Bilingual SSD & Intervention Leacox EBP Bilingual Phonology - - PDF document

Bilingual SSD & Intervention Leacox ICCD 2014 1

Speech Sound Disorders & Interventions for Bilingual Children

Lindsey Leacox, Ph.D., CCC-SLP ICCD March 2014

Learning Objectives

 Describe expected phonological differences in Spanish and

English development

 Explain outcome differences between articulation and

phonological interventions in English for multilingual students

 Explain rationale and how to include home language in

speech interventions for multilingual students

 Disclosure: Salary from Bilingual Therapies Phonology Assessment EBP Therapy Outcomes Bilingual Therapy supports

Dual Language Learners in your area?

 Spanish  Bosnian  Other languages

Why bilingual SSD important?

 National SLP Survey (Skahan, Watson, & Lof, 2007)

 36% evaluated ELL students for speech disorders  Most rely on informal measures or English-only tests

 ASHA 2012 Schools Survey

 93% of SLPs served students with articulation and

phonological disorders

 63% SLPs served ELLs

 Limited # of treatment studies for multilingual

students (Holm & Dodd 1999; Holm, Dodd, & Ozanne, 1997; Ray, 2002)

Bilingual Phonological System(s)

1 or 2 phonological systems

 (Barlow & Enriquez, 2007; Ray, 2002)

Interactional Dual Language Systems Model (Paradis, 2001)

 2 systems which interact (Fabiano-Smith & Barlow, 2010; Hambly, Wren, McLeod, & Roulstone, 2013)

Interaction may be “convergent” or “competitive”

 (Goldstein & Bunta, 2011; Kohnert, 2013)

Phonology Assessment EBP Therapy Outcomes Bilingual Therapy supports

English – Spanish

 Spanish - Only 5 vowels: a, e, i, o, u

Phonology Assessment

h z ʤ v θ ŋ sh Ʒ r w ñ rr (trill) ɾ (flap) β ɤ

b d g p t k m n s ʧ j l f δ

Bilingual SSD & Intervention Leacox ICCD 2014 2

English-Spanish “R”

 Bilinguals had more substitutes [l, ɾ, j, s, t, tj, dr, ld] for trill than Spanish monolinguals [l, ɾ, j]

(Goldstein & Washington; 2001)

 Goldstein & Iglesias, 1999; Gonzalo-Bueno, 2005

English:

/r/ /er/

Spanish:

trilled /rr/ flap /ɾ/

Phonology Assessment EBP Therapy Outcomes Bilingual Therapy supports

Spanish & English Phonological Differences

 Spanish consonants < English consonants  NO English “r”, “h”, “z”, “sh”, or “zh”  NO word initial clusters with “s” (only “es”  espejo [mirror])  Only 5 FINAL sounds in Spanish: /d, l, n, s, ɾ /  Longer words in Spanish (Span = 2.76 syllables, Eng = 1.74 syllables) (Bilinguistics, 2007; Goldstein, 1995; Gorman & Stubbe Kester)

Phonology Assessment EBP Therapy Outcomes Bilingual Therapy supports

Spanish-influenced English

Consonant Influence or Disorder?

 “choose” for shoes  “eschool” for school  “wabbit” for rabbit  “den” for then (Goldstein, 2001; Tsuagawa, 2005)

Phonology Assessment EBP Therapy Outcomes Bilingual Therapy supports

Dialectal Differences

Puerto Rico

 Substitute /l/ for flap /r/ - /kalta/ for “carta” [letter] Syllable final ONLY  Syllable-final deletion - /do:/ for “dos” [two] /s/ ONLY (Goldstein, 2004; Yavas & Goldstein, 1998)

Phonology Assessment EBP Therapy Outcomes Bilingual Therapy supports

Bilingual Assessment

Evaluación Bilingüe

Phonology Assessment EBP Therapy Outcomes Bilingual Therapy supports

Complete assessment in both languages

 Bilingual SLP  Bilingual liason  Interpreter  Language Line  Tele-therapy  Collaborate with local university

