A Review of 30 Speech Assessments in 19 Languages Other Than English Purpose In this study, the authors aimed to evaluate instruments designed to assess children's speech production in languages other than English. Method Ninety-eight speech assessments in languages other than English were identified: 62 were commercially published, 17 published within journal articles, and 19 informal assessments. A review was ... Review
Review  |   November 2014
A Review of 30 Speech Assessments in 19 Languages Other Than English
 
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Sharynne McLeod
    Charles Sturt University, Australia
  • Sarah Verdon
    Charles Sturt University, Australia
  • Disclosure: The authors have declared that no competing interests existed at the time of publication.
    Disclosure: The authors have declared that no competing interests existed at the time of publication.×
  • Correspondence to Sharynne McLeod: smcleod@csu.edu.au
  • Editor: Carol Scheffner Hammer
    Editor: Carol Scheffner Hammer×
  • Associate Editor: Peter Flipsen, Jr.
    Associate Editor: Peter Flipsen, Jr.×
  • © American Speech-Language-Hearing Association
Article Information
Speech, Voice & Prosodic Disorders / Cultural & Linguistic Diversity / Review
Review   |   November 2014
A Review of 30 Speech Assessments in 19 Languages Other Than English
American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, November 2014, Vol. 23, 708-723. doi:10.1044/2014_AJSLP-13-0066
History: Received July 12, 2013 , Revised December 23, 2013 , Accepted March 22, 2014
 
American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, November 2014, Vol. 23, 708-723. doi:10.1044/2014_AJSLP-13-0066
History: Received July 12, 2013; Revised December 23, 2013; Accepted March 22, 2014
Web of Science® Times Cited: 2

Purpose In this study, the authors aimed to evaluate instruments designed to assess children's speech production in languages other than English.

Method Ninety-eight speech assessments in languages other than English were identified: 62 were commercially published, 17 published within journal articles, and 19 informal assessments. A review was undertaken of 30 commercially published assessments that could be obtained.

Results The 30 instruments assessed 19 languages: Cantonese, Danish, Finnish, German, Greek, Japanese, Korean, Maltese-English, Norwegian, Pakistani-heritage languages (Mirpuri, Punjabi, Urdu), Portuguese, Putonghua (Mandarin), Romanian, Slovenian, Spanish, Swedish, and Turkish. The majority (70.0%) assessed speech sound production in monolingual speakers, 20.0% assessed one language of bilingual speakers, and 10.0% assessed both languages of bilingual speakers. All used single-word picture elicitation. Approximately half (53.3%) were norm-referenced, and the number of children in the normative samples ranged between 145 and 2,568. The remaining assessments were criterion-referenced (50.0%) (one fitted both categories). The assessments with English manuals met many of the psychometric criteria for operationalization; however, only 2 provided sensitivity and specificity data.

Conclusions Despite the varying countries of origin, there were many similarities between speech assessments in languages other than English. Few were designed for use with multilingual children, so validation is required for use in English-speaking contexts.

Acknowledgments
This work has been supported by Australian Research Council Future Fellowship FT0990588 awarded to Sharynne McLeod. The authors thank Nicole Limbrick for advice and support.
Order a Subscription
Pay Per View
Entire American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology content & archive
24-hour access
This Article
24-hour access