Pub Date : 2025-05-19DOI: 10.1044/2025_lshss-24-00166
Genesis D Arizmendi
PURPOSEFunctional language proficiency is presented as a conceptual framework that builds upon cultural-linguistic assets in bilingually developing children and bridges the theory of natural translation, translanguaging, and language brokering practices. A novel task was developed based on this framework for quantifying Spanish-English bilingual children's functional language proficiency. The development, feasibility, face, and convergent validity of the Functional Language Proficiency (FLiP) task are detailed as part of this work, as well as its application and utility as a culturally responsive practice.METHODA conceptual framework and novel task were developed based on bilingual communication practices. This article details the conceptual framework and development process of the task, including considerations for cultural relevance, memory demands, linguistic complexity, and scoring procedures. The FLiP was administered to 90 Spanish-English learning Latino children in first, second, and third grade (30 per grade).RESULTSAll 90 first-, second-, and third-grade children completed the task, generating an expectedly wide range of proficiency profiles across both languages. Importantly, 86% of the children reported that they had engaged in these language practices in their daily lives. There was strong interrater reliability (94%), and scores on the FLiP were positively correlated with measures of language sample analyses in both languages.CONCLUSIONSThe results of this study showed that the FLiP was an age-appropriate, asset-based, and culturally relevant task for measuring functional language proficiency in most Spanish-English school-age bilinguals. The role of functional proficiency is discussed, along with future research directions including validation, item analysis, and task refinement.SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALhttps://doi.org/10.23641/asha.28946261.
{"title":"Functional Language Proficiency in Bilingual Children: A Conceptual Framework, Culturally Responsive Practice, and Measurement Approach.","authors":"Genesis D Arizmendi","doi":"10.1044/2025_lshss-24-00166","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1044/2025_lshss-24-00166","url":null,"abstract":"PURPOSEFunctional language proficiency is presented as a conceptual framework that builds upon cultural-linguistic assets in bilingually developing children and bridges the theory of natural translation, translanguaging, and language brokering practices. A novel task was developed based on this framework for quantifying Spanish-English bilingual children's functional language proficiency. The development, feasibility, face, and convergent validity of the Functional Language Proficiency (FLiP) task are detailed as part of this work, as well as its application and utility as a culturally responsive practice.METHODA conceptual framework and novel task were developed based on bilingual communication practices. This article details the conceptual framework and development process of the task, including considerations for cultural relevance, memory demands, linguistic complexity, and scoring procedures. The FLiP was administered to 90 Spanish-English learning Latino children in first, second, and third grade (30 per grade).RESULTSAll 90 first-, second-, and third-grade children completed the task, generating an expectedly wide range of proficiency profiles across both languages. Importantly, 86% of the children reported that they had engaged in these language practices in their daily lives. There was strong interrater reliability (94%), and scores on the FLiP were positively correlated with measures of language sample analyses in both languages.CONCLUSIONSThe results of this study showed that the FLiP was an age-appropriate, asset-based, and culturally relevant task for measuring functional language proficiency in most Spanish-English school-age bilinguals. The role of functional proficiency is discussed, along with future research directions including validation, item analysis, and task refinement.SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALhttps://doi.org/10.23641/asha.28946261.","PeriodicalId":54326,"journal":{"name":"Language Speech and Hearing Services in Schools","volume":"54 1","pages":"1-19"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2025-05-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144097714","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-05-19DOI: 10.1044/2025_lshss-23-00200
Sharynne McLeod,Linda J Harrison,Catherine McMahon,Cen Wang,John Robert Evans
PURPOSEThe aim of this study was to longitudinally investigate parent-reported children's speech and language in early childhood as an early indicator of Indigenous Australians' school-age educational outcomes.METHODParticipants were 1,534 children from the Longitudinal Study of Indigenous Children (LSIC) whose parents reported on expressive and receptive speech and language concern (SLC) at 3-5 years using the Parents' Evaluation of Developmental Status. A total of 467 children (30.4%) were identified as having SLC, of whom 308 had only expressive SLC, 65 had only receptive SLC, and 81 had both expressive and receptive SLC. Educational outcomes included (a) National Assessment Program-Literacy and Numeracy (NAPLAN) tests (Grade 3, 8-9 years), (b) teacher-reported literacy and numeracy on the Academic Rating Scale (ARS; 8-9, 9-10 years), and (c) research officer-administered Progressive Achievement Tests in Reading (PAT-Reading; 6-7, 7-8, 8-9, 9-10 years) and Progressive Achievement Tests in Mathematics (PAT-Maths; 8-9, 9-10 years).RESULTSAfter controlling for covariates (child age, sex, having hearing problems, having a disability, speaking an Indigenous language, parent education, family life events, community socioeconomic status, and remoteness), SLC was associated with significantly lower scores on all NAPLAN subtests (Reading, Writing, Spelling, Grammar, Numeracy), teacher-rated ARS for Language and Literacy (9-10 years), and PAT-Reading (6-7 years) and PAT-Maths (9-10 years). Subgroup comparisons indicated that children with both expressive and receptive SLC had the poorest outcomes on NAPLAN and ARS subtests.CONCLUSIONParental reporting of Indigenous Australian children's SLC in early childhood is an important early indicator of education outcomes at school, indicating the importance of families throughout a child's trajectory of learning and development.