(Goldstein & Fabiano, 2007; Jackson, Leacox, & Callender, 2010; Yavas & Goldstein, 1998;)

Phonology Assessment EBP Therapy Outcomes Bilingual Therapy supports

Bilingual SSD & Intervention Leacox ICCD 2014 3

Complete assessment in both languages

Thorough assessment in both languages

(Goldstein & Fabiano, 2007; Yavas & Goldstein, 1998)  Complete Case History (language use/proficiency, dialect)  Collect Single words & Speech Samples (Goldstein, Fabiano, & Washington, 2005)  Assess phonetic inventory = Independent Analysis  Compare to target words = Relational Analysis  Determine difference or disorder  Link assessment to intervention goals

Phonology Assessment EBP Therapy Outcomes Bilingual Therapy supports

Spanish Speech Assessments

 CPAC-S (Contextual Probes of Articulation Competence-Spanish) (Goldstein & Iglesias, 2006)  SAM (Spanish Articulation Measure) (Mattes, 1995; like GFTA, But no Norms)  Spanish Language

Assessment Procedure (Mattes; sentence level word repetitions)

 BAPA (IPad) Bilingual Articulation Phonology Assessment (Fernandes, Kester, Bauman, & Prath, 2014) Phonology Assessment EBP Therapy Outcomes Bilingual Therapy supports Phonology Assessment EBP Therapy Outcomes Bilingual Therapy supports

Spanish & English Phonological Differences

 See Goldstein (1999) chart or CPAC-Spanish for typical patterns of

phonological processes.

Phonology Assessment EBP Therapy Outcomes Bilingual Therapy supports

Example

Phonology Assessment EBP Therapy Outcomes Bilingual Therapy supports

Bilingual SSD & Intervention Leacox ICCD 2014 4

Determine initial treatment targets

Yavas & Goldstein (1998)

1) Patterns exhibited with similar rates in L1 & L2, Frequently occurring patterns

 Cluster reduction  Unstressed syllable deletion

2) Unequal frequency between L1 and L2

 Final consonant deletion

3) Error patterns exhibited in only 1 language

 Trill errors (Spanish) Phonology Assessment EBP Therapy Outcomes Bilingual Therapy supports

Bilingual Intervention

Intervención Bilingüe

Phonology Assessment EBP Therapy Outcomes Bilingual Therapy supports

Bilingual Speech Therapy

 Limited research on bilingual speech sound

interventions (Holm & Dodd, 1999; Holm & Dodd, 2001; Holm, Ozanne,

& Dodd, 1997; Ray, J., 2002)

 Only case studies  All completed with English therapy

 Recent ASHA presentations combining languages for bilingual

therapy (e.g., Mead & Ramos, 2012)

Phonology Assessment EBP Therapy Outcomes Bilingual Therapy supports

Therapy Outcomes

 Therapy provided in English, transfer will occur in

1st language

 articulation errors is across languages  phonological errors: decreased in English but not

Cantonese (Holm & Dodd, 2001)  Transfer more likely to occur when phonological

components of 2 languages are similar (Yavas &

Goldstein 1998)

Phonology Assessment EBP Therapy Outcomes Bilingual Therapy supports

Cognates

 Words which share meaning and linguistic

similarity across languages (Harley, 2008)

baby bebé

Phonology Assessment EBP Therapy Outcomes Bilingual Therapy supports

Cognate Facilitation = features of one language influences another

(Bialystok, 2001; Kroll & Stewart, 1994; van Hell & Dijkstra, 2002)

 Bilingual adults

 quicker to recognize and fewer errors on cognates

than non-cognates (Hoshino & Kroll, 2008; Sunderman & Kroll, 2006)

 Positive effect during case study for patient with aphasia in

naming cognates (Kohnert, 2004)  May occur due to simultaneous activation

(Colomé, 2001; Hermans, Bongaerts, de Bot, & Schreduer, 1998; Kroll, Gerfen, & Dussias, 2008).

