The results indicate the Feather Squadron assessment is a time-efficient, feasible, concurrently valid, and reliable approach for measuring auditory processing in school-aged children. Clinically, this may be a useful option for audiologists when performing auditory processing assessments as it is a relatively fast, engaging, and easy way to assess auditory processing abilities. Research is needed to investigate further the construct validity of this new assessment by examining the association between performance on Feather Squadron and objective evoked potential, lesion studies, and/or functional imaging measures of auditory function.

The current study found altered AP in poor readers using behavioral Feather Squadron measures and speech-evoked cortical potentials. These results provide further evidence that intact central auditory function is fundamental for reading development.

Background The relationship between auditory processing (AP) test results and reading has shown significant correlations in the literature; however, whether the relationship is more coincidental or more causal is uncertain. Improving AP deficits is also not well understood, especially regarding its impacts on real-world benefits such as with reading and language. Purpose This study investigates the efficacy of two deficit-specific AP therapy programs and compares them to a control therapy program on behavioral AP measures. It also investigates relationships between the improved AP skills and related real-world skills, particularly reading ability. Method From three school regions, 335 children were tested using the Feather Squadron Diagnostic Assessment AP test and, if qualified, given a deficit-specific AP therapy (either Insane Earplane or Zoo Caper Skyscraper) or placed in a control therapy group. After therapy, AP abilities were measured again and compared across groups. For one region, pre- and posttherapy reading abilities were also compared across groups. Results Both experimental therapies were significantly efficacious for the AP areas in which they claimed to target, whereas the control therapy group was not. One experimental therapy revealed significant improvement ( p < .01) and the other approached significant improvement ( p < .02) of the reading ability of the participants, whereas the control group did not. Conclusions The current study found significant improvements for both AP skills and real-world skills compared to the control group. This information provides evidence that bottom-up, deficit-specific therapy approaches are beneficial for the targeted areas and can have associated benefits as well. One of the schools in the study was a special school for children with known speech and language disorders. Of the children tested at this special speech and language school, 83% of them qualified for an AP deficit-specific therapy, indicating a very strong relationship between AP and speech/language difficulties.

No abstract