{"title":"Parent-Reported Speech and Language in Early Childhood Is an Early Indicator of Indigenous Australian Children's Literacy and Numeracy Outcomes.","authors":"Sharynne McLeod,Linda J Harrison,Catherine McMahon,Cen Wang,John Robert Evans","doi":"10.1044/2025_lshss-23-00200","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1044/2025_lshss-23-00200","url":null,"abstract":"PURPOSEThe aim of this study was to longitudinally investigate parent-reported children's speech and language in early childhood as an early indicator of Indigenous Australians' school-age educational outcomes.METHODParticipants were 1,534 children from the Longitudinal Study of Indigenous Children (LSIC) whose parents reported on expressive and receptive speech and language concern (SLC) at 3-5 years using the Parents' Evaluation of Developmental Status. A total of 467 children (30.4%) were identified as having SLC, of whom 308 had only expressive SLC, 65 had only receptive SLC, and 81 had both expressive and receptive SLC. Educational outcomes included (a) National Assessment Program-Literacy and Numeracy (NAPLAN) tests (Grade 3, 8-9 years), (b) teacher-reported literacy and numeracy on the Academic Rating Scale (ARS; 8-9, 9-10 years), and (c) research officer-administered Progressive Achievement Tests in Reading (PAT-Reading; 6-7, 7-8, 8-9, 9-10 years) and Progressive Achievement Tests in Mathematics (PAT-Maths; 8-9, 9-10 years).RESULTSAfter controlling for covariates (child age, sex, having hearing problems, having a disability, speaking an Indigenous language, parent education, family life events, community socioeconomic status, and remoteness), SLC was associated with significantly lower scores on all NAPLAN subtests (Reading, Writing, Spelling, Grammar, Numeracy), teacher-rated ARS for Language and Literacy (9-10 years), and PAT-Reading (6-7 years) and PAT-Maths (9-10 years). Subgroup comparisons indicated that children with both expressive and receptive SLC had the poorest outcomes on NAPLAN and ARS subtests.CONCLUSIONParental reporting of Indigenous Australian children's SLC in early childhood is an important early indicator of education outcomes at school, indicating the importance of families throughout a child's trajectory of learning and development.","PeriodicalId":54326,"journal":{"name":"Language Speech and Hearing Services in Schools","volume":"45 1","pages":"1-17"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2025-05-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144097720","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-05-19DOI: 10.1044/2025_lshss-24-00089
Marianne Elmquist,Katherine C Hustad
PURPOSEEarly identification of diverging developmental trajectories is important to optimize communication interventions for children with cerebral palsy (CP). The aim of this study was to examine if communication profiles at 2 years of age predicted speech, language, and communication outcomes at 9-10 years of age in children with CP.METHODTwenty-three children with CP (Mage = 9;10 [years;months]) participated in the study comprising of three mutually exclusive 2-year speech-language profiles: not yet talking (n = 10), emerging talkers (n = 9), and established talkers (n = 4). Using generalized linear regression and Kruskal-Wallis rank sum tests, we examined if 2-year speech-language profiles predicted speech, language, and communication outcomes at 9-10 years of age. Outcomes at 9-10 years of age were obtained from classification systems, spontaneous language samples, elicited speech tasks, and parent report.RESULTSBased on 2-year speech-language profiles, we found significant differences in speech, language, and communication outcomes at 9-10 years of age. Specifically, children who were not talking at 2 years of age had more restricted outcomes than children who were emerging or established talkers at 2 years of age.CONCLUSIONOur study's results provide preliminary evidence that early communication interventions can and should be differentiated based on communication abilities at 2 years of age to maximize later communication outcomes for children with CP.
