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
Functionally assessing the speech Mechanism
examine movement of lips/mandible, tongue, velum
? to ask:
can the client adequately perform the task?
is the range of movements adequate?
Are the movements integrated and smooth?
Given the age of the client, is the speed of movement within normal limits?
Diadochokinetic rates
test speed of movement of the articulators.
rate measured by:
1) count by time: procedure, examiner counts # of syllables spoken in a given interval of time
2) a time by count: tester notes the time it takes to do a specific # of repetitions.
rates increase with age
from 8 years to adult remain similar
Additional measures for “delayed speech”
language testing recommended for every child with artic or phonological disorder
hearing screening
may also include: auditory discrimination skills/appraisal of cognitive abilities (depend on an evaluation of background information, medical/school records, clinical impression of client)
Hearing Screening
part of assessment procedure
1) take history (noting recent episodes of ear pain)otalgia /discharge (otorrhea)
2) visual inspection to determine the presence of structural defects, ear-canal & ear drum abnormalities
3) id audiometry: air conduction @ 20dB HL@1000, 2000, 4000 Hz
4) acoustic immittance measurements
Language testing
screening
80% those with speech delay have language problems
formal –Denver II (birth-3)/E-LAP (b-36m), /TELD-3 (pre/&school)
informal
Speech Sound Discrimination
used w/ children that demonstrate a collapse of 2 or more phonemic constraints into 1 sound (sub [w] for [r] [l])
discrimination Testing & the Phonological Performance Analysis
1) test items should be relevant and client oriented ([r] incorrect task concentrate on discrim of [r] not [l],[t]. if child sub [w]for[r] then task should reflect differentiating between the two sounds
2) the specific aberrant production of the client should be targeted. (child’s production should be contrasted to norm prod)
3) the phonetic context in which the incorrect productions occur must be considered. (word initial, medial, final/singletons, consonants cluster/with specific vowels etc.)
Cognitive Appraisal
SLP cannot perform IQ testing
1) large % of children with speech disorders also demonstrate language diff. IQ test may be affected by child’s language incompetence.
2) intelligibility espec. if verbal IQ measures used
3) cognitive measures do not adequately reflect the abilities of children form culturally & linguistically diverse backgrounds
Assessing child with emerging phonology
have to look at what will be appropriate and what will not be
1)Artic test: difficulties: limited expressive lang (don’t talk much)
2) supplement measure with info from caregiver/ use interaction with caregiver to get sample/have them keep a log/bring item from home that child labels
3) examination of oral-facial structures and the speech motor system. may not cooperate with SLP/limitations of imitating sounds Solution: make fish face etc. get babbling & feeding behaviors from caregiver
4) hearing screening indispensable use conditioned response audiometric screening
5) Additional tests (children with phonological disorder often have lang. disorder-need to assess lang. attention span limited (problem)
INDEPENDENT analysis may be used for this age.
use independent analysis for child with emerging phonological system
take only client’s productions into account. which sounds/in what position/syllable shape.
1) inventory of speech sounds
2) syllable shape
3) constraints noted on sound sequences ([p] used only word initially or [d] used only in CVCV structures.
Normal production for emerging phonological system
# of diff consonants 18-24 m = 14/small expressive vocab =6 # of diff consonants 24-36 m = 18/small expressive vocab =10 Syllable level: 1) V or C (syllabic [l]/[m] or CV (C= glottal/glide/stop or [h],[wi], [ha] Level 2) VC, CVC (single cons), CV [^k] [um] [ab] [papa] [baba] (voicing differences are disregarded ie [t3di] or [bip] same cons level 3) vocalization is composed of syll with 2 or more diff consonant types(voicing diff only level 2) [bati] [d^k] [hat] [h3lo] norm @ 24 m SSL = 2.2/small expressive = 1.7
Unintelligible
speaker’s message cannot be understood.
