Confused about expressive speech delay

[Anonymous]

My 4.5yo DC had a speech evaluation done by a private practice. The results suggest average receptive language and low average expressive language. Based on this, the suggestion is do speech therapy to address the expressive language delay.

I am very open to doing this - no harm, I guess. But what exactly qualifies as an expressive language delay?

[Anonymous]

This may help: http://www.asha.org/public/speech/disorders/Preschool-Language-Disorders/

You should also have them elaborate on what they mean. Review the written report again.

[Anonymous]

Receptive is what you understand. Expressive is how you talk. Your child is having trouble talking, explaining what they mean, etc. Get speech therapy now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My 4.5yo DC had a speech evaluation done by a private practice. The results suggest average receptive language and low average expressive language. Based on this, the suggestion is do speech therapy to address the expressive language delay.

I am very open to doing this - no harm, I guess. But what exactly qualifies as an expressive language delay?

Expressive means talking, so your child understands what is said to her as well as her peers, but in some elements of talking she is a little behind. Maybe she uses shorter sentences, or her grammar isn't good, or the vocabulary she uses, as opposed to what she understands, is smaller than other kids. Or maybe all 3 of those are true.

But low average is mild, it's right on the cusp of not needing speech at all. So that's good.

[Anonymous]

OP here. Sorry I wasn't clear about my question. I understand what expressive and receptive language involve.

My question is what is considered a delay: say the average score is 100 and the low average is 90. Does this constitute a delay that calls for therapy? (By definition, not everyone can be above average.)

[Anonymous]

That makes no sense. I'd get a second opinion..

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP here. Sorry I wasn't clear about my question. I understand what expressive and receptive language involve.

My question is what is considered a delay: say the average score is 100 and the low average is 90. Does this constitute a delay that calls for therapy? (By definition, not everyone can be above average.)

So the average range on the CELF -- which is one of the most popular and comprehensive tests of language is 86 to 114. Low average would be 78 - 85.

Having said that, it's important to understand that the test is normed on an average set of children from across the country. When kids who have advantages such as middle class parents, high quality childcare (whether from a SAHM or a quality nanny or center), fluent English models, etc . . . are looked at as a group, their scores average out close to 110. So, a student who scores 1 Standard Deviation below the "mean", will be closer to 2 SD's below the mean in their gen ed classroom in a high performing school. That can sometimes mean frustration, and academic difficulties, even for a kid with supposedly "average speech".

If I had a kid with those scores, and I could afford it without breaking the bank, I'd probably get treatment if I liked the therapist and thought my child would establish good rapport. But I also acknowledge that if you approached the public schools for help they would turn you away with those scores.

What made you get the testing in the first place?

[Anonymous]

Have you noticed actual problems? Or is this pie in the sky?

[Anonymous]

Typically 100 is considered to be the mean. Anything over 100 is great. 85-100 is average with 85 being on the lower end of average. A few points below 85 is ok, it's usually in the 70's where we get concerned. However, in a private practice, they often recommend services to kids who score in the 80's/90's anyways. It doesn't sound like your DC has a language delay based on the scores. Is there something else in the report that would lead them to believe there is a true delay?

[Anonymous]

OP again. Thanks for your input. The expressive language scores were 86 (on the CELF) and 90 (on the EOWPVT). For both tests, the report says that the normal range is 85 and 115.

We can afford therapy and will likely do it. But as a statistician (by training), I am really puzzled by the language in the report and what is considered a problem.

[Anonymous]

How old exactly was your child when administered the CELF? I think the CELF is by 6 month age ranges so one age range is 4 years, 0 months, 0 days to 4 years, 5 months, 30 days. And the next cut off is 4years 6 months, 0 days to 4 years, 11 months, and 30 days. So if your child was 4 years, 5 months I would be more concerned because many of of the normative sample were younger. If your child was 4 years 6 months I would be less concerned.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP again. Thanks for your input. The expressive language scores were 86 (on the CELF) and 90 (on the EOWPVT). For both tests, the report says that the normal range is 85 and 115.

We can afford therapy and will likely do it. But as a statistician (by training), I am really puzzled by the language in the report and what is considered a problem.

What were the receptive scores?

What was the reason you did the eval?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How old exactly was your child when administered the CELF? I think the CELF is by 6 month age ranges so one age range is 4 years, 0 months, 0 days to 4 years, 5 months, 30 days. And the next cut off is 4years 6 months, 0 days to 4 years, 11 months, and 30 days. So if your child was 4 years, 5 months I would be more concerned because many of of the normative sample were younger. If your child was 4 years 6 months I would be less concerned.

OP here: 4 years and 7 months.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP again. Thanks for your input. The expressive language scores were 86 (on the CELF) and 90 (on the EOWPVT). For both tests, the report says that the normal range is 85 and 115.

We can afford therapy and will likely do it. But as a statistician (by training), I am really puzzled by the language in the report and what is considered a problem.

What were the receptive scores?

What was the reason you did the eval?

The receptive scores were 100 on both tests. The full evaluation was done because the screening had suggested possible receptive language issues. And I had taken DD2 to the screening because of concerns about articulation.

[Anonymous]

She is at the low end of the normal range. I'd do the speech therapy just because I wouldn't want to risk it getting worse/her slipping further behind.

While it's possible she could catch up on her own, it's good to get this resolved before kindergarten if you can. It truly doesn't sound like it will need to go on forever.