articulation and phonology test 2 Flashcards
early 8
(by place) /b/, /p/, /w/, /m/, /d/, /n/, /j/, /h/
(by manner) /b/, /p/, /d/, /h/, /m/, /n/, /w/, /j/
Middle 8
(by manner) /t/,/k/,/g/, /ŋ/, /f/,/v/, /tʃ/,/dʒ/
(by place) /f/, /v/, /t/, /tʃ/, /dʒ/, /k/, /g/, /ŋ/
late 8
(by place) /θ/, /ð/, /s/, /z/, /ʃ/, /l/, /r/, /ʒ/
(by manner) /θ/, /ð/, /s/, /z/, /ʃ/, /ʒ/, /l/, /r/
cross-sectional
large sample number (including variations ie 2-6yr, 2-3, 5-6 yr)
at the same time
longitudinal
long term study
small sample group
challenges to this moving, medical conditions, time constraints produce drop out rate. because of the challenges have fewer people to follow.
phonological processes
syllable structure processes
reduplication final consonant deletion unstressed syllable deletion cluster reduction epenthesis (insertion of sound segment into a word changing its syllable sturctue, ie schwa between 2 conosnants [p(schwa)liz]
Phonological processes
substitution Process
fronting, labialization, alveolarization, stopping, affrication, deaffrication, denasalization, glidding, vowelization, derhotacication, voiced, devoiced
Phonological process
assimilatory processess
labial assimilation
velar assimilation
nasal assimilation
liquid assimilation
suppression of phonological processes
Denasalization 2 yrs Affrication 3 yrs Context-sensitive 3 yrs Deaffrication 4 yrs Derhotacization Vowelization 4.8 yrs Alveolarization 5 yrs Final devoicing 5 yrs Labialization 6 yrs Initial voicing 6 yrs Epenthesis 8 yrs Consonant cluster substitution 9 yrs
largest decline in use if phonological processes
between 3-4 yrs
Natural phonology
a time frame during which children do suppress certain processes. used as a guideline when targeting remediation goals.
By 4 years suppression or reduction of
weak syllable deletio final consonant deletion consonant assimilation reduplication velar fronting voicing/devoicing cluster reduction for (two elements like pr, st, tw) affrication derhotacization
suppression between 4 - 8
labilization alveolarization cluster reduction of three elements epenthesis gliding vowelization stopping deaffrication palatal fronting
prosodic feature development
within 2 word utterances (around 18 months)
have pause between words maintain same prosody
or one intonational contour with out pause between
intelligibility
2 yr 50% intelligible 3 yr 75 % intelligible 4 yr 85 intelligible 5 yrs 90-95%. tally conversational speech sample with + * as they are speaking
According to Smit and et al
clusters that are inaccurate in the spech of 5;6 to 7: yr old
Smit and et al clusters that are inaccurate in the spech of 5;6 to 7: [sl] [br] thr] [skw] [str] [skr] [spr]
Over diagnosis/ when determining disorder or difference As a profession
over: spl saying children have disorder when they don’t actually have a disorder. reasons not being aware of typical norms, expectations, and suppression ages for that person’s linguistic community.
Under diagnosis
may assume that it is a dialect issue. reasons not knowing the appropriate guidelines for linguistic community
challenges in knowing disorder or difference
increasing diverse pop with more multilingual individuals
if bilingual what is their typical phonological development (minimal normative info for normal develping and disordered in diverse populations)
lack of bilingual SLPs
English as 2nd language phonological development
errors
- expect to see INTERFERENCE or TRANSFER– errors that children make in their second language (L2) as a direct result of their knowledge of L1 language
- Silent period- children may speak very little as they focus on acquiring the second language.
- Code switching or code mixing — a developemental process in which speakers alternate between L1 and L2
- (keep in mind Monolingual and bilingual speakers try to simplify speech production. all children will try to find a way to simplify the adult model.)
