Talk With Me

A Resource Guide for Speech-language Pathologists and Educators

Working with Linguistically Diverse Young Children and Their Families
Revised April 2011

Talk With Me
Table of Contents
Introduction- How to use this Resource Guide and Author Biographies
Chapter 1 - Current Resources on Diversity
Appendix
Chapter 2 - Dual Language Development
Appendices
Chapter 3 - Evaluation of Culturally and Linguistically Diverse Children
Appendices
Chapters 4 - 9 COMING May, 2011
Chapter 4- Intervention with Culturally and Linguistically Diverse Children
Appendices
Chapter 5- Culture Specific Information
Appendices
Chapter 6- Parent Resources in Other Languages
Appendices
Chapter 7- Biliteracy
Appendices
Chapter 8- International Adoption
Appendices
Chapter 9- Staff Training and Continuing Education Opportunities
Appendices

Page 2

Introduction
Talk with Me-Revised
A resource guide for speech-language pathologists and educators working with
linguistically diverse young children and their families
Background
The original Talk with Me Manual: A resource guide for speech/language pathologists and early
childhood special education teams working with linguistically diverse young children and their
families was published in 2002 by the Minnesota Department of Education. It was a joint project
between the Minnesota Speech-Language-Hearing Association (MSHA) and the Minnesota
Department of Children, Families and Learning (now known as the Minnesota Department of
Education) and was disseminated to early childhood special education programs across
Minnesota. In addition, MSHA members received their own copies upon request. The first
version of this resource guide was well received and has been widely used. Though no longer
available, Talk with Me continues to be sought after, as more and more early childhood
practitioners are faced with the challenge of providing services to children and families who do
not share their cultural and/or language background.
Purpose
The purpose of Talk with Me-Revised is to provide professionals with easy access to updated
resources that will help them serve young culturally and linguistically diverse (CLD) students
and their families more effectively. Much has changed since the original resource was
published in 2002. Advances in technology have changed how people access and share
resources, more information related to CLD children has become available and new
requirements (i.e., early childhood outcomes - ECOs) have been instituted. In addition,
professionals throughout the state who have used the first Talk with Me have provided feedback
regarding what information has been and would be most useful to them in their practice.
As a result, Talk with Me-Revised has been designed to be a dynamic, online resource that is
user friendly and practical. Accessible through the Minnesota Department of Educations
Website, it will allow users not only to view and download information but to link to other
recommended resources on the Web as well. More information that is relevant to Early
Childhood Special Education (ECSE) teachers and general early childhood teachers has been
added. New topics addressed in Talk with Me-Revised include ECSE evaluations, early
childhood screening, professional development opportunities, selective mutism, cultural
competence, biliteracy, ongoing progress monitoring and decision making regarding language
immersion programs and children with identified special education needs.
How to Use this Resource Guide
Talk With Me Manual-Revised is designed to help users navigate through the manual by
selecting a bookmark on the left side of this pdf document. Users will then be able to go directly
to the chapter of their choice. Each chapter has sections that contain general, introductory
information related to its topic as well as descriptions of and links to additional resources. Some
of the links will open documents that are designed to be printed, such as language interview
forms, articulation screeners in other languages, parent handouts in other languages, etc.
Other links may direct users to locations such as different organizations Websites, podcasts or
publishers. In the event that a link is no longer active or if a Web address has changed and
Page 3

does not support redirection, users can conduct an Internet search using the title of the
resource.
School teams may decide to use the resources found in this guide to create and/or enhance
their own staff development programs. For example, recommended books and articles could be
read and discussed as a professional learning community activity. The last chapter highlights
recorded lectures by experts in the specialized field of culturally and linguistically diverse
children with special needs. These lectures as well as other video or computer training modules
could be viewed as a group.
As you use Talk with Me-Revised you will become familiar with the names of people and
programs who are leaders in the field of culturally responsive service delivery. We encourage
you to watch for new information and materials from these sources. Likewise, as you work with
CLD students and families, you may discover resources that are not referred to in this current
version of Talk with Me-Revised or you may be inspired to create your own materials. You can
help keep this resource guide current by submitting your ideas for additional resources and
materials. Suggestions will be reviewed and new information will be added yearly. Please
submit your contributions via email to Shivani.Pandit@state.mn.us
Contributors Biographies
Kris Schmiesing Christians M.S., CCC-SLP, is a speech-language pathologist who earned
her bachelor's degree in communication disorders and Spanish from St. Cloud State University
and her masters degree from the University of New Mexico in Albuquerque. Kris is bilingual
and works primarily with Spanish-speaking students in bilingual and Dual Immersion programs
in the St. Paul Public Schools. Kris was one of the contributors to the first edition of Talk with
Me and participated in the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association training grant
Clinical Decision Making with Linguistically Diverse Learners: A Statewide Professional Training
Model. She and her husband have two children adopted in Colombia and enjoy the challenge
of raising bilingual children. kris.christians@gmail.com
Ann Derr, M.A. CCC-SLP is a bilingual speech-language pathologist (Spanish and Portuguese)
who received her B.A. from Macalester in psychology and Spanish and her masters degree in
communication disorders from the University of Minnesota. She has worked for Saint Paul
Public Schools Early Childhood Special Education Evaluation Team for over 20 years
evaluating children birth to five years old who speak more than 25 different languages. She has
studied in Mexico and lived in Brazil for four years. Ann is the co-founder and past chairperson
of the Minnesota Speech-Language Hearing Associations (MSHA) Multicultural Affairs
Committee, recipient of the Spirit of MSHA Award, producer of the video: Teachers in the
Trenches; participating author of the original Talk with Me manual; trainer with the ASHA grant:
Clinical Decision Making with Linguistically Diverse Learners: A Statewide Professional Training
Model; presenter at MSHA conventions, Minnesota Department of Education and various
Minnesota school district workshops; conference chair of the Surgical Teams to Developing
Nations conference in 2005 and 2008; and frequent volunteer to Guatemala with a cleft palate
medical team. annderr@gmail.com
Lillian Duran, Ph.D., earned a Ph.D. in Educational Psychology from the University of
Minnesota and is currently an Assistant Professor in the Department of Special Education and
Rehabilitation at Utah State University. She helped to begin the first Spanish-English Head Start
Page 4

bilingual preschool program in the state of Minnesota and conducted a three year experimental,
longitudinal study comparing the language and literacy development of the children who
attended the bilingual classroom to children in an English-only setting. She is currently
collaborating with Centro de la Familia, the lead agency for Migrant Head Start in Utah. Dr.
Durn has delivered numerous presentations on the topic of evidence-based practices in
assessment and instruction with young Dual Language Learners (DLLs) at regional, state and
national conferences. Dr. Durn has been contracted by the Minnesota Department of
Education to train and provide technical assistance to an interagency master cadre of early
childhood professionals to serve as regional experts in culturally and linguistically responsive
practices throughout the state (CLD cadre). In Utah she is under contract with the Utah State
Department of Education to deliver technical assistance and training on cultural and linguistic
responsiveness to Early Childhood Special Education professionals with a focus on
collaboration with Head Start. lillian.duran@usu.edu
Marilyn Fairchild, M.A. (TESL), M.A., CCC-SLP, one of the contributors to the first edition of
Talk with Me, is a speech pathologist at the University of Minnesota. She works in clinical
education, supervising graduate students with pediatric and adult clients from various cultural
and linguistic groups. In that setting, she oversees preschool speech and language groups with
an early literacy focus. She also supervises graduate students at a charter school with a
student population comprised of refugees, recent immigrants, and other English language
learners. Marilyn received a B.A. in English with minors in political science and speech
communication from Louisiana State University as well as two masters degrees, one in
teaching English as a second language and one in communication disorders, both from the
University of Minnesota. She has served on cleft palate teams in the U.S., Peru, and
Guatemala, served as co-chair of the Minnesota Speech-Language-Hearing Associations
Multicultural Affairs Committee, presented on topics such as second language acquisition and
communication needs of internationally adopted children, worked as a communication
consultant for the Chongqing Bureau of Health, and participated in the ASHA training grant
Bilingual/Multicultural Clinical Training in Speech-Language Pathology. She also works
privately with adult typical language learners on modifying elements of their English such as
accent and grammar. fairchildm@msn.com
Sonja Griebel, M.A., CCC-SLP currently works on the Early Childhood Special Education
Inclusion Team in the St. Paul Public Schools. Her caseload consists of primarily Spanishspeaking children with a variety of speech and language delays and disorders. She graduated
from the University of Minnesota with a bachelors degree in communication sciences and
disorders and a minor in Spanish. Through the U of M's Minnesota Studies in International
Development (MSID) program, she spent six months working in Ecuador at a center for children
with cerebral palsy and at a school for students with developmental delays. Sonja earned a
masters degree in communication disorders from the University of Minnesota-Duluth. She is a
member of the MSHA Multicultural Affairs Committee and one of the contributors to the original
Talk with Me. She has given presentations to parents and teachers in the Early Childhood
Family Education program on topics such as selective mutism and English Language Learners
and on speech and language development and literacy. Sonja is also a member of the Family
Guided Routine Based Interventions (FGRBI) Cadre through the Centers of Excellence for
Young Children with Disabilities funded by Minnesota Department of Education.
sonja.griebel@spps.org