{"title":"How Well Do Communication Profiles at 2 Years of Age Predict Outcomes at 9-10 Years of Age in Children With Cerebral Palsy?","authors":"Marianne Elmquist,Katherine C Hustad","doi":"10.1044/2025_lshss-24-00089","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1044/2025_lshss-24-00089","url":null,"abstract":"PURPOSEEarly identification of diverging developmental trajectories is important to optimize communication interventions for children with cerebral palsy (CP). The aim of this study was to examine if communication profiles at 2 years of age predicted speech, language, and communication outcomes at 9-10 years of age in children with CP.METHODTwenty-three children with CP (Mage = 9;10 [years;months]) participated in the study comprising of three mutually exclusive 2-year speech-language profiles: not yet talking (n = 10), emerging talkers (n = 9), and established talkers (n = 4). Using generalized linear regression and Kruskal-Wallis rank sum tests, we examined if 2-year speech-language profiles predicted speech, language, and communication outcomes at 9-10 years of age. Outcomes at 9-10 years of age were obtained from classification systems, spontaneous language samples, elicited speech tasks, and parent report.RESULTSBased on 2-year speech-language profiles, we found significant differences in speech, language, and communication outcomes at 9-10 years of age. Specifically, children who were not talking at 2 years of age had more restricted outcomes than children who were emerging or established talkers at 2 years of age.CONCLUSIONOur study's results provide preliminary evidence that early communication interventions can and should be differentiated based on communication abilities at 2 years of age to maximize later communication outcomes for children with CP.","PeriodicalId":54326,"journal":{"name":"Language Speech and Hearing Services in Schools","volume":"32 1","pages":"1-18"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2025-05-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144097736","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-05-19DOI: 10.1044/2025_lshss-24-00123
Carol Westby,Leslie E Kokotek,Karla N Washington
PURPOSEThe prevalence of adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) is increasing and is highest in minoritized ethnic/racial groups, most notably in Indigenous populations in the United States and Canada. Beyond ACEs, minoritized ethnic/racial groups have also experienced historical oppression, discrimination, and economic inequalities that can perpetuate ACEs and initiate intergenerational cycles of adversity. Children who have experienced multiple ACEs are at risk for learning and communication impairments that would qualify them for speech and language services. The purpose of this case study is to: (a) define ACEs, intergenerational and historical trauma, as well as describe the causes, consequences, and relationships among these three types of trauma; (b) describe the use of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) for assessment of an Indigenous child who has experienced multiple ACEs that may be associated with historical trauma; and (c) describe implementation of the Attachment, Regulation, Competency intervention for children with complex posttraumatic stress disorder adapted for an Indigenous child.CONCLUSIONSThe concept of historical trauma arose with Indigenous populations, but it has been extended to many other populations that have experienced chronic trauma associated with oppression based on their ethnicity, race, or culture. The ICF provides a framework for conducting a comprehensive assessment and developing an intervention plan for a child who has experienced multiple ACEs, possibly related to intergenerational and historical trauma. To understand the child's strengths and needs, it is essential that clinicians consider the child's unique personal and environmental contextual factors. By considering these contextual factors, clinicians can identify which attributes serve as barriers or facilitators to children's functioning and how intervention programs may need to be adapted for the child's culture.
