Publications of the DELV tests and beyond

Permanent URI for this collection

https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14394/54578

Now showing 1 - 5 of 12

Evaluating language variation: Distinguishing development and dialect from disorder. Special issue
(2004-01-01) Seymour, Harry N; Pearson, Barbara Zurer
CONTENTS 1 Preface Nan Bernstein Ratner, Ed.D. SECTION I: INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND 3 The Challenge of Language Assessment for African American English-Speaking Children: A Historical Perspective Harry N. Seymour, Ph.D. 13 Theoretical and Empirical Bases for Dialect-Neutral Language Assessment: Contributions from Theoretical and Applied Linguistics to Communication Disorders Barbara Zurer Pearson, Ph.D. 27 Steps in Designing and Implementing an Innovative Assessment Instrument Harry N. Seymour, Ph.D., and Barbara Zurer Pearson, Ph.D. 33 Dialect Identification versus Evaluation of Risk in Language Screening Lois Ciolli, M.A., C.C.C.-S.L.P., and Harry N. Seymour, Ph.D. SECTION II: KEY CONCEPTS AND EXAMPLES FOR THE DOMAINS OF THE PROPOSED TESTS 41 Diagnosing Language Variations: Underlying Principles for Syntactic Assessment Thomas Roeper, Ph.D. 57 Assessing Pragmatic Skills in Elicited Production Peter de Villiers, Ph.D. 73 Cultural and Linguistic Fairness in the Assessment of Semantics Jill G. de Villiers, Ph.D. 91 A Noncontrastive Model for Assessment of Phonology Harry N. Seymour, Ph.D. SECTION III: PRACTICAL ISSUES AND GOALS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH 101 Distinguishing Dialect and Development from Disorder: Case Studies Barbara Zurer Pearson, Ph.D., and Lois Ciolli, M.A., C.C.C.-S.L.P. 113 Conclusions, Future Directions, and Implications for Remediation Harry N. Seymour, Ph.D., Thomas Roeper, Ph.D., and Jill G. de Villiers, Ph.D. C-1 Continuing Education Self-Study Program
Developmental Trends for Features Contrastive between African American English and General American English
(2010-01-01) Jackson, Janice E.; Pearson, Barbara Zurer
Purpose: In order to provide developmental guidelines for predicted dialect differences, trends in the use of features contrastive between General American English (GAE) and African- American English (AAE) were explored in a representative, national sample. Method: Participants were 1130 AAE- and 194 GAE-speaking typically-developing children, ages 4 to 12. A core set of distinguishing developmental features were identified and used in a focused elicitation of contrastive items in obligatory contexts. Responses were analyzed for age-related changes and demographic influences. Results: Major findings include pervasive use of zero-marked forms and predicted substitutions in young typically-developing AAE speakers through age 6. After age 6 the pattern was reversed: levels of zero-marking were lower than overt-marking, but remained distinct from GAE levels of similar forms. Moreover, total absence of overt-marking after age 7 was a-typical. Increased use of overt-marking and other GAE-like forms was observed earlier for constructions like multiple negation and regular past tense /–ed/ than invariant subject-verb agreement (e.g., she run). Parent education and region, but not gender, were significant, but small factors influencing contrastive feature use. Conclusion: Expected contrastive feature shifts were distinguished from general language development and possible clinical indicators.
Dialect-neutral indices of narrative cohesion and evaluation.
(2012-01-01) Burns, Frances A; de Villiers, Peter A; Pearson, Barbara Zurer; Champion, Tempii B
Purpose: This study compared the development of essential elements of narrative skill in children from African American English (AAE)- and general American English (GAE)-speaking communities using an innovative elicitation and evaluation protocol consisting of four key indices of narrative language: (a) reference contrasting, (b) temporal expressions, (c) mental state descriptions, and (d) understanding of behavior based on false belief. Method: Participants were 291 AAE speakers and 238 GAE speakers, 4 to 9 years of age. Approximately one-third of both dialect groups were identified as having language impairments. Children generated 2 stories based on short picture sequences. Their stories were coded for the 4 key indices of narrative language. Analyses of variance were performed with subsets of the measures and a composite index with all measures combined as outcomes; and with age, dialect group, and clinical status as predictors. Results: Age and clinical status had statistically significant effects on the subset measures and the composite score. Variation between AAE and GAE dialect was not a significant factor. Conclusion: By focusing on dialect-neutral elements of narratives—creating links across sentences and providing mental state interpretations—this study adds to our knowledge of development and impairment in narrative production among both AAE- and GAE-background children.
Unbiased assessment of first language acquisition in English: Distinguishing development and dialect from disorder.
(2003-01-01) de Villiers, Peter; de Villiers, Jill G.; Roeper, Thomas; Seymour, Harry N; Pearson, Barbara Zurer
The project described in this article reflects the combined expertise of linguists studying the distinctive characteristics of AAE, developmental psycholinguists with extensive experience studying normal acquisition in several domains of language, and clinicians skilled in assessment of and intervention with language-impaired children. Another important feature of the project was that the research contract included an agreement between the principal investigators, the federal funding agency, and a major publishing company (The Psychological Corporation) for the publishers to carry out the field testing and standardization of the assessment instrument as soon as the researchers developed the materials. This considerably reduced the time from conception to publication of the tests.
Seeking a valid gold standard for an innovative, dialect-neutral language test
(2014-01-01) Pearson, Barbara Zurer; Jackson, Janice E; Wu, Haotian
Purpose: In this study, the authors explored alternative gold standards to validate an innovative, dialect-neutral language assessment. Method: Participants were 78 African American children, ages 5;0 (years;months) to 6;11. Twenty participants had previously been identified as having language impairment. The Diagnostic Evaluation of Language Variation—Norm Referenced (DELV–NR; Seymour, Roeper, & J. de Villiers, 2005) was administered, and concurrent language samples (LSs) were collected. Using LS profiles as the gold standard, sensitivity, specificity, and other measures of diagnostic accuracy were compared for diagnoses made from the DELV–NR and participants’ clinical status prior to recruitment. In a second analysis, the authors used results from the first analysis to make evidence-based adjustments in the estimates of DELV–NR diagnostic accuracy. Results: Accuracy of the DELV–NR relative to LS profiles was greater than that of prior diagnoses, indicating that the DELV–NR was an improvement over preexisting diagnoses for this group. Specificity met conventional standards, but sensitivity was somewhat low. Reanalysis using the positive and negative predictive power of the preexisting diagnosis in a discrepant resolution procedure revealed that estimates for sensitivity and specificity for the DELV–NR were .85 and .93, respectively. Conclusion: The authors found that, even after making allowances for the imperfection of available gold standards, clinical decisions made with the DELV–NR achieved high values on conventional measures of diagnostic accuracy.

Recent Submissions