Page 5

Deanine Mann, M.S., CCC-SLP, is a Spanish-English bilingual speech-language pathologist

who earned a B.A. in communication disorders with double minors in Spanish and the
humanities from Valparaiso University and a M.S. in speech language pathology from the
bilingual program at Texas Christian University. She has 19 years experience working with
preschool-aged children and currently is a member of the Early Childhood Special Education
(ECSE) team in the Centennial Public Schools. Previous work settings include an Easter Seals
Early Intervention Clinic, the Childrens Memorial Hospital of Chicago, Head Start Centers in the
Chicago area, and the ECSE program in the Roseville school district. Deanine has served as
co-chair of the Minnesota Speech Language Hearing Associations Multicultural Affairs
Committee and was a contributor to the first Talk with Me resource guide. She participated in
the ASHA training grant Clinical Decision Making with Linguistically Diverse Learners: A
Statewide Professional Training Model. She also has presented at ASHA and MSHA
conferences and has provided trainings for various school districts related to serving culturally
and linguistically diverse students. She recently has co-led four church mission trips to
Guatemala. dmann@isd12.org
Christine Paz, M.A., CCC, is a speech-language pathologist in the St. Paul Public Schools.
She conducts native language assessments as a member of the ELL (English Language
Learner) Special Education Resource group that completes evaluations for ELL students in
grades K-12. She has more than 25 years of experience conducting bilingual assessments in
California and Florida. She also lived in Central America for several years. She has a
bachelors degree and a masters degree in speech-language pathology and certification in
bilingual assessment from San Jose State University. Christine is one of the contributors to the
first Talk with Me manual. Currently she is active in the Minnesota Speech-Language-Hearing
Association serving as a regional representative on the Policy Council as well as a member of
the Multicultural Affairs Committee, of which she has been a part since its inception.
Christine.paz@spps.org
Anne Pionkowski, M.S., CCC-SLP, is a Spanish-English bilingual speech-language pathologist
in St. Paul Public Schools. She earned a bachelor's degree from the University of WisconsinMadison with majors in communication disorders and Spanish. During this time she had the
opportunity to study abroad in the Dominican Republic where she learned about their health
care system and improved her Spanish language skills. Anne earned a masters degree from
Arizona State University in speech and hearing science with an emphasis on bilingualism. She
has led parent groups surrounding the topic of language development and currently works in
community and public school settings with preschoolers who have special education needs.
anne.pionkowski@spps.org
Acknowledgments
The authors of this guide would like to thank all of the service providers throughout the state of
Minnesota and beyond who have generously shared information and resources so that we all
have access to a wide variety of materials and information. We specifically would like to
acknowledge the participation of the Minnesota Speech-Language-Hearing Association and its
membership for their support in completing this manual.

Page 6

Chapter 1
Current Resources on Diversity
As diversity increases within early childhood settings, so do the number of resources dedicated
to providing culturally responsive services. The Current Resources on Diversity section is a
well-rounded collection of current resources that vary in focus from theoretical to applied
information. It covers a range of topics applicable to teachers in both regular and special
education, speech-language pathologists, and others interested in seeking practical and
instructional resources to better serve the populations with whom they work. This section may
serve as a guide to those looking to enrich their professional libraries. The descriptions of these
highly recommended books and Internet resources will help narrow ones search for information
related to specific areas within the broader topic of culturally appropriate service delivery.
American Speech-Language-Hearing Association Website
The Website of the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA) contains a
multitude of resources for individuals working with children from culturally and linguistically
diverse (CLD) backgrounds. Since the formation of its Office of Multicultural Affairs nearly 40
years ago, ASHA has continually shown a commitment to providing members and the public
with current information to adequately serve an increasingly diverse society. Many of the
resources developed for this purpose are available online. The resources cover topics such as
working with interpreters, raising a bilingual child, international adoption and evaluating speech
and language skills in culturally and linguistically diverse (CLD) children. The Website contains
articles (many full text versions which are accessible to ASHA members), self-assessment tools,
information for parents, continuing education PowerPoint presentations; handouts from ASHA
conventions, glossaries, etc. Some of these materials have been translated into other
languages. In addition, the Website lists contact information for the Office of Multicultural Affairs
and for ASHAs action centers, where members and the public can get answers to frequently
asked questions.
American Speech-Language-Hearing Association Website www.asha.org
Appropriate Services for Young English Language Learner: Language Culture and
Practice
This 75-minute webinar adapted from Lillian Durans presentation at the 2008 Minnesota
Early Intervention Summer Institute can be viewed online at the University of
Minnesotas Center for Early Education and Developments Website. In addition,
PowerPoint slides can be viewed and printed. A review of the research pointing to the
need to support home languages is provided together with a discussion of strategies for
moving toward evidence-based practice in this area. The talk is organized around
practical questions such as Dont all children need to learn English? and What do I do
with an interpreter in my classroom? This webinar is an excellent tool for self-study or
staff development activities.
Duran, L. (2008, June). Appropriate Services for Young English Language Learner:
Language Culture and Practice. Lecture given at the 2008 Minnesota Early Intervention
Summer Institute, Collegeville, MN.
http://www.cehd.umn.edu/ceed/profdev/Conferences/SummerInstitute/2008Instit
ute/2008Institute.htm
Page 7

Assessment and Intervention for Communication Disorders in Culturally and

Linguistic Diverse Populations
This text provides specific information on the major cultural and linguistic groups a speechlanguage pathologist may encounter, as well as best practices when assessing and working
with a student or adult from a culture that is not shared by the service provider. As speechlanguage pathologists serve more clients from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds,
there is a growing need for strategies to provide successful and appropriate assessment and
treatment. This resource helps practitioners determine the most effective and appropriate ways
to provide services to all clients.
Langdon, H.W. (2008). Assessment and intervention for communication disorders in culturally
and linguistically diverse populations. Clifton Park, NY: Delmar, Cengage Learning.
Bilingual Language Development & Disorders in Spanish-English Speakers
This research-based text provides reliable assessment and intervention approaches for speech
language pathologists (SLPs) serving bilingual children with language disorders. This
comprehensive text is one of the few to offer readers in-depth theoretical and practical
information regarding assessment and intervention. Current research is reviewed and
discussed for topics including developmental data, best assessment practices, and appropriate
intervention approaches in the following areas: language processing skills; lexical development;
morpho-syntactic development; first language loss; grammatical impairments; semantic
development; phonological development and disorders; narrative development and disorders;
and fluency. Suggestions for language intervention for bilingual speakers are discussed in the
final chapter. The following topics are discussed: major purposes of intervention for bilingual
children with speech and language disorders, the debate over which language speech language
pathologists should use with bilingual children, and ways to promote gains in both languages.
With this resource, speech language pathologists will understand the complexity of language
development in bilingual children and learn appropriate assessment and intervention
approaches.
Goldstein, B.A. (2004). Bilingual language development & disorders in Spanish-English
speakers. Baltimore: Brookes.
The Bilingual Special Education Interface (4th Edition)
This book describes the major needs of bilingual children who have disabilities and balances
practical information with strong research. Chapters highlight the connections between the fields
of special education and those of bilingual education. Other topics include: the legal
background supporting bilingual special education; bilingual language development and second
language acquisition; issues, considerations, procedures, and techniques related to
assessment; development of individualized educational programs, curriculum, methods, and
materials; family involvement; and issues in policy development and implementation. This book
is an excellent resource for teachers, counselors, psychologists, and speech/language
specialists.
Baca, L.M. & Cervantes, H.T. (2003). Bilingual special education interface (4th ed.). Upper
Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Page 8