{"title":"Adverse Childhood Experiences, Intergenerational Trauma, and Historical Trauma: A Child's Story.","authors":"Carol Westby,Leslie E Kokotek,Karla N Washington","doi":"10.1044/2025_lshss-24-00123","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1044/2025_lshss-24-00123","url":null,"abstract":"PURPOSEThe prevalence of adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) is increasing and is highest in minoritized ethnic/racial groups, most notably in Indigenous populations in the United States and Canada. Beyond ACEs, minoritized ethnic/racial groups have also experienced historical oppression, discrimination, and economic inequalities that can perpetuate ACEs and initiate intergenerational cycles of adversity. Children who have experienced multiple ACEs are at risk for learning and communication impairments that would qualify them for speech and language services. The purpose of this case study is to: (a) define ACEs, intergenerational and historical trauma, as well as describe the causes, consequences, and relationships among these three types of trauma; (b) describe the use of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) for assessment of an Indigenous child who has experienced multiple ACEs that may be associated with historical trauma; and (c) describe implementation of the Attachment, Regulation, Competency intervention for children with complex posttraumatic stress disorder adapted for an Indigenous child.CONCLUSIONSThe concept of historical trauma arose with Indigenous populations, but it has been extended to many other populations that have experienced chronic trauma associated with oppression based on their ethnicity, race, or culture. The ICF provides a framework for conducting a comprehensive assessment and developing an intervention plan for a child who has experienced multiple ACEs, possibly related to intergenerational and historical trauma. To understand the child's strengths and needs, it is essential that clinicians consider the child's unique personal and environmental contextual factors. By considering these contextual factors, clinicians can identify which attributes serve as barriers or facilitators to children's functioning and how intervention programs may need to be adapted for the child's culture.","PeriodicalId":54326,"journal":{"name":"Language Speech and Hearing Services in Schools","volume":"12 1","pages":"1-16"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2025-05-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144097713","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-05-19DOI: 10.1044/2025_lshss-24-00096
Elizabeth A Walker,Meredith Spratford,Meaghan Foody,Ryan McCreery
PURPOSEChildren who use hearing aids show large individual differences in the amount of time they wear their devices, but the vast majority of research studies have focused on infants and preschoolers who are deaf and hard of hearing (D/HH). There is limited empirical evidence regarding hearing aid use in adolescents or published data on adolescents' attitudes toward hearing aids. The overarching aim of the current study was to characterize hearing aid use in adolescents who are D/HH.METHODOne hundred twenty-nine adolescents who are D/HH (12-19 years old) and their parents completed questionnaires about hearing aid use and attitudes toward amplification. Examiners collected data logging at research visits. Adolescents and parents estimated the average amount of time hearing aids were worn during the week and weekend. We conducted a linear regression analysis to investigate the relationships among the independent predictor variables (chronological age, age at hearing aid fitting, maternal education level, proximity of hearing aid fitting to prescriptive targets, and better ear pure-tone average) and the dependent variable (adolescent self-report of average daily hearing aid use).RESULTSSeverity of hearing loss and maternal education level accounted for variation in hearing aid use among adolescents who are D/HH, whereas chronological age, age at hearing aid fitting, and proximity of fitting to prescriptive targets did not. Parent report, adolescent self-report, and data logging were in high agreement, although both parents and teenagers tended to overestimate the amount of daily hearing aid use by around 30 min.DISCUSSIONIn general, the results of the current study are inconsistent with the notion that adolescents decrease hearing aid use when they reach adolescence. Furthermore, many of the adolescents who participated in this study expressed positive attitudes about amplification, demonstrating emerging self-advocacy.
