Search for: All records

Abstract Introduction This research examined the classification accuracy of the Quick Interactive Language Screener (QUILS) for identifying preschool-aged children (3;0 to 6;9) with developmental language disorder (DLD). We present data from two independent samples that varied in prevalence and diagnostic reference standard. Methods Study 1 included a clinical sample of children (54 with DLD; 13 without) who completed the QUILS and a standardized assessment of expressive grammar (Syntax subtest from the Diagnostic Evaluation of Language Variation–Norm Referenced; Structured Photographic Expressive Language Test–Preschool 2nd Edition; or Structured Photographic Expressive Language Test–3 rd Edition). Study 2 included a community sample of children (25 with DLD; 101 without) who completed the QUILS and the Auditory Comprehension subtest of the Preschool Language Scales–5th Edition (PLS-5; Zimmerman et al., 2011). Discriminant analyses were conducted to compare classification accuracy (i.e., sensitivity and specificity) using the normreferenced cut score (< 25th percentile) with empirically derived cut scores. Results In Study 1, the QUILS led to low fail rates (i.e., high specificity) in children without impairment and statistically significant group differences as a function of children's clinical status; however, only 65% of children with DLD were accurately identified using the norm-referenced cutoff. In Study 2, 76% of children with DLD were accurately identified at the 25th percentile cutoff and accuracy improved to 84% when an empirically derived cutoff (<32nd percentile) was applied. Conclusions Findings support the clinical application of the QUILS as a component of the screening process for identifying the presence or absence of DLD in community samples of preschool-aged children. 

Purpose The aims of the study were to explore responses of children with developmental language disorder (DLD) to rich vocabulary instruction and to identify potential factors that contribute to outcomes. Method Children with DLD participated in a language intervention embedded within a science camp. Using parent and clinician reports, standardized tests, probes, notes, and video, we derived descriptions of seven of the campers who received a vocabulary intervention that incorporated principles of rich instruction. We present them here as a case series. Results Five cases responded to the intervention with modest gains in Tier 2 science vocabulary and science knowledge. One case demonstrated no response, and another was unable to complete the intervention. The latter two cases presented with triple risks: DLD, executive function deficits, and stressors associated with poverty. In comparison, the best responder also lived in poverty and had DLD, but he had intact executive function, strengths in extant vocabulary, stronger knowledge of science, better engagement in the science and language intervention activities, and was older. Other factors that seemed to contribute to outcomes included the complexity of the word forms and dosage. Conclusions Translating research on rich instruction to clinical practice is challenging. This case series motivated hypotheses about the nature of the challenge and what to do about it, the primary one being that the modest success of rich vocabulary instruction for children with DLD is not a limitation of the approach itself but rather a reflection of the difficulty of delivering the intervention while tailoring the targets, approach, and dosage to the needs of individual children with DLD. Supplemental Material https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.13667699 

Abstract BackgroundThe language of the science curriculum is complex, even in the early grades. To communicate their scientific observations, children must produce complex syntax, particularly complement clauses (e.g.,I think it will float;We noticed that it vibrates). Complex syntax is often challenging for children with developmental language disorder (DLD), and thus their learning and communication of science may be compromised. AimsWe asked whether recast therapy delivered in the context of a science curriculum led to gains in complement clause use and scientific content knowledge. To understand the efficacy of recast therapy, we compared changes in science and language knowledge in children who received treatment for complement clauses embedded in a first‐grade science curriculum to two active control conditions (vocabulary + science, phonological awareness + science). Methods & ProceduresThis 2‐year single‐site three‐arm parallel randomized controlled trial was conducted in Delaware, USA. Children with DLD, not yet in first grade and with low accuracy on complement clauses, were eligible. Thirty‐three 4–7‐year‐old children participated in the summers of 2018 and 2019 (2020 was cancelled due to COVID‐19). We assigned participants to arms using 1:1:1 pseudo‐random allocation (avoiding placing siblings together). The intervention consisted of 39 small‐group sessions of recast therapy, robust vocabulary instruction or phonological awareness intervention during eight science units over 4 weeks, followed by two science units (1 week) taught without language intervention. Pre‐/post‐measures were collected 3 weeks before and after camp by unmasked assessors. Outcomes & ResultsPrimary outcome measures were accuracy on a 20‐item probe of complement clause production and performance on ten 10‐item unit tests (eight science + language, two science only). Complete data were available for 31 children (10 grammar, 21 active control); two others were lost to follow‐up. Both groups made similar gains on science unit tests for science + language content (pre versus post,d= 2.9,p< 0.0001; group,p= 0.24). The grammar group performed significantly better at post‐test than the active control group (d= 2.5,p= 0.049) on complement clause probes and marginally better on science‐only unit tests (d= 2.5,p= 0.051). Conclusions & ImplicationsChildren with DLD can benefit from language intervention embedded in curricular content and learn both language and science targets taught simultaneously. Tentative findings suggest that treatment for grammar targets may improve academic outcomes. What this paper addsWhat is already known on the subjectWe know that recast therapy focused on morphology is effective but very time consuming. Treatment for complex syntax in young children has preliminary efficacy data available. Prior research provides mixed evidence as to children’s ability to learn language targets in conjunction with other information.What this study addsThis study provides additional data supporting the efficacy of intensive complex syntax recast therapy for children ages 4–7 with Developmental Language Disorder. It also provides data that children can learn language targets and science curricular content simultaneously.What are the clinical implications of this work?As SLPs, we have to talk about something to deliver language therapy; we should consider talking about curricular content. Recast therapy focused on syntactic frames is effective with young children. 

Purpose Elementary school students are expected to participate in science learning settings that place high demands on skill with certain types of grammatical structures, including complex sentences. This research note aims to clarify the types of complex sentences that are evident in a general education science curriculum across the elementary school years in order to assist clinicians and others in better understanding the specific language demands of science learning in the classroom. Method I analyzed all sentences within children's texts and suggested teacher scripting from the first-, third-, and fifth-grade science units of a commonly used general education curriculum aligned to the Next Generation Science Standards. We determined the frequency and type of complex sentences that were present for each type of material (text, teacher scripts) and grade level. Results Complex sentences are evident in both children's texts and suggested scripting provided to teachers at all grade levels. The rate of complex sentences in children's readings is higher in third- and fifth-grade texts than in first-grade texts. Complement clauses are common throughout, and adverbial and relative clauses are more frequent in third- and fifth-grade texts than in first-grade texts. Conclusions Children are expected to read and listen to complex sentences across the elementary school years. Speech-language pathologists should be aware of the language demands that general education science curricula may pose to students at different ages.