Language Assessment With Children Who Speak Nonmainstream Dialects: Examining the Effects of Scoring Modifications in Norm-Referenced Assessment.

Saved in:

Bibliographic Details
Title:	Language Assessment With Children Who Speak Nonmainstream Dialects: Examining the Effects of Scoring Modifications in Norm-Referenced Assessment.
Authors:	Hendricks, Alison Eisel¹ ahendric@buffalo.edu, Adlof, Suzanne M.¹
Source:	Language, Speech & Hearing Services in Schools. Jul2017, Vol. 48 Issue 3, p168-182. 15p. 6 Charts, 2 Graphs.
Subject Terms:	Dialects, Speech evaluation, Questionnaires, Research funding, Video recording
Geographic Terms:	South Carolina
Abstract:	Purpose: We compared outcomes from 2 measures of language ability in children who displayed a range of dialect variation: 1 using features that do not contrast between mainstream American English (MAE) and nonmainstream dialects (NMAE), and 1 using contrastive features. We investigated how modified scoring procedures affected the diagnostic accuracy of the measure with contrastive features. Method: Second-grade students (N = 299; 167 White, 106 African American, 26 other) completed measures of language variation and ability (the Diagnostic Evaluation of Language Variation-Screening Test and the Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals-Fourth Edition [CELF-4]). The CELF-4 was scored with and without the recommended scoring modifications for children who spoke African American English. Results: Partial correlations controlling for socioeconomic status revealed small to moderate correlations between measures of language ability and the use of NMAE features. Modified scoring yielded higher scores for children who spoke African American English and a reduced association between the use of NMAE features and CELF-4 scores. Modified scoring also affected the diagnostic accuracy of the CELF-4, resulting in a lower positive likelihood ratio and a higher negative likelihood ratio. Conclusions: The decision to apply scoring modifications affects both the false positive and false negative rates. Implications for language assessment for children who speak NMAE dialects are discussed, including the need for further investigation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
	Copyright of Language, Speech & Hearing Services in Schools is the property of American Speech-Language-Hearing Association and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
Database:	Education Research Complete

Description
Abstract:	Purpose: We compared outcomes from 2 measures of language ability in children who displayed a range of dialect variation: 1 using features that do not contrast between mainstream American English (MAE) and nonmainstream dialects (NMAE), and 1 using contrastive features. We investigated how modified scoring procedures affected the diagnostic accuracy of the measure with contrastive features. Method: Second-grade students (N = 299; 167 White, 106 African American, 26 other) completed measures of language variation and ability (the Diagnostic Evaluation of Language Variation-Screening Test and the Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals-Fourth Edition [CELF-4]). The CELF-4 was scored with and without the recommended scoring modifications for children who spoke African American English. Results: Partial correlations controlling for socioeconomic status revealed small to moderate correlations between measures of language ability and the use of NMAE features. Modified scoring yielded higher scores for children who spoke African American English and a reduced association between the use of NMAE features and CELF-4 scores. Modified scoring also affected the diagnostic accuracy of the CELF-4, resulting in a lower positive likelihood ratio and a higher negative likelihood ratio. Conclusions: The decision to apply scoring modifications affects both the false positive and false negative rates. Implications for language assessment for children who speak NMAE dialects are discussed, including the need for further investigation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
ISSN:	01611461
DOI:	10.1044/2017_LSHSS-16-0060