{"title":"Characteristics of Hearing Aid Use in Adolescents Who Are Deaf and Hard of Hearing.","authors":"Elizabeth A Walker,Meredith Spratford,Meaghan Foody,Ryan McCreery","doi":"10.1044/2025_lshss-24-00096","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1044/2025_lshss-24-00096","url":null,"abstract":"PURPOSEChildren who use hearing aids show large individual differences in the amount of time they wear their devices, but the vast majority of research studies have focused on infants and preschoolers who are deaf and hard of hearing (D/HH). There is limited empirical evidence regarding hearing aid use in adolescents or published data on adolescents' attitudes toward hearing aids. The overarching aim of the current study was to characterize hearing aid use in adolescents who are D/HH.METHODOne hundred twenty-nine adolescents who are D/HH (12-19 years old) and their parents completed questionnaires about hearing aid use and attitudes toward amplification. Examiners collected data logging at research visits. Adolescents and parents estimated the average amount of time hearing aids were worn during the week and weekend. We conducted a linear regression analysis to investigate the relationships among the independent predictor variables (chronological age, age at hearing aid fitting, maternal education level, proximity of hearing aid fitting to prescriptive targets, and better ear pure-tone average) and the dependent variable (adolescent self-report of average daily hearing aid use).RESULTSSeverity of hearing loss and maternal education level accounted for variation in hearing aid use among adolescents who are D/HH, whereas chronological age, age at hearing aid fitting, and proximity of fitting to prescriptive targets did not. Parent report, adolescent self-report, and data logging were in high agreement, although both parents and teenagers tended to overestimate the amount of daily hearing aid use by around 30 min.DISCUSSIONIn general, the results of the current study are inconsistent with the notion that adolescents decrease hearing aid use when they reach adolescence. Furthermore, many of the adolescents who participated in this study expressed positive attitudes about amplification, demonstrating emerging self-advocacy.","PeriodicalId":54326,"journal":{"name":"Language Speech and Hearing Services in Schools","volume":"18 1","pages":"1-20"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2025-05-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144097721","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-05-19DOI: 10.1044/2025_lshss-24-00148
Lesley Sylvan,Meaghan McKenna
PURPOSEWhile there is overwhelming support from clinical texts, journal articles, and our national organization for the implementation of multi-tiered system of supports (MTSS) in school-based speech and language practice, the reality is that many speech-language pathologists (SLPs) may be unfamiliar with how to fully engage with this framework. In this clinical focus article, we identify potential misconceptions related to MTSS and explore the degree to which these misconceptions may be prevalent and the driving factors that influence SLPs. We also discuss what next steps the field can take to support accurate beliefs about MTSS and refudiate potential misconceptions in order to best position SLPs to successfully participate in an MTSS framework.METHODTwelve potential misconceptions related to MTSS and SLPs were identified by the authors of this clinical focus article. Nineteen school-based SLPs who worked in public schools in the United States participated in a 75-min focus group where they were asked to rate the degree to which they agreed or disagreed with the identified misconceptions and explain their reactions. Focus groups ranged in size from three to four SLPs.RESULTSThe focus groups produced both quantitative and qualitative data about SLPs' perspectives related to MTSS and provided insights into which misconceptions may be prevalent or influential in how SLPs frame, approach, and reflect on MTSS.CONCLUSIONSAlthough roles and responsibilities of school-based SLPs support engagement with MTSS, there is growing concern regarding the gap between research, policy, and practice related to MTSS implementation. Identifying and addressing potential misconceptions SLPs hold related to MTSS will bolster efforts to support SLP involvement in MTSS, resulting in high-quality services and supports matched to strengths and needs of all students.
