Bridging the gap between the principles and practice in the screening/assessment of linguistically and culturally diverse populations By

Dr Thandeka Mdlalo

SASLHA conference Port Elizabeth 2017

Overview of the workshop

Day 1

Motivation for topic

Theory and practice

Principles of multilingual assessments

Application of principles : Groupwork

Case study to illustrate application of principles

Day 2

Current assessments of multilingual populations in SA: Research

Critique of current assessment : Groupwork

Conclusion

Motivation for topic

Personal

Professional

Motivation cont. As an SLT, I find that, when conducting such an assessment, it is impossible to

separate both objective and subjective means. Bell (cited in Ulin, Robinson, Tolley, & McNeill, 2002), a psychologist writing on incorporating ‘the Self’ in his research, captures my sentiments best:

Answers to my research questions were coming more from my interpretation of people, their behaviour, and the words they used to express the realities of their lives, and less from instruments, numbers and statistical formulas. At first I felt confused and insecure. Would others see my work as relevant and legitimate, if I adopted a more qualitative and interpretive approach to research? The uncertainty I felt as a researcher to the people I was supposed to study began to influence the questions I was asking and the methods I was choosing to answer them. Instead of asking questions that emerged from the standardized measures and instruments and relating everything to existing theory, I began exploring everyday life from the perspectives of the people I was studying. I was becoming aware that I could look at research problems differently. I had the power to choose the appropriate methodology for the research question and I was able to incorporate my personal beliefs and research style at the same time. Research was no longer a clinical and academic act; it was human interaction on a very personal level. (Ulin et al., 2002, p. 15)

Features of topic

Political

Social

Linguistic

Emotional

Psychological

Financial/economic

Cultural

Impact on clinician

LEARNING TO BE COMFORTABLE WITH THE UNCOMFORTABLE

Challenges embedded Personal worldview Own frame of reference

Ethnocentrism Own values Own belief system

Minority vs majority in SA : language

Motivation cont.

Shift from TOLERATING

to

truly EMBRACING diversity

Principles on multilingual assessments

HPCSA

SASLHA

ASHA

Curriculum at tertiary institutions offering the profession

Numerous articles many papers presented

DISCUSSION

The principles

knowledge of languages and culture,

use of culturally appropriate resources,

consideration of the cultural, social and political context,

consultation with families and communities,

collaboration between professionals.

(McLeod, Verdon & Wong, 2015)

Principles (cont)

multilingual children with speech sound disorders have both similar and different needs to monolingual children when working with speech-language pathologists.

cultural competence for speech-language pathologists.

collaboration and consultation.

importance of engaging with families and people within their local communities for supporting multilingual children in context.

(Bowen,McLeod,Verdon, 2013)

Culturally and linguistically sensitive therapist

Knowledge of theory of second language acquisition

Awareness of different cultures, customs, beliefs and values

Awareness of different languages and language differences

(Westby 2009)

Groupwork : Principles

How do you apply the principles in Case history interview

Formal assessment/screening tools

Informal assessment/screening tools

Report writing

Feedback

Group feedback

Groupwork Ethics/principles

1. Beneficence

2. Non-malifecence

3. Truth

4. Justice

5. Cultural competence

6. Language development/acquisition

7. Acknowledgement of linguistic differences

8. Collaboration with family/ communities/other professionals

Case study illustration

6 year old, isiZulu mother-tongue speaker in outreach programme

Reason for referral

Does not speak to adults

Not interested in learning but interacts and plays with peers

Follows instructions and points to communicate

Elective mutism?

Application of ethical principles in case

L2 acquisition

Mother-tongue use ( problem in L2 class)

Non-verbal (response to L2 context but much data collection on L2, listening, rehearsal)

Telegraphic/formulaic (phrases /utterances heard from teacher or peers socially)

Production of language ( expansion of telegraphic)

Nonverbal stage

FEATURES OF STAGE CHILD’S PRESENTATION Not expressively using L2

Understanding of L2 higher than

expressive

Perception of assessor

Listening and rehearsing silently

Watching

Nonverbal in L2

Understood basic concepts in Eng, could follow basic instructions

Negative response to assessor linked to L2

‘up’ and ‘down’

Comments about his environment

Speech-Language Assessment

Bilingual Assessment i.e. Eng and Zulu

Formal and informal: Tests and spontaneous conversation

Assessment Tools: Zerla (Zulu Expressive and Receptive Language Assessment)

