Reply to Confused about expressive speech delay

Forum Index » Kids With Special Needs and Disabilities

Reply to "Confused about expressive speech delay "

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]As an SLP, I'm a little frustrated by how unethical some SLPs in the area are, framing average scores as "low" or "borderline" to worry parents into paying a significant amount of money to fix something that isn't actually a problem. The test authors designated 85-115 as average scores. Not low average or borderline. We also collect a range of 90% probability that a child falls into which will include higher scores into the mid-90s based on an 86 which takes into account that some children don't perform their best during testing situations, or on certain days, etc. Your child received average scores on two well-respected tests, and the CELF contains a large cognitive load component which can lead to over-identifying. She will almost certainly continue being average, barring any unforeseen circumstances. Those scores are a good thing, and one or two word changes on that report would drastically impact how you felt about your daughter's future.

If you choose to give her ST, it certainly won't hurt her. She'll continue developing typically and therefore make progress. Just know that if you have better things to spend that money on, you shouldn't feel obligated. Your concern wasn't even in this area, nor were the results of the screening. ChildFind offers free screenings if you want a free second opinion, otherwise you may want to consult with another SLP in the area.

(Sorry for how negative the tone of this post is, it just frustrates me to no end. Parents worry enough about their children and those who actually need the help don't need fudging on reports to know it.)[/quote]

I appreciate your thoughts and can understand your frustration. On the other hand, I'm also an educator and evaluator...I understand standard deviation and the range of 85 - 115 but think that scoring at the 16th %ile is worthy of concern. Certainly, most people would have some concerns over a WISC-V Verbal Scale Score of 85.[/quote]

NP here. But, you are not a speech pathologist and you have misinterpreted the percentile. The standard scores are average. And speech therapy is not really going to change that. If this child was to be tested years later,the scores would most likely be the same. The private practice is telling the parent that this child needs speech therapy and that implies that there is a speech language delay when there really isn't. That is unethical.[/quote]

How was the 16th %ile misinterpreted? I'm not saying it's a severe delay but was pointing out that falling within the low average range (some tests give a qualitative performance descriptor at that level as below average) is worthy of concern. In our school system, a child may (depending on the eligibility team's decision) qualify for services if he/she obtained several speech/lang scores at that level.[/quote]

Because the scores are interpreted by standard scores. And scores are grouped into ranges. If you fall below a certain range - usually by a standard deviation and a half - then it is of concern and a true delay. Being on the lower range of average is still average. Not everybody is going to be above average.  I highly doubt your school system would give services to someone who scored in the average range. If so, then you are wasting tax payers money. 85 and even a few points below (there is a range) is still average whether it be low average. We do not go by percentiles as it is just a comparison to how other children scored. [b]Again, you are not a speech pathologist. I am[/b].[/quote]

No, I'm not a speech pathologist but recognize your area of expertise. Nonetheless, I have years of experience in the special education field. Whether you agree or not, our school system does (not all the time) often qualify children with speech/lang scores of 85 and below--especially if they're obtained IQ scores are significantly higher.

[/quote]

They shouldn't be. It's not a true delay. And it certainly shouldn't be coded as a speech language delay. I hope the state doesn't audit your school system. Please be careful about spreading wrong information. This thread is about the OP and her child. Your response that a 16% should warrant looking into is what the speech paths on this thread are responding to. The OP asked if she was being given misinformation about scores and she was. 16% is not what is being looking at when coding a language delay, it's the standard scores. The OP's child does not have the standard scores to be diagnosed with a speech language delay.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics