Bilingual Speech Therapy Guide for Diverse Populations

Derick D. Deweber, M.S.,
CCC-SLP
Bilingual Speech-Language Pathologist
Deweber and Associates, PLLC

- Diverse Demographics of United States
- Overview of Culture and Belief Values
- Models of Bilingual Language Development
- ASHA Guidelines for Bilingual Language
Assessment
- Methods for Assessment
- Working with Interpreters
- Therapy Ideas for this Population
- Case Study
- Questions

 US census data from 2000 show that during
the 1990s:
 Hispanic population increased by 58%
 Asian population increased by 48%
 Native American, Pacific Islander increased by
35% and
 African American Population increased by 16%
 In last 20 years, the non-hispanic white
population grew by 7.6%

 Population of US of Hispanic or Latino origin
projected to increase from 12.6% in 2000 to
24.4% in 2050
 Overall, 87% of Hispanic Population in the
United States is concentrated in 10 states:
California, Texas, New York, Florida,
Illinois, New Jersey, Arizona, New
Mexico, Colorado and Massachusetts

 Estimated that 19.6% of US population speaks
a language other than English at home
 Of these families 63% speak Spanish, while
37% speak one of the 100 different minority
languages
 By year 2070, 47% of the US population is
expected to speak Spanish as a first language

 Some Hispanics may prefer to organize into
extended family systems
 Some Hispanics may tend to be more person
oriented
 Some Hispanics may only seek help only
when perceived crisis exists
 Use of Spanish Language is an important
social tool

 Value Implication
 Respect Elders Greet family and elders
 Circularness, wholeness Work with student and
family
 Silence is valued Listen. Wait for answers
 Priv. for personal matters Tell why asking
questions
 Congeniality Accept food/drinks
 Accept what is Prevention not as
important
 Time is viewed differently Family over therapy
 Healers give tangible objects Leave something at end
of appointment (i.e.,
pamphlet, toy, etc)

 The continuum of language input
 Parental beliefs
 Aspects of culture
 Environmental factors
 Parental education
 Parental economic resources
 Parental psychological status

 Silent Period
 Code-switching
 Transfer
 Interference
 Subtractive bilingual environments
 Additive bilingual environments
 Immersion
 Simultaneous Bilingual
 Sequential Bilingual

 Unitary Language System Hypothesis
(Volterra and Taeschner, 1978)
 Children’s brains process with a single language
system that combines rules and input from their
two language input
 Dual Language System Hypothesis (Genesee,
1989)
 Assumes that children exposed to two languages
from birth establish two separate linguistic
systems from outset of acquisition
 See Cummins Handout

See Roseberry-Mckibbin Handout

 A child who simultaneously develops two
languages reaches some language
development milestones in a way similar to a
monolingual child
 For example, these children speak their first
words and word combinations at the same
age that monolingual children do (Kayser,
2002)

 A child learning a second language manifests
normal characteristics and processes as the
second language is being acquired
 Some of these are:
 Silent period
 Code-switching
 Transfer
 Language loss

 In the early stages of learning a second a
second language (L2), most students focus on
comprehension and very little speaking
 The younger the student, the longer the
silent period usually lasts
 Students introduced to L2 during the
preschool years may speak very little L1 or in
L2 for an extended period of time (Brice,
2002; Hakuta 1978; Krashen 1992)

 This is the phenomenon of alternating
between 2 languages within a single phrase,
sentence, or discourse
 Bilingual children commonly use this strategy
(Brice & Anderson, 1999)
 Generally, code-switching is a normal
communication behavior
 Code-switching is used by multilingual adults
and children around the world

 When students are learning an L2, they make
errors that reflect the influence of L1
 For example: in Spanish, a child would say
“la casa verde” (the house green)
 If a Spanish-speaking child pointed to a
picture and said, “Look-I see the house
green” this would be transfer from Spanish,
not a sign of a clinically significant problem
with syntax