Celf-Preschool

Results of Speech-Language Assessment Easily interacted and co-operated with the therapist Enthusiastically participated in all activities Expressively only communicated in isiZulu Expressive language in isiZulu age appropriate Semantics, syntax, pragmatics Vocabulary : primary, secondary , tertiary

but School concepts e.g. Colours , shapes, numbers were not known Reasoning and vocabulary linked to rural or urban interpretation of frame

of reference

Day 2

ASSESSMENT

Review

Principles of multilingual assessments

Application of principles : Groupwork

Case study to illustrate application of principles

Research

Multilinguals assessed by mostly English/Afrikaans L1 speakers

Multilinguals assessed in English

Multilinguals assessed using English overseas developed tests

IALP (Jordaan , 2008);Mdlalo , Flack. Joubert ,2016; Southwood and von Dulm 2013; Cruz-Ferreira and Chin, 2010

Reasons for findings

Dominance of English

English and education

Perception of English as language of progress

Paucity of appropriate assessment tools

Competence of therapists in other languages other than English

Pressure from teachers

Pressure from parents

Research

REASONS FOR PLACEMENT DECISION REASON FOR PLACEMENT IN ENGLISH-MEDIUM SCHOOL EXPECTED OUTCOMES Need for better education in more stable environment ,more meaningful

education free from problems in Black schools English is the international language

Learners prepared for modern world with cultural awareness, tolerance, communication with other groups. Need to give learners a better chance in life

Learners able to be financially better off than parents/caregivers English will open the door to more job opportunities

Equip learners with competitive edge and ability to speak the language of the workplace English is vital for educational success in general

Research (De Klerk cont.)

Learners able to understand other subjects and pass future exams in English

Prestige of English Higher status of learners able to speak English Social advantages of English Learners will become assertive and confident

Want learners to be able to mix with English and L1 speakers Learners must not be embarrassed when speaking English

Closer geographical proximity to an English school Learners must assimilate into English-speaking Western culture

Source: De Klerk (2002a:6-7).

Many of these parents or caregivers could not speak English themselves, but expected the learners to become fluent in English.

Research

Multilingual preschoolers acquiring ELoLT experienced difficulties on three levels: vocabulary (both receptive and expressive),

syntactic structures,

and communicative skills (especially pragmatic skills).

(Du Plessis, 2006)

( reporting on teacher conversations in research in Sunnyside multilingual preschools)

Multilingual speaking ‘English’ as L2/3

Multilingual NOT=2 monolinguals

Constant language mode is of multilingual whether using L1 or L2 is combined third language

Combined form also when in monolingual mode

Implications for assessment = language abilities include combined dual language abilities (semantic, lexical, syntactic, morphological, phonological, etc)

(Brice, 2015)

Relationship between L1&L2

Beware bilingual NOT=2 monolinguals in one person

(Grosjean 1989) Constant interaction between the

languages Thus

Bilingual must be assessed through ‘total language repertoire’

Relationship between L1&L2 cont. Genesee, F. (2015).

Myths about early childhood bilingualism. Canadian Psychology/Psychologie canadienne, 56(1), 6-15.

(1) the myth of the monolingual brain;

(2) the myth that bilingualism is not advisable for children with developmental disorders or academic challenges

CAUTIONARY

NOT IDEAL TO USE STANDARDISED TESTS THAT ARE NOT NORMED ON THE SA POPULATION

The issue of culture fair assessments requires the development of appropriate tools and new ways of culturally and linguistically relevant assessment.

However, despite decades of advocacy, position papers and research, Speech-Language Therapists (SLTs) continue to use standardised tools that are available to them even though these tools are not normed on the appropriate population tested.

Research

Johanne Paradis (2005, 2010, 2011)

language characteristics of typically developing (TD) children learning English as a second language (ESL) have similarities to the characteristics of the English that is spoken by monolingual children with specific language impairment (SLI)

Clinical Implications The results also emphasize how the use of English standardized tests with

non-native English-speakers is not a good practice

Syntactic parallels between bilinguals and SLI Subject- verb agreement

Overgeneralisation of the irregular past tense

Adherence to present progressive –ing

In/on used accurately

Definite and indefinite article use i.e. a vs the

Omission of verb to be or other small words such as articles

Research cont.

Purpose: conducted to examine whether the expressive language characteristics of

typically developing (TD) children learning English as a second language (ESL) have similarities to the characteristics of the English that is spoken by monolingual children with specific language impairment (SLI), and whether this could result in the erroneous assessment of TD English-language learners (ELLs) as language impaired.

Results: The ELLs’ accuracy rates and error patterns with the grammatical morphemes

were similar to those that have been reported for same-age monolingual children with SLI, in both spontaneous and elicited speech. Point to the possibility that TD ELLs could be mistaken as language impaired.

