“…At the time of Washington’s review, few non-biased tools existed and attempts to renorm or adjust existing tools were deemed inadequate for nonmainstream English-speaking children. Unfortunately, although many assessment tools within the field have been revised or recently developed to better address the needs of nonmainstream English-speaking children, test biases continue to be identified (e.g., Gutierrez-Clellen & Simon-Cerijido, 2007; Hammer, Pennock-Roman, Rzasa, & Tomblin, 2002; Qi, Kaiser, Milan, & Hancock, 2006; Restrepo et al, 2006; Thomas-Tate, Washington, & Edwards, 2004; Woods, Pena, & Martin, 2004; Wyatt, 2012). …”
Section: Test Biasesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Some may refer to the position statement on social dialects that was published by the American Speech-Language-and Hearing Association (ASHA, 1983). Others may cite work by Stockman (1996, 2000), Wyatt (2012), and others to explain test biases, both historical and present, that limit one’s ability to evaluate and ultimately serve nonmainstream English-speaking children. Still others may cite work by Seymour et al to describe nonmainstream English-speaking children’s use of contrastive and noncontrastive grammar structures and to argue for the former to be excluded from assessment (Pearson & Ciolli, 2004; Seymour, 2004; Seymour, Bland-Stewart, & Green, 1998).…”
In this article, we review three responses to the study and evaluation of grammar in children who speak nonmainstream dialects of English. Then we introduce a fourth, system-based response that views nonmainstream dialects of English, such as African American English (AAE) and Southern White English (SWE) as made up of dialect-specific and dialect-universal features. To illustrate the usefulness of a system-based approach and to distinguish our two terms from others in the dialect literature, we present AAE and SWE relative clause data from two previously published studies. Following this, we present new findings from AAE- and SWE-speaking children’s use of past tense and past participles to further demonstrate the value of examining larger units (i.e., systems) of a grammar to identify a child’s language strengths and weaknesses. We conclude by arguing that a system-based approach moves clinicians, educators, and researchers beyond a preoccupation with the nonmainstream aspects of children’s dialects while also moving us beyond Brown’s 14 morphemes. Although the focus of the article is on assessment, the content is relevant to the treatment of grammar because effective promotion of any child’s grammar (including the grammars of those who speak nonmainstream dialects of English) will occur only when clinicians, educators, and researchers begin to view the child’s grammar as a system rather than as a sum of its parts.
“…At the time of Washington’s review, few non-biased tools existed and attempts to renorm or adjust existing tools were deemed inadequate for nonmainstream English-speaking children. Unfortunately, although many assessment tools within the field have been revised or recently developed to better address the needs of nonmainstream English-speaking children, test biases continue to be identified (e.g., Gutierrez-Clellen & Simon-Cerijido, 2007; Hammer, Pennock-Roman, Rzasa, & Tomblin, 2002; Qi, Kaiser, Milan, & Hancock, 2006; Restrepo et al, 2006; Thomas-Tate, Washington, & Edwards, 2004; Woods, Pena, & Martin, 2004; Wyatt, 2012). …”
Section: Test Biasesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Some may refer to the position statement on social dialects that was published by the American Speech-Language-and Hearing Association (ASHA, 1983). Others may cite work by Stockman (1996, 2000), Wyatt (2012), and others to explain test biases, both historical and present, that limit one’s ability to evaluate and ultimately serve nonmainstream English-speaking children. Still others may cite work by Seymour et al to describe nonmainstream English-speaking children’s use of contrastive and noncontrastive grammar structures and to argue for the former to be excluded from assessment (Pearson & Ciolli, 2004; Seymour, 2004; Seymour, Bland-Stewart, & Green, 1998).…”
In this article, we review three responses to the study and evaluation of grammar in children who speak nonmainstream dialects of English. Then we introduce a fourth, system-based response that views nonmainstream dialects of English, such as African American English (AAE) and Southern White English (SWE) as made up of dialect-specific and dialect-universal features. To illustrate the usefulness of a system-based approach and to distinguish our two terms from others in the dialect literature, we present AAE and SWE relative clause data from two previously published studies. Following this, we present new findings from AAE- and SWE-speaking children’s use of past tense and past participles to further demonstrate the value of examining larger units (i.e., systems) of a grammar to identify a child’s language strengths and weaknesses. We conclude by arguing that a system-based approach moves clinicians, educators, and researchers beyond a preoccupation with the nonmainstream aspects of children’s dialects while also moving us beyond Brown’s 14 morphemes. Although the focus of the article is on assessment, the content is relevant to the treatment of grammar because effective promotion of any child’s grammar (including the grammars of those who speak nonmainstream dialects of English) will occur only when clinicians, educators, and researchers begin to view the child’s grammar as a system rather than as a sum of its parts.
“…These models require using multiple measures, procedures, and contexts so as to gain as much data as possible about the individual. Many also emphasize the importance of testing the child in all of the languages they can speak or understand (32, 33). …”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…There are four primary kinds of test bias that could negatively impact the test scores of children who are culturally or linguistically diverse from the test population: linguistic, format, value, and situational biases (32, 38). Linguistic bias occurs when there are sounds, or types of grammar, syntax, or morphology, that do not exist in the test taker’s language.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Only one measure in this list, the Rossetti Infant-Toddler Language Scale, uses observational information as part of the assessment—the other assessments are parent report measures. In light of these limitations, current guidance recommends focusing on universally shared aspects of language development when working with children in the prelinguistic stage (32). …”
Background
There is a great need in the United States to develop presymbolic evaluation tools that are widely available and accurate for individuals that come from a bilingual and/or multicultural setting. The Communication Complexity Scale (CCS) is a measure that evaluates expressive presymbolic communication including gestures, vocalizations and eye gaze. Studying the effectiveness of this tool in a Spanish speaking environment was undertaken to determine the applicability of the CCS with Spanish speaking children. Methods & Procedures: In 2011–2012, researchers from the University of Kansas and Centro Ann Sullivan del Perú (CASP) investigated communication in a cohort of 71 young Spanish speaking children with developmental disabilities and a documented history of self-injurious, stereotyped and aggressive behaviors. Communication was assessed first by parental report with translated versions of the Communication and Symbolic Behavior Scales (CSBS), a well-known assessment of early communication, and then eleven months later with the CCS.
Hypothesis
We hypothesized that the CCS and the CSBS measures would be significantly correlated in this population of Spanish speaking children.
Outcomes & Results
The CSBS scores from time 1 with a mean participant age of 41 months were determined to have a strong positive relationship to the CCS scores obtained at time 2 with a mean participant age of 52 months.
Conclusions & Implications
The CCS is strongly correlated to a widely accepted measure of early communication. These findings support the validity of the Spanish version of the CCS and demonstrate its usefulness for children from another culture and for children in a Spanish speaking environment.
Language difference among speakers of African American English (AAE) has often been considered language deficit, based on a lack of understanding about the AAE variety. Following Labov (1972), Wolfram (1969), Green (2002, 2011), and others, we define AAE as a complex rule-governed linguistic system and briefly discuss language structures that it shares with general American English (GAE) and others that are unique to AAE. We suggest ways in which mistaken ideas about the language variety add to children's difficulties in learning the mainstream dialect and, in effect, deny them the benefits of their educational programs. We propose that a linguistically informed approach that highlights correspondences between AAE and the mainstream dialect and trains students and teachers to understand language varieties at a metalinguistic level creates environments that support the academic achievement of AAE-speaking students. Finally, we present 3 program types that are recommended for helping students achieve the skills they need to be successful in multiple linguistic environments.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.