{"title":"Understanding Speech-Language Pathologists' Misconceptions About Multi-Tiered System of Supports: Initial Exploration From a Focus Group Analysis.","authors":"Lesley Sylvan,Meaghan McKenna","doi":"10.1044/2025_lshss-24-00148","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1044/2025_lshss-24-00148","url":null,"abstract":"PURPOSEWhile there is overwhelming support from clinical texts, journal articles, and our national organization for the implementation of multi-tiered system of supports (MTSS) in school-based speech and language practice, the reality is that many speech-language pathologists (SLPs) may be unfamiliar with how to fully engage with this framework. In this clinical focus article, we identify potential misconceptions related to MTSS and explore the degree to which these misconceptions may be prevalent and the driving factors that influence SLPs. We also discuss what next steps the field can take to support accurate beliefs about MTSS and refudiate potential misconceptions in order to best position SLPs to successfully participate in an MTSS framework.METHODTwelve potential misconceptions related to MTSS and SLPs were identified by the authors of this clinical focus article. Nineteen school-based SLPs who worked in public schools in the United States participated in a 75-min focus group where they were asked to rate the degree to which they agreed or disagreed with the identified misconceptions and explain their reactions. Focus groups ranged in size from three to four SLPs.RESULTSThe focus groups produced both quantitative and qualitative data about SLPs' perspectives related to MTSS and provided insights into which misconceptions may be prevalent or influential in how SLPs frame, approach, and reflect on MTSS.CONCLUSIONSAlthough roles and responsibilities of school-based SLPs support engagement with MTSS, there is growing concern regarding the gap between research, policy, and practice related to MTSS implementation. Identifying and addressing potential misconceptions SLPs hold related to MTSS will bolster efforts to support SLP involvement in MTSS, resulting in high-quality services and supports matched to strengths and needs of all students.","PeriodicalId":54326,"journal":{"name":"Language Speech and Hearing Services in Schools","volume":"8 1","pages":"1-16"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2025-05-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144097715","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-05-15DOI: 10.1044/2025_lshss-24-00085
Nina R Benway,Jonathan L Preston
PURPOSEArtificial intelligence (AI) is more capable and accessible than ever before. But what does this mean for clinical practice? How can speech-language clinicians evaluate the efficacy, validity, and reliability of AI and machine learning tools for automating assessment and treatment? How can speech-language clinicians ethically use these clinical AI technologies? We contend that clinical AI will best serve clinicians and clients when aligned with an evidence-based framework. Therefore, this tutorial presents guidelines for the critical appraisal of clinical AI through the lens of validity, reliability, ethical use, and equitable use, facilitated by the Critical Appraisal Rubric for Ethical and Equitable Clinical Artificial Intelligence. Similarly, in order for developers of clinical AI to meet the needs of the profession, these principles should guide the development and assessment of new clinical technologies.CONCLUSIONSThe questions of efficacy, validity, reliability, ethical use, and equitable use of clinical AI can be answered through the examination of a specific clinical AI for a given user, as emphasized by culturally responsive professional practice. A framework is provided to assist clinicians in the critical appraisal of clinical AI tools.
{"title":"Equipping Speech-Language Clinicians for the Critical Appraisal of an Artificial Intelligence-Driven, Evidence-Based Future.","authors":"Nina R Benway,Jonathan L Preston","doi":"10.1044/2025_lshss-24-00085","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1044/2025_lshss-24-00085","url":null,"abstract":"PURPOSEArtificial intelligence (AI) is more capable and accessible than ever before. But what does this mean for clinical practice? How can speech-language clinicians evaluate the efficacy, validity, and reliability of AI and machine learning tools for automating assessment and treatment? How can speech-language clinicians ethically use these clinical AI technologies? We contend that clinical AI will best serve clinicians and clients when aligned with an evidence-based framework. Therefore, this tutorial presents guidelines for the critical appraisal of clinical AI through the lens of validity, reliability, ethical use, and equitable use, facilitated by the Critical Appraisal Rubric for Ethical and Equitable Clinical Artificial Intelligence. Similarly, in order for developers of clinical AI to meet the needs of the profession, these principles should guide the development and assessment of new clinical technologies.CONCLUSIONSThe questions of efficacy, validity, reliability, ethical use, and equitable use of clinical AI can be answered through the examination of a specific clinical AI for a given user, as emphasized by culturally responsive professional practice. A framework is provided to assist clinicians in the critical appraisal of clinical AI tools.","PeriodicalId":54326,"journal":{"name":"Language Speech and Hearing Services in Schools","volume":"5 1","pages":"1-27"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2025-05-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144065748","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-05-15DOI: 10.1044/2025_lshss-24-00156
Eve Julie Rioux,Elin Thordardottir
PURPOSEThis study examined the writing skills of English-French bilingual (EFbil) adolescents with extensive exposure to both languages in a two-majority language context.METHODParticipants were EFbil adolescents (n = 26) and French near-monolinguals (FL1; n = 12) aged 12 to 17 years. All participants wrote image descriptions in French; EFbil also wrote in English. Between-group comparisons were run for complex syntax, errors, and productivity. Within-group comparisons looked at bilinguals across their languages, and oral and written syntax for both groups. Predictors of text quality were explored through multiple regression analyses.RESULTSIn French, both groups performed similarly on productivity and syntactic measures. Bilinguals made more errors, but both groups had a high error-to-productivity ratio. Bilinguals performed similarly in both languages on all measures, except errors that were higher in French. Comparisons between oral and written modalities followed similar patterns for both groups. French exposure and all syntactic measures as well as time spent reading in French were predictive of French text quality. However, a low error-to-productivity ratio best predicted French text quality.CONCLUSIONSResults indicate a similar syntactic performance in French for monolinguals and bilinguals given comparable French school exposure. Being schooled in French did not prevent bilinguals from developing equivalent writing skills in their first language, English. As a majority and globalized language, the environment appears to have allowed bilinguals to maintain sufficient exposure to support their English skills. These results also point to a mutually contributing relationship between the ability to write good content quality and to respect the spelling and grammar of the language.
