Project ADOLANG: Identification of Adolescent Language Problems and Implications for Education. Research Report 1.

Institution	Florida State Dept. of Education, Tallahassee. Bureau of Education for Exceptional Students.
Titel	Project ADOLANG: Identification of Adolescent Language Problems and Implications for Education. Research Report 1.
Quelle	(1983), (32 Seiten) PDF als Volltext kostenfreie Datei Verfügbarkeit
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Monographie
Schlagwörter	Academic Failure; Communication Disorders; Elementary Secondary Education; Exceptional Child Research; High Risk Students; Language Research; Learning Disabilities; Middle Schools; Mild Mental Retardation; Oral Language; Florida + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Kommunikationsstörung; Problemschüler; Sprachforschung; Learning handicap; Lernbehinderung; Middle school; Mittelschule; Mittelstufenschule; Oral interpretation; Mündlicher Sprachgebrauch
Abstract	A study investigated the existence of language disorders among 290 "high risk" middle school students (grades five through nine) in five selected Florida school districts. "High risk" students were defined as those students experiencing academic difficulties in whom language deficits would be suspected. Students from the following primary placement categories were represented: regular education/high risk, compensatory education, specific learning disabilities, emotionally handicapped, severely language impaired, educable mentally handicapped, regular education, and gifted. Speech-language clinicians screened the students using the "Clinical Evaluation of Language Functions (CELF) Advanced Level Screening Test." The 11 basic subtests of the CELF Diagnostic and the Processing Speech Sounds supplementary subtest were administered to 131 of the students who failed the screening (those students classified as Educable Mentally Handicapped were not further evaluated). Findings revealed that of the 290 students screened statewide, 194 or 67% failed the screening. Of the total sample screened, 266 or 92% were high risk students, as defined previously. Rates of failure for each primary placement category were also calculated. In viewing the percentage of failure on specific subtests, patterns emerge across and within placement categories. In addition, findings showed that only 20% of the students who failed the screening were enrolled in speech therapy. When severely language impaired students were excluded from the data, only 9% of the remaining high risk group who failed the screening were receiving speech-language therapy. (Thirty-one references are attached.) (ARH)
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC