Scribd
Upload
223 views4 pages

SLDT

The document describes the Social Language Development Test, which assesses social language skills for both children and adolescents. It contains multiple subtests and provides standard scores, percentiles, and age equivalents. The test was standardized on large sample sizes and demonstrates good reliability and validity in differentiating children with language disorders from typically developing children.

Uploaded by

khadidja BOUTOUIL
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
223 views4 pages

SLDT

The document describes the Social Language Development Test, which assesses social language skills for both children and adolescents. It contains multiple subtests and provides standard scores, percentiles, and age equivalents. The test was standardized on large sample sizes and demonstrates good reliability and validity in differentiating children with language disorders from typically developing children.

Uploaded by

khadidja BOUTOUIL
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 4

Outcome Measure Social Language Development Test (SLDT) (Elementary and

Adolescent versions)

Sensitivity to Unknown
Change
Population Paediatrics
Domain Language and Communication

Type of Measure Standardised Assessment


ICF-Code/s D3
Description Social Language Development Test (Comes in 2 versions, a) Elementary
Ages: 6-11, Grades: 1-6 and b) Adolescent Ages: Ages: 12-17, Grades: 7-
12).

Testing Time: 45 minutes

• The Social Language Development Test is designed to assess language-


based skills of social interpretation and interaction with friends, the
skills found to be most predictive of social language development.
• Assesses students' language-based responses to portrayed, peer-to-
peer situations.
• Assesses language required to infer and express what another person
is thinking or feeling within a social context, to make multiple
interpretations, take mutual perspectives, and negotiate with and
support their peers.
• Test tasks reflect the developmental refinement of social language
comprehension and expression and differentiate typically-developing
children from those with language learning disorders or autism.

Subtests
Subtests consist of question-answering tasks, interpretations of
photographed scenes, and verbal explanations.
• Subtest A: Making Inferences
• Subtest B: Interpersonal Negotiations
• Subtest C: Multiple Interpretations .
• Subtest D: Supporting Peers
Examiner Qualifications
The test should be administered by a trained professional familiar with
language disorders (e.g., speech-language pathologist, psychologist).

ADOLESCENT VERSION
Test Description
The SLDT A is a diagnostic test of social language skills for adolescents. It
assesses students' language-based responses to portrayed, peer-to-peer
situations. The test differentiates typically-developing adolescents from
those with language learning disorders or autism. There are five subtests
with 12 items each: Making Inferences, Interpreting Social Language,
Problem Solving, Social Interpretation, and Interpreting Ironic
Statements. Test stimuli include photographs, scenarios presented
verbally by the examiner, and audio recordings of a CD.

Subtests
• Subtest A: Making Inferences
• Subtest B: Interpreting Social Language
• Subtest C: Problem Solving (Stating and Justifying Solutions)
• Subtest D: Social Interaction
• Subtest E: Interpreting Ironic Statements

Examiner Qualifications
The test should be administered by a trained professional familiar with
language disorders (e.g., speech-language pathologist, psychologist)
because careful interpretation of the responses is required.

Testing Time: 45 minutes


Raw scores convert to:
◦ Age Equivalents
◦ Percentile Ranks
◦ Standard Scores

Properties Standardization and Statistics


Two studies were conducted on the Social Language Development Test
Elementary: the item pool and standardization studies.
The item pool study consisted of 390 subjects. The test was standardized
on 1,104 subjects that represented the latest National Census for race,
gender, age, and educational placement. In addition, 352 subjects with
language learning disorders and autism spectrum disorders were used in
the validity studies.
• Reliability—established by the use of the following for all subtests
and the total test at all age levels:
◦ SEM
◦ Inter-Rater Reliability
◦ Test-Retest
◦ Reliability Based on Item Homogeneity (KR20)
The test-retest coefficient is .79 for the total test, the SEM is 11. 26 for the
total test and the KR20 coefficient is .93. Given the uniqueness of the test,
the clinical population, and scoring criteria, the reliability is considered
highly satisfactory.

• Validity—established by the use of construct and contrasted group


validity.
◦ Contrast Groups (t-values)
◦ Point Biserial Correlations
◦ Subtest Intercorrelations
◦ Correlations Between Subtests and Total Test
Results revealed highly satisfactory levels of item consistency
(88%). Internal consistency estimates are clearly satisfactory. The test
differentiates students with language disorders or autism spectrum
disorders from students developing language normally.

• Race/Socioeconomic Group Difference Analyses—conducted at the


item and subtest levels. The analysis of performance differences
among race/socioeconomic groups was conducted at the subtest
level.
◦ Z-tests Chi Square analysis at the subtest level
◦ Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) F-tests
The low percentage (1%) for race and small number of race/SES
differences, indicate that neither is a strong impact on the Social Language
Development Test Elementary at the item level

ADOLESCENT VERSION
Standardization and Statistics
Two studies were conducted on The Social Language Development Test
Adolescent – the item pool and standardization studies.
The item pool study consisted of 500 subjects from every region of the
country. The test was standardized on 834 subjects. For both studies, the
subjects represented the latest national school population demographics
from the latest National Census for race, gender, age, and educational
placement. Test performances reflect typically-achieving students as well
as those in subgroups found in the school population. In addition, 68
subjects with language disorders and autism spectrum disorders were
used in the validity studies.
• Reliability—established by the use of the following for all subtests
and the total test at all age levels:
◦ SEM
◦ Inter-Rater Reliability
◦ Test-Retest
◦ Reliability Based on Item Homogeneity (KR20)
The test-retest coefficient is .82 for the total test, the SEM is 4.66 for the
total test and the KR20 coefficient is .92. Inter-Rater reliability is 85% for
the total test. Given the uniqueness of the test, the clinical population,
and scoring criteria, the reliability is considered highly satisfactory.

• Validity—established by the use of construct and contrasted group


validity.
◦ Contrast Groups (t-values): test discriminates between subjects
with normal social language development and subjects with autism and/or
language impairment
◦ Point Biserial Correlations
◦ Subtest Intercorrelations
◦ Correlations Between Subtests and Total Test
Results revealed highly satisfactory levels of item consistency (97%).
Internal consistency estimates are clearly satisfactory. The test
significantly discriminates between contrasted groups for every subtest
and the total test. These results are highly satisfactory and substantiates
that the test differentiates students with language disorders or autism
spectrum disorders from students developing language normally.

• Race/Socioeconomic Group Difference Analyses—conducted at the


item and subtest levels. The analysis of performance differences among
race/socioeconomic groups was conducted at the subtest level.
◦ Z-tests Chi Square analysis at the subtest level
◦ Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) F-tests
There are three Chi Squares out of 30 that are significant—one at the
median, one at the 25th percentile, and one at the 75th percentile. These
relationships were not strong as the contingency coefficients ranged from
.35 to .41. The analyses of variance test indicate that there were some
race and socioeconomic effects on the subtest scores but in 88% of the
analyses, there were no race or SES effects. Neither race nor SES has a
major impact on the SLDT A.

Advantages Likely the most comprehensive and ecologically valid assessment of


pragmatics.

Disadvantages
Additional NA
Information
Reviewers Angela Morgan

References

Bowers, L., Huisingh, R., & LoGiudice, C. (2008). Social Language Development Test:
Elementary. East Moline, IL: LinguiSystems.

Bowers, L., Huisingh, R., & LoGiudice, C. (2010). Social Language Development Test:
Adolescent. East Moline, IL: LinguiSystems.

You might also like