Classification Accuracy of Teacher Ratings When Screening Nonmainstream English-Speaking Kindergartners for Language Impairment in the Rural South Purpose We compared teacher ratings as measured by the Teacher Rating of Oral Language and Literacy (TROLL; Dickinson, McCabe, & Sprague, 2001, 2003) and Children's Communication Checklist–Second Edition (CCC-2; Bishop, 2006) to 2 established screeners, the Part II of the Diagnostic Evaluation of Language Variation–Screening Test (DELV-ST-II; Seymour, Roeper, & ... Research Article
Research Article  |   April 05, 2018
Classification Accuracy of Teacher Ratings When Screening Nonmainstream English-Speaking Kindergartners for Language Impairment in the Rural South
 
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Kyomi D. Gregory
    Salus University, Elkins Park, PA
  • Janna B. Oetting
    Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge
  • Disclosure: The authors have declared that no competing interests existed at the time of publication.
    Disclosure: The authors have declared that no competing interests existed at the time of publication. ×
  • Correspondence to Kyomi D. Gregory: kgregory@salus.edu
  • Editor: Shelley Gray
    Editor: Shelley Gray×
  • Publisher Note: This article is part of the Clinical Forum: Toward Accurate Identification of Developmental Language Disorder Within Linguistically Diverse Schools.
    Publisher Note: This article is part of the Clinical Forum: Toward Accurate Identification of Developmental Language Disorder Within Linguistically Diverse Schools.×
Article Information
Cultural & Linguistic Diversity / Language Disorders / Clinical Forum: Toward Accurate Identification of Developmental Language Disorder Within Linguistically Diverse Schools / Research Articles
Research Article   |   April 05, 2018
Classification Accuracy of Teacher Ratings When Screening Nonmainstream English-Speaking Kindergartners for Language Impairment in the Rural South
Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, April 2018, Vol. 49, 218-231. doi:10.1044/2017_LSHSS-17-0045
History: Received May 18, 2017 , Revised August 16, 2017 , Accepted September 15, 2017
 
Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, April 2018, Vol. 49, 218-231. doi:10.1044/2017_LSHSS-17-0045
History: Received May 18, 2017; Revised August 16, 2017; Accepted September 15, 2017
Web of Science® Times Cited: 1

Purpose We compared teacher ratings as measured by the Teacher Rating of Oral Language and Literacy (TROLL; Dickinson, McCabe, & Sprague, 2001, 2003) and Children's Communication Checklist–Second Edition (CCC-2; Bishop, 2006) to 2 established screeners, the Part II of the Diagnostic Evaluation of Language Variation–Screening Test (DELV-ST-II; Seymour, Roeper, & de Villiers, 2003) and Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills–Next (DIBELS; Good, Gruba, & Kaminski, 2009), and then examined whether teacher ratings alone or when combined with the DELV-ST-II or DIBELS accurately classify nonmainstream English-speaking kindergartners by their clinical status.

Method Data came from 98 children who lived in the rural South; 47 spoke African American English, and 51 spoke Southern White English. Using the syntax subtest of the Diagnostic Evaluation of Language Variation–Norm Referenced (Seymour, Roeper, & de Villiers, 2005) as the reference standard, 43 were language impaired and 55 were typically developing. Analyses included analysis of variance, correlations, and discriminant function with sensitivity and specificity indices.

Results The TROLL, CCC-2, DELV-ST-II, and DIBELS showed clinical status but not dialect effects, and they correlated with each other, the Diagnostic Evaluation of Language Variation–Norm Referenced, and other language measures. Classification accuracies of all 4 tools were too low for screening purposes; however, empirically derived cut scores improved the results, and a discriminant function selected the TROLL and DELV-ST-II as optimal for determining who should be referred for an evaluation, with the TROLL yielding the highest level of sensitivity (77%).

Conclusion Findings support teacher ratings as measured by the TROLL when screening nonmainstream English-speaking kindergartners for language impairment in the rural South, while also calling for additional development and study of teacher rating tools and other screening instruments.

Supplemental Material https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.6007712

Acknowledgments
This research was supported by Grants NIDCD RO1DC009811 (awarded to Janna Oetting, Janet McDonald, and Michael Hegarty) and RO1DC009811-03S1 (awarded to Janna Oetting). Appreciation is extended to Jessica Berry, Ryan Lee-James, Andy Rivière, Christy Seidel, Tina Villa, Sarah Williams, and other students who helped collect and input the data and the teachers, families, and children who agreed to participate in the study.
Order a Subscription
Pay Per View
Entire Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools content & archive
24-hour access
This Article
24-hour access