CURRENT RESEARCH

The Persistence and Functional Impact of English Language Difficulties Experienced by Children Learning English as an Additional Language and Monolingual Peers

Katie E. Whiteside and Courtenay Frazier Norbury

Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, July 2017, Vol. 60, 2014-2030. doi:10.1044/2017_JSLHR-L-16-0318

CURRENT RESEARCH CONT.

Purpose This study explored whether a monolingual-normed English language battery could identify children with English as an additional language (EAL) who have persistent English language learning difficulties that affect functional academic attainment.

Results Children with EAL and monolingual peers who met monolingual criteria for language impairment displayed comparable functional impact of their language difficulties year 1 and 2.

Conclusion Monolingual-normed language batteries in the majority language may have some practical value for identifying bilingual children who need support with language learning, regardless of the origin of their language difficulties.

Assessment tools

English norm-references standardised tests

Informal tests

Spontaneous language samples

Checklists

Observation

Criterion referencing

Groupwork Critique of assessment tools Procedure -critique subtests -scribe -feedback from each group -questions from the floor to the group

Standardised tests used

Artic/phono (vowels and dental sounds)

Auditory processing (neuro/cog e.g. memory of words/aud compreh)

RAPT- influence of pics, cognitive style i.e. give answer to only what directly asked

TACL

PLAI

Pendulum

CELF

L2 Eng vs Language impairment

Restricted vocabulary

Use of simple vocabulary e.g big vs huge, colossal

Omission of ‘small words’ e.g. a, the

Omission of morphology e.g –ing

Grammatical errors e.g. Irregular plural

(Paradis. 2007)

Types of errors: Interlanguage Transfer errors

Developmental errors

Language/dialectal variation

LANGUAGE DIFFERENCE

VS

LANGUAGE DISORDER

Standard English vowel system

A comparison of the formant values of /iː æ ɑː ɔː ʊ uː/ for older (black) and younger (light blue) RP speakers. From de Jong et al. (2007, p. 1814)

Guidelines to avoid assumptions/generalisations

1. Is the symbol system in which the competencies are represented familiar to the person being assessed?

If the picture of a thermometer found in the tests, such as the Test of Language Development – Primary ( TOLD-P) (Hammil & Newcomer, 2008) is presented to a child who has never seen a thermometer in their daily experience, the response of the child will not reflect their level of vocabulary but rather that the picture symbol presented is not familiar to them.

Guidelines to avoid assumptions/generalisations cont. 2. Are there alternative symbol systems for assessing the competencies of

interest?

If the child has not been exposed to table-top pen and pencil activities at home or comes from a background where they have not been to a formal schooling environment, using a symbol system that involves table-top pen and pencil activities may not be of interest to this child and an alternative symbol system may need to be used. The child’s lack of interest may be misperceived as reflective of poor attention skills or concentration span

Guidelines to avoid assumptions/generalisations cont. 3. Is the value system, which is implicit in the competencies, shared by the

person being assessed?

The Western value system of celebrating in anticipation of the birth of a baby e.g. having a party with presents, including baby clothing, is contrary to African culture where naming or getting goods in preparation for the coming baby is regarded as bad luck and perceived negatively.

Guidelines to avoid assumptions/generalisations cont. 4. Is the language system that is used to communicate the competencies

familiar to the person being assessed?

Research on English L2 learners has shown that there is a tendency by EAL speakers to use more formal terms in conversation (Goldberg, Paradis, & Crago, 2008) while less formal terms may be used by the SLT who is an English mother-tongue speaker, resulting in potential confusion or misunderstanding contextually, depending on whether it is a formal or informal context. Use of language forms a significant part of language competence (Blance, 1994). For example, mother-tongue English speakers usually use the word ‘bum or bottom’ for the backside while formal English language speakers may be more familiar with and use the word ’buttocks’ that is commonly found in books.

Guidelines to avoid assumptions/generalisations cont. 5. Are there alternative language systems for assessing the competencies of

interest?

If table-top activities are not familiar to children in terms of their experience, are there concrete objects or pictures that can be used to elicit a language sample that reflects and / or is relevant to the child’s linguistic and sociocultural experience (Westby, 2009).

Guidelines to avoid assumptions/generalisations cont. 6. Is the level of complexity in the competencies assessed commensurate with

the prior knowledge of the person assessed?

Even if the child’s age is consistent with that of school age children, if the child has not been in a school environment, typical competencies required in the early language development tests such as numbers, letters, colours and shapes may not be commensurate with her prior knowledge. In SA, many children do not attend preschool and only encounter these skills in grade one. These children are predominantly African EAL speakers from indigenous language and cultural backgrounds (Government, 2001).

Conclusion

Results be totally accurate?

No! Tests used NOT normed on population

BUT

Improved validity and reliability of the results

Thank you!