Is language an approximation of intelligence of a child is verbal?

[Anonymous]

Will not be able to rule out cognitive issues until neuropsych, but if a child is verbal, is a language score a reasonable approximation of intelligence or not? Have heard conflicting reports.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Will not be able to rule out cognitive issues until neuropsych, but if a child is verbal, is a language score a reasonable approximation of intelligence or not? Have heard conflicting reports.

Kids can have language delays that make their language skills lower than their cognitive skills, often substantially lower. You definitely can see kids with severe language problems and average IQ's. The reverse doesn't happen, at least not to the same degree. You don't see, for example, age appropriate language skills in a child with a significant cognitive disability.

[Anonymous]

SLP here.
Short answer, yes.
Language abilities in general cannot surpass cognitive abilities. Cognitive processes are the foundation, language is built upon those abilities. So, as long as language has been evaluated as within normal limits, general cognition should be fine. There can always be learning disabilities, difficulties and differences, so if there are concerns, you need to know the whole picture.
Some children on the autism spectrum may have seemingly high expressive language skills but will likely show deficits in functional language skills and more complex concepts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Will not be able to rule out cognitive issues until neuropsych, but if a child is verbal, is a language score a reasonable approximation of intelligence or not? Have heard conflicting reports.

Kids can have language delays that make their language skills lower than their cognitive skills, often substantially lower. You definitely can see kids with severe language problems and average IQ's. The reverse doesn't happen, at least not to the same degree. You don't see, for example, age appropriate language skills in a child with a significant cognitive disability.

Is that true, that you don't see children with average language skills and significant cognitive disabilities?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Is that true, that you don't see children with average language skills and significant cognitive disabilities?

For significant / severe cognitive disabilities? Yes, that would most likely be true. Even for a moderate cognitive disability you would be looking at fair language skills rather than average. Simple yes, but nothing too complex.
Might be difficult to differentiate at a young age, when fair skills are still the norm for the age group. But from what I know - not a SLP, just a minor in psychology with a focus on psycholinguistics / language acquisition (has been a while and I am not overly active in the field) - severe cognitive disabilities do not usually correlate with average language skill. Mild cognitive disabilities might see average language skills (in children). Learning disabilities can very well see average or above average language skills. But I would agree with 16:17 and 16:18 that in general language skills do not surpass cognitive abilities. The other way round, yes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is that true, that you don't see children with average language skills and significant cognitive disabilities?

For significant / severe cognitive disabilities? Yes, that would most likely be true. Even for a moderate cognitive disability you would be looking at fair language skills rather than average. Simple yes, but nothing too complex.
Might be difficult to differentiate at a young age, when fair skills are still the norm for the age group. But from what I know - not a SLP, just a minor in psychology with a focus on psycholinguistics / language acquisition (has been a while and I am not overly active in the field) - severe cognitive disabilities do not usually correlate with average language skill. Mild cognitive disabilities might see average language skills (in children). Learning disabilities can very well see average or above average language skills. But I would agree with 16:17 and 16:18 that in general language skills do not surpass cognitive abilities. The other way round, yes.

I am 16:17 (special educator) and I'm confused by this comment.

When I say "average" skills, I mean average for age. I'm guessing that the SLP meant the same thing. So, there isn't really an age where the norm is "fair" rather than "average". "Average" is, by definition, the norm.

A child with an intellectual disability is not going to present with average language skills, as tested by an SLP. Comprehensive language testing requires children to make connections, draw inferences, sequence, and do other things that are challenging for children with intellectual disabilities.

Having said that, I'll provide a couple caveats.

1) There are some syndromes that cause cognitive/intellectual disabilities for whom social skills are a strength. Williams syndrome comes to mind. These kids may easily acquire some of the very early social markers that an SLP looks for, so they may not look "language delayed" as infants. I've never been involved in formal testing for kids this young, but I wouldn't be surprised to see age appropriate language scores in a 6 month old who went on to have an intellectual and language disability. This doesn't apply to language testing done after the point at which kids can talk.

2) There are some kids, particularly kids with ASD, who acquire parts of language easily. For example, they may develop large vocabularies of nouns; be able to repeat long sentences, sometimes at a later time in the right context; and have great articulation and fluency. A casual observer, or even someone like a parent who has no other experience with kids, might look at these skills and conclude that the child has "great language skills". However, on a full battery of testing, the same child might show difficulty using language for a variety of purposes, creating novel sentences, and understanding spoken language. Many of those kids will have normal intelligence with specific language delays, but some may also have an intellectual disability.

3) There are things that cause kids to lose abilities. For example, a child can have age appropriate language skills, and then get hit by a bus, and end up significantly disabled.