{"title":"Biliterate Adolescents' Writing Skills in a Two-Majority Language Context.","authors":"Eve Julie Rioux,Elin Thordardottir","doi":"10.1044/2025_lshss-24-00156","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1044/2025_lshss-24-00156","url":null,"abstract":"PURPOSEThis study examined the writing skills of English-French bilingual (EFbil) adolescents with extensive exposure to both languages in a two-majority language context.METHODParticipants were EFbil adolescents (n = 26) and French near-monolinguals (FL1; n = 12) aged 12 to 17 years. All participants wrote image descriptions in French; EFbil also wrote in English. Between-group comparisons were run for complex syntax, errors, and productivity. Within-group comparisons looked at bilinguals across their languages, and oral and written syntax for both groups. Predictors of text quality were explored through multiple regression analyses.RESULTSIn French, both groups performed similarly on productivity and syntactic measures. Bilinguals made more errors, but both groups had a high error-to-productivity ratio. Bilinguals performed similarly in both languages on all measures, except errors that were higher in French. Comparisons between oral and written modalities followed similar patterns for both groups. French exposure and all syntactic measures as well as time spent reading in French were predictive of French text quality. However, a low error-to-productivity ratio best predicted French text quality.CONCLUSIONSResults indicate a similar syntactic performance in French for monolinguals and bilinguals given comparable French school exposure. Being schooled in French did not prevent bilinguals from developing equivalent writing skills in their first language, English. As a majority and globalized language, the environment appears to have allowed bilinguals to maintain sufficient exposure to support their English skills. These results also point to a mutually contributing relationship between the ability to write good content quality and to respect the spelling and grammar of the language.","PeriodicalId":54326,"journal":{"name":"Language Speech and Hearing Services in Schools","volume":"57 1","pages":"1-23"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2025-05-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144065747","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-05-14DOI: 10.1044/2025_lshss-24-00056
Hope Sparks Lancaster,Erin Smolak,Alice Milne,Katherine R Gordon,Samantha N Emerson,Claire Selin
PURPOSEChildren with neurodevelopmental disorders historically exhibit lower and more variable nonverbal intelligence (NVIQ) scores compared to their typically developing peers. We hypothesize that the intrinsic characteristics of the tests themselves, particularly the cognitive constructs they assess, may account for both the lower scores and variability across tests and over time. Using a qualitative content analysis approach, we examined the extent to which key cognitive constructs are engaged in NVIQ tests and how these constructs compare across different tests.METHODCurrent editions of seven NVIQ tests were selected based on their relevance in clinical and research settings. Qualitative coding of constructs was developed iteratively by speech-language pathologists and researchers. The codes focused on cognitive domains most affected in highly prevalent neurodevelopmental conditions, including attention, receptive language, statistical learning, and working memory.RESULTSWe identified multiple subfeatures for our constructs of interest. Using this coding framework, we found that NVIQ tests qualitatively differ in the extent to which these four constructs influence test performance.CONCLUSIONSOur findings suggest that understanding the impact of cognitive constructs on NVIQ tests can help explain why children with neurodevelopmental disorders exhibit lower and more unstable NVIQ scores compared to their peers. We provide recommendations for the use of NVIQ tests with neurodevelopmental disorder populations and encourage researchers and clinicians in speech and hearing sciences and psychology to use our results to inform test interpretation and selection.SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALhttps://doi.org/10.23641/asha.28886957.
