Tools for Measuring Sentence Development: Some unanswered
questions.
Unanswered questions from the August 13th
posting:
What tools are there for monitoring language
development across all 4 levels—sounds, words, sentences, discourse?
How often should we monitor progress?
What do we do with the information we gain
from monitoring?
Standardized Tools for Monitoring Sentence Development
1 Developmental Sentence Scoring
Research Report on the DSS by Laura Lee, 1970, giving a very
detailed description of what this tool entails.
It involves collecting via audio tape (perhaps now video tape) 50
samples of a child’s spontaneous speech, for children ranging in age from 3-0
to 6-11. This article gives a very
detailed description of the range and complexity of sentence production skills. I suggest this tool not so it will be used as
a formal test, but because it offers a very detailed listing of all of the
sentence structure (syntax/grammar) elements.
2 Here is another standardized commercial tool with multiple
measures of language, including sentence knowledge: Preschool Language
Assessment-5
3 For a more recent tool see Appendix B of Anne Toolen
Rowley’s dissertation:
4 American Speech Hearing (Language) Association Annual
Convention
Got Grammar? An Easy
Way to Review Grammar and Syntax
*****
For the most part, the tools noted above were
designed for Speech/Language Pathologists.
At the same time, the information presented in the tools provides good
insight into the range of syntactic knowledge norms we should pay attention to
in preschoolers (0-5) language development.
Many of these tests are for children 3 to 5 or 3 to 7. We will need to pay attention to sentence
development from 18 to 36 months. In
this age range, knowing the developmental norms is critical, since so much of
syntactic development occurs between 18-36 months. Although even in the 3-5 range, some
syntactic elements are more complex than others.
Laura Lee’s DSS test is especially
informative. Because so many language
development authors suggest that “syntax” or “grammar” knowledge/skill is
essentially complete by age 5, it is easy to assume that there is little need to
pay and to the more sophisticated elements of syntax: embedded clauses, auxiliary verbs and secondary verbs, use of
conjunctions, and question forms. These
syntactic elements may tax a child’s cognitive, processing, and memory skills.
*****
In addition to monitoring sentence grammar, we
need to pay attention to the pragmatics of language at the sentence level. Do children understand and use sentences for
the full range
of purposes?
There are several ways of talking about “using” sentences to
communicate: pragmatics, functions, speech acts, communication purposes,
intentions. Researchers have studied
babies’ communicative purposes even before the babies can put words together to
make sentences. Hoff describes the work
of R. S. Chap showing a wide range of “speech acts” at the One-Word Stage,
including labeling, repeating, answering, requesting action, calling, greeting,
protesting and practicing. (Hoff, p 103).
Nino (l995), cited in Hoff, lists “communicative intention” by a 1-1/2
year old, including, greetings, agreeing, refusing, disagreeing, asking a
yes/no question, disapproving and expressing surprise.
Although addressing function relative to older
children, Pinnell (in Power and Hubbard’s Language Development: A Reader for
Teachers) suggests using Halliday’s seven categories for language function to
assess children’s repertoire of language functions: instrumental, regulatory,
interactional, personal, imaginative, heuristic, and informative. In that same text, Halliday describes each function
in detail. For further details, see https://classroomdiscourse.wordpress.com/2014/04/26/sentences-function-part-3-of-3/ We will come back to
the “functions of language” topic again as we move to the discourse level of
language.
Timing
As with other levels of language, given that
children start to develop 2 word sentences as young
18 months, it is important to start tracking
their progress and pace of development on a regular basis from age 2 on. The data tell us that the typical development
of sentences (grammar, syntax) is essentially complete by age 4 or 5. That being the case, it seems reasonable to
suggest tracking progress every 4 to 6 months between 2 and 5. Again, we don’t want to miss tracking those
“optimal” periods of development only to find that a 4 or 5 year old child is
well behind the typical milestones. We
have too much information and research that tells us that children who arrive
at kindergarten with under-developed language skills are likely to struggle to
keep up as they go through school.
One study that highlights the role of
“sentences” in the “readiness for school” literature is an “old” monograph study: Language Development,
Kindergarten through Grade Twelve Walter Loban, NCTE, 1976. I quote this study
here because of the insight it gives us on the importance of sentence structure. The following are direct quotes from the
text:
“In the elementary school, the members
of the High group were superior in tentativeness
or flexibility of expression; they avoided the flat dogmatism of the
Low group, the stark statement without possibility of qualification or supposition. They used more subordination than the Low group, thus reducing the number of
communication units by combining them in complex
fashion. Even so, the High group still
exceeded the Low group in number of communications units in oral language.”
…..
Although all subjects knew and used
all the basic structural patterns of English sentences, the High group
had a much greater flexibility and repertoire within the pattern of a
sentence: that is, they had more ways to fill slots like the subject,
the modifiers, the objects. Their usage
was also more conventional that the rest of the group.”
…..
“Both in
reading and in written composition, the proficient (High) group excelled and
they were superior in using connectors--like
meanwhile, unless--in a test which showed their median to be almost double that of the Low
group. The High group also excelled in
the use of adverbial clauses of concession and
condition. On listening tests, those
who were superior with oral language ranked highest. IT IS OF SPECIAL NOTE THAT THOSE SUPERIOR IN
ORAL LANGAUGE IN KINDERGARTEN AND GRADE ONE BEFORE THEY LEARNED TO READ AND
WRITE ARE THE VERY ONES WHO EXCEL IN READING AND WRITING BY THE TIME THEY ARE
IN GRADE SIX. OUR DATA SHOW A POSITIVE
RELATIONSHIP OF SUCCESS AMONG THE LANGUAGE ARTS.”
Loban goes on to note that these differences
are not attributable to poor cognitive development.
“NOTHING THAT WE HAVE EVER FOUND
SUPPORTS THE IDEA OF ANY BASIC ABILITY DIFFERENCES AMONG ETHNIC GROUPS. WHAT WE DO FIND IS THAT THOSE WHO USE THE FULL RESOURCES OF LANUAGE USUALLY
COME FROM FAMILIES WITH REASONABLY GOOD SOCIOECONOMIC STATUS. SOCIAL INJUSTICES, NOT GENETIC DIFFERENCE,
ACCOUNT MOST PLAUSIBLY FOR THE LARGE NUMBER OF OUR MINORITY SUBJECTS WITH LOWER
SOCIOECONOMIC BACKGROUNDS. ANGO SUBJECTS
FROM LOW SES STATUS FELL INTO THE NONPROFICIENT LANGUAGE GROUP JUST AS
INEVITABLY AS THE SUBJECTS FROM MINORITY GROUPS.”
If Loban’s study were inconsistent with current data on the
“Achievement Gap,” perhaps we could ignore it as old data. It is not
inconsistent with the current attention to the Achievement Gap. Too many children are still arriving at
kindergarten without the oral language skills that they will need to succeed.
Use
Backtracking to our discussion of both
sentence structure (grammar and syntax) and function, we need to look at both of
these dimensions of sentences in determining how to use the developmental data
gleaned from standardized tests, formalized checklists or naturalistic
observations.
I would suggest that the easier starting place
it to note to what extend the child uses all of the functions of sentences (as
per Halliday). In those instances where
a function is not being used to an appropriate developmental level, then we
might look more closely at the syntax/grammar of the utterances.
At the same time, when a 3 year old is not
using fairly complete basic sentences or continually lags behind the
developmental norms, we should determine whether more attention, more
stimulation or scaffolding or more direct intervention is needed.
The next set of questions:
What do we know about
monitoring discourse?
How do we write/talk
about discourse?
What are the tools,
timing, and uses for monitoring discourse?