~difficulty with:liquids, stridents, and consonant clusters
~used: cluster reduction, stridency deletion, stopping, gliding, vocalization of liquids, labial & nasal assimilation
Procedural difficulties with unintelligible children
no diff completing an artic test/stimulability test/or speech motor assess
difficulty in transcribing a spontaneous speech sample. what to do
1) choose a topic and attempt to structure the situation as much as possible (routine events-happen in an order / scripted events- activities performed previously.
2)gloss the utterances the child says as much as possible (repeat child’s utterance according to norm pronunciation)
prosody
inflection, emphasis, sarcasm
takes awhile for kids to pick it up
Assessing intelligibility tools
give a passage that is 100 words and cross out every word that you cannot understand.
intelligiblity
consonant cluster development
connection between phonological development and literacy development
because: phonological disorder means they don’t understand the rules of the sound system of that language
difficulty may have problems learning sounds in other context like vocabulary
trouble understanding connection between sound and symbol (B = bee sound)
there is debate we don’t know what the relationship is
stages of pre-liquistic development
Stage 1 Reflexive/vegetative 0-2m Stage 2 cooling/laughter 2-4 m Stage 3 Vocal play 4-6 m State 4 Canonical babbling 6-first word Stage 5 jargon 10+
linguistic development
Stage 3
Vocal play 4-6 months
longer series of segments an dproduction of prolonged vowel or consonant like steady state.
extreme variations in loudness and pitch
vowels are more varied (in tongue height & position)
Linguistic development
Stage 4
Canonical babbling 6-to first word
reduplicated babbling: similar string of consonant-vowel production [babuba]
nonreduplicated babbling: VARIEGATED variation of both consonants and vowels from syllable to syllable [ditu]
begins as self stimulating
or in IMITATIVE behaviors
linguistic development
stage 5
Jargon 10+ (to first word)
overlaps first meaningful word
have intonation, rhythm, and pausing similar to adult speech but without actual words
connected with eye gaze, gestures,
phonological awareness
area of assessment
the ability to reflect on and manipulate the structure of an utterance
individuals awareness of the sound structure or phonological structure of a spoken word. knowning words are composed of sounds/syllables/can break word into segments
used in rhyming/combining sounds together s i t= sit/segmentation sit= s i t/
phonemic awareness
only to phoneme level necessitates an understanding that words are comprised of individual sounds.
is a subcategory of phonological processing
may or may not be related to reading and spelling abilities
phonological processing
includes coding and awareness
syllable awareness/onset-rime awareness/phonemic awareness
AHSHA
requires us to know about Normal lang development in culturally diverse populations
current research /best evidence based practice/ be aware of speech production variations in clients community (may need to pull up speech sound charts/ speak to parents) think how do those linguistic variations impact your diagnosis (disorder/speech difference)
interference/transfer
see errors in second language that are a result of second language. normal typical to see a child substitute some L2 sounds with L1 sounds slightly changing production to match what they are familiar with
influence of 1st lang affecting 2nd lang
code switching
start with one language and switch to another or insert a word.
monolingual speakers
the bilingual speaker in terms of development seeing similar processes in sound monolingual Spanish and monolingual English
4 years
see mastery of most sounds in English and Spanish
rainbow passage
screening for voice, artic, fluency
uses all consonants and vowels of MAE
use with those who can read
formal Articulation screening tests
Fluarty Speech and Language/for artic have them look at pictures and also listen to their speech
DEAP diagnostic evaluation of artic and pholology:reliable/good specificity& sensitivity (screening and more stand diagnostic and oral motor exame and artic that looks at vowels)
Joliet 3 min speech and lang screening
sensitivity
specificity
sensitiviy: id child as having disorder that actually has disorder
specificity id child as typically developing that is typically developing
phonetic-phonemic inventory
phonetic-speech sounds all that the child can produce
phonemic-inventory of what they can produce contrastively indicating meaning
using a formal speech sound test (speech sound some look at artic some at phonological only some both look at them to see which you need)
how to use Goldman Fristoe Test of Articulation to help with phonological disorder
only tests consonant/consonant blends in initial and final position
use with Khan Lewis to get analysis of phonological processes
Arizona Articulation Proficiency Scale III
can use with children but good to use with older clients/pictures more mature-looks at sound production in syllables
looks at speech sound production in sentences and gives a severity rating
IEP needs something about intelligibility can use this to give severity rating
score vowels and consonants
DEAP
has everything in one kit screening diagnostic oral mechanism built in artic measure phonological measure vowels and consonants great sensitivity and specificity measures 80-90%
Hodson Assessment of Phonological Patterns III
preschoolers (specifically)
uses toys instead of pictures to elicits sounds get more of a spontaneous speech sample (than when using pictures)
has screening and diagnostic component (use with cycles intervention approach)
phonological evaluation takes 20 min (if you know what your doing and can get toys from child)
how do we use information about stimulability in therapy?