Bilingual Therapies Website

This Website provides a variety of clinical resources for speech-language pathologists working
with Spanish-speaking children and families. Lists of informative Websites, electronic
educational forms translated into Spanish, and speech-language articles and materials are all
available without charge. Two monthly columns, Hortencia Kaysers From the Hart and
Henriette Langdons Que Tal? are archived here as well. A series of ten-minute webinars
cover evaluation of phonology in bilinguals, intervention with phonologically disordered bilingual
children, and autism in bilingual populations.
Bilingual Therapies, Inc. (n.d.). Bilingual therapies Spanish speech- language pathology
http://www.bilingualtherapies.com
Building Culturally and Linguistically Competent Services to Support Young
Children, Their Families, and School Readiness
This 146-page document, available online through the ERIC database, was created as a tool
kit to assist communities in building culturally and linguistically meaningful services, supports,
programs, and practices related to young children and their families. The tool kit is organized
into seven major content sections 1) Introduction: Rationale, Literature Review, and Definitions
2) Planning and Implementation: Self-Assessment and Planning Process 3) Learning About
Family and Community: Family Culture and Information Gathering 4) The Early Care and
Education Environment: Curriculum and Family Involvement 5) Early Learning: Language and
Literacy 6) Family Friendly Communication: Interpreters, Translators, and Translated Materials
and 7) Training: Provider and Personnel Preparation. Each of the seven sections includes
critical questions for communities; key strategies for families, providers, and administrators;
guides, tip sheets and checklists; promising practices; and annotated resources.
Hepburn, K.S. (2004). Building culturally and linguistically competent services to support
young children, their families, and school readiness. Baltimore: Annie E. Casey
Foundation. http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED485881.pdf
Collaborating with Interpreters and Translators: A Guide for Professionals in the
Communication Disorders Field
This book addresses federal guidelines and best practices for working with interpreters and
translators in a variety of settings. It gives options for overcoming typical challenges in this area
and also provides a variety of sample forms to use in implementing work with interpreters and
translators. The authors provide standards for planning collaborations with interpreters and
translators, and also give useful suggestions for making appropriate assessment decisions.
This resource is useful when training interpreters, translators, speech-language pathologists,
and audiologists to work together to serve the growing population of people whose primary
language is not English.
Langdon, H.W & Cheng, L.L. (2002). Collaborating with interpreters and translators: A guide for
professionals in the communication disorders field. Eau Claire, WI: Thinking Publications.
Concise Compendium of the Worlds Languages
This compendium provides information on more than one hundred languages spoken today by
populations of at least five to ten million people. Minor languages that figure prominently in the
contemporary socio-political context also are included. This combination allows less familiar
languages, such as Akan, Navajo, Basque, and Zulu, to figure prominently alongside
mainstream languages such as Arabic, French, Chinese, and Russian. Each entry considers the
phonological, morphological and lexical features of a specific language. This information is
Page 9

especially useful when developing an articulation screener for an unfamiliar language and when
interpreting perceived errors in grammar and/or phonology.
Campbell, G.L. (1998). Concise Compendium of the Worlds Languages. New York:
Routledge.
Cultural and Linguistic Diversity Resource Guide for Speech-Language
Pathologists
This comprehensive guide is designed for speech-language pathologists who work with
individuals from culturally and linguistically diverse populations. It bridges the gap between
existing research and the use of that information in clinical practice. It includes easy-to-access
information on normative data, assessment techniques, intervention approaches, and
resources. Practical information is included to help readers provide speech and language
services that meet the needs of culturally and linguistically diverse populations.
Goldstein, B.A. (2000). Cultural and linguistic diversity resource guide for speechlanguage pathologists. San Diego, CA: Singular Publishing Group.
Developing Cross-Cultural Competence: A Guide for Working with Children and
Their Families (3rd Edition)
This resource book provides a wealth of information on working with families and children with
disabilities from specific cultural, ethnic, and language backgrounds. Readers will learn the
basics of cultural competence and receive advice on how to communicate effectively and
respectfully with families. They will also learn how various cultures view education, family
structure, independence, control, and more. Nine chapters are dedicated to different cultural
groups and provide information about each groups history, demographics, traditions, values,
beliefs, and attitudes toward child rearing and disability. Appendices at the end of each chapter
provide quick references to cultural customs and courtesies, significant cultural events/holidays
and some basic vocabulary in the home language (greetings, social words, family names). A
list of suggested books, films, and other media also is provided.
Lynch, E.W. & Hanson, M.J. (2004). Developing cross-cultural competence: A guide for
working with children and their families (3rd Edition). Baltimore: Brookes.
Dual Language Development and Disorders
This book explains normal and impaired dual language development and the differences
between monolingual and bilingual development. This information can assist professionals with
successfully diagnosing and treating children with language delays and disorders. The book
divides children into two types of language learners: bilingual children (simultaneous bilinguals),
who have learned two languages from infancy, and second language learners (sequential
bilinguals), who are learning a second language after significant progress has been made with a
first language. The book also breaks dual language learners into two types according to whether
or not their primary language is widely used, has a high social value, and is typically associated
with socioeconomic power. Case studies of four children representing each of these four
groups are introduced in chapter one and reoccur throughout the book. The final section of the
book discusses assessment and intervention issues related to dual language children with
impaired development.
Genessee, F., Paradis, J., Crago, M.B. (2004). Dual language development and disorders.
Baltimore: Brookes
Page 10

ELL Companion to Reducing Bias in Special Education Evaluation

This on-line resource provides guidelines for reducing bias in special education evaluation for
English Language Learners (ELL). The manual was developed as a companion to the existing
guidelines, Reducing Bias in Special Education Assessment for American Indian and African
American Students, and can be found on the Minnesota Department of Education Website.
Topics covered in the manual include: legal requirements for evaluation, diversity among
English Language Learners; language acquisition; how to work with cultural liaisons,
interpreters, and/or translators; collecting and using background information; assessment tools;
eligibility; and mental health issues affecting immigrants and refugees. More chapters with
information on how to evaluate achievement, intellectual functioning, and eligibility
determination and documentation will be updated as they are completed.
Minnesota Department of Education. (2003). ELL companion to reducing bias in special
education evaluation
http://education.state.mn.us/MDE/Learning_Support/Special_Education/Evaluatio
n_Program_Planning_Supports/Cultural_Linguistic_Diversity/Reducing_Bias_Ma
nual/index.html
Gateway Tutorial on Clinical Decision Making with Linguistically Diverse Learners
This tutorial on linguistically diverse learners was developed as part of a multicultural training
grant from the American Speech Language Hearing Association awarded to Drs. Kohnert and
Glaze at the University of Minnesota. Presented in PowerPoint format, it provides the user with
valuable information on speech and language services for culturally linguistically diverse
students. The first part covers bilingual language development including differences between
simultaneous and sequential learners. Assessment information follows, and it includes a
description of the documentation necessary under federal special education law. An
intervention section explains how to provide speech-language services to bilingual clients. It
includes suggestions for choosing the language(s) of intervention and for structuring
intervention so that gains are made in both languages. (See Appendix 1A)
Kohnert, K., and L. Glaze (2003). Clinical Decision Making with Linguistically Diverse Learners:
A Statewide Professional Training Model. ASHA Multicultural Grant Award.
Increasing Language Skills of Students from Low-Income Backgrounds: Practical
Strategies for Professionals
This is a practical book for speech-language pathologists, educators, and other professionals
attempting to gain an understanding of the effects of socio-economic status on children's
language development. This resource provides readers with strategies for supporting these
children and their families. Factors that impact low-income childrens language skills, strategies
for nonbiased assessment, and suggestions for structuring school environments are discussed.
Roseberry-McKibbin, C. (2007). Increasing language skills of students from lowincome backgrounds: Practical strategies for professionals. San Diego, CA: Plural
Publishing.
International Guide to Speech Acquisition
The International Guide to Speech Acquisition serves as a comprehensive guide for speechlanguage pathologists working with children from a wide variety of language backgrounds.
Descriptions of phonetic inventories, syllable structures, and phonological processes as well as
Page 11