Bilingual SSD & Intervention Leacox ICCD 2014 5

Cognate Facilitation

 Older bilingual children

 sensitivity to cognates (Kelley & Kohnert, 2012; Malabonga et al., 2008)  increased learning with instruction to recognize

cognates (Carlo et al., 2004, Nagy, García, Durngunuğlu, & Hancin-Bhatt, 1993;

Proctor & Mo, 2009

 Young children

 Initial research found no effect for cognates

(Pearson, Fernández, & Oller, 1995; Umbel, Pearson, Fernandez & Oller, 1992).

 Pérez, Mendez, & Bedore (2010) found perform better

• n cognate items than noncognates

 Leacox et al. (2011) found young children named cognates with higher accuracy than noncognates

Research to Practice

 Screened 8-year old student in BOTH languages (Goldstein & Fabiano, 2007)  “pyato” [plato]  “plate”

Phonology Assessment EBP Therapy Outcomes Bilingual Therapy supports

Single Subject Study

 8;10 male, 3rd grade

Parent Questionnaire

 Spanish-English bilingual  Mexican heritage  Language exposure  Home: Parents (20% English)  School: 1-way dual-language

(50% Spanish - 50% English)

Phonology Assessment EBP Therapy Outcomes Bilingual Therapy supports

Method: Assessment

Language Samples (English, Spanish) Spanish Articulation Measure (Mattes, 1995) Goldman Fristoe Test of Articulation

(Goldman & Fristoe, 2000)

Create Cognate and Noncognate Probes

Error Patterns

Spanish (L1) English (L2) Liquid Errors

“pyato” for plato [plate] Occasional Final /l/ omission Consonant Cluster Reduction “tes” for tres [three] Occasional omission in conversation Trilled /rr/ Substitute bilabial for alveolar trill N/A

Phonology Assessment EBP Therapy Outcomes Bilingual Therapy supports

Cognate-Noncognate Probes

Sample “L” Words

Cognates Noncognates (untrained) Spanish English Spanish English lámpara lamp lágrima tear

• matched on word frequency (Cuetos et al., 2011) and phoneme

length.

• Black and white pictures (Frederick, 2005)

Phonology Assessment EBP Therapy Outcomes Bilingual Therapy supports

Bilingual SSD & Intervention Leacox ICCD 2014 6

Method: Intervention

 1 individual session/week for 4 weeks  40 minutes per week (80-100 practices)

1) weekly probe testing 2) practice (games, 1 metaphon activity) 3) Weekly homework

 5 Cognates targeted in Spanish each session



Words and phrases

 Combination of phonetic strategies and self-

checking

Phonology Assessment EBP Therapy Outcomes Bilingual Therapy supports

Results: Spanish Probes

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 B1 B2 B3 Wk 1 Wk 2 Wk 3 Wk 4 post

2 wks post 6 wks % Words Correct

Spanish Cognates Spanish NonCognates

Phonology Assessment EBP Therapy Outcomes Bilingual Therapy supports

Primary Findings

 Assessment: Asymmetric speech sound errors  Intervention: Increased accuracy in /l/

productions

 Student did not identify cognate similarity

between languages until week #3

 Need explicit cognate instruction (Nagy et al., 1993)

Phonology Assessment EBP Therapy Outcomes Bilingual Therapy supports

Discussion

 Exploratory study:

 Children are sensitive to cognates (Leacox et al., 2011; Perez

et al., 2010).