 Transfer can occur in all areas of speech and
language: syntax, morphology, phonology,
semantics, and pragmatics
 Errors of transfer from L1 are NOT signs of a
communication disorder. These errors
indicate a communication difference, not a
disorder

 Many ELL students’ L1 is not maintained in
school through bilingual education
 Unfortunately, they experience language loss
in L1
 This, in combination with other variables,
can lead to achievement of low test scores in
both L1 and English

 Simultaneous acquisition occurs when a child
is exposed to 2 languages from infancy in
natural situations
 Interference between L1 and L2 is minimal
 Early infancy is the ideal time for a child to
be exposed to 2+ languages

 The child is exposed to L1 during infancy,
and learns L2 at a later time
 Sequential learners may show greater
diversity in rates and stages of acquisition
(Kayser, 2002; Langdon, 1992)
 If L2 is introduced sequentially before a
strong L1 foundation has been established (6-
8 yrs.), L1 development may be arrested or
even regress while L2 is being formed

 These students, for a while, achieve low test
scores in both L1 and L2—this can cause them
to appear language-learning disabled when
they are not
 Preschool children who learn English in a
sequential manner are especially vulnerable
to this situation

 Additive vs. Subtractive Bilingualism
 Additive Bilingualism – the ideal situation,
where the student’s L1 is nurtured and
developed along with L2
 Research shows that additive bilingualism has
great cognitive and linguistic benefits
 Subtractive Bilingualism- the student’s L1 is
not nurtured or developed
 It is replaced by L2; language loss in L1 occurs
 In many cases can lead to academic failure

 At-Risk factors
 Macarthur found that persons who spoke
languages other than English were at least twice
as likely to drop out of school
 Low family incomes and low parental education
 Cultural change/language shift
 Civil Rights Legislation
 Special Education Legislation

 Title VI of Civil Rights Act of 1964
 Update 2000: Executive Order 13166: Institutions
could lose funding if found to be discriminatory in
provision of services to those who speak a language
other than English at home
 Equal Educational Opportunities Act of 1975
 Sec. 1703(f) requires SEAs to take action to over come
language barriers that impede ELL students from
participating in district education programs
 IDEA 2004
 Title 1, Part B, Sec. 614, paragraph (b), assessments
are “provided and administered in the language and
form most likely to yield accurate information on
what the child knows and can do academically,
developmentally, and functionally, unless it is not
feasible to so provide or administer.”

 Transitional Bilingual Education involves
education in a child's native language,
typically for no more than three years, to
ensure that students do not fall behind in
content areas like math, science, and social
studies while they are learning English.
 Two-Way or Dual Language Immersion
Bilingual Education. These programs are
designed to help native and non-native
English speakers become bilingual and
biliterate.

 Dual Language program that has students study in
two different ways: 1) A variety of academic subjects
are taught in the students' second language, with
specially trained bilingual teachers who can
understand students when they ask questions in their
native language, but always answer in the second
language; and 2) Native language literacy classes
improve students' writing and higher-order language
skills in their first language. Research has shown that
many of the skills learned in the native language can
be transferred easily to the second language later.
 Late-Exit or Developmental Bilingual Education.
Education is in the child's native language for an
extended duration, accompanied by education in
English. The goal is to develop literacy in the child's
native language first, and transfer these skills to the
second language.

 ASHA has several policy documents
pertaining to service delivery in CLD
populations
 All consistent with federal policies and
regulations
 There are a number of policies and
documents specifically useful for individuals
who work with 3 to 5 year old populations

 The Clinical Management of Communicatively
Handicapped Minority Language Populations
(1985)
 Simply reminds us to provide assessments in
languages used by child
 If you do not speak language, should include
bilingual service providers
 If unable to find bilingual provider should use
TRAINED interpreter
 Document lists, in order of preference, who
should be contacted as interpreter
 Intervention should be provided in languages of
assessment