two schools of thought
1) sound that is highly stimulable target for intervention/ the thought is that if they are stimulable they will produce themselves soon
2) sounds that are highly stimulable should not target it for intervention. target sounds that are not in their inventory (not stimuable)
Assessing related areas to speech sound disorders
80% of children with a speech sound disorder have poor language skills
screen for lang at a minimum
for child with significant speech sound errors may want to *do a comprehensive assessment.
*monitor language development
*reassess their speech as their language improves because they now have more verbal production and maybe attempting more sounds
child having difficulty learning the rules of sound system
will most likely have difficulty learning the rules of language system (syntax, semantic, morphology)
relationship between language and speech sound production in children who have articulation and phonological disorders
concept of metaphonology
meta-linguistic
ability to think about and reflect on the nature of language and how it functions.
see language as the big picture
use language as a tool. able to break a word into parts (syllables/sounds)
metaphonology
involves the child’s conscious awareness of the sounds within the particular language
pyramid
build from bottom to top
meta-linguistic -> metaphonology ->phonological awareness
child 4-6 having difficulty learning to read
need to assess phonological awareness
children with speech sound disorders have difficulty with phonological awareness (blending sounds together&segmenting the sounds apart/ identifying syllables in words/identifying the first, last sounds)
some debate if there is a correlation between child with speech sound disorder and difficulty reading (learning disability)
CELF
a phonological awareness measure
Related area (Speech sound) speech perception/discrimination
does a person need to be able to discriminate between sounds to produce them? research says don’t need to be able to discriminate.
times when you want to be able to assess the child’s ability to discriminate: when a child is collapsing at least two phonemes (phonemic collapse)
phonemic collapse
taking one sound ans sub it for many sounds ie child subs /s/ for /z/, /sh/, /ch//f/
special considerations:
intelligibility
highly unintelligible: when eliciting a conversational sample select a topic and proved a structure/scripts of action event either routine events (follow pattern) or scripted events -activities performed earlier so you have an idea of the words that will be used
-gloss the utterances that are difficult to understand (pronounce the word normally)
independent analysis
look at child’s production on it own don’t compare to norms (what they can and can’t produce)
doesn’t matter if sound is produced correctly or not
an inventory of all speech sounds child can produce/consonants & vowels, what position can they produce it in
relational analysis
compare production with norms/ to adult model (traditional model)
may not be appropriate for very young or with limited speech production
Berenthal (2009) need 50 + expressive words to use a formal assessment. they will not be able to name the items on an a standardized test
use independent analysis
inventory of speech sounds
what consonants/vowels can they produce in what position
what articulatory features:place, manner, and voicing (can they produce fricatives and affricatives or only stops)
inventory of syllales and word shapes cv, cvc, vc, ccvc /are there any shapes they cannot produce
distribution of speech sounds
-Correctly/incorrectly -where/when the child is able/not to produce the sound correctly
(are they able to do it one position but not another/ in singleton not in cluster etc)
-syllable shapes CV, CVC, CVCC
-initial, medial (may need to see what the test says if more than 2 syllable), final position in words
prevocalic, intervocalic, postvocalic (consonant in relation to vowel).
analyze data
taken from across multiple context
interpret the data:
inventory of speech sounds/accuracy may vary according to context
distribution of speech sounds
phonemic inventory
all the sounds that the child can use contrastively differeniate meaning
- analyze errors to determine what sounds are being substituted, deleted etc.
