Tyler, A.A., & Tolbert, L.C. (2002). Speech-language assessment in the clinical setting.
American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 11, 215-220.
|
Record |
React |
|
Main Point:
The purpose of this article is to inform practicing clinicians of a possible assessment outline that could be used to complete a speech and language evaluation on a preschool-aged child. |
Relevance:
The article is relevant to the field of speech-language pathology because it outlines a possible assessment that could be used with a preschool-aged child when there are time constraints of completing a 60-90 minute evaluation, which is often the case for practicing clinicians. This article provides what the authors view as a time efficient thorough evaluation. |
|
Concepts:
Concepts presented by the authors in this article include: standardized testing is important in an assessment because it allows the child’s performance to be compared to his peers and nonstandardized procedures are important in the assessment process because the tasks allow clinicians to make clinical judgments based on the child’s performance. |
Connections:
The authors of this article emphasize the need for standardized measures as well as informal testing. When comparing their assessment outline with the outline provided by Bleile (2002), the authors of this article chose to perform a standardized language assessment and phonological assessment while Bleile only performed a standardized articulation assessment with the child. After reviewing the authors plan I do not believe that it is possible to complete this assessment within 60-90 minutes with a preschool-aged child. The authors have planned to give two standardized assessments as well as performing a language sample. The two standardized assessments in my opinion would take at least an hour. This would leave only a half an hour to perform the pre-interview and the nonstandardized procedures that the authors outlined. When comparing the authors assessment to Bleile’s assessment I believe that Bleile has provided an assessment that is more realistic in keeping with the time constraints placed upon the evaluation.
Reference: Bleile, K. (2002). Evaluating articulation and phonological disorders when the clock is running. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 11, 243- 249. |
|
Summarize:
The authors of this article have designed a thorough assessment that could be used with a preschool-aged child. The authors emphasize the importance of formal and informal measures within an assessment throughout the article. The formal assessment that is standardized allows a clinician to compare the child’s scores with scores of children his or her age. The informal assessment allows the clinician to use clinical judgment when determining goals and the level of deficit. It provides additional information to the snapshot of the child. |
Confusions:
My only problem with this article is that the authors would probably go over 90 minutes if they were to administer this assessment. I was also wondering what the Bankson-Bernthal Test of Phonology is used for? Is it just a screening or is it an assessment? |
