An Ipad Speech Assessment for English and Spanish Speakers


Published on

Great speech assessment tool for English and/or Spanish speakers. Calculates percentages of errors by type automatically. You can save each administration to evaluate change over time.

Published in: Education, Technology
1 Comment
  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

An Ipad Speech Assessment for English and Spanish Speakers

  1. 1. TSHA Annual Convention March 8-10, 2012 San Antonio, Texas An iPad Speech Assessment for English and Spanish Speakers Mary Bauman, M.S., CCC-SLP Barbara Fernandes, M.S., CCC-SLP
  2. 2. The iPad is a registered mark of Apple, Inc. Presenters do not have any financial interest in promoting the device. The Bilingual Articulation Phonology Assessment is a registered mark of Smarty Ears and authors of this presentation have a direct financial relation with the product presented. Vendor presentation
  3. 3. Mary Bauman, M.S., CCC-SLP Barbara Fernandes, M.S, CCC-SLP •Founder & CEO of Smarty Ears • •Developed over 30 apps for the iPad & iPhone for speech and language development •Practicing bilingual speech- language pathologist with Bilinguistics •Areas of focus in speech sound disorders in English and Spanish
  4. 4. The iPad
  5. 5. Our team wanted to create an assessment tool that: • could be used with monolingual (English or Spanish) and bilingual (Spanish-English) speakers • provides multiple opportunities to assess sounds in each position • reduces the time required to analyze results and makes the assessment process time efficient
  6. 6. • Interactional Dual Systems Model of phonological representation suggests that bilingual children possess two separate phonological systems with mutual influence. These systems are separate, yet non-autonomous. (Paradis, 2001) L2 L1 L1 L2
  7. 7. Click to visit
  8. 8. • Due to the interaction of the two languages within a child’s phonological system, speech production abilities should be tested and compared across both languages. • Testing in one language, even the language the child uses the most, may not yield the most accurate and reliable results. Combining children's best performance across domains is promising for improving assessment practices for bilingual children. (Peña & Bedore, 2011)
  9. 9. • Possibility of a Test Mode Effect • No significant differences in performance found for children ages 7-8 between computer-based testing (CBT) and paper-based testing (PBT) (Sim & Horton, 2005) Children also showed a preference for computer-based assessments
  10. 10. SAM CPAC‐S SPAT Primary Use  Production of Spanish  consonants and  phonological processes Screener/comprehensive  assessment to gauge  articulatory and  phonological performance To examine the production  of  Spanish phonemes in  single words.  Normative Sample Spanish‐speaking children Ages 3;0 +  Spanish‐speaking children  from the U.S., Mexico, and  Puerto Rico Ages 3;0 to 8:11 Hispanic children from  Oregon Ages ranged 2;6 to 5;5 Norm‐based or  Criterion Referenced Criterion Referenced Criterion Referenced Normative data published  on 9/15/09 Norm‐based Administration Time  15 minutes 15‐20 minutes 5‐10 minutes 
  11. 11. How can the BAPA help us with assessment? • Performs time-consuming calculations and analysis • Provides a more in-depth look at speech errors in less time • Generates report template to save time
  12. 12. • The BAPA codes both articulation and phonological errors to allow the SLP to appropriately identify the profile of the child • Greater efficacy found in treatments that differentiate between articulation and phonological errors (Holm, Ozanne, & Dodd, 1997) Speech Articulation Phonology Other
  13. 13. • Articulation Disorder – difficulty producing specific age-expected sounds; error in the motor movements of sound production ▫ e.g., omission, distortions, substitutions • Phonological process disorder – patterns of error related to underlying difficulty with rules of a language’s sound system ▫ e.g., weak syllable deletion, stopping, fronting, assimilation (ASHA, 2008)
  14. 14. Considerations in the development of the BAPA: • Frequency of occurrence of words in each language • Picturability of target words • Selection of culturally-appropriate items • Phonological differences between Spanish and English • Regional differences of words (in both Spanish and English) • Minimum of 2 targets of each frequently- occurring sound in all positions
  15. 15. • Words chosen from familiar categories, such as objects in the home, clothing, body parts, & animals • Target words selected based on how easily pictures could be identified, particularly for young children • Stimulus pictures were field tested across various age groups of children with different cultural backgrounds and modified to find stimuli that produced the highest rates of correct identification
  16. 16. • Consideration given to exclude items that may be less familiar or unfamiliar to children who are culturally and linguistically diverse • Word targets selected from common categories familiar to multiple cultures as much as possible
  17. 17. • Consonant blends and sequences in Spanish • Other assessment tools don’t address reduction of consonant sequences /n/ - Final consonant of syllable or consonant sequence?
  18. 18. All of the documents and charts in this presentation  can be downloaded from our Free Resource Library. Click here to visit the Resource Library
  19. 19. Stimulus Pictures: • Eliminated words with various labels due to regional or dialectal differences Analysis: • Report will address Spanish dialectal differences, such as Mexican, Puerto Rican, and Cuban Spanish
  20. 20. • Phonemes assessed in all positions ▫ Initial, medial, final ▫ Consonant clusters (blends) as well as consonant sequences Spanish: /n/ nariz chancla conejo llorando pan
  21. 21. • In English we distinguished between medial (intervocalic) consonants and medial consonants within a consonant sequence English: /n/ neck blanket dinosaur plant Kitchen
  22. 22. • Many current tools assess each phoneme in each position one time • Have observed contextual/assimilatory errors that can misrepresent child’s actual error type • Greater number of opportunities to produce each target increases accuracy of error analysis
  23. 23. • Doesn’t doubling the number of opportunities increase the number of words targeted and administration time?
  24. 24. • The BAPA uses every opportunity to assess a phoneme, which reduces the total number of target words needed • Accounts for all errors made within words /bl/ cluster /k/ medial /s/ final
  25. 25. • Speech intelligibility is considered one of the main manifestations in subjects with acquired or developmental speech disturbances. (Barreto, Ortiz, 2008)
  26. 26.
  27. 27. Barreto, S. & Ortiz, K. (2008). Intelligibility measurements in speech disorders: a critical review of the literature. Pró-Fono R. Atual. Cient. 20(3): 201-206. Retreived from 56872008000300011&script=sci_arttext&tlng=en#back1 Holm, A., Ozanne, A., Dodd, B. (1997). Efficacy of intervention for a bilingual child making articulation and phonological errors. International Journal of Bilingualism, 1(1), 55-69. Fernandes, Barbara (2011). iTherapy: The revolution of mobile devices within the field of speech therapy. Perspectives. School-Based issues. Peña, E.D. & Bedore, L.M. (2011). It takes two: Improving assessment accuracy in bilingual children. ASHA Leader. Retreived from Two-Improving-Assessment-Accuracy-in-Bilingual-Children/
  28. 28. Secord, W. (2007). Eliciting Sounds. Florence, KY: Thomson Delmar Learning. Sim, G. & Horton, M. (2005). Performance and Attitude of Children in Computer Based Versus Paper Based Testing. In P. Kommers & G. Richards (Eds.), Proceedings of World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications 2005 (pp. 3610-3614). Chesapeake, VA: AACE. Skelton, S. (2004). Motor-skill learning approach to the treatment of speech-sound disorders. CSHA Magazine, Summer, 8-9. Yavas, M. & Goldstein, B. (1998). Phonological assessment and treatment of bilingual speakers. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 7(2) 49-60.