4) Just like kids can have significant language delays and not have an intellectual disability, due to things like autism, or apraxia of speech, or aphasia, or hearing loss, kids can have significant delays in visual processing or motor skills and not have an intellectual disability, due to things like motor apraxia, CP, or visual processing disorders. Having age appropriate language doesn't mean that a child won't struggle substantially with school, or that they won't need significant support going forward.

[Anonymous]

Kids can also have normal receptive language and no expressive language.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is that true, that you don't see children with average language skills and significant cognitive disabilities?

For significant / severe cognitive disabilities? Yes, that would most likely be true. Even for a moderate cognitive disability you would be looking at fair language skills rather than average. Simple yes, but nothing too complex.
Might be difficult to differentiate at a young age, when fair skills are still the norm for the age group. But from what I know - not a SLP, just a minor in psychology with a focus on psycholinguistics / language acquisition (has been a while and I am not overly active in the field) - severe cognitive disabilities do not usually correlate with average language skill. Mild cognitive disabilities might see average language skills (in children). Learning disabilities can very well see average or above average language skills. But I would agree with 16:17 and 16:18 that in general language skills do not surpass cognitive abilities. The other way round, yes.

I am 16:17 (special educator) and I'm confused by this comment.

When I say "average" skills, I mean average for age. I'm guessing that the SLP meant the same thing. So, there isn't really an age where the norm is "fair" rather than "average". "Average" is, by definition, the norm.

A child with an intellectual disability is not going to present with average language skills, as tested by an SLP. Comprehensive language testing requires children to make connections, draw inferences, sequence, and do other things that are challenging for children with intellectual disabilities.

Having said that, I'll provide a couple caveats.

1) There are some syndromes that cause cognitive/intellectual disabilities for whom social skills are a strength. Williams syndrome comes to mind. These kids may easily acquire some of the very early social markers that an SLP looks for, so they may not look "language delayed" as infants. I've never been involved in formal testing for kids this young, but I wouldn't be surprised to see age appropriate language scores in a 6 month old who went on to have an intellectual and language disability. This doesn't apply to language testing done after the point at which kids can talk.

2) There are some kids, particularly kids with ASD, who acquire parts of language easily. For example, they may develop large vocabularies of nouns; be able to repeat long sentences, sometimes at a later time in the right context; and have great articulation and fluency. A casual observer, or even someone like a parent who has no other experience with kids, might look at these skills and conclude that the child has "great language skills". However, on a full battery of testing, the same child might show difficulty using language for a variety of purposes, creating novel sentences, and understanding spoken language. Many of those kids will have normal intelligence with specific language delays, but some may also have an intellectual disability.

3) There are things that cause kids to lose abilities. For example, a child can have age appropriate language skills, and then get hit by a bus, and end up significantly disabled.

4) Just like kids can have significant language delays and not have an intellectual disability, due to things like autism, or apraxia of speech, or aphasia, or hearing loss, kids can have significant delays in visual processing or motor skills and not have an intellectual disability, due to things like motor apraxia, CP, or visual processing disorders. Having age appropriate language doesn't mean that a child won't struggle substantially with school, or that they won't need significant support going forward.

This is interesting and a good explanation. For kids who fall under caveat 2, would a speech evaluation, a comprehensive one, show them as having average language? And as for kids that have receptive delays, that doesn't always mean intellectual disability, correct?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is that true, that you don't see children with average language skills and significant cognitive disabilities?

For significant / severe cognitive disabilities? Yes, that would most likely be true. Even for a moderate cognitive disability you would be looking at fair language skills rather than average. Simple yes, but nothing too complex.
Might be difficult to differentiate at a young age, when fair skills are still the norm for the age group. But from what I know - not a SLP, just a minor in psychology with a focus on psycholinguistics / language acquisition (has been a while and I am not overly active in the field) - severe cognitive disabilities do not usually correlate with average language skill. Mild cognitive disabilities might see average language skills (in children). Learning disabilities can very well see average or above average language skills. But I would agree with 16:17 and 16:18 that in general language skills do not surpass cognitive abilities. The other way round, yes.

I am 16:17 (special educator) and I'm confused by this comment.

When I say "average" skills, I mean average for age. I'm guessing that the SLP meant the same thing. So, there isn't really an age where the norm is "fair" rather than "average". "Average" is, by definition, the norm.

A child with an intellectual disability is not going to present with average language skills, as tested by an SLP. Comprehensive language testing requires children to make connections, draw inferences, sequence, and do other things that are challenging for children with intellectual disabilities.

Having said that, I'll provide a couple caveats.

