the Interpreter’s questions and/or concerns
Some important considerations for the pre-established guidelines are the SLP is present during the testing, the SLP speaks directly to the student, the SLP monitors the student’s behaviors, and the Interpreter must provide an exact translation of the student’s responses
Some important considerations for the debriefing are discussion of the student’s testing performance, any difficulties encountered during the assessment, and any difficulties encountered during interpretation
If utilizing an Interpreter for a speech-language assessment: Become as familiar as possible with the grammatical and syntactical structures, and phonemic inventory, of the particular language of the test taker Allow plenty of time for the briefing and debriefing
The written report of the speech-language assessment should include the following information:
The SLP utilized an Interpreter for the speech-language assessment The student’s native language The student’s language of content/literacy instruction The student’s current level of English language proficiency The language that the student used for responses to the test items administered Any deviation from the test administration guidelines, and the reasons for the deviation
Report converted, or derived, scores when: a trained Interpreter is utilized during the speech-language assessment the speech-language assessment is standardized and norm-referenced on the population of individuals that speak the same language as the Interpreter and the test taker the Interpreter follows the test administration guidelines of the speechlanguage assessment tool the test taker is represented in the standardization sample of the speech-language assessment tool
Do not report converted, or derived, scores when:
a trained Interpreter is not utilized to administer a speech-language assessment a speech-language assessment is not standardized and normreferenced on the population of individuals that speak the same language as the Interpreter and the test taker the test taker is not represented in the standardization sample of the speech-language assessment tool
APPROPRIATE SPEECH-LANGUAGE ASSESSMENT OF ENGLISH LEARNERS
Stages of Second Language Acquisition
SLPs, whether they are bilingual or not, need to know the Stages of Second Language Acquisition 6 so as not to misidentify normally-occurring circumstances for English Learners as a language disorder or a languagelearning disability
All individuals learning a second language pass through the Stages of Second Language Acquisition; however, the amount of time that they remain in each of these stages is highly variable
There are five Stages of Second Language Acquisition: Silent and Receptive Stage - students do not verbally respond to communication in the second language although there is receptive processing Early Production Stage - students begin to respond verbally using one or two words Speech Emergence Stage - students begin to respond in simple sentences when they are comfortable in the setting and engaged in activities they understand Intermediate Fluency Stage - students gradually make the transition to more elaborate speech Advanced Fluency Stage - students begin to engage in non-cued conversation and to speak fluently using social and academic language
Progression through the Stages of Second Language Acquisition is affected by the following factors:
First/native language development Motivation to learn a second language Access to the second language Personality and learning style Age Level of acculturation Anxiety level Language distance
Movement from one Stage of Second Language Acquisition to the next is uneven due to the complexity of language acquisition/development
Individuals moving through the Stages of Second Language Acquisition exhibit varying levels of ability with respect to different language skills
The skills required to move through the beginning Stages of Second Language Acquisition are more limited than those required to move through the later Stages of Second Language Acquisition
APPROPRIATE SPEECH-LANGUAGE ASSESSMENT OF ENGLISH LEARNERS
Second Language Acquisition Processes
SLPs, whether they are bilingual or not, need to know the Second Language Acquisition Processes 7 so that the language errors associated with each process are not mistakenly attributed to a language disorder or languagelearning disability
Individuals learning a second language may manifest one or more of the Second Language Acquisition Processes
The Second Language Acquisition Processes are not indicative of a language disorder
There are seven Second Language Acquisition Processes: Silent Period - the individual focuses on comprehension of the second language, and responses may be non-verbal or limited to one or two words Language Loss - occurs when an individual spends more time learning the second language; the individual's skills in the first language diminish from lack of use and reinforcement Reduced Exposure - the underlying conceptual development may be underdeveloped in the first and second languages due to reduced exposure to both languages Codeswitching - changing from one language to another in the same sentence or paragraph
Interlanguage - a temporary language system which fluctuates as the individual tests hypotheses about language, and modifies language rules as a result Interference - the individual makes errors in the second language due to the direct influence of language structures in the first language; morphology and syntax errors are common Fossilization - the individual has achieved a level of good fluency in the second language but continues to make certain specific errors in the second language
APPROPRIATE SPEECH-LANGUAGE ASSESSMENT OF ENGLISH LEARNERS
Basic Interpersonal Communication Skills (BICS) and Cognitive Academic Language Proficiency (CALP) Skills
Basic Interpersonal Communication Skills (BICS) 8 - the language needed to function in everyday interpersonal or social contexts
Typically attained within one to three years after an individual is consistently and sufficiently exposed to the second language
Not related to academic achievement
Cognitive Academic Language Proficiency (CALP) Skills 9 - the language needed to function proficiently in an academic setting
Typically attained within five to seven years after entering the school environment, with consistent and sufficient exposure to the second language
Can take possibly more than five to seven years to attain
The language needed for reading, speaking about, writing, and listening to subject area content material
BICS should not be used to gauge an individual’s CALP Skills
BICS are cognitively undemanding activities, such as face-to-face conversations, buying lunch at school, telephone conversations, and notes on a refrigerator
CALP Skills are cognitively demanding activities, such as demonstrations/experiments, basic math computations, reading/writing in content areas, and taking standardized tests
APPROPRIATE SPEECH-LANGUAGE ASSESSMENT OF ENGLISH LEARNERS Language Difference and Language Disorder
Language Difference - result of the normal process of second language acquisition, and its impact on the development of the second language. The first/native language is developing normally.
