James scored 28 on the Auditory Comprehension Subtest of the Preschool Language Scale. This corresponds to a standard score of 90, which is less than 1 SD below the mean, and is at the 25th percentile for his age. The Expressive Communication Subtest could not be scored since James did not complete all of the items. During 15 minutes of play, James produced 28 utterances that were completely intelligible. Mean Length of Utterance was 3.16, which is 1.25 SD below the mean for his age.

The Use of MLU for Identifying Language Impairment in Preschool Children: A Review

This review focused on the methods used to identify language impairment in specifically language-impaired subjects participating in 72 research studies that were described in four journals from 1983 to 1988. The single most frequent source of information used in the identification process was found to be test data. There was, however, considerable variability and, often, a lack of clarity regarding the specific number and identity of tests used. More specific findings on test use indicated that researchers routinely assessed both expressive and receptive language and that they used incomplete tests. When test scores used in identification and selection were examined, there was a wide range of score types, and age-equivalent scores were by far the most common and often the only type of score utilized. Conclusions are drawn regarding the impact of these findings on the interpretation and generalizability of this research literature.

The Identification of Language Impairment in the Selection of Specifically Language-Impaired Subjects

Abstract Background It is widely acknowledged that children with developmental language disorder (DLD) predominantly have difficulties in the areas of grammar and vocabulary, with preserved pragmatic skills. Consequently, few studies focus on the pragmatic skills of children with DLD, and there is a distinct lack of studies examining the effectiveness of pragmatic interventions. Aims To carry out a systematic review of the literature on pragmatic interventions for children with DLD. Methods & Procedures This systematic review was registered with PROSPERO (ID = CRD42017067239). A systematic search in seven databases yielded 1031 papers, of which 11 met our inclusion criteria. The included papers focused on interventions for children with DLD (mean = 3–18 years), enhancing oral language pragmatic skills, published between January 2006 and May 2020, and were based on a group‐study design such as randomized control trial or pre‐post‐testing. Study participants were monolingual speakers. The quality of papers was appraised using the Cochrane Risk of bias tool for randomized controlled trials. Outcomes & Results There was a high degree of variability between the included intervention studies, especially regarding intensity, intervention targets and outcomes. The evidence suggested that pragmatic intervention is feasible for all models of delivery (individual, small and large group) and that interventions for pragmatic language are mostly focused on encouragement of conversation and narrative skills observed through parent–child interaction or shared book‐reading activities. Conclusions & Implications This study highlights the importance of promoting and explicitly teaching pragmatic skills to children with DLD in structured interventions. A narrative synthesis of the included studies revealed that in addition to direct intervention, indirect intervention can also contribute to improving oral pragmatic skills of children with DLD. What this paper adds What is already known on the subject? An increasing number of studies have shown that difficulties in acquiring pragmatic language is not only present in children with autism. What this study adds to existing knowledge? Interventions for pragmatic language in children with DLD are mostly focused on encouragement of conversation and narrative skills, very often through parent–child interaction or shared book‐reading activities. Interventions that target language pragmatic are feasible for all models of delivery (individual, small and large group). What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work? The efficacy of the existing studies varies, and it is difficult to give recommendations regarding the intensity and duration of the specific intervention. In addition to offering pragmatic intervention directly from a specialist, pragmatic interventions can also be carried out indirectly if the intervention is under the continuous supervision of a specialist.

Efficacy, model of delivery, intensity and targets of pragmatic interventions for children with developmental language disorder: A systematic review

INTERACTION: Many clinicians have shifted in recent years from carrying out language therapy in a diITS NATURE dactic, speech-lesson format, with the adult in control, to a more open, more egalitarian AND POTENT I AL format, simulating everyday life events (Duchan, 1991; Duchan & Weitzner-Lin, Judith Felson Duchan, Ph.D. 1987; Snow, Midkiff-Borunda, Small, & Proctor, 1984). Now that language intervention has expanded its horizons, the task of characterizing the nature of these clinicianchild interactions becomes more formidable. More open styles of therapy allow a wide variety of interactional formats based upon the type of events taking place. In this article I will argue that clinical interactions will differ depending upon whether the child and clinician are engaged in conversation, or in book reading, problem solving, or play activity. Such differences lead necessarily to a shift in the study of clinical interactions from attempts to discover "the nature of clinical interaction" to investigations of how clinical interactions vary depending upon the type of intervention being used. I will begin with a review of the literature on clinician-child interaction during didactic activities and try to show how assumptions of this past research are not appropriate for pragmatics intervention. In particular, I will argue that past research on clinical interactions are based on an information-sending, conduit view of these interactions, and that we need to change our view of such interactions to a collaborative view, in order to best capture what is happening with pragmatics intervention. I will illustrate the differences between conduit and collaborative views using a new therapy method, facilitated communication, showing how proponents of each view will arrive at different renditions of what is going on between a facilitator and a facilitated speaker.