 The Knowledge and Skills Needed by Speech-
Language Pathologists and Audiologists to
Provide Culturally and Linguistically
Appropriate Services (2004)
 Provides guidance for monolingual service
providers
 Providers required to have knowledge to
determine if child has a difference or disorder
 In addition, they should be able to work with an
interpreter

 Provision of Instruction in English as a Second
Language by Speech-Language Pathologists in
School Settings (1998)
 Position paper/technical report to clarify that
ASHA-certified SLPs do not provide ESL services
unless they have applied for and have been hired
for that position
 It is appropriate to provide tips to classroom
teachers
 ESL service is a general education service
 ASHA members work with persons who have
communication impairments/differences

 General considerations
 Is student manifesting characteristics of normal
SLA and/or bilingual development that are
mistakenly identified as a language-learning
disability?
 Is there a mismatch between the student’s
background/environment and the school’s
expectations?
 Review Diagnostic Pie
 SLPs only serve children in Quadrants 3 and 4

 IDEA permits the use of qualitative,
subjective measures
 But…standardized, formal tests are generally
preferred for schools, educational programs
 Many SLPs operate from the belief that we
must always obtain quantitative data

 Very few standardized tests in most
languages
 Most standardized tests are developed from a
Western, literate, middle class framework
 Tests have assumptions
 Students will cooperate
 Students will be comfortable with unfamiliar
adult
 Students will be proficient in verbal display of
knowledge
 Students will understand and perform unfamiliar
tasks

 Types of clothing
 Foods
 Money
 US nursery rhyme and fairy tales
 Electrical appliances
 Snow and cold weather

 Work with Trained Interpreters
 Modify Standardized Tests
 Informal, Non-standardized Assessments

 Interpreters and Translators in
Communication Disorders
 Henriette W. Langdon, EdD
 Thinking Publications, 2002
 BID Process
 Briefing
 Interaction
 Debriefing

 Need to have these skills:
 Literacy in both English and Spanish
 Ability to interact appropriate in both languages
 Ability to maintain confidentiality
 Knowledge of educational system and relevant
terminology
 Areas of training:
 Ethical practices
 Professional terminology
 Rationale for procedures used in assessment
 Implementation of strategies

 Training strategies:
 Role-playing
 Practice administering procedure to a speaker of
English of the same as a child
 Use the cultural informant as a resource for
evaluating the interpreter’s skills

 Give instructions in L1 and English
 Rephrase confusing instructions
 Give extra examples and demonstrations
 Give the student extra time to respond
 Repeat items when necessary

 If student gives “wrong” answer ask for
explanation
 Omit items student will probably miss
 Test beyond the ceiling
 Complete assessment in several sessions
 Count as correct answer in either language

 Team Approach to Comprehensive
Assessment Handout
 Checklists
 Interviews
 Portfolio Assessment
 Narrative Assessment
 Observe child in a number of communication
environments
 Dynamic assessment
 Evaluates a student’s ability to learn when
provided with instruction

 Review of information gained from formalized
assessments and informal methods
 Comparison of child’s ability to language norms
 Thorough understanding of language differences
that exist between English and Spanish languages
 Semantics
 Phonology
 Syntax
 Morphology
 Pragmatics
 Awareness of heterogeneity of bilingual children

Linguistic
Feature
Spanish English
Word order
variation
High Low
Inflectional
morphology
Rich Sparse
Morphological
regularity
Multiple regular
and irregular
forms
One regular;
multiple regulars
Omission of
sentence
constituents
Subjects can be
omitted
Not permitted
Lexical ambiguity Low (due to
inflectional
markings)
High (esp. for
nouns and verbs

Linguistic
Feature
Spanish English
Use of
compounding
Low High
Grammatical cues
to word identity
Gender and form
class (masc. and
fem)
Form class only
Word length in
syllables
Long Short
Canonical syllable
shape
CV CVC
Orthographic
regularity
Highly regular Highly opaque

