Recommended interface Medical information including nursing, health care systems, pre-clinical sciences, and dentistry, veterinary medicine.
This article contains essential information that is crucial for both students and future SLPs to grasp. The material covered can significantly impact your ability to interpret norm-referenced tests and accurately assess an individual's performance on such tests.
This article is organized into sub-sections that align with the structure of most technical manuals. SLPs can use this article as a reference to analyze various tests in order to better understand what might make one test better or more appropriate than another.
This article focuses on criterion-referenced assessments and their value in the evaluation process. It explains the nature of criterion-referenced assessments, discusses how to determine whether a criterion-referenced assessment is appropriate for a specific testing purpose, and how to evaluate the psychometric soundness of clinician-generated assessments.
The findings of this research might be surprising. Although it focuses on language impairment, it has good information that can be applied to assessment in general.
(This article is an introduction to alternative assessment procedures that may be less biased for culturally and linguistically diverse (CLD) populations, and it summarizes issues to consider when assessing CLD children.
Caution should be taken when assessing a client who does not fit within the norming sample of a test. The PPVT could be a highly valid assessment when used in certain ways, but is limiting when used in others. This article focuses on test validity and is a good starting point for a discussion about SLP assessment traditions and what we should do about evaluating and changing traditions that do not have strong empirical backing.
This article updates McCauley & Swisher (1984) and provides information on norm-referenced speech sound productions tests.
RECOMMENDED: http://www.socialresearchmethods.net/kb/constval.php.
Validity and Reliability explained by Dr. William M. K. Trochim
This website by Dr. William M. K. Trochim, a Professor in the Department of Policy Analysis and Management at Cornell University, offers us a different approach to explaining validity, reliability, and other factors related to assessment. He has been teaching this topic for over 30 years, and his website is full of very clear explanations. I highly recommend you read the main sections on this website about construct validity and reliability.
1. |
Screening for language and speech delay in children under five years. Jullien S. BMC Pediatr. 2021 Sep 8;21(Suppl 1):362. doi: 10.1186/s12887-021-02817-7. PMID: 34496812 Free PMC article. Review. |
2. |
Language development and assessment in the preschool period. Conti-Ramsden G, Durkin K. Neuropsychol Rev. 2012 Dec;22(4):384-401. doi: 10.1007/s11065-012-9208-z. Epub 2012 Jun 17. PMID: 22707315 Review. |
3. |
Using a monolingual screening test for assessing bilingual children. Altman C, Harel E, Meir N, Iluz-Cohen P, Walters J, Armon-Lotem S. Clin Linguist Phon. 2022 Dec 2;36(12):1132-1152. doi: 10.1080/02699206.2021.2000644. Epub 2021 Nov 29. PMID: 34844504 |
4. |
Orellana CI, Wada R, Gillam RB. Am J Speech Lang Pathol. 2019 Aug 9;28(3):1298-1317. doi: 10.1044/2019_AJSLP-18-0202. Epub 2019 Jun 13. PMID: 31194570 |
5. |
Screening for Speech and Language Delay in Children 5 Years Old and Younger: A Systematic Review. Wallace IF, Berkman ND, Watson LR, Coyne-Beasley T, Wood CT, Cullen K, Lohr KN. Pediatrics. 2015 Aug;136(2):e448-62. doi: 10.1542/peds.2014-3889. Epub 2015 Jul 7. PMID: 26152671 Review. |
6. |
Pace A, Curran M, Van Horne AO, de Villiers J, Iglesias A, Golinkoff RM, Wilson MS, Hirsh-Pasek K. J Commun Disord. 2022 Nov-Dec;100:106276. doi: 10.1016/j.jcomdis.2022.106276. Epub 2022 Oct 28. PMID: 36335826 |