A Comparison of Three Language Assessment Tools

1. A Comparison of Three Language Assessment Tools Laura Wrobel Washington University-Central Institute for the Deaf

2. Introduction • Language assessment tools allow deaf educators to assess the language of their students. • Based on the results of the assessment, educators can: • select Individualized Educational Plan (IEP) objectives • plan instruction to promote language acquisition • monitors progress of language acquisition • aids in reporting

3. Introduction • The following assessment tools have been developed to aid in assessing language: • The Teacher of Grammatical Structures (TAGS) • The Teacher Assessment of Spoken Language (TASL) • The Cottage Acquisition Scales for Listening, Language, and Speech (CASLLS)

4. Purpose • To analyze the similarities and differences among the 3 tools • Discuss the strengths and weaknesses • Discover which is the most concise, simplest to administer, and easiest to explain

5. Method • Manuals and evaluation forms were obtained, read, and analyzed • Spontaneous language samples were collected • Child #1 at 2-3 word level • Child #2 at 4-5 word level • After the language samples were analyzed using the evaluation forms, conclusions were drawn

6. TAGS Manual • Provides a detailed rationale and description of its rating forms • Explains how to determine where to begin when analyzing a child’s language • Provides norms of language development in children with normal hearing and no language delay • May be used to evaluate sentence structure for children who use sign language • Explains language competency levels

7. TAGS Manual • Each competency level is rated. The rater decides if the level of competence: • has not been demonstrated • is emerging • is acquired • Explains dotted (x’s) and half dotted (x’s) • Explains solid (x’s) and half (x’s)

8. TAGS Evaluation Forms • Assesses language at three levels • Lists grammatical categories • Provides sample acceptable productions on the form

9. Advantages of the TAGS • Developed by experienced deaf educators • Manual and forms simply written • Lists acceptable and unacceptable productions on the form and in the manual • Provides norms of language development in children with normal hearing without a language delay to use as a guide • Allows teacher creativity

10. Limitations of the TAGS • Criteria for mastery is very stringent • Criterion of acquiring any competency level is the teacher’s decision • Difficult to distinguish between prompted and spontaneous productions

11. TASL Manual • Assesses language of those who are deaf, hard-of-hearing, and /or with a language delay • May be used to evaluate language of those who use sign language • Evaluates written language • Explains how to determine where to begin when evaluating a child’s language • Describes syntactic elements and sentence types

12. TASL Manual • Each sentence type or syntactic element is rated as: • emerging • acquired • Dotted (x’s) and half dotted (x’s) are used to indicate that a sentence type or element is selected as an objective • Solid (x’s) and half (x’s) are used to indicate an emerging or acquired skill

13. TASL Evaluation Forms • Five sentence levels • Hierarchial sequence of language development • Syntactic Types • Syntactic Elements • Reference Form • Examples of acceptable productions are written on the forms

14. Advantages of the TASL • Developed by experienced deaf educators • Less stringent criteria • Avoids controversy between prompted and spontaneous productions • Concise evaluation forms • Allows teacher creativity

15. Limitations of the TASL • An inexperienced teacher may need a more stringent criteria • Easy to be too lenient about what is considered “acquired” • Geared toward experienced deaf educators

16. CASLLS Manual • Comprehensive • Provides suggestion of how to obtain language samples and construct activities • Provides a rating system • emerging • mastered in some contexts • generalized • Language is evaluated at five levels • Evaluation forms have acceptable productions written on them

17. CASLLS Evaluation Forms • Provides acceptable sentences on the form itself • Hierarchial sequence of language development • Age norms are written above each grammatical category

18. Advantages of the CASLLS • Provides a review of language acquisition in a concise manner • Useful to inexperienced teachers or those who do not have a strong language background • Comprehensive • Has a pre-verbal level that would be beneficial for birth to age three programs

19. Limitations of the CASLLS • Manual was overwhelming • Contains unnecessary information for experienced teachers • Six evaluation forms • Norms are written on the evaluation forms • Evaluation forms required frequent references to the manual • Written by a linguist • Does not distinguish between a selected objective versus an acquired objective versus an emerging objective

20. Conclusion • The TAGS is the oldest of the three assessment tools and proved to be the easiest to understand, use, and explain • Provided the most specific criteria and left minimal questions when assessing language • TASL is very similar to the TAGS, therefore, transition from the TAGS to the TASL would not be difficult • Perhaps the CASLLS would have been easier to administer if the evaluator observed a demonstration and/or video