ASHAWire
Advanced search
Skip main navigation
Close Drawer MenuOpen Drawer Menu
No AccessLanguage, Speech, and Hearing Services in SchoolsResearch Article1 Jul 2016

Use of Language Sample Analysis by School-Based SLPs: Results of a Nationwide Survey

    https://doi.org/10.1044/2016_LSHSS-15-0044

    Abstract

    Purpose

    This article examines use of language sample analysis (LSA) by school-based speech-language pathologists (SLPs), including characteristics of language samples, methods of transcription and analysis, barriers to LSA use, and factors affecting LSA use, such as American Speech-Language-Hearing Association certification, number of years' experience, and caseload characteristics.

    Method

    School-based SLPs responded to an invitation to complete an electronic survey related to LSA.

    Results

    One third of respondents indicated they did not use LSA during the 2012–2013 school year. SLPs who served middle and high school students were less likely to use LSA. Most respondents reported using conversation to analyze fewer than 10 samples and transcribing in real time. Additional analyses revealed that SLPs who had 3 or fewer years of experience and who analyzed fewer than 20 language samples per year were statistically less likely to report using real-time transcription. The most frequently cited barrier to using LSA was “LSA is too time-consuming.”

    Conclusion

    Many school-based SLPs do not routinely use LSA. Further, many did not report engaging in evidence-based practices, such as recording samples, using established protocols, or using tasks designed to elicit complex syntax. These results indicate a continued need for professional development regarding evidenced-based practices relative to LSA use.