the age of acquisition of speech sounds are given for twelve dialectal variations of English and
24 other languages. This information is valuable when identifying speech difficulties in children
and when choosing age-appropriate prevention and intervention targets.
McLeod, S. (2007). International guide to speech acquisition. Clifton, NY: ThomsonDelmarLearning.
Language Disorders in Bilingual Children and Adults
This book provides speech-language pathologists with information on how to provide effective
services to bilingual children and adults with suspected or confirmed language disorders across
the life span. Emphasis is placed on functional aspects of bilingualism as opposed to mere
analysis of proficiency in a second language. This book provides the reader with an
understanding of both typical and atypical language skills in bilingual children and adults.
Assessment and intervention information is provided with consideration to social, cognitive, and
communicative systems. Sections on bilingual children focus primarily on developmental
language disorder (i.e., specific language impairment, language learning impairment, isolated
language impairment, and late talkers) as opposed to language disorders that are secondary to
other conditions (such as autism or Down Syndrome).
Kohnert, K. (2007). Language disorders in bilingual children and adults. San Diego, CA:
Plural Publishing.
Multicultural Students with Special Language Needs: Practical Strategies for
Assessment and Intervention (3rd edition)
This third edition of Multicultural Students with Special Language Needs provides the reader
with practical strategies for assessment and intervention of students from culturally and
linguistically diverse backgrounds. Specific information about cultural groups and their customs
are addressed. These variables are important to consider when assessing and planning
programs for students with language disorders and other special learning needs.
Roseberry-McKibbin, C. (2008). Multicultural students with special language needs: Practical
strategies for assessment and intervention (3rd ed.). Oceanside, CA: Academic Communication
Associates
One Child, Two Languages: A Guide for Early Childhood Educators of Children Learning
English as a Second Language (2nd Edition)
The latest edition of One Child, Two Languages is most useful for early childhood educators
working with bilingual children. This version includes updated research and an expanded
chapter on assessment, including a new tool for monitoring children's progress as they learn
English. The book also includes information on cultural diversity and international adoption.
This resource covers a wide range of topics related to the education of second-language
learners. Teachers will benefit from information about how to create a supportive classroom
environment for second-language learners, effective ways to measure progress, how to address
individual differences, and how to work with parents to acknowledge the importance of
children's home language and culture.
Tabors, P.O. (2008). One child, two languages A Guide for Early Childhood Educators of
Children Learning English as a Second Language (2nd Edition). Baltimore: Brookes.

Page 12

Ready or Not: A California Think Piece on School Readiness and Immigrant Communities
Providing all immigrant children (not just those with special needs) and their families with ready
schools is a primary focus of this paper. It urges educators and policymakers to dialogue about
the impact of school readiness efforts on immigrant families. It also draws attention back to the
initial goals of giving all children the chance to succeed in school and reducing disparities and
longstanding academic achievement gaps between groups of students. Six subsections
discuss 1) the history of school readiness 2) the central role of families to the healthy
development and future success of their children 3) issues of culture, language, and child
development 4) the appropriateness of standardized tests in the evaluation of early childhood
and school readiness programs 5) school reform and 6) a vision for school readiness programs
that support immigrant children and families. This information is useful for anyone involved in
shaping school readiness initiatives and programs-- policymakers, family and child advocates,
funders, early childhood educators, and organizations that provide services to immigrants.
California Tomorrow (n.d.). Ready or not: A California think piece on school readiness and
immigrant communities. Baltimore: Annie E. Casey Foundation.
http://www.californiatomorrow.org/media/readyornot.pdf
Skilled Dialogue: Strategies for Responding to Cultural Diversity in Early
Childhood
This book provides professionals with a model to use for working and interacting with culturally
and linguistically diverse students and families. The model is based on respectful, reciprocal,
and responsive interactions that honor cultural beliefs and values. Skilled Dialogue includes
detailed vignettes, reproducible forms, tips on using translators, and guidelines for distinguishing
and differentiating between behaviors from other cultures.
Arrera, I., Corso, R.M., & Macpherson, D. (2003). Skilled dialogue: Strategies for
responding to cultural diversity in early childhood. Baltimore: Brookes.

Page 13

Contents
Appendix 1A .............................................................................................................................15

Please scroll to next page for appendix.

Page 14

Chapter 2
Dual Language Development
The purpose of this chapter is to provide speech-language pathologists and other educators
with resources and background information regarding normal bilingual language acquisition in
early childhood. The focus is on acquiring multiple languages simultaneously (simultaneous
bilingualism) and/or acquiring an additional language in early childhood (early sequential
bilingualism); however, there is also information that is relevant to language learning later in
childhood and/or adulthood.
In order to avoid over- or under-representation of culturally and linguistically diverse children on
special education caseloads, it is important for professionals to understand what is typical for
individuals who are bilingual or acquiring a second language. While it may be tempting to go
directly to the sections on evaluation and intervention when trying to answer specific questions
about children on ones caseload, gaining an understanding of the underlying processes at work
in these children will ultimately inform clinical decisions. In addition, it may be necessary to
locate information for parents or other professionals in order to make informed decisions
regarding matters such as language choice for intervention and educational placement.
When asked to evaluate the language abilities of a child who is not a member of the mainstream
language group, professionals must separate those linguistic behaviors that result from the
childs status as a bilingual or second language learner from those that constitute a disorder.
The diagram below illustrates the population that speech-language pathologists and early
childhood special education teams are seeking to identify and serve.
The area in which the circles overlap represents those second language learners who also have
a speech, language or other disorder. A speech or language disorder affects the persons ability
to learn any language. Children must show problems in both English and their primary
language in order to be classified as having a disability. Therefore, once a child is determined to
be bilingual, evaluation and intervention procedures should take place in both languages.
Please reference Chapter 3 of this manual for more information on this topic.
The resources included here range from theoretical to practical. With this edition of Talk with
Me, there has been a shift towards online resources because of their accessibility and
practicality. Many of the items in Chapter 1 of this manual also have information on bilingualism
and second language acquisition and are, therefore, cross-referenced in both chapters. For a
list of five key points related to dual language learning, see Appendix 2A.

Page 15

Summary of Dual Language Learning Processes

The summary given here is not meant to be exhaustive, but rather to acquaint professionals
with some of the processes and terminology pertaining to bilingualism and second language
acquisition. The resources listed in the second section of this chapter can be used to obtain far
more information on these topics. It is hoped that these resources will equip professionals with
the background knowledge they need to be better prepared as they seek to evaluate and treat
young children from various backgrounds.

English
Language
Learners

Disordered
Populations

Bilingualism
Bilingualism refers to the use of two or more languages by an individual or a community.
Simultaneous bilinguals are individuals who learn more than one language at a time starting at
birth. They are also referred to as bilingual first language learners. Others are considered
sequential bilinguals, in that they first learn one language and then start learning a second. It is
not necessary for someone to have equal proficiency in all languages to be considered bilingual.
Stages of Second Language Acquisition
Second language acquisition often follows a similar trajectory to first language acquisition.
Stages commonly observed in second language learners include the following:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

Use of native language, even if the listener doesnt speak or understand it

Silence (observing)
Simplification (e.g.: Dog for I see a dog.)
Chunks of language (e.g.: I dunno. for I do not know.)
Productive language use
(Ellis, 1994)

It is not uncommon for some children to enter a silent period when first exposed to a new
language (Ibid.). During this time their receptive language skills should be developing, despite a
lack of expressive output in the new language. Estimates regarding how long this period lasts
differ. Variance among individuals based on temperament and circumstance are commonly
observed.