Spanish preschooler (L2) Monolingual
processes at 4
- normal by 4 yrs Monolingual spanish speaking mastered the majority sounds in spanish
- difficulties with /g/, /f/, /s/. /r/ trill and /l/ flap
- processes -use of cluster reduction, final consonant deletion, weak syllable deletion, /r/ distortion, and fronting
bilingual Spanish 4 yr old
rarely made vowel or voicing errors
sounds not masterd at his age included fricatives. especially interdental sounds and affricates in English
and the flap and tril in Spanish
-phonological processes were similar between monolingual and bilingual: stopping/final consonant deletion in English liquid simplification and cluster reduction in Spanish
How do you determine if AAE speaker
African American English
dialect
-Self identify of race/ethnicity
-examine speach for use of AAE features in conversation/speech production/syntax/morphology
-have to consider socioeconomic status, area of residence, and race/ethnicity of the examiner
to get an idea need to listen in a conversational setting. not all african americans will use AAE
Pearson article
Similarities
Shriberg’s early, mid, and late 8 development groupings similar in MAE and AAE
production of single consonants and consonats/consonant clusters in the initial position of words
Pearson article
differences
MAE: acquired th (voiced or voicless??) in final position later than MAE only in final positon
omission of voiced th in any position some children still were not producing by age 12
acquired r and s earlier than MAE speakers
reduced production of conosonats/consonant clusters in final position of words
development of speech sounds in a typically developing AAE:
clinical implications
warning signs for a speech sound disorder in a child with AAE difficulty with r s z or clusters containing them
initial liquid clusters
AAE speakers whose primary error is voiced and voiceless th probably are not candidates for therapy represents a communication DIFFERENCE not disorder because dialect
Assessment
clinical evaluation of a client’s disorder
two phases
appraisal: collection of data
diagnosis: end result of studying and interpreting these data to figure out if a delay or disorder and what type
screening
activities or tests that id indiviuals who merit further evaluation
formal or informal (read passage/rainbow) or listen to them speak
beneficial for those who “fail” later receive more comprehensive evaluation
not always reliable may get false negatives
5 min or 15-20 if doing an over-all communication screening
comprehensive evaluation
series of activities and tests allow more detailed & complete collection of data
comprehensive phonetic-phonemic evaluation is the core of the appraisal for articulatory/phonological impairments.
Speech language evaluation for Articulation assessment
Comprehensive
begin with hearing screening/full evaluation
formal speech sound test (look at speech sound at level of word/way of looking at speech sound in conversation)
task to look at stimulability (don’t have to can do it on your own)
screen for language
other related areas including: language/phonological awareness/ speech perception
any co-morbid (preexisting) conditions
oral mechanism exam
Initial impressions
begin even before formal appraisal begins
task is to notice certain features of conversation
may help in planning and organizing the remainder of the assessment
if intelligible next stepis articulation test
if unintelligible: consider additional procedures for data collection
Articulation Tests
designed to elicit spontaneous naming based on presentation of pictures
most conosonats of Gen Amer Eng tested in initial/medial/final position of words
Advantages of Articulation Tests
1) relatively easy to administer and score
time is minimal
2) inventory of “incorrect” sound productions in different word positions.
3) many provide standardized scores/can compare to other children of similar age
4) standardized administration so have structure
5) detailed scoring procedures/consistency from child to child and clinician to clinician
Articulation test disadvantages
1) examines sound articulation in selected isolated words and possibly not in all positions /never gives adequate info on client’s production in connected speech
2) not enough info about client’s phonological system
3) do not test all sounds in all contexts in general English (may not test vowels/or consants in all positions)
4) sounds tested do not occur in comparable phonetic contests
words used are varying lengths and complexities
5) limited aspects of an individual’s total artic behavior/abilities
6) may not give phonological process info
factors to consider when selecting a measure of Articulation
1) test’s appropriateness for age or developmental level and for what you think the problem is
2) test’s ability to supply a standardized score
3) test’s analysis of the sound errors (does it just give omissions or does it have phonological processes)
4) test’s inclusion of a adequate sample of sound/s relevant to the individual client
- is there an adequate sample of consonants in positions does it look at vowels
- look at sensitivity and specificity
Selecting measure of articulation
Appropriateness for the age or developmental level of client
most begin to test 3 yr to school age
2 problems for eval of adolescent/older clients
1) not standardized for children beyond 12 or 13
2) most artic tests oriented towards young may prove demeaning for older adolescents and adults
better to use tests that have printed sentences for this pop.