    References

    • American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. (n.d.). Spoken language disorders [Practice Portal]. Retrieved from http://www.asha.org/practice-portal/Clinical-Topics/Spoken-Language-Disorders/
      Google Scholar
    • American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. (2004). Knowledge and skills needed by speech-language pathologists and audiologists to provide culturally and linguistically appropriate services [Knowledge and skills]. Retrieved from http://www.asha.org/policy/KS2004-00215.htm
      Google Scholar
    • American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. (2010). Roles and responsibilities of speech-language pathologists in schools [Professional Issues Statement]. Retrieved from http://www.asha.org/policy/PI2010-00317.htm
      Google Scholar
    • American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. (2014). 2014 schools survey report: SLP caseload characteristics. Retrieved from http://www.asha.org/research/memberdata/schoolssurvey/
      Google Scholar
    • Betz, S. K., Eickhoff, J. R., & Sullivan, S. F. (2013). Factors influencing the selection of standardized tests for the diagnosis of specific language impairment.Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 44, 133–146. doi:10.1044/0161-1461(2012/12-0093)
      LinkGoogle Scholar
    • Connecticut State Department of Education. (2008). Guidelines for speech and language programs: Determining eligibility for special education speech and language services under IDEA. Hartford, CT: Author.
      Google Scholar
    • Council for Clinical Certification in Audiology and Speech-Language Pathology of the American Speech-Language Hearing Association. (2013). 2014 standards for the certificate of clinical competence in speech-language pathology. Retrieved from http://www.asha.org/Certification/2014-Speech-Language-Pathology-Certification-Standards/
      Google Scholar
    • Danahy Ebert, K., & Scott, C. M. (2014). Relationships between narrative language samples and norm-referenced test scores in language assessments of school-age children.Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 45, 337–350. doi:10.1044/2014_LSHSS-14-0034
      LinkGoogle Scholar
    • Dillman, D., Smyth, J., & Christian, L. (2008). Internet, mail, and mixed-mode surveys: The tailored design method. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
      Google Scholar
    • Ellsworth, J., & Fuse, A. (2008, November). CELF-4: Potential for bias against speakers of African American English. Paper presented at the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association, Chicago, IL.
      Google Scholar
    • Evans, J. L. (1996). Plotting the complexities of language sample analysis: Linear and non-linear dynamical models of assessment.In K. Cole, P. Dale, & D. Thal (Eds.), Assessment of communication and language (pp. 207–256). Baltimore, MD: Brookes.
      Google Scholar
    • Evans, J. L., & Miller, J. (1999). Language sample analysis in the 21st century.Seminars in Speech and Language, 20, 101–116. doi:10.1055/s-2008-1064012
      CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • Florida Department of Education. (2010). Exceptional student education eligibility for students with language impairments. Tallahassee, FL: Author.
      Google Scholar
    • Gray, L., Thomas, N., & Lewis, L. (2010). Teachers' use of educational technology in U.S. public schools: 2009 (NCES 2010-040). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.
      Google Scholar
    • Grover, H., Leadholm, B., & Miller, J. (2005). Language sample analysis: The Wisconsin guide II. Madison: Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction.
      Google Scholar
    • Heilmann, J. J. (2010). Myths and realities of language sample analysis.SIG 1 Perspectives on Language Learning and Education, 17, 4–8. doi:10.1044/lle17.1.4
      LinkGoogle Scholar
    • Heilmann, J., Miller, J. F., Iglesias, A., Fabiano-Smith, L., Nockerts, A., & Digney-Andriacchi, K. (2008). Narrative transcription accuracy and reliability in two languages.Topics in Language Disorders, 28, 178–188. doi:10.1097/01.TLD.0000318937.39301.76
      CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • Heilmann, J., Nockerts, A., & Miller, J. F. (2010). Language sampling: Does the length of the transcript matter?.Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 41, 393–404. doi:10.1044/0161-1461(2009/09-0023)
      LinkGoogle Scholar
    • Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, 20 U.S.C. § 1400 (2004).
      Google Scholar
    • Kemp, K., & Klee, T. (1997). Clinical language sampling practices: Results of a survey of speech-language pathologists in the United States.Child Language Teaching & Therapy, 13, 161–176. doi:10.1177/026565909701300204
      CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • Klee, T., Membrino, I., & May, S. (1991). Feasibility of real-time transcription in the clinical setting.Child Language Teaching & Therapy, 7, 27–40.
      CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • Kroecker, J., Lyle, K., Allen, K., Filippini, E., Galvin, M., Johnson, M., … Owens, R. (2010). Effects of student training on child language sample quality.Contemporary Issues in Communication Science and Disorders, 37, 4–13.
      LinkGoogle Scholar
    • Lee, L. L. (1974). Developmental sentence analysis: A grammatical assessment procedure for speech and language clinicians. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.
      Google Scholar
    • Long, S., Fey, M., & Channell, R. (2000). Computerized Profiling (CP) (Ver. 9.2.7) [Computer software]. Cleveland, OH: Department of Communication Sciences, Case Western Reserve University.
      Google Scholar
    • Lund, N. J., & Duchan, J. F. (1993). Assessing children's language in naturalistic contexts (3rd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
      Google Scholar
    • MacWhinney, B. (1996). The CHILDES system.American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 5, 5–14. doi:10.1044/1058-0360.0501.05
      LinkGoogle Scholar
    • MacWhinney, B. (2000). The CHILDES project: Tools for analyzing talk (3rd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
      Google Scholar
    • McCabe, A., & Champion, T. (2010). A matter of vocabulary II: Low-income African American children's performance on the Expressive Vocabulary Test.Communication Disorders Quarterly, 31, 162–169. doi:10.1177/1525740109344218
      CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • Miller, P. J. (1981). Assessing language production in children: Experimental procedures. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