Page 16

Primary Language, Language Dominance

When working with bilingual children, professionals should consider the childrens primary
language (also referred to as first language or home language), their current dominant
language and whether or not they have varying levels of proficiency in a language depending
upon the context in which each language is used. For example, a child whose home language is
Arabic and school language is English may have vocabulary for items associated with the home
(e.g.: bed, rice) in Arabic, and vocabulary for items associated with school in English (e.g.:
scissors, glue).
Language Loss
It should also be noted that a childs language dominance is subject to change depending upon
patterns of usage and exposure. Language loss is a possibility and often takes place within a
limited number of generations in a family. For example, a child who is only exposed to
Portuguese for the first two years of life can be said to have Portuguese as a primary (and
dominant) language. However, if that child then moves to the United States and attends
preschool in an English-speaking environment, his or her dominant language status may shift to
English after a period of time. As the child moves through the English-speaking school system
and uses Portuguese less, he/she may also experience some language loss and may no longer
be able to use Portuguese in a functional manner. Subsequent generations in this childs family
may then have no exposure to Portuguese in the home.
Language Influence
A childs first language may influence how they learn subsequent languages. This influence may
be reflected in speech (e.g.: A child may say, tum for thumb because their first language
does not have a th sound) and/or language (e.g.: A child may say, What shape it is? because
of syntax rules in the primary language.). In children, these influences are usually temporary.
In adolescents or adults, they may persist indefinitely.
Code Switching
Code switching is a normal activity in which bilingual people blend the languages that they
speak in a rule-bound way to convey meaning. Speakers choose when and with whom to code
switch. Code switching does not impede a childs ability to understand or learn language,
provided the child is familiar with the language elements being used (Kohnert, 2007). Individuals
may also code switch between languages if they lack the vocabulary or syntax to complete a
thought in one language. This may be reflective of limited language proficiency and not
necessarily a disorder (Ibid.).
Impact of Exposure
Professionals should consider potential differences in the type and amount of exposure children
have had to various linguistic frameworks and contexts. For instance, assumptions regarding
narrative structure and content (e.g.: understanding that stories often begin with Once upon a
time.) are learned behaviors with which non-mainstream children may not be familiar (Heath,
1982a). Children may therefore lack some linguistic constructs in both their first and second
language, not because of learning difficulties but because of a lack of exposure to that type of
linguistic construct.
This lack of exposure can also impact evaluation procedures. For example,
children from some culture groups may be less likely to answer known-information questions
(Heath, 1982b). These children may, therefore, not immediately comply with evaluation tasks
Page 17

such as labeling of common objects (Wyatt, 1993). Please refer to Chapter 3 in this manual for
more information regarding avoiding bias during evaluation.
BICS and CALP
Frequently mentioned in discussions of second language proficiency are Cummins notions of
Basic Personal Interpersonal Communication Skills (BICS) and Cognitive Academic Language
Proficiency (CALP) (1979).
BICS refers to the highly contextualized language skills needed in everyday face-to-face
communication (including grammar, pronunciation and vocabulary). Cummins estimates that in
sequentially bilingual children, BICS is acquired after approximately two to three years of
exposure to a second language in a host country.
CALP refers to de-contextualized language needed to function in academic settings and
includes literacy skills. Cummins suggests that it takes approximately five to seven years in the
host country in order for a child to acquire adequate CALP (or longer without support of the
primary language).
Though the BICS/CALP dichotomy has been widely used across disciplines, professionals
should avoid over application of these principles, particularly the time frames listed. They are
not norm-referenced standards by which one can make evaluation or eligibility decisions.
Nevertheless, this distinction is useful to professionals in that it alerts them to the potential
discrepancy between a childs or parents ability to communicate orally in the mainstream
language and their ability to function within an academic environment or to fully understand
more abstract concepts in their second language (e.g., special education terminology). For a
more thorough discussion of BICS and CALP, please refer to Kohnert (2007), Ellis (1994) and
Cummins (1979).
Language Choice
When determining language choice for interactions with the child and family, one must consider
the familys opinions. Some bilingual individuals may feel more comfortable communicating in
their non-dominant language depending upon their conversational partner and the setting in
which the interaction occurs. Cultural differences can also impact mutual understanding
between professionals and families as much as language differences do.
Language choice for intervention requires consideration of the childs first language, dominant
language, family opinion, availability of bilingual service providers, communication needs in
each language spoken, etc. Ideally, intervention would be conducted in the dominant language,
which, in early childhood, is often the first language.
Parental Concerns
Learning a new language is a cognitively challenging activity. It is a frequent assumption that
because children are natural language learners they can acquire new languages without effort.
While it is true that children are often better than adults at imitating the phonological patterns of
new languages, children still require time, support, and adequate exposure in order to learn a
new language. That language learning process is ameliorated when the first language is
maintained (Baker, 2007).
Professionals and parents may be concerned that use of the first language may delay
acquisition of the second language. However, if children can build the second language on the
Page 18

framework of the first, both languages benefit. The most significant risk is actually the loss of
the first language, particularly if it is not the mainstream language (Kohnert, 2008). Thus,
parents should be encouraged to maintain use of the first language.
Parents also may be concerned that exposing a child to multiple languages will be too
challenging or confusing to the child, particularly if the child has language or learning difficulties.
Parents can be reassured that children are equipped to learn multiple languages; children
should be able to achieve proficiency in multiple languages to the fullest extent of their language
learning potential (Kohnert, 2007). Indeed, rather than impeding language skills, bilingualism
has been reported to confer a cognitive advantage to children (Yoshida, 2008).
See Appendix 2B for Reference list.
Resources for Bilingualism- Books
Assessment and Intervention for Communication Disorders in Culturally and
Linguistically Diverse Populations
This text, which is also reviewed in Chapter 1 of this manual, provides specific information for
speech-language pathologists about best practices when evaluating and treating a student or
adult from a culture/language group that is not shared by the service provider. This resource
helps practitioners determine the most effective and appropriate ways to provide services to all
clients. Chapters 2 and 3 discuss second-language development, dual language processes,
bilingual education, optimal teaching/learning strategies for culturally and linguistically diverse
populations, ways to promote bilingualism, etc.
Langdon, H.W. (2008). Assessment and intervention for communication disorders in culturally
and linguistically diverse populations. Clifton Park, NY: Delmar, Cengage Learning.
Bilingual First Language Acquisition
This readable textbook provides a thorough description of all of the factors that contribute to the
language development of children who grow up with two or more languages from birth and
describes how these children learn to understand and use sounds, words and sentences in their
two languages. Information is based on studies done in a number of languages in many
different countries. In addition, the author explains how attitudes towards bilingualism and an
individual's language learning environment contribute to the variability amongst bilingual
children and their families. Many examples of bilingual children and families are given. Each
chapter concludes with a boxed summary, suggested activities and projects for further
understanding of the subject matter and recommended readings.
DeHouwer, A. (2009). Bilingual First Language Acquisition. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Bilingual Language Development and Disorders in Spanish-English Speakers
This research-based text, which is also reviewed in the first chapter of this manual, provides
reliable evaluation and intervention approaches for speech-language pathologists serving
bilingual children with language disorders. Topics covered that pertain to bilingual language
acquisition include first language loss, language development, promoting gains in more than
one language, etc.
Goldstein, B.A. (2004). Bilingual language development & disorders in Spanish-English
speakers. Baltimore: Brookes
Page 19

Bilingual Special Education Interface (4th Edition)

This book, which is also reviewed in Chapter 1 of this manual, offers research-based practical
information regarding the needs of bilingual children with disabilities. Among topics covered are
the following: bilingual language development, second language acquisition, and the interface of
the special education and bilingual education fields.
Baca, L.M. & Cervantes, H.T. (2003). Bilingual special education interface (4th ed.). Upper
Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Dual Language Development and Disorders: A Handbook on Bilingualism and Second
Language Learning
This text, which is also reviewed in Chapter 1 of this manual, explains normal and impaired dual
language development while exploring the differences between monolingual and bilingual
development. The book discusses the differences in language acquisition between bilingual
children (those learning two or more languages simultaneously) and second language learners
(those learning languages sequentially). There is discussion of the ways in which the status of a
language may impact learning. Four case studies are introduced in the first chapter and
revisited throughout the remaining chapters.
Genessee, F., Paradis, J., Crago, M.B. (2004). Dual language development and disorders: A
Handbook on bilingualism and second language learning. Baltimore: Brookes.
How Languages are Learned (3rd Edition)
This third-edition provides a user-friendly introduction to the theories of first and second
language acquisition. It is designed for teachers and discusses theories in relation to classroom
implementation. Topics covered include basic tenets of first and second language acquisition,
individual differences in second language learning, developmental sequences of acquisition,
first language influence on subsequent languages, observation in the second language
classroom, proposals for classroom teaching, etc.
Lightbown, P.M. and Spada, N. (2006). How languages are learned (3rd Edition). Oxford
Oxford University Press
Language Disorders in Bilingual Children and Adults
This book, which is also reviewed in Chapter 1 of this manual, provides speech-language
pathologists with information on providing effective services to bilingual children and adults with
suspected or confirmed language disorders across the life span. Several concepts pertaining to
normal second language acquisition are addressed.
Kohnert, K. (2007). Language disorders in bilingual children and adults. San Diego, CA: Plural
Publishing
One Child, Two Languages: A Guide for Early Childhood Educators of Children Learning
English as a Second Language (2nd Edition)
The latest edition of One Child, Two Languages is most useful for early childhood educators
working with bilingual children. This version includes updated research and an expanded
chapter on assessment, including a new tool for monitoring children's progress as they learn
English. This resource covers a wide range of topics related to the education of secondlanguage learners. Teachers will benefit from information about how to create a supportive
Page 20

