Lab Report 5

Introduction
We assessed a 26 month old female child, named Alex. We analyzed her word and
sentence production, while assessing her language skills. We analyzed the words the child
produced and how she used them. A checklist was used to record the words the child
produced, the word forms she uses in her speech, and the word endings she uses. Rating
scales were used to assess how frequently the child used words and word endings in
specific ways. There was also an open ended question where the childs longest sentences
were recorded. Lastly, a multiple choice assessment was used to determine the complexity
of the phrases the child uses. While assessing the child to evaluate her language skills, we
looked for the childs strengths and weaknesses in her language production. Our goal was to
determine recommendations for the childs learning: particularly what kinds of activities might
further her learning in these areas of language. We would like to determine if the child
should be recommended to a child study team, which could lead to intervention.
Data Summary
The child produced 313 out of the listed 680 words. She was in the 30-35th percentile. The
child was able to use 6 out of the 25 possible word forms, which put her in the 40th
percentile. She was also able to produce 6 out of the 45 possible word endings. We also
found that the child was able to combine words, which 95.7% of other children her age can
do. Of the childs three sentence constructions, the longest had 5 morphemes, the second 3,
and the third also 3. The median score for these constructions was 3.7. This put her at the
25-30th percentile. The child uses the more complex sentence structure 8 out of 37 times,
putting her at the 35-40th percentile.
How Children Used Words
Used (Yes)

Not Used (No)

Percentage of
affirmative answers
at this childs age

Past

82.0

Future

85.0

Absent Object
(Production)

93.0

Absent Object
(Comprehension)

98.0

Absent Owner

97.0

Not Used (No)

Percentage of
Affirmative answers
at this childs age

Word Endings
Used (Yes)

Plural (-s)

78.0

Possessive (-s)

79.0

Progressive (-ing)
Past tense (ed)

X
X

64.0
48.0

Interpretation.
First, since the child was in the 30-35th percentile for word production, we are also
somewhat concerned with the number of words she can produce. The child struggled
particularly with: connecting words, quantifiers/articles, pronouns, words about time and
helping verbs. Also, the child appeared to produce a limited amount of animal names, places
to go, and foods. Another area with low production was the people category. The child
excelled in her knowledge of body parts, which meets the CDCs milestone expectations for
her age. One concerning piece of data we found was the childs usage of words when the
owner was absent. 97% of children her age are able to identify the absent owner to whom
objects belong, however the child we assessed was not able to do so. The other ways in
which the child used the language were not concerning because, like most of her peers, she
produced words in those situations. In terms of word endings, we noticed that the child rarely
produced the progressive (ing) ending, which 64% of children her age produce. This is much
less concerning than the Absent Owner, but it is still something that should be followed up.
We were not concerned with the other word endings since the child produced them. We
were not particularly concerned with the childs sentence production and morpheme usage,
because the CDC milestones state that children her age usually use 2-4 word sentences at
this age. However, since she is in the 25-30th percentile, we would recommend keeping an
eye on this skill in the future.

Recommendation
Based on the data we gathered from our assessments, we think it would be beneficial to
follow up with a few specific language skills of the child. Wed recommend focusing on
identification of objects belonging to an absent owner, as this appeared to be a weakness of
the child. This could be supported in everyday conversations with the child by mentioning
objects that belong to specific people and talking about them. An emphasis on ownership
and reflexive pronouns would support the development of this skill. Additionally, talking about
known caregivers/peers who are absent may also support this understanding of the Absent
Owner. Games and activities could be devised to support the childs vocabulary needs. For
example, talking about food at the grocery store can support the development of food words,
so a grocery store could be set up in Pretend Play to support this skill development in the
classroom. Overtime, we would suggest checking the childs progress in her sentence
construction even though she meets the CDCs milestones, because of her lower percentile
score. Since we are not particularly concerned with the child, we would not recommend
referral to a child study team at this moment. However, if the child does not continue to make
progress, we would like to refer her later since she is in the lower percentile for her age.

Reflection.
One thing we learned from this type of assessment was how to compare one childs
language skills and sentence structure to a broad range of children. This allowed us to
assess whether or not certain areas of this childs language skills were of concern or not.
Without these comparisons we would have had a very difficult time determining where this
child was developmentally in terms of language and sentence structure. To complete this
assignment each person in our group individually completed the Child Report Form before
meeting in person. Once we met in person we compared answers and fixed any problems
with any data or numbers that were collected. This allowed us to work from a google doc to
put all of the information into a lab report form.