      Google Scholar
    • Naremore, R. E., Densmore, A. E., & Harman, D. R. (2001). Assessment and treatment manual for school-age language disorders: A resource manual. Florence, KY: Thomson Delmar Learning.
      Google Scholar
    • Nelson, N. W. (2009). Language and literacy disorders: Infancy through adolescence. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
      Google Scholar
    • Nippold, M. A. (2014). Language sampling with adolescents: Implications for intervention (2nd ed.). San Diego, CA: Plural.
      Google Scholar
    • Nippold, M. A., Frantz-Kaspar, M., Cramond, P., Kirk, C., Hayward-Mayhew, C., & MacKinnon, M. (2014). Conversational and narrative speaking in adolescents: Examining the use of complex syntax.Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 57, 876–886. doi:10.1044/1092-4388(2013/13-0097)
      LinkGoogle Scholar
    • Nippold, M. A., Frantz-Kaspar, M., Cramond, P., Kirk, C., Hayward-Mayhew, C., & MacKinnon, M. (2015). Critical thinking about fables: Examining language production and comprehension in adolescents.Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 58, 325–335. doi:10.1044/2015_JSLHR-L-14-0129
      LinkGoogle Scholar
    • Nippold, M. A., Hesketh, L. J., Duthie, J. K., & Mansfield, T. C. (2005). Conversational versus expository discourse: A study of syntactic development in children, adolescents, and adults.Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 48, 1048–1064. doi:10.1044/1092-4388(2005/073)
      LinkGoogle Scholar
    • Nippold, M. A., Mansfield, T. C., Billow, J. L., & Tomblin, J. B. (2008). Expository discourse in adolescents with language impairments: Examining syntactic development.American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 17, 356–366. doi:10.1044/1058-0360(2008/07-0049)
      LinkGoogle Scholar
    • Owens, R. E. (2014). Language disorders: A functional approach to assessment and intervention (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
      Google Scholar
    • Peña, E. D., Gillam, R. B., & Bedroe, L. M. (2014). Dynamic assessment of narrative ability in English accurately identifies language impairment in English language learners.Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 57, 2208–2220. doi:10.1044/2014_JSLHR-L-13-0151
      LinkGoogle Scholar
    • Peña, E. D., Spaulding, T. L., & Plante, E. (2006). The composition of normative groups and diagnostic decision making: Shooting ourselves in the foot.American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 15, 247–254. doi:10.1044/1058-0360(2006/022)
      LinkGoogle Scholar
    • Plante, E., & Vance, R. (1994). Selection of preschool language tests: A data-based approach.Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 25, 15–24. doi:10.1044/0161-1461.2501.15
      LinkGoogle Scholar
    • Price, L., Hendricks, S., & Cook, C. (2010). Incorporating computer-aided language sample analysis into clinical practice.Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 41, 206–222. doi:10.1044/0161-1461(2009/08-0054)
      LinkGoogle Scholar
    • Reed, V. A. (2012). An introduction to children with language disorders (4th ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
      Google Scholar
    • SALT Software LLC. (2012). SALT software. Retrieved from http://www.saltsoftware.com
      Google Scholar
    • Scarborough, H. (1990). Index of productive syntax (IPSyn).Applied Psycholinguistics, 11, 1–22.
      CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • Scott, C. M., & Windsor, J. (2000). General language performance measures in spoken and written narrative and expository discourse in school age-children with language learning disabilities.Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 43, 324–339. doi:10.1044/jslhr.4302.324
      LinkGoogle Scholar
    • Southwood, F., & Russell, A. (2004). Comparison of conversation, freeplay, and story generation as methods of language sample elicitation.Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 47, 366–376. doi:10.1044/1092-4388(2004/030)
      LinkGoogle Scholar
    • Spaulding, T. J., Plante, E., & Farinella, K. A. (2006). Eligibility criteria for language impairment: Is the low end of normal always appropriate?.Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 37, 61–72. doi:10.1044/0161-1461(2006/007)
      LinkGoogle Scholar
    • State Education Agencies Communication Disabilities Council. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.seacdc.org/about-us.html
      Google Scholar
    • State of New Jersey Department of Education. (2015). Clarification of N.J.A.C. 6A:14-3.5(c)4. Retrieved from http://www.nj.gov/education/specialed/memos/100615Speech.pdf
      Google Scholar
    • Templin, M. C. (1957). Certain language skills in children: Their development and interrelationships. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
      CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • Tilstra, J., & McMaster, K. (2007). Productivity, fluency, and grammaticality measures from narratives: Potential indicators of language proficiency.Communication Disorders Quarterly, 29, 43–53. doi:10.1177/1525740108314866
      CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • Ukrainetz McFadden, T. (1996). Creating language impairments in typically achieving children: The pitfalls of “normal” normative sampling.Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 27, 3–9. doi:10.1044/0161-1461.2701.03
      LinkGoogle Scholar
    • U.S. Census Bureau. (2014). Measuring America. Retrieved from http://www.census.gov/hhes/computer/files/2012/Computer_Use_Infographic_FINAL.pdf
      Google Scholar
    • Utah State Board of Education. (2013). Special education rules. Salt Lake City, UT: Author. Retrieved from http://www.schools.utah.gov/sars/Laws/Rules.aspx
      Google Scholar
    • Virginia Department of Education. (2011). Speech-language pathology services in schools: Guidelines for best practice. Richmond, VA: Author. Retrieved from http://www.doe.virginia.gov/special_ed/disabilities/speech_language_impairment/speech_lang_pathology_services.pdf
      Google Scholar
    • Wright, K. (2005). Researching internet-based populations: Advantages and disadvantages of online survey research, online questionnaire authoring software packages, and web survey services.Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 10, 00. doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2005.tb00259.x
      CrossrefGoogle Scholar

    Additional Resources