No description available.

Purpose: The current study examined if bilingual children (English-Spanish) with language impairment(LI) and children in the low typical(LT) range display a cognate advantage as their typically developing(TD) peers do. Given the literature we posed two hypotheses; on one hand, learning cognates may be easier for bilingual children with language impairment over typically developing children, as their shared representations lend to overlap in input. Conversely, it is possible the children with SLI would exhibit a cognate disadvantage given that in early language development children reject lexical units with high competition. Method: We examined whether 117 Spanish-English bilingual children (5;0 to 9;11) displayed a cognate advantage in oral production relative to their typically developing peers. The cognate and noncognate items were derived from the English and Spanish versions of the Expressive One-Word Picture Vocabulary Test. Children’s average proportion of cognate and noncognate responses were compared across ability groups. Results: TD bilingual children exhibited a cognate advantage, while the bilingual children with LI exhibited a cognate disadvantage. TD bilingual children produced a significantly higher proportion of cognates across their two languages, while LI children produced most of their cognates in Spanish only. The LT children performed similarly to the LI group in terms of overall proportion correct of cognate pairs over noncognate pairs, but performed similar to the TD group in terms of the language of response (only English, only Spanish, or both languages) of the cognate pairs. Conclusion: Consistent with our second hypothesis, children with LI show a cognate disadvantage, while TD bilingual children show an advantage for cognate production. As expected, LT children’s performance fell between the LI and TD groups. We discuss the theoretical and clinical implications of these findings. / text

The goal of this report was to explore ways to differentiate the performance of early school-aged Spanish-English bilingual children in U.S. public schools, who appear “at-risk” for language impairment versus those who have true risk. We compared the patterns of performance reported for children with typical development and language impairment reported in the literature to those for children with risk described by Bedore et al., (2013) and Perez et al., (in preparation). Children with risk seem quite different than their peers with true language problems on formal measures such as the Bilingual English Spanish Assessment (BESA). However these children presented fewer errors or weaknesses in spontaneous speech than did their peers with true language impairment. Language variability and errors are expected in the language of young bilingual children, so it is of utmost importance that language professionals closely assess each of the child’s languages with formal and functional measures prior to making a diagnosis of language impairment. / text

This study examined the effectiveness of the Otago screening protocol in identifying school-aged children with severe speech and language impairments. In order to do so, the results of the Otago screening protocol were compared with those of comprehensive language assessment as determined by best practice protocol (Gillon & Schwarz, 1998, Kennedy, 2002). Following the completion of the screening and the comprehensive assessments, an evaluation of the true positives and false positives was calculated, and an analysis of the false negative outcomes made. Findings indicated that fourteen of the twenty participants were true positives, three were true negatives, three were false positives, and none were false negatives. The Positive Predictive Value and Negative Predictive Value of the screening protocol was 100%. Test Sensitivity and Specificity were very high at 82% and 100%. Inter-rater reliability was very high, generally ranging from 92-100%. Adding a standardised measure of phonological awareness would improve efficiency of the screening protocol. Consideration of alternative screening tools, such as the GAPS test (Gardner et al, 2006) and the CELF-4 screening test (Semel, Secord & Wiig, 2004), should be made. Additional factors which could influence a screening protocol are discussed. The Otago screening protocol is a valid procedure to detect severe speech and language impairments in school-aged students referred to Special Education.

No description available.

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the characteristics of vocabulary use of seven- to nine-year-old bilingual children with and without language impairment. 74 participants (37 typically developing and 37 language impaired) ranging from age 7;0 to 9;11 years were matched based on age, language dominance and when they first began speaking English. The Test of Narrative Language (TNL) was administered to the participants in English and Spanish. The three oral narratives of the English and Spanish TNL were transcribed and scored. A prototypical word list was derived from 10 high scoring students from the normative data set. Word lists from both the TD and LI participants in English and Spanish were compared to the prototypical word list. Results indicated that the participants produced more prototypical words when telling stories in English than in Spanish. TD participants also produced more prototypical words than LI participants overall. The results have implications for both assessment and intervention and add to our knowledge of word selection in bilingual children with and without LI. / text

This study examined the effectiveness of the Otago screening protocol in identifying school-aged children with severe speech and language impairments. In order to do so, the results of the Otago screening protocol were compared with those of comprehensive language assessment as determined by best practice protocol (Gillon & Schwarz, 1998, Kennedy, 2002). Following the completion of the screening and the comprehensive assessments, an evaluation of the true positives and false positives was calculated, and an analysis of the false negative outcomes made. Findings indicated that fourteen of the twenty participants were true positives, three were true negatives, three were false positives, and none were false negatives. The Positive Predictive Value and Negative Predictive Value of the screening protocol was 100%. Test Sensitivity and Specificity were very high at 82% and 100%. Inter-rater reliability was very high, generally ranging from 92-100%. Adding a standardised measure of phonological awareness would improve efficiency of the screening protocol. Consideration of alternative screening tools, such as the GAPS test (Gardner et al, 2006) and the CELF-4 screening test (Semel, Secord & Wiig, 2004), should be made. Additional factors which could influence a screening protocol are discussed. The Otago screening protocol is a valid procedure to detect severe speech and language impairments in school-aged students referred to Special Education.

No description available.

No description available.

Preschool children with Specific Language Impairment are at an increased risk for later reading difficulties (Watson, Layton, & Pierce, 1994; Catts et al., 1999; Johnston et al., 1999; Boudreau & Hedberg, 1999). Current emergent literacy intervention approaches have been discussed regarding typically developing children and children from lower incomes, but they lack efficacy data for preschoolers with SLI. The purpose of this article is to describe the current literature regarding emergent literacy intervention in preschoolers with SLI and reach an evidence-base decision as to the most effective intervention techniques to utilize in order to prevent later reading difficulties. / text