» Articles » PMID: 35007430

Is Bilingual Receptive Vocabulary Assessment Via Telepractice Comparable to Face-to-Face?

Overview
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Purpose: This study investigated the effect of delivery method (face-to-face or telepractice), time, home language, and language ability on bilingual children's receptive vocabulary scores in Spanish and English.

Method: Participants included bilingual children with ( = 32) and without ( = 57) developmental language disorders (DLD) that were assessed at 2 time points about 1 year apart. All children participated in face-to-face assessment at Time 1. At Time 2, 41 children were assessed face-to-face and 48 children were assessed using telepractice.

Results: Delivery method was not a significant predictor of receptive scores in either Spanish or English. Spanish and English receptive vocabulary increased over time in both children with and without DLD. Children with DLD had lower receptive vocabulary raw scores than children with typical development. Children who spoke English-only at home had significantly higher English receptive scores than children who spoke Spanish-only or both Spanish and English at home.

Conclusions: Face-to-face and telepractice assessments seem to be comparable methods for the assessments of Spanish and English receptive skills. Spanish and English receptive skills increased over time in children with and without DLD.

Supplemental Material: https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.17912297.

Citing Articles

Assessing handwriting skills in a web browser: Development and validation of an automated online test in Japanese Kanji.

Inoue T, Chen Y, Ohyanagi T Behav Res Methods. 2024; 57(1):32.

PMID: 39738808 PMC: 11685258. DOI: 10.3758/s13428-024-02562-6.


Remote First-Language Assessment: Feasibility Study With Vietnamese Bilingual Children and Their Caregivers.

Dam Q, Pham G Lang Speech Hear Serv Sch. 2023; 54(2):618-635.

PMID: 36972337 PMC: 10187970. DOI: 10.1044/2023_LSHSS-22-00123.

References
1.
Cusack C, Pan E, Hook J, Vincent A, Kaelber D, Middleton B . The value proposition in the widespread use of telehealth. J Telemed Telecare. 2008; 14(4):167-8. DOI: 10.1258/jtt.2007.007043. View

2.
Waite M, Theodoros D, Russell T, Cahill L . Internet-based telehealth assessment of language using the CELF-4. Lang Speech Hear Serv Sch. 2010; 41(4):445-58. DOI: 10.1044/0161-1461(2009/08-0131). View

3.
Ciccia A, Whitford B, Krumm M, McNeal K . Improving the access of young urban children to speech, language and hearing screening via telehealth. J Telemed Telecare. 2011; 17(5):240-4. DOI: 10.1258/jtt.2011.100810. View

4.
Haaf R, Duncan B, Skarakis-Doyle E, Carew M, Kapitan P . Computer-Based Language Assessment Software: The Effects of Presentation and Response Format. Lang Speech Hear Serv Sch. 1999; 30(1):68-74. DOI: 10.1044/0161-1461.3001.68. View

5.
Hoff E, Burridge A, Ribot K, Giguere D . Language specificity in the relation of maternal education to bilingual children's vocabulary growth. Dev Psychol. 2017; 54(6):1011-1019. PMC: 5962365. DOI: 10.1037/dev0000492. View