classroom environment for second-language learners, effective ways to measure progress, how
to address individual differences, and how to work with parents to acknowledge the importance
of children's home language and culture.
Tabors, P.O. (2008). One child, two languages A Guide for Early Childhood Educators of
Children Learning English as a Second Language (2nd Edition). Baltimore: Brookes.
A Parents and Teachers Guide to Bilingualism (3rd Edition)
This accessible book is written in question/answer format, providing parents and educators with
readable answers to a comprehensive collection of frequently asked questions about
bilingualism and bilingual education. It includes information both for monolingual and bilingual
individuals who wish to learn more about bilingualism and how it impacts family life, education
choices, cultural identity, literacy, etc.
Baker, C. (2007) A Parents and Teachers Guide to Bilingualism (3rd Edition). Buffalo, NY:
Multilingual Matters.
Websites
American Speech-Language-Hearing Association's Website
The Website of the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA),
http://www.asha.org, which is also reviewed in Chapter 1 of this manual, contains a multitude of
resources for individuals looking for information regarding both normal and disordered second
language acquisition. The resources cover topics such as working with interpreters, raising a
bilingual child, international adoption and evaluating speech and language skills in CLD
children. The information in all of these resources applies directly or indirectly to second
language acquisition. The Website contains articles (many full-text versions, accessible to
members), self-assessment tools, information for parents, continuing education PowerPoint
presentations, handouts from ASHA conventions, glossaries, etc. Some of these materials have
been translated into other languages. In addition, the Website lists contact information for the
Office of Multicultural Affairs and for ASHAs action centers, where members and the public can
get answers to frequently asked questions. Following are selections from that Website that
pertain directly to the topic of bilingualism:
Acquiring English as a 2nd Language: What's Normal, Whats Not
This handout covers normal phenomena, benefits of bilingualism, how
students
should learn multiple languages and the differences between social and academic
language. This handout is also available in Spanish.
Roseberry-Mckibbin, C., Brice, A.(n.d.). Acquiring English as a 2nd language: Whats
normal, whats not. http://www.asha.org/public/speech/development/easl.htm#learn,
Bilingualism, ELL, LEP and ESL
Bibliography of resources pertaining to Bilingualism, ELL, LEP, and ESL and
Communication Development and Disorders in Multicultural Populations

American Speech, Language Hearing Association (2008, September 15).

Bilingualism, ELL, LEP and ESL.
Page 21

http://www.asha.org/practice/multicultural/readings/bilingual_lep_esl.htm
English Language Learners in Schools, Typical Bilingual Language Development
with Talking Points
This link connects the reader to 14 PowerPoint slides that briefly cover
characteristics
of typical bilingual language development, including a cursory discussion of BICS and
CALP.
American Speech, Language Hearing Association (n.d.). English Language Learners in
Schools: Typical Bilingual Language Development.
http://www.asha.org/uploadedFiles/practice/multicultural/issues/TalkingPtsBilingualLang
Develop.pdf#search=%22talking%22
Learning Two Languages
This handout includes information for parents that addresses the following questions:
How do I teach my child to be bilingual? Will learning two languages cause speech or
language problems? What should I expect when my child learns more than one
language? What resources can I use to help my child be bilingual? If my child is having
trouble communicating, should we use only one language? What are some additional
resources? This information is also available in Spanish.
American Speech, Language Hearing Association (n.d.). Learning two languages
http://www.asha.org/public/speech/development/BilingualChildren.htm,
Second Language Acquisition
This handout includes general information about second language acquisition, the best
way to teach a second language, how speech-language pathologists can help, and lists
of other organizations that have information about second language acquisition.
American Speech, Language Hearing Association (n.d.). Second language acquisition.
http://www.asha.org/public/speech/development/second.htm,
Center for Applied Linguistics (CAL) Website
CAL (http://www.cal.org) is a private, nonprofit organization that is dedicated to improving
communication through increased understanding of language and culture. It provides a variety
of research-based information, tools, and resources in the areas of bilingualism, English as a
second language, literacy, and foreign language education; dialect studies; language policy;
refugee orientation; and the education of linguistically and culturally diverse adults and children.
Two of their resources that are specific to early childhood bilingualism are listed below.
Raising Bilingual Children: Common Parental Concerns and Current Research
This two-page digest summarizes the research related to bilingualism and language
delay, bilingualism and language confusion, language learning and television and
bilingualism and intelligence. A Spanish version also is available.
King, K. and Fogle, L. (2006). Raising bilingual children: Common parental concerns
and current research, CAL Digest,
http://www.cal.org/resources/digest/raisebilingchild.html
Fostering Second Language Development in Young Children
Page 22

This digest concisely summarizes many aspects of bilingualism by outlining eight

principles. These principles will help educators better understand and serve their
students who are in the process of acquiring a second language.
National Center for Research on Cultural Diversity and Second Language
Learning (1995, October) Fostering second language development in young children,
CAL Digest. http://www.cal.org/resources/digest/ncrcds04.html.
Early Childhood Learning and Knowledge Center Website
Offered by the Administration for Children and Families, Office of Head Start, this
comprehensive Website (http://www.eclkc.ohs.acf.hhs.gov/hslc) contains many resources that
early childhood programs may find helpful. Because Head Start serves a large number of
children from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds, they have developed a number of
resources to prepare professionals to provide culturally responsive services. This Website is
current and updated regularly. On the homepage, there is a sidebar menu that includes Dual
Language Learners and Their Families. In this section, there are articles, tip sheets,
information for parents, etc. In addition, the following three PowerPoint presentations related to
dual language learners can be found by selecting DLL: Professional Development from the
side bar.
"Keynote Address: Assessing Young Dual Language LearnersWhat You Need to
Know and Why-Part I by Carol Scheffner Hammer: This presentation covers eight main
points about the language development of dual language learners and the implications
for assessment.
Scheffner Hammer, C. (2008, October 30). Assessing Young Dual Language Learners
What You Need to Know and Why (Part I). Keynote address at the Office of Head Start
National Dual Language Institute, Washington D.C.
http://eclkc.ohs.acf.hhs.gov/hslc/resources/cinema/Dual%20Language%20Learn
ers'%20General%20Session/CarolHammer.htm
"Keynote Address: Assessing Young Dual Language LearnersWhat You Need to
Know and Why-Part II by Linda M. Espinosa: This presentation focuses on the
underlying goals of assessment of young dual language learners, language development
factors that need to be considered and the processes for completing authentic
assessments that yield the most reliable results.
Espinosa, L.M. (2008, October 31). Assessing Young Dual Language LearnersWhat
You Need to Know and Why (Part II). Keynote address at the Office of Head Start
National Dual Language Institute, Washington D.C.
http://eclkc.ohs.acf.hhs.gov/hslc/Dual%20Language%20Learners/prof_dev/confe
rences/Espinosa.pdf
Keynote Address: Myths and Realities about Dual Language Learning by Fred
Genesee. This presentation focuses on five unfounded beliefs surrounding dual
language development: 1) early dual language learning is confusing; 2) code switching is
a sign of confusion; 3) children easily pick up languages; 4) more and earlier exposure
to English is better and 5) monolingual staff cannot support dual language development.
Research findings and implications are used to promote appropriate learning
environments for dual language learners.
Page 23

Genesee, F. (2008, October 29). Myths and Realities about Dual Language Learning
Keynote address at the Office of Head Start National Dual Language Institute,
Washington D.C.
http://eclkc.ohs.acf.hhs.gov/hslc/Dual%20Language%20Learners/ecd/language_develop
ment/KeynoteAddress.htm
Everything ESL Website
Everything ESL (http://www.everythingesl.net) is a Website that was developed by Judie
Haynes, an English as a Second Language teacher from New Jersey. She and other
experienced ESL teachers have contributed lesson plans, teaching tips, downloads, discussion
topics and classroom resource picks to this Website. Although designed for K-12 teachers, the
following two short articles are applicable to general understanding of second language
acquisition.
Explaining BICS/CALP
This short article provides a brief summary of the difference between social language
and academic language.
Haynes, J. (n.d.) Explaining BICS/CALP. EverythingESL.net.
http://www.everythingesl.net/inservices/bics_calp.php.
Stages of Second Language Acquisition
This practical article provides a succinct summary of stages of second language
acquisition and also provides suggestions for teachers on how to engage students at the
various stages.
Haynes, J. (n.d.) Stages of second language acquisition. EverythingESL.net
http://www.everythingesl.net/inservices/language_stages.php .

