Speech Disorders Exam 3

Assessment of speech sound disorders

Types of relational analysis

• traditional analysis

• phonological process analysis

  • other: intelligibility

  • PCC/Severity

  • stimulability

traditional analysis is most appropriate for

• children with few articulation errors

• relatively good intelligibility

• problem is articulatory

traditional analysis considers what 2 variables

• position the sounds are misarticulated

  • prevocalic

  • postvocalic

  • intervocalic

• types of errors made

  • substitutions

  • omissions

  • distortions

  • additions

omission

sound is deleted all together

distortion

non english sound produced for an english sound

addition

adding an extra sound

relational analysis is best for

older children regardless of intelligibility

does relational analysis analysis compare child’s production to adult target?

yes

independent analysis is best for what age

very young children and/or children who are very unintelligible

independent analysis yields

an inventory of sounds and syllable structures produced

relational analysis yields

types of errors and operating phonological processes

How to determine phonological issue

errors with whole classes of sounds (all fricatives, all stops, etc)

idiosyncratic

“of unknown origin”

glottal replacement

consistently using glottal stop in replacement for a phoneme

strong sound preference/phoneme collapse

child using one phoneme to replace many phonemes

backing

substitution of later developing sounds for earlier ones

/t, d/ to /k, g/

metathesis

switching around sounds

“caterpillar” - “callapiter”

denasalization

taking a nasal sound away

frequency of occurence

number of times a particular process occurs in a sample

percentage of occurence

more specific, requires more analysis but provides more information

5/8 (63%) vs 5/30 (17%)

articulation issue

more sound errors

phonological issue

• low intelligibility

• consistent phoneme errors

assessment definition

process of arriving at a diagnosis

assessment can be synonymous with

evaluation / diagnostics

purpose of assessment

• obtain good understanding or diagnosis of client’s issue

• identify need for referral

• identify need for treatment

• determine focus, structure, length, & frequency of treatment

• monitor client’s progress & describe changes in communication disturbance

formal assessment

• standardized measures

• compare child to standard norms

• administration dictated by an examiner’s manual

• result in statistical scores

Informal assessment

• non standardized measures

• compare child to themselves, informal norms, or a certain criteria

• administration is determined by clinician

• result in informal info or scores

independent analysis purpose

describe phonemes & syllable shapes that occur in a speech sample

independent analysis is most appropriate for

• children in the “first 50 words” stage

• less than 30 months old

• children with VERY low intelligibility

norms: 15 months

/b, d, h/

norms: 18 months

/b, t, d, m, n, h, w/

norms: 21 months

/b, t, d, m, n, h, w/

norms: 24 months

/b, p, t, d, k, g, m, n, h, w, f, s, r/

syllable structure norms: 12 months

v

cv

cvc

cvcv

syllable structure norms: 24 months

v

cv

cvc

cvcv

cvcvcv

clusters emerging

formal measures

• articulation exams

• phonological process exams

informal measures

• sampling techniques

• relational analysis

single word articulation tests AKA

citation tasks

single word articulation provide

an identifiable unit of production that examiners can more easily transcribe

single word articulation tests yield

a standardized score

prevocalic

consonants that precede a vowel and initiate a syllable (soap, cat)

intervocalic

consonant that is embedded (VCV) between tow vowels (camel, eager)

postvocalic

consonants that follow a vowel (VC) & terminate the syllable (soap, cat)

Goldman Fristoe Test of Articulation - 3 tests what age

• 2:0 to 21;11

• gender based norms

Goldman Fristoe Test of Articulation - 3 examines what

• artic in words

• intelligibility

khan lewis phonological analysis - 3 tests what age

2:0 to 21;11

khan lewis phonological analysis - 3 examines what

phonology

Arizona Articulation and Phonology Scale - 4 tests what age

• 18-months to 21;11

• gender based norms

Arizona Articulation and Phonology Scale - 4 examines

• word artic

• sentence artic

• phonology

intelligibility tells us

what % of the time we understand someone

intelligibility analysis

• transcribe sample

• use a symbol to mark unintelligible words

intelligibility analysis for words

intelligibility analysis for utterances

intelligibility norms: 19-24 months

25-50%

intelligibility norms: 2-3 years

50-75%

intelligibility norms: 4-5 years

75-90%

intelligibility norms: 5+ years

90-100% (a few errors may persist)

severity analysis provides

• info that determines if therapy is needed

• support for your findings

factors that influence severity

• child’s age

• intelligibility

• # of phonological processes

• consistency of errors

severity analysis scale

mild + = need for therapy

PCC Formula

#of correct consonants / total consonants x 100 = PCC

severity level

85-100%

mild

severity level

65-85%

mild-moderate

severity level

50-65%

moderate-severe

severity level

<50%

severe

stimulability testing example

stimulability testing

client’s ability to make a correct/improved production of a misarticulated sound when given a model or additional stimulation

stimulability testing helps with

• selection of therapy targets

• identity cues/prompts that may be helpful in therapy

Normal speech production

• errors due to bilingualism / dialect/ 2nd language

• errors within normal developmental range

• errors are slight & would not draw attention

speech production assessment example