{"title":"Analyzing the Impact of Four Cognitive Constructs on Nonverbal Intelligence Test Performance: Implications for Children With Neurodevelopmental Disorders.","authors":"Hope Sparks Lancaster,Erin Smolak,Alice Milne,Katherine R Gordon,Samantha N Emerson,Claire Selin","doi":"10.1044/2025_lshss-24-00056","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1044/2025_lshss-24-00056","url":null,"abstract":"PURPOSEChildren with neurodevelopmental disorders historically exhibit lower and more variable nonverbal intelligence (NVIQ) scores compared to their typically developing peers. We hypothesize that the intrinsic characteristics of the tests themselves, particularly the cognitive constructs they assess, may account for both the lower scores and variability across tests and over time. Using a qualitative content analysis approach, we examined the extent to which key cognitive constructs are engaged in NVIQ tests and how these constructs compare across different tests.METHODCurrent editions of seven NVIQ tests were selected based on their relevance in clinical and research settings. Qualitative coding of constructs was developed iteratively by speech-language pathologists and researchers. The codes focused on cognitive domains most affected in highly prevalent neurodevelopmental conditions, including attention, receptive language, statistical learning, and working memory.RESULTSWe identified multiple subfeatures for our constructs of interest. Using this coding framework, we found that NVIQ tests qualitatively differ in the extent to which these four constructs influence test performance.CONCLUSIONSOur findings suggest that understanding the impact of cognitive constructs on NVIQ tests can help explain why children with neurodevelopmental disorders exhibit lower and more unstable NVIQ scores compared to their peers. We provide recommendations for the use of NVIQ tests with neurodevelopmental disorder populations and encourage researchers and clinicians in speech and hearing sciences and psychology to use our results to inform test interpretation and selection.SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALhttps://doi.org/10.23641/asha.28886957.","PeriodicalId":54326,"journal":{"name":"Language Speech and Hearing Services in Schools","volume":"30 1","pages":"1-13"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2025-05-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143982529","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-05-14DOI: 10.1044/2025_lshss-24-00100
Sarah D Wiegand,Jennifer A Brown,Rebecca G Lieberman-Betz
PURPOSEPart C early intervention (EI) providers, including speech-language pathologists, are often involved in autism screening practices and discussing autism with families of toddlers. The purpose of this study was to understand EI providers' perspectives of screening for autism.METHODUsing a phenomenological qualitative design, we explored EI providers' perspectives and experiences related to autism screening and engaging in conversations about autism with families.RESULTSFindings from semistructured interviews with EI providers revealed themes related to (a) experiences screening for autism and engaging in conversations about autism, (b) interactions with families during autism conversations, and (c) resources and supports for providers and families.CONCLUSIONFindings from this study have implications for professional development and policies surrounding screening for autism in Part C.
{"title":"\"It's Not My Journey, It's Theirs\": Experiences of Part C Providers Screening for Autism.","authors":"Sarah D Wiegand,Jennifer A Brown,Rebecca G Lieberman-Betz","doi":"10.1044/2025_lshss-24-00100","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1044/2025_lshss-24-00100","url":null,"abstract":"PURPOSEPart C early intervention (EI) providers, including speech-language pathologists, are often involved in autism screening practices and discussing autism with families of toddlers. The purpose of this study was to understand EI providers' perspectives of screening for autism.METHODUsing a phenomenological qualitative design, we explored EI providers' perspectives and experiences related to autism screening and engaging in conversations about autism with families.RESULTSFindings from semistructured interviews with EI providers revealed themes related to (a) experiences screening for autism and engaging in conversations about autism, (b) interactions with families during autism conversations, and (c) resources and supports for providers and families.CONCLUSIONFindings from this study have implications for professional development and policies surrounding screening for autism in Part C.","PeriodicalId":54326,"journal":{"name":"Language Speech and Hearing Services in Schools","volume":"1 1","pages":"1-11"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2025-05-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143982422","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：