1) There are some syndromes that cause cognitive/intellectual disabilities for whom social skills are a strength. Williams syndrome comes to mind. These kids may easily acquire some of the very early social markers that an SLP looks for, so they may not look "language delayed" as infants. I've never been involved in formal testing for kids this young, but I wouldn't be surprised to see age appropriate language scores in a 6 month old who went on to have an intellectual and language disability. This doesn't apply to language testing done after the point at which kids can talk.

2) There are some kids, particularly kids with ASD, who acquire parts of language easily. For example, they may develop large vocabularies of nouns; be able to repeat long sentences, sometimes at a later time in the right context; and have great articulation and fluency. A casual observer, or even someone like a parent who has no other experience with kids, might look at these skills and conclude that the child has "great language skills". However, on a full battery of testing, the same child might show difficulty using language for a variety of purposes, creating novel sentences, and understanding spoken language. Many of those kids will have normal intelligence with specific language delays, but some may also have an intellectual disability.

3) There are things that cause kids to lose abilities. For example, a child can have age appropriate language skills, and then get hit by a bus, and end up significantly disabled.

4) Just like kids can have significant language delays and not have an intellectual disability, due to things like autism, or apraxia of speech, or aphasia, or hearing loss, kids can have significant delays in visual processing or motor skills and not have an intellectual disability, due to things like motor apraxia, CP, or visual processing disorders. Having age appropriate language doesn't mean that a child won't struggle substantially with school, or that they won't need significant support going forward.

This is interesting and a good explanation. For kids who fall under caveat 2, would a speech evaluation, a comprehensive one, show them as having average language? And as for kids that have receptive delays, that doesn't always mean intellectual disability, correct?

It might be possible for a very young child with that profile to get a score that is technically average but the scatter is going to be so wide that the SLP will absolutely comment on it and recommend therapy. There is no way a parent would leave the meeting at which the eval was presented with the impression that the skills were actually average.

You are correct that intellectual disabilities always mean receptive language delays but the opposite is not true. Kind of like the way that blindness always means difficulty reading standard text, but there are many reasons why a kid might read, with blindness being just one.

[Anonymous]

Hmmm. Right now all I know is both in average range, but low/mid average range. Still recommending therapy. Pragmatic social issues.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Hmmm. Right now all I know is both in average range, but low/mid average range. Still recommending therapy. Pragmatic social issues.

That really does not sound like an ID profile. That sounds like a kid with average language (and thus average or maybe above average cognition) and some discrete weaknesses in pragmatics, you might see that profile in a kid with LD, ADHD, or ASD, but not in ID.

An ID profile would either be consistently low across, or in the case of my #2 example above, low in most areas with a few super high scores (e.g. labeling nouns, and repeating back sentences) that pull him up.

[Anonymous]

I have a child with a normal nonverbal IQ and normal fluid reasoning skills, but his receptive language skills are in the very bottom percentiles, pulling down all the rest of his scores.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I have a child with a normal nonverbal IQ and normal fluid reasoning skills, but his receptive language skills are in the very bottom percentiles, pulling down all the rest of his scores.

m
How old? How is he doing?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is that true, that you don't see children with average language skills and significant cognitive disabilities?

For significant / severe cognitive disabilities? Yes, that would most likely be true. Even for a moderate cognitive disability you would be looking at fair language skills rather than average. Simple yes, but nothing too complex.
Might be difficult to differentiate at a young age, when fair skills are still the norm for the age group. But from what I know - not a SLP, just a minor in psychology with a focus on psycholinguistics / language acquisition (has been a while and I am not overly active in the field) - severe cognitive disabilities do not usually correlate with average language skill. Mild cognitive disabilities might see average language skills (in children). Learning disabilities can very well see average or above average language skills. But I would agree with 16:17 and 16:18 that in general language skills do not surpass cognitive abilities. The other way round, yes.

I am 16:17 (special educator) and I'm confused by this comment.

When I say "average" skills, I mean average for age. I'm guessing that the SLP meant the same thing. So, there isn't really an age where the norm is "fair" rather than "average". "Average" is, by definition, the norm.

A child with an intellectual disability is not going to present with average language skills, as tested by an SLP. Comprehensive language testing requires children to make connections, draw inferences, sequence, and do other things that are challenging for children with intellectual disabilities.

Having said that, I'll provide a couple caveats.

1) There are some syndromes that cause cognitive/intellectual disabilities for whom social skills are a strength. Williams syndrome comes to mind. These kids may easily acquire some of the very early social markers that an SLP looks for, so they may not look "language delayed" as infants. I've never been involved in formal testing for kids this young, but I wouldn't be surprised to see age appropriate language scores in a 6 month old who went on to have an intellectual and language disability. This doesn't apply to language testing done after the point at which kids can talk.

