Bibliographic Details
| Title: |
Impact of Discourse Type and Elicitation Task on Language Sampling Outcomes. |
| Authors: |
Spencer, Trina D.1 trinaspencer@ku.edu, Tolentino, Trina J.2, Foster, Matthew E.1 |
| Source: |
American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology. Nov2023, Vol. 32, p2827-2845. 19p. |
| Subject Terms: |
*Phonological awareness, *Language & languages, *Speech evaluation, *Comparative studies, *Language acquisition, *Students, *Data analysis, Statistics, Mean length of utterance, Cross-sectional method, Descriptive statistics, Research funding, Data analysis software |
| Abstract: |
Purpose: Language sampling is a critical component of language assessments. However, there are many ways to elicit language samples that likely impact the results. The purpose of this study was to examine how different discourse types and elicitation tasks affect various language sampling outcomes. Method: A diverse group of K-3 students (N = 1,037) contributed eight spoken language samples in four elicitation conditions: (a) expository generation, (b) expository retell, (c) narrative generation, and (d) narrative retell. Samples were audio-recorded, transcribed, and coded for number of total words, number of different words, mean length of utterance in words (MLUW), and number of clauses per communication unit (i.e., Subordination Index [SI]). Results: Narrative retell and expository generation conditions yielded the largest samples with the greatest lexical diversity when compared to narrative generation and expository retell. MLUW was higher in expository conditions, but mean SI was higher in narrative conditions. For both measures of syntax, narrative retell and expository generation yielded the highest mean scores. For each outcome, there were expected increases corresponding to grades; however, the differences faded between second and third grade. Conclusion: As a component of language assessments, clinicians' selection of language sampling procedures will impact the sample length, lexical diversity, utterance length, and syntactical complexity of the samples. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
|
Copyright of American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology 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 |