 Depends on age/stage of learning
 Evidence from sequential bilinguals suggests that
starting with teaching words in L1 and later
teaching in English is more efficient than starting
with words in L2
 In adults with limited L2, form-meaning
mappings appear to be mediated by relating L2
word to an equivalent word in L1
 For sequential learners past beginning L2 stages,
may be more effective to introduce new items in
whichever language it is needed

Both
People
Functions
Categor-
ization
Part-Whole

 Language of intervention is often not apparent
 SLP may use child’s knowledge of shared and
unshared phonemes
 SLPs might treat shared phonemes initially and
monitor and transfer that takes place
 SLPs might treat unshared phonemes initially and
monitor the effect on the other phonemes in
inventory
 SLPs may choose intervention targets based on
type and rates of errors found in the two
languages
 NEITHER CROSS-LINGUISTIC EFFECTS NOR
DIALECT FEATURES ARE APPROPRIATE
INTERVENTION TARGETS

 34 month old Vietnamese male named
“Frank”
 Referred to SoonerStart at age 27 months
 Parents self-employed at nail salon
 No significant health/learning difficulties
reported in family history

 Full term vaginal birth with weight of 6 lbs
and length of 20 inches
 Hernia repair early at age 6 months
 Upper respiratory allergies
 Continuous rash on arms and hands
 No other medical history known or reported

- No interest in communication
- Low muscle tone
- First walked at 26.5 months
- Does not hold bottle/self-feed
- Picky eater/poor appetite
- Minimal eye contact

 Battelle Developmental Inventories – II
 Birth to Three - Language
 SoonerStart vision screen
 SoonerStart hearing screen
 Modified Checklist for Autism in Toddlers (M-
CHAT)

Adaptive
Personal-Social
Communication
Motor
Cognitive
Self Care -3.00
Personal Responsibility -2.00
Total -2.40
Adult Interaction -2.33
Peer Interaction -3.00
Self-Concept and Social
Role
-2.67
Total -2.40
Receptive -3.00
Expressive -3.00
Total -3.00
Gross Motor -1.67
Fine Motor -2.00
Perceptual Motor -2.33
Total -2.00
Attention and Memory -2.67
Reasoning and Academic -1.67
Perception and Concepts -2.00
Total -2.27

Target
Area
Age
Equivalent
Percent
Delay
Receptive
Language 7.5 months 71%
Expressive
Language 9.0 months 68%

 Frank passed SoonerStart vision screening at
time of evaluation
 Family reports no concerns with Frank’s
vision

 Child fails M-CHAT when 2 or more critical
items or any 3 items are failed
 Frank is indicated to be at risk for Autism as
he failed 12/23 items on checklist

 Family does not speak the same
language as the service providers
 Why could this be a problem?
 What is one possible solution to this problem?

 Family is unwilling to follow up on
recommended follow-up screenings
(e.g., hearing, autism, and weight)
due to belief that issues will resolve
themselves

 Family does not utilize intervention
strategies in their daily routines
with child and do not practice
intervention targets
 What is one possible solution to this
problem?

 Child is allowed to hit mother and
service providers, pull hair, throw
toys, and to exhibit other
inappropriate behaviors and is
encouraged to do so by parents’
laughing when behaviors are
performed

 Assessment/Intervention materials
that are provided to families who
access school services are not
available in family’s language

 What’s next for this child?
 Based on the information provided in this
talk, what barriers do you think this
child/family will encounter as they access
intervention services in the public schools?

 If you have questions that were not answered
during today’s talk or would like additional
information please contact me at:
 Derick D. Deweber, M.S., CCC-SLP
 Derick.Deweber@gmail.com
 405-601-7080 (Office)
 405-305-8762 (Cell)
 http://www.derickdeweber.com

Bilingual Speech Therapy Guide for Diverse Populations

Recomendados

Recomendados

Más contenido relacionado

La actualidad más candente

La actualidad más candente (19)

Similar a Bilingual Speech Therapy Guide for Diverse Populations

Similar a Bilingual Speech Therapy Guide for Diverse Populations (20)

Último

Último (20)

Bilingual Speech Therapy Guide for Diverse Populations