2) There are some kids, particularly kids with ASD, who acquire parts of language easily. For example, they may develop large vocabularies of nouns; be able to repeat long sentences, sometimes at a later time in the right context; and have great articulation and fluency. A casual observer, or even someone like a parent who has no other experience with kids, might look at these skills and conclude that the child has "great language skills". However, on a full battery of testing, the same child might show difficulty using language for a variety of purposes, creating novel sentences, and understanding spoken language. Many of those kids will have normal intelligence with specific language delays, but some may also have an intellectual disability.

3) There are things that cause kids to lose abilities. For example, a child can have age appropriate language skills, and then get hit by a bus, and end up significantly disabled.

4) Just like kids can have significant language delays and not have an intellectual disability, due to things like autism, or apraxia of speech, or aphasia, or hearing loss, kids can have significant delays in visual processing or motor skills and not have an intellectual disability, due to things like motor apraxia, CP, or visual processing disorders. Having age appropriate language doesn't mean that a child won't struggle substantially with school, or that they won't need significant support going forward.

This is interesting and a good explanation. For kids who fall under caveat 2, would a speech evaluation, a comprehensive one, show them as having average language? And as for kids that have receptive delays, that doesn't always mean intellectual disability, correct?

Yes, happened to my child with ASD whose language scores were higher than average. Only the Language Use Inventory test would reveal his deficiencies. Without it, the school wouldn't have provided services.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is that true, that you don't see children with average language skills and significant cognitive disabilities?

For significant / severe cognitive disabilities? Yes, that would most likely be true. Even for a moderate cognitive disability you would be looking at fair language skills rather than average. Simple yes, but nothing too complex.
Might be difficult to differentiate at a young age, when fair skills are still the norm for the age group. But from what I know - not a SLP, just a minor in psychology with a focus on psycholinguistics / language acquisition (has been a while and I am not overly active in the field) - severe cognitive disabilities do not usually correlate with average language skill. Mild cognitive disabilities might see average language skills (in children). Learning disabilities can very well see average or above average language skills. But I would agree with 16:17 and 16:18 that in general language skills do not surpass cognitive abilities. The other way round, yes.

I am 16:17 (special educator) and I'm confused by this comment.

When I say "average" skills, I mean average for age. I'm guessing that the SLP meant the same thing. So, there isn't really an age where the norm is "fair" rather than "average". "Average" is, by definition, the norm.

A child with an intellectual disability is not going to present with average language skills, as tested by an SLP. Comprehensive language testing requires children to make connections, draw inferences, sequence, and do other things that are challenging for children with intellectual disabilities.

Having said that, I'll provide a couple caveats.

1) There are some syndromes that cause cognitive/intellectual disabilities for whom social skills are a strength. Williams syndrome comes to mind. These kids may easily acquire some of the very early social markers that an SLP looks for, so they may not look "language delayed" as infants. I've never been involved in formal testing for kids this young, but I wouldn't be surprised to see age appropriate language scores in a 6 month old who went on to have an intellectual and language disability. This doesn't apply to language testing done after the point at which kids can talk.

2) There are some kids, particularly kids with ASD, who acquire parts of language easily. For example, they may develop large vocabularies of nouns; be able to repeat long sentences, sometimes at a later time in the right context; and have great articulation and fluency. A casual observer, or even someone like a parent who has no other experience with kids, might look at these skills and conclude that the child has "great language skills". However, on a full battery of testing, the same child might show difficulty using language for a variety of purposes, creating novel sentences, and understanding spoken language. Many of those kids will have normal intelligence with specific language delays, but some may also have an intellectual disability.

3) There are things that cause kids to lose abilities. For example, a child can have age appropriate language skills, and then get hit by a bus, and end up significantly disabled.

4) Just like kids can have significant language delays and not have an intellectual disability, due to things like autism, or apraxia of speech, or aphasia, or hearing loss, kids can have significant delays in visual processing or motor skills and not have an intellectual disability, due to things like motor apraxia, CP, or visual processing disorders. Having age appropriate language doesn't mean that a child won't struggle substantially with school, or that they won't need significant support going forward.

This is interesting and a good explanation. For kids who fall under caveat 2, would a speech evaluation, a comprehensive one, show them as having average language? And as for kids that have receptive delays, that doesn't always mean intellectual disability, correct?

Yes, happened to my child with ASD whose language scores were higher than average. Only the Language Use Inventory test would reveal his deficiencies. Without it, the school wouldn't have provided services.

Interesting. My son does not have ASD, but he is only 4, so I can see the point about this not really being meaningful until higher order language comes into play.