http://www.thieme-connect.de/products/ejournals/pdf/10.1055/s-2008-1064181.pdf

Clinician-Child Interaction: Its Nature and Potential

Developmental Language Disorder (DLD) is among the most frequent communication disorders in early childhood. It affects the quality of the child’s academic and social life. Speech- language therapy to counter this impairment is usually individual and based on the direct approach with the therapist. New approaches begin to emerge, involving group settings, as well as indirect involvement of a parent who is constantly monitored and supervised by the therapist. Group and indirect therapies are infrequently used in Croatia, even though their effectiveness is well demonstrated worldwide. The aims of the current study were: 1) to examine whether two approaches to language therapy ; group-based direct and indirect at home, can foster early literacy in children with DLD, and 2) to gain insight into parental perception of the group therapy and how they perceived its potential influence on children’s lives. It has a pre-experimental design and thus presents the first step towards an evidence-based effectiveness study. Eight children and their parents participated in the programme. Children’s language progress was measured using language tests before and after the programme, and parents' perception of the therapy was evaluated using a post-programme questionnaire. The results suggest that group- based direct and indirect approaches can foster early literacy in preschool children with DLD. Parental perception of the therapy was positive ; they expressed strong trust in the therapy and reported finding it useful for their children. The outcomes of the present pre- experimental study further corroborate positive effects of carefully planned therapies and serve as the step forward in conducting effectiveness studies in order to establish evidence-based practices in Croatia.

/pdf/group-based-direct-and-indirect-approaches-to-language-izgj2bh46d.pdf

Group-based direct and indirect approaches to language therapy for children with developmental language disorder: a pre- experimental study

Three widely used tests of grammatical ability were evaluated for content-oriented test construction using two procedures. First, a decision-making model was developed to assist in judging the content relevance and coverage of each test using information provided by respective test authors. Second, a comprehensive model of the grammatical domain was applied to individual items on the tests so that descriptions and comparisons of their content domains could be made. Both evaluations showed inadequate content relevance and coverage for all three tests. The content domains of these tests were found deficient when judged against an external standard as well as when examined according to their own content specifications. The influence of inadequate content relevance and coverage on assessment and remediation is discussed.

Content relevance and content coverage in tests of grammatical ability.

https://pubs.asha.org/doi/pdf/10.1044/nsshla_14_51

Group Therapy Revisited: Using Cooperative Learning Procedures in Speech-Language Therapy

Handle everyday research tasks with reliable, citation-backed results

Your personal Research Agent to handle research tasks with citation-backed results

Popular Tasks used by Researchers

How can I help with your research?

Meet SciSpace

Get more enhanced response by uploading the PDFs you want me to reference.

No relevant PDFs in your library

SciSpace is the AI research assistant for academics. Run systematic literature reviews on 280M+ papers, and write papers with cited sources. Trusted by 1M+ students, PhDs & researchers.

SciSpace | AI for Research

Analyze PDFs

Code & Manuscripts

Funding & Grants

Literature & Patents

Medical & Clinical Data

Systematic Review

Visualize & Present

Web & Data

Build a Google Scholar-like website for your research.

Build a website

Create charts and images for your research

Create a Chart

Write a paper for submission to a journal

Draft a manuscript

Patent Search

Design eye-catching scientific posters in minutes.

Scientific Poster Generation

Systematic Literature Review

One task is running at the moment. Your messages will be shown right after.

Drag and drop or click here to browse

Loved by <highlight>1 million+</highlight> researchers

Extract a list of specific topics and their sources from unstructured text

Topics

Compare and analyze relevant papers that matches with your search

Papers

Get insights from PDFs and bookmarked papers from your library

My library

Recent searches

Try searching for:

Catch AI-generated content in scholarly and non-scholarly content

{ai} Detector

Ai Writer

Get PDF Summaries, highlighted text explanations 

Chat with PDF

Effortlessly create in-text citations and bibliographies in APA and 2,500 other formats

Citation generator

Get explanations, summaries, and answers on academic papers

Ease up your research workflow with {scispace}'s cohort of exciting AI tools

Elevate your academic writing skills and convey your ideas the way you want

Paraphraser

Explore our range of reading and writing tools

Your file is being prepared and should be ready in a few minutes. If it's a large file, it might take a bit longer. You can close this window, and we'll email you the file when it's done.

You have reached a maximum limit of <strong>{limit}</strong> columns in the table. Remove at least <strong>1</strong> column to add or create another one.

Ann Michael

Author Tools

Chat about Author

Papers

Content relevance and content coverage in tests of grammatical ability.

Group Therapy Revisited: Using Cooperative Learning Procedures in Speech-Language Therapy