Language Assessment of Bilingual Children

Information about bilinguals in U.S. Bilinguals not “two monolinguals in one” (Grosjean, 1989) Bilinguals use amalgamated system Forward & back transfer of strategies (Hernandez, Bates & Avila, 1994) Bilingualism changes over lifespan (Kohnert, Bates, & Hernandez, 1999)

Primary Language Impairment Primary language impairment (PLI) is a language disorder that delays the mastery of language skills in children who have no hearing loss or other developmental delays.

Bilingual Language Impairment Primary language impairment (PLI) is a language disorder that delays the mastery of language skills in children who have no hearing loss or other developmental delays Not an effect of second language acquisition Affects BOTH languages

Challenges in Assessment True Language Impairment vs. Outcomes of Divided Input

Challenges in Assessment Second language learning looks like PLI First language loss looks like PLI Language Dominance Age of first English exposure Percent of current exposure Test domain (by language experience)

Bilingualism HIGHLY VARIABLE at individual level

Translation Linguistic Equivalence Functional Equivalence Cultural Equivalence Psychometric Equivalence From: Peña, 2007

Linguistic Equivalence Translation focusing on using the same words in similar ways Ensures similarity in task presentation Problem Same words ≠ same FUNCTION & MEANING

What’s the goal of: Where’s the ______. Show me the ______. Will translation meet the goal?

Functional Equivalence “Where’s the” 6.97 times/million “En donde esta” 1 time/million “Show” 609 times/million (“show me” 8.02) “Enseña” 1 time/million “Mira” 439 times/million “Busca” 45 times/million

Functional Equivalence Goal is to be able to test same concept or behavior Need to be able to elicit target

Meaning Cultural meaning Words are not culture/experience neutral

Bread

Pan

Meaning Goal is to elicit behavior that means the same culturally Example: Temperament questionnaire

Practical Considerations Language of home Language of school Demands across contexts

Psychometric Equivalence Item difficulty Based on number of participants who got item correct Item discrimination Difference in correct performance between clinical and non-clinical group Goal  equivalent tests

Development of a Bilingual Test Four Domains: Semantics Morphosyntax Pragmatics Phonology

Development of a Bilingual Test Test blueprint Focus on markers Iterative approach Large item set Smaller item set Final

Semantics Children with PLI: Weak semantic representations & semantic depth (McGregor et al., 2002; Sheng, Peña, Bedore, & Fiestas, 2012) Require more exposures to learn new word (Gray, 2003, 2005) BUT Vocabulary knowledge often WNL (low normal)

Semantics

Morphosyntax Spanish Direct object clitics Articles Subjunctive (Bedore & Leonard, 2002; Gutiérrez- Clellen, Restrepo, & Simon-Cereijido, 2006; Jacobson & Schwartz, 2005) English Tense marking (-ing, -ed) Passives Plurals (Conti-Ramsden, 2003; Dale & Cole, 1991; Leonard, 1998; Rice, 1996) Difficulty with inflectional morphology (Leonard, 2000) Difficulties differ depending on the language

Morphosyntax

What language should be tested? L1 L2 Both How should the two languages be combined?

Language Performance Associated with age of first L2 exposure current input/output (Bedore, et al., 2012)

Language Dominance

Patterns Bilingual English Spanish Assessment (BESA) Best (higher) in each language for: morphosyntax + semantics Morpho EngXX Morpho SpnXX Sem EngXX Sem SpnXX

Procedure Children tested in Spanish, English or both Ability testing: language samples, parent/teacher questionnaire, clinical concern Bilingual input-output based on parent/teacher questionnaire Bilingual English Spanish Assessment– BESA Semantics

Discriminant Analysis Determined cuts via FME and FMS Applied same cut-scores to BSE group Single language Both languages

AgeSensitivity (LI as LI) Specificity (TD as TD) + likelihood ratio - likelihood ratio 481.0%73.1% %63.3% %85.7% %83.3% %77.8% %86.8%

AgeSensitivity (LI as LI) Specificity (TD as TD) + likelihood ratio - likelihood ratio 481.0%73.1% %63.3% %85.7% %83.3% %77.8% %86.8% %100.0%infinite %84.0% %85.7%

Discrimination Bilingual English Spanish Assessment (BESA) SensitivitySpecificity Best language morphosyntax + Best language semantics 90.5%87.5%

Discussion For ID of PLI in bilinguals consider: Structure of language Markers of PLI particular to language Level of exposure– L1 vs. L2 Performance by language and domain Performance in best language

Practical Considerations Language of home Language of school Demands across contexts