selecting a measure of Articulation
ability to provide a standardized score
some artic test are not standardized.
if not then cannot be compared to the performance of other children of similar age. if that is needed select appropriate test
selecting a measure of articulation
analysis of sound errors
most artic test & phonology test do not differ in exam format
differ in analysis of results.
phonology: categorize misarticulations according to phonological processes
selecting a measure of articulation
adequate sample of sound/s relevant to individual client
most consonants of general American english are tested
most tests do not sample the most frequently misarticulated sounds in a large number of different contexts
Assessment procedures to supplement articulation tests
1) if a word contains any aberrrant vowel or consonant productions, transcribe the entire word use broad transcription/use narrow if they are doing something unique
2) supplement the artic test with additional utterances that address the noted problems of the client (you may come up with picture)
3) always sample and record continuous speech (if not recorded listen for awhile before transcribing)
4) determine the stimulability of the error sound/s
should hear similarities between norm test and conversational speech
Test results/describing the error
after giving the test
1) 2 way scoring: right / wrong typically use for screening or during therapy session doesn’t give enough info during assessment
2) 5 way scoring: correct/deletion or omission/substitution/ distortion/addition
3) phonetic transcription: not judge the misarticulations but describe them as accurately as possible.
Five-way scoring
problems
This may not give enough detail of what was going on. use 5 way plus transcribe what child says.
1) artic test often do not define/give examples of what is within normal limits
2) deletion/ommission may include the presence, rather than the absence of a sound. (glottal stops)
3) substitution/distortion have definitional unclarity
Test results using transcription
1) precise
2) gives more information about misarticulation: tells about context/phonological processes helpful for assessment and intervention
3) among professionals most universally accepted way to communicate information about articulatory features.
Stimulability Testing
assessment procedure used during appraisal process
testing client’s ability to produce a misarticulated sound in an appropriate manner when stimulated by clinician to do so.
1st in isolation if normal->place within a syllable-> word context in positions initial and final
2 trials in each position
not a formal procedure
give general information like watch/ do what I do
spontaneous speech sample
1) compare with child’s production of single-word citation task
2) provide objects or pictures that may elicit targeted sounds
3) plan the length of sample 3-5 min sample
4) plan diversity into the sample: picture description/storytelling/ problem solving
5) monitor recording and gloss any questionable utterances
6) transcribe as much of the spontaneous sample as possible during the recoding. (live transcription)
evaluating the speech mechanism
1) examine the head and facial structure
2) examine breathing
3) examine oral and pharyngeal cavity structures4) functionally assessing the speech mechanism
4) diadochokinetic rates
Examining the head and facial structures
1) evaluate size and shape of the head (relative to rest of body)
2) Shape: cranial portion should not be too large nor facial area too small vice versa
3) symmetry of facial features should be proportional (similar on both sides)
examining breathing
evaluate the client’s breathing patterns at rest (silent breathing)
mouth closed/no clavicular breathing/inspirat&expiration =
Evaluate client’s breathing during speech
expiration 2x as long as inspiration
no irregular breathing patterns should be seen
Examining the oral and pharyngeal cavitiy
Teeth: occlusion/all teeth present/axial orientation (position)/spacing
Tongue: size in relation to oral cavity/color/muscular dorsum/ surface of tongue/resting position
Hard and soft palates: feeling structures/look
Examine Hard and Soft Palates
wear gloves & penlight.
size and shape of palatal vault/presence or absence of clefts, fissures, fistulas (openings/holes)
midline=pink & whitish color
feel midline (ensure underlying bony structure is intact)
examine uvula note length/any abnormalities/
fauces (passage between oral & pharyngeal area assessed) tonsils /adenoids