Other Online Resources

Challenging Common Myths about Young English Language Learners
This resource, published by the Foundation for Child Development, is a review of research from
a variety of disciplines that challenges conventional thoughts regarding bilingualism in young
children. There is a level of detail here that surpasses the typical "handout" discussion of
myths, yet the document is highly readable and suitable for a variety of professionals and
parents. Myths addressed include the following: learning two languages will cause a delay in
the acquisition of English; total immersion is the best format for language acquisition; schools
should provide "English-only" instruction because they are unable to provide instruction in all of
the other languages spoken by children in the school system, etc. Myths regarding Latino
language and culture groups specifically are also discussed.
Espinosa, L., (2008), Foundation for Child Development
http://www.fcd-us.org/sites/default/files/MythsOfTeachingELLsEspinosa.pdf

The Cognitive Consequences of Early Bilingualism

Page 24

This article discusses recent research findings regarding the benefits of bilingualism. The
author addresses earlier perspectives that viewed learning of multiple languages as a source of
developmental problems or delays (p. 26). The author reports that, contrary to previous
assumptions, research from a variety of disciplines supports the notion that bilingualism confers
a cognitive advantage upon children, particularly within the domains of executive function and
knowledge transfer from one language to another. Consideration of bilingualism issues in
immigrant communities is discussed, and a call is made for more systematic research into the
effects of socio-economic issues on bilingualism.
Yoshida, Hanako (2008). The Cognitive Consequences of Early Bilingualism.
http://main.zerotothree.org/site/DocServer/29-2_Yoshida.pdf?docID=6821
Does Bilingualism Make You Smarter?
This article provides a quick resource for those looking to support that bilingualism confers a
cognitive advantage. Maceri discusses potential benefits such as increased neural plasticity,
improved problem-solving ability, greater social opportunities, improved academic performance,
etc. Research studies are cited in order to support these stated benefits.
Maceri, D., (2004) Does Bilingualism Make You Smarter?, Originally published at:
www.hispanicvista.com.
http://www.pww.org/article/articleprint/4606/.
Dual Language Learners in Early Care and Education Settings
This two-page practical tips and tools sheet is excerpted from Early Steps to School Success:
An Introduction to Dual Language Learning for Early Childhood
Coordinators. The information is provided in table format. The left column describes four
aspects of bilingualism (language development, language mixing, language loss and
relationships), and the right column addresses how these aspects of bilingualism impact the
way in which one works with families.
Dual Language Learners in Early Care and Education Settings (2008, November). [Practical tips
and tools] Washington D.C.: Zero to Three, pp. 52-53.
http://www.zerotothree.org/site/DocServer/Dual_Language_Learners.pdf?docID=6741.
Early Childhood Bilingualism: Perils and Possibilities
Dr. Fred Genesee addresses the questions and concerns often expressed by parents, early
childhood educators, teachers, and speech-language specialists when it comes to bilingual
education and raising children bilingually. He cites research studies to support the assertion
that early bilingualism benefits learning and language development. This is part of the Minerva
Lecture Series, which was created to foster discussion between Canadian researchers and
citizens from across the country. It is available at:
http://www.ccl-cca.ca/CCL/Events/Minerva/PastLectures/PastLecturesGenesee.html
Genesee, F. H. (2007, November 22) Early childhood bilingualism: Perils and possibilities.
Minerva Lecture Series. Canadian Council on Learning.
Early Childhood Education Brief: Second Language Development
This two-page handout summarizes ten essential research findings related to bilingualism in
early childhood. Many references are given for each of the findings. This handout could be
Page 25

used as a quick reference for some families or other professionals.

Escamilla, K. (2005). Early childhood education brief: Second language development,10
essential findings. BUENO Center, University of Colorado-Boulder.
http://eclkc.ohs.acf.hhs.gov/hslc/Dual%20Language%20Learners/ecd/language_develop
ment/ConferenceandRe_1.htm
ELL Companion to Reducing Bias in Special Education Evaluation
This online resource provides guidelines for reducing bias in special education evaluation for
English Language Learners (ELL). The manual was developed as a companion to the existing
guidelines, Reducing Bias in Special Education Assessment for American Indian and African
American Students, and can be found on the Minnesota Department of Education Website. The
chapters that most directly relate to bilingualism and second language acquisition are Diversity
Among English Language Learners (Chapter 3) and Background Information on Language
Acquisition (Chapter 4).The manual may be accessed through the Minnesota Department of
Education's Website: http://education.state.mn.us/mde/index.html. It is found by selecting
"Special Education" under "Learning Support" and then "Cultural & Linguistic Diversity," which is
listed under "Evaluation & Program Planning Supports."
Minnesota Department of Education. (2003). ELL Companion to Reducing Bias in Special
Education Evaluation. http://www.asec.net/Archives/Manuals/ELLmanual.pdf
Foundations in English Language Development
This chapter of California Preschool Learning Foundations (Volume 1) summarizes sequential
bilingualism in preschool children. The authors assert that the learning that occurs in the home
language is the foundation for later learning in a second language. The stages of second
language acquisition are described and aligned with a continuum of second language
development for four academic areas: listening, speaking, reading, and writing. Rubrics for
each of these areas are provided. This document helps classroom teachers understand their
students progress toward English-language proficiency. The document can be accessed
through the California Department of Educations Website (www.cde.ca.gov) and searching for
learning foundations.
Abbot, D, Lundin, J. Ong, F. (editors) (2008) Foundations in English language development.
Chapter in The California Preschool Learning Foundations (Volume 1). Sacramento: California
Department of Education. http://www.cde.ca.gov/sp/cd/re/documents/preschoollf.pdf
Home Language Acquisition and Retention for Young Children with Special Needs
This highly readable article discusses the benefits of bilingualism and maintenance of the home
language. The authors state that children with special needs may lose their home language
more quickly than others, partly because of parents' and professionals' well-intentioned but
mistaken beliefs that the use of multiple languages will confuse a child or cause a language
delay (pp. 28-29). The article debunks these beliefs and outlines several benefits of
bilingualism, including the following: bilingualism facilitates English language acquisition,
promotes positive self-identity, enhances the family's quality of life, promotes community
inclusion, and supports smoother transitions to new environments. Recommendations for
teachers and parents are provided.

Page 26

Cheatham, G.A., Santos, R.M., & Yeonsun, E.R., (2007) Home Language Acquisition and
Retention for Young Children with Special Needs, Young Exceptional Children, Volume 11,
Number 1, pp 27-39. http://yec.sagepub.com/cgi/content/refs/11/1/27
Interaction in Bilingual Language Acquisition
This PowerPoint, designed for speech-language pathologists, on bilingual language acquisition
and the interaction between two languages was presented by Brian Goldstein at the Bilingual
Therapies Symposium. View the PowerPoint on the Bilingual Therapies Website:
http://blog.bilingualtherapies.com
Goldstein, B. (2008,July). Interaction in Bilingual Language Acquisition. Presentation given at
the Bilingual Therapies Symposium, Cabo San Lucas, Mexico.
http://blog.bilingualtherapies.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/goldstein-interaction.pdf
National Association for the Education Young Children (NAEYC)
On its Website http://www.naeyc.org/positionstatements/linguistic
the NAEYC has posted four position statements related to linguistic and cultural diversity. They
can be found under the pull down menu titled resources. Three of these statements apply to
bilingualism and second language acquisition. The position statements are described below.
Responding to Linguistic and Cultural Diversity Recommendations for Effective Early
Childhood Education
In this eight-page position statement NAEYC asserts that educators must accept the legitimacy
of childrens home language, respect and value the home culture and promote and
encourage the active involvement and support of all families (p.1.). It also takes the position
that early education programs should encourage the development of childrens home language
while fostering the acquisition of English (p. 2). They also discuss the challenges in acting on
this position and provide recommendations for a responsive learning environment.
National Association for the Education of Young Children. (1995). Responding to linguistic and
cultural diversity recommendations for effective early childhood education:
A position statement of the National Association for the Education of Young Children:
http://www.naeyc.org/files/naeyc/file/positions/PSDIV98.PDF
Also available in Spanish from http://www.naeyc.org/files/naeyc/file/positions/PSDISP98.PDF
Where We Stand: Many Languages, Many Cultures: Respecting and Responding to
Diversity
This two-page summary is based on the complete position statement referenced above. It
covers the benefits of bilingualism and promotes the support and maintenance of home
languages.
National Association for the Education of Young Children. (2005). Where We Stand: Many
Languages, Many Cultures: Respecting and Responding to Diversity.
http://www.naeyc.org/files/naeyc/file/positions/diversity.pdf