 Cognates targeted in Spanish, transfer

• ccurred to untrained noncognates

 Single subject  Not enough evidence

 No preliminary evidence for using cognates vs.

noncognates

 Errors primarily present in Spanish and not English

Phonology Assessment EBP Therapy Outcomes Bilingual Therapy supports

Future Research

Additional participants Explicit instruction between L1 and L2 Include orthography Select errors patterns of equal frequency (Yavas

& Goldstein, 1998)

English, Spanish, or Bilingual Intervention 

Phonology Assessment EBP Therapy Outcomes Bilingual Therapy supports

Bilingual Options for Therapy

 English first (or Spanish) to some criterion and then in Spanish (or English) to

some criterion

 1 week in English and 1 in Spanish  English (or Spanish) for a set number of sessions and then Spanish (or English)

for a set number of sessions

 Monitor generalization to the other language  Use Spanish probes (Spanish Articulation Measure)  Ask parent, teacher, or bilingual liason to help create probe list

(Goldstein, B. : http://2languages2worlds.wordpress.com/2009/03/30/its-the- wrong-question-initially-part-2/)

Phonology Assessment EBP Therapy Outcomes Bilingual Therapy supports

Bilingual SSD & Intervention Leacox ICCD 2014 7

Free Resources

 Teachers Pay Teachers  1-4 syllable words in Spanish Phonology Assessment EBP Therapy Outcomes Bilingual Therapy supports

Thank you! Gracias!

Lindsey Leacox, Ph.D., CCC-SLP Lindsey.Leacox@gmail.com Bilingual Therapies

References



American Speech-Language-Hearing

• Association. (2012). 2012 Schools Survey report: SLP

caseload characteristics. Available from www.asha.org/research/memberdata/schoolssurvey/



Goldstein, B. (2004). Bilingual language development & Disorders in Spanish-English

• Speakers. Paul H. Brookes Publishing Company: Baltimore.



Goldstein, B. (2001). Transcription of Spanish and Spanish-influenced English. Communication Disorders Quarterly, 23(1), 54-60.



Holm, A. & Dodd, B. (1999). An intervention case study of a bilingual child with a phonological disorder. Child Language Teaching and Therapy, 15, 139 – 158.



Holm, A., Ozanne, A., & Dodd, B., (1997). Efficacy of Intervention for a bilingual making articulation and phonological errors. International Journal of Bilingualism, 1, 55 – 69.



Leacox, L.R. (in preparation). An Exploratory Approach: Spanish-English Cognate Assessment for Speech Sound Errors.



Leacox, L. R., Jackson, C.J., Sunderman, G. Schatschneider, C., & Apel, K. (2011). Dissertation: Young English language learners’ cognate sensitivity on word production.



Nagy, W., Garcia, G., Durngunugulu, A., & Hancin-Bhatt, B. (1993). Spanish “English bilingual students’ use of cognates in English reading. Journal of Reading Behavior, 25, 240 - 259.

References, cont’d.



Paradis, J. (2001). Do two-year-olds have separate phonological systems? International Journal of Bilingualism, 5(1), 19-38.



Perez, A.M., Pena, E.D. & Bedore, L.M. (2010). Cognates facilitate word recognition in young Spanish-English bilinguals’ test performance. Early Childhood Services Journal.



Ray, J. (2002). Treating Phonological disorders in a multi-lingual child: A case

• study. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 11, 305-315.



Schelletter, C. (2002). The effect of form similarity on bilingual children’s lexical

• development. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 5(2), 93-107. Retrieved from

http://search.proquest.com/docview/619948739?accountid=4840



Skahan, S. Watson, M. & Lof, G. (2007). Speech-Language Pathologists’ Assessment Practices for Children With Suspected Speech Sound Disorders: Results of a National Survey. American Journal of Speech Language Pathology, 16, 246-259.



Tsuagawa, L. (Jan, 2005). Spanish articulation for the Spanish-challenged

• clinician. Handout from OHSU Campus sponsored by CDRC.



Yavaş, M. & Goldstein, B. (1998). Phonological Assessment and treatment of bilingual speakers. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 7, 49-60.