Standardised speech-language tests and students with intellectual disability: a review of normative data.

Resource type
Author/contributor
Title
Standardised speech-language tests and students with intellectual disability: a review of normative data.
Abstract
Background: Before a school speech-language pathologist (SLP) utilises a standardised speech-language test with a student with intellectual disability (ID), the clinician should carefully consider the purpose of the test and whether the test includes students with ID in the normative group. Method: This project reviewed 49 tests published between 1994 and 2004 and their applicability to students with ID. Results: Students with mild ID were included in the norm group for 23 of the tests, but no tests included students with more significant ID. Separate norms for students with mild ID were included in 15 tests, but none met Salvia & Ysseldyke's (1995) suggested requirement that at least 100 students be included to represent a specific subgroup. A majority of the tests assessed receptive and expressive vocabulary, syntax, and grammar but no recent test measured a student's pragmatic communication. Conclusions: Clinicians are encouraged to supplement standardised tests with non-standardised procedures to document students' pragmatic, social, and functional communication abilities. © 2006 Australasian Society for the Study of Intellectual Disability Inc.
Publication
Journal of intellectual & developmental disability
Date
2006
Volume
31
Issue
2
Pages
120-4
Journal Abbr
J Intellect Dev Disabil
DOI
Citation Key
cascellaStandardisedSpeechlanguageTests2006
ISSN
1366-8250
Language
English
Extra
11 citations (Crossref) [2023-10-31] Place: England Cascella, Paul W. Department of Communication Disorders, Southern Connecticut State University, New Haven, CT 06515, USA. cascellap1@southernct.edu
Citation
Cascella, P. W. (2006). Standardised speech-language tests and students with intellectual disability: a review of normative data. Journal of Intellectual & Developmental Disability, 31(2), 120–124. https://doi.org/10/frh3pg