Language Disorder - characterized by deficits in language comprehension and/or production in both the native language and the second language.
The indicators of a possible language disorder are: Difficulty correctly following oral directions Difficulty responding correctly to questions Difficulty formulating sentences Difficulty understanding or using vocabulary Use of predominantly gestures to communicate Difficulty with correct sentence repetition Difficulty with the correct use of grammar
The language characteristics shared by English Learners and individuals with a language disorder: Use predominantly gestures to communicate Poor comprehension Poor vocabulary Speak in single words and/or phrases Poor syntax Speak infrequently Provide inappropriate responses to questions
For English Learners without a language disorder: The shared language characteristics will appear only when the second language is used. They do not appear in the first/native language The shared language characteristics are typical in the normal process of second language acquisition
For English Learners with a language disorder: The shared language characteristics appear in both the first/native language and the second language
To determine a language difference from a language disorder: Review the background information of the individual suspected of having a language disorder for language development and/or language concerns in the first/native language Conduct observations of the individual across a variety of settings Collect information regarding the individual’s current English language proficiency skills Collect information regarding the individual’s current level of acculturation
Conduct parent/teacher interviews regarding any language concerns
Collect basic information regarding the individual’s receptive and expressive language skills, in both the first/native language and the second language, if possible, through record review, language sampling, teacher/parent report, etc.
Conduct informal/formal language evaluation in the first/native language
Conduct an informal language evaluation in the second language, if possible
QUESTIONS AND DISCUSSION!
Resources 1.
2. 3.
4.
5.
Preferred Practice Patterns for the Profession of Speech-Language Pathology (November 2004), “Speech-Language Assessment for Individuals Who Are Bilingual and/or Learning English as an Additional Language,” issued by the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA). National Association of School Psychologists (2009); “School Psychologists’ Involvement in Assessment” (Position Statement). Assessing Comprehension and Communication in English State-to-State for English Language Learners (ACCESS), 2003, World Class Instructional Design and Assessment (WIDA) Consortium. Clinical Management of Communicatively Handicapped Minority Language Populations (1985), issued by the American Speech-LanguageHearing Association (ASHA). Bedore, Lisa M., Peña, Elizabeth D., García, Melissa, and Cortez, Celina; Conceptual Versus Monolingual Scoring: When Does It Make a Difference; Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools; 2005; 36; 188-200.
Resources 6. 7.
8.
9.
Terrell, Tracy D., PhD, and Krashen, Stephen, PhD; The Natural Approach: Language Acquisition in the Classroom; 1983. Roseberry-McKibbin, Celeste; Assessment and Intervention for Children With Limited English Proficiency and Language Disorders; American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology; 1994; 3; 77-88. Cummins, Jim, PhD; 1979; Cognitive/academic language proficiency, linguistic interdependence, the optimum age question and some other matters. Working Papers on Bilingualism, No. 19, 121-129. Cummins, Jim, PhD; 1979; Cognitive/academic language proficiency, linguistic interdependence, the optimum age question and some other matters. Working Papers on Bilingualism, No. 19, 121-129.
Contact Information
[email protected]
[email protected]
http://teresa-gillespie.wikispaces.dpsk12.org