- is there a pattern (always sub /w/ for /r/ or are there other sounds also used to sub for /r/, or sub 1 sound for a variety of sounds
- use minimal pairs to figure out the phonemic inventory (only 1 phoneme different ie wed/led, wed/red, red/led
Articulation or phonological disorder how to determine which it is
Articulation
Articulation disorder: there are phonemic contrasts (expect to see some phonemic constrast of sounds other than the few they have problems with)
problems are motor based (tongue placement wrong)
speech sound errors are consistent (same error across positions) sub w for r in initial and schwa for r in medial and final
Articulation or phonological disorder how to determine which it is
Phonological
looking for PATTERNS
Review the inventory of speech sounds and how the sounds are distributed
look at syllable shapes and constraints/place, manner/voicing and look for patterns are there any of the phonological processes present
to determine if it is phonological
because there may be variations in place and manner you have to do some sort of phonological analysis
use Khan Lewis with GF,
phonological processes error pattern analysis
look at the type of phonological processes that are being used
frequency of phonological process being used which are the most commonly occurring list it as a % (final consonant deletion is occurring in 76% of opportunities)
most standardized tests have some way of calculating the type and frequency of the process being used
can a child use a phonological process and not have a disorder? as part of diagnosis process
yes depending on the age. if before the age of suppression
compare to normative information
standardized test measures of phonological processes
Khan Lewis, Bankson-Bernthal, Slossen, Hodson Phonological Process, DEAP, CAAP*
have to use the phonological definition of the test or you invalidate the norms
Idiosyncratic processes
unique to a person - own sounds unique way of producing a sound or substitution etc.
When is there a need for intervention?
what are the factors to consider?
is there a speech sound disorder (artic or phonological processes)
can we Id the nature of the problem (the cause of the problem)
how does the speech sound problem affecting communication
How is speech sound affecting communication
1) measure of intelligibility
2) measure of severity
in school system writing long term goals for articulation usually related to measure of intelligibility
intelligibility
a perceptual judgment (not an exact science)
when making the assessment take into account the number, type, and consistency of errors; vowel or consonant errors
common measures of intelligibility
1) open-set: transcribe a speech sample and determine the percentage of words identifiable score with + * do with 100 words (hard to keep up with it)
2) close-set repeats words or reads from a word list or passage; (mark out the words not understood) determine the percentage of words identifiable
3) rate Scale: 6 levels this is highly subjective (not as reliable)
Rating Scale for intelligibility
level 6: sound errors occasionally
level 5: intelligible although noticeably in error
level 4: intelligible with careful listening
level 3: intelligibility is difficult
level 2: usually unintelligible
level 1: unintelligible
calculating % intelligibility
take the # of words understood divide by the total # of words multiply by 100.
child is 3 years old and 50 % intelligible
recommend for therapy
Severity
conveys the significance of the impairment
percentage of consonants correct (PCC) commonly used measure
steps to calculate severity
collect a conversational speech sample
two-way analysis of consonants (no vowels)
rules to determine PCC in conversational speech sample
Incorrect
1) deletion of target consonant
2) substitution of a target consonant (including glottal stop)
3) partial voicing of prevocalic consonant
4) any distortion
5) addition of sound to correct or incorrect target sound
6) initial [h] deletion and final n/ing substitution in stressed syllables only [fishun] for fishing would be correct
rules to determine PCC in conversational speech sample
what not to score
do not score utterances that are unintelligible, or consonants in the 2nd or succesive repetitions of syllable. do not score target consonants in the 3rd or successive repitions of adjacent words unless articulation changes. [trit] tret] [trit] count them but if [trit] [trit] [trit] count first two words
calculating PCC
of correct consonants divided by total # of consonants multiply by 100
PCC levels
mild: 85-100%
Mild-Moderate: 65-85% this is where we begin to see clients for therapy
Moderate -Severe: 50-65%
Severe: <50%