Page 27

Ready or Not: A California Think Piece on School Readiness and Immigrant

Communities
Providing all immigrant children (not just those with special needs) and their families with ready
schools is a primary focus of this paper. It urges educators and policymakers to dialogue about
the impact of school readiness efforts on immigrant families. Section three discusses issues of
culture, language, and child development. While not devoted specifically to second language
acquisition, the information in this section stresses the importance of a child's home language.
California Tomorrow (n.d.). Ready or not: A California think piece on school readiness and
immigrant communities. Baltimore: Annie E. Casey Foundation.
http://www.californiatomorrow.org/media/readyornot.pdf.
Second Language Acquisition: Success Factors in Sequential Bilingualism
This informative article describes how sequential bilingualism, like simultaneous bilingualism,
requires that the language learner have means, opportunity, and motive in order to successfully
acquire more than one language. Means refers to a person's innate language learning abilities.
Anything that impacts the person's ability to acquire one language is going to also impact the
ability to learn subsequent languages. Opportunity refers to social circumstances that allow or
prevent a person to hear and practice a language. Motive refers to the interaction between
internal and external factors. Kohnert discusses how the social prestige of a language such as
English may negatively impact maintenance of another language if it decreases a person's
motivation for maintaining that language. Implications for individuals with communication
disorders are discussed.
Kohnert, K., (2008) Second Language Acquisition: Success Factors in Sequential Bilingualism,
ASHA Leader. http://www.asha.org/Publications/leader/2008/080212/f080212a/
Continuing Education Opportunities through the American Speech Language Hearing
Association (ASHA)
The following products specifically related to dual language development are available for
purchase through ASHA. Depending on the resource, continuing education units (CEUs) may
be available for a limited time. One may find them by viewing Continuing Education at
www.asha.org and searching by authors name or topic.
Assessment of Bilingual Learners: Difference or Disorder?
This DVD course and accompanying manual is available through ASHA. In the DVD, Celeste
Roseberry-McKibbin, PhD, CCC-SLP, provides information about normal second language
acquisition processes, phenomena of bilingualism as a foundation for distinguishing between
language differences and disabilities in ELL students, assessment considerations and
techniques used to differentiate between language difference and disability in ELL students.
Roseberry-McKibbin, C. (n.d.). Assessment of Bilingual Learners: Difference or Disorder?.
http://www.asha.org/eweb/OLSDynamicPage.aspx?Webcode=olsdetails&title=Assessm
ent+of+Bilingual+Learners%3a+Language+Difference+or+Disorder%3f
Second Language Acquisition in Children: Considerations for Assessment
This audio CD and manual by Johanne Paradis are available for purchase from the American
Speech-Language-Hearing Association. When performing language assessments in
multilingual contexts where English is the second language (L2), important questions must be
answered before meaningful assessment can occur. What are the similarities and differences
Page 28

between the first language (L1) and L2 acquisition patterns for phonology, lexicon, and
morphosyntax? What factors cause individual differences in children learning a second
language? How long does it take for ELL to perform as well as their native-speaking peers?
What happens to the L1 of minority children learning English as a second language? This audio
self-study provides an overview of the research on children learning a second language, with a
special focus on informing language assessment in multilingual contexts when English is the
second language.
Paradis, J. (n.d.) Second Language Acquisition in Children: Considerations for Assessment.
http://www.asha.org/eweb/OLSDynamicPage.aspx?Webcode=olsdetails&title=Second+L
anguage+Acquisition+in+Children%3a+Considerations+for+Assessment
Speech, Language, and Hearing in Developing Bilinguals
Developing bilingualism is marked by variability in time frames and patterns of language
acquisition among bilingual individuals. This journal self-study course, edited by Brian Goldstein,
is available in print form or online through ASHA. It specifically addresses sources of this
variability and the clinical challenges of serving developing bilinguals. Topics include
comparison of phonological skills, language processing, conceptual scoring, and effects of
classroom noise.
Goldstein, B. (n.d.) Speech, Language, and Hearing in Developing Bilinguals.
http://www.asha.org/eweb/OLSDynamicPage.aspx?Webcode=olsdetails&title=Speech%
2c+Language%2c+and+Hearing+in+Developing+Bilinguals

Page 29

Chapter 2- Appendices
Appendix 2A: Fast Facts Regarding Second Language Acquisition .................. 31
Appendix 2B: References for Summary of Dual Language Learning Processes 32

Page 30

Appendix 2A: Fast Facts Regarding Second Language Acquisition

1. Learning a second language does not delay or prevent development of the first
language. Being bilingual does not cause language disorders.
2. Maintenance of the home language can actually foster development in the second
language.
3. Some parents or professionals may be concerned that speaking two languages is too
confusing or challenging for children with learning or language difficulties. The research
indicates that children are capable of learning multiple languages to the fullest extent of
their overall language learning ability and that there actually are cognitive advantages to
being bilingual.
4. Children may appear to learn language quickly, as they are better than adults at imitating
speech sounds in another language. However, becoming fluent in a language takes
time.
5. People worry about children not learning English. Losing their primary language is
actually the bigger risk.

Page 31

Appendix 2B: References for Summary of Dual Language Learning Processes

Baker, C. (2007) A Parents and Teachers Guide to Bilingualism (3rd Edition). Buffalo, NY:
Multilingual Matters.
Cummins, J. (1979). Cognitive/academic language proficiency, linguistic interdependence, the
optimum age question and some other matters. Working Papers on Bilingualism, No. 19, 121129.
Ellis, R. (1994). The Study of Second Language Acquisition. New York: Oxford University
Press.
Heath, S.B. (1982a). What no bedtime story means: Narrative skills at home and school.
Language in Society, Vol. II, pp. 49-76. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Heath, S.B. (1982b). Questioning at home and school: A comparative study. In G. Spindler
(Ed.), Doing the ethnography of schooling: Educational anthropology in action (pp. 102). New
York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.
Kohnert, K. (2008, Feb. 12). Second Language Acquisition: Success Factors in Sequential
Bilingualism, The ASHA Leader, 13(2), 10-13.
Kohnert, K. (2007). Language disorders in bilingual children and adults. San Diego, CA: Plural
Publishing.
Wyatt, T. (1993). Assessment Issues with Multicultural Populations. In D.E. Battle (Ed.),
Communication disorders in multicultural populations (pp. 379-418). Stoneham, MA:
Butterworth-Heinemann.
Yoshida, Hanako (2008). The Cognitive Consequences of Early Bilingualism. Retrieved on
June 28, 2009 from http://www.zerotothree.org/site/DocServer/29-2_Yoshida.pdf?docID=6821.

Page 32

Chapter 3
Evaluation of Culturally and Linguistically
Diverse Children
Introduction to Section
Evaluation of young children who speak a language other than English is challenging for
speech-language pathologists and early childhood special education teams who do not speak
the familys language. The articles, books, and links in this section, as well as those in the first
chapter, highlight the importance of the following steps that are needed in preparing for an
evaluation:

Understanding second language acquisition and bilingualism in order to determine

whether there is a language disorder or a difference due to learning English as a second
language
Completing a thorough home language/ethnographic interview with parents to determine
which language(s) the child hears and uses in different situations.
Learning about the culture and language of the child and family so that you have a
context in which to interpret the child's performance and make non-biased judgments
about the child's skills.
Understanding the specific legal requirements that apply to evaluation of culturally and
linguistically diverse children.
Asking the parent to compare the child being referred with other children in the family
and/or peers from the same culture. If the parents see differences and are concerned,
the need for an assessment is strongly indicated.
Training and using an interpreter to help you talk with the parents, work with the child,
and learn about the culture of the student and the language you are evaluating.
Evaluating the childs skills using tasks that are age appropriate and culturally relevant. If
items from standardized tests are given, scores should not be reported since the test is
not being given in the standardized manner. If a test was given with an interpreter or the
child is not representative of the standardization group, the standardization is invalid.
Consult the following recommended articles, books and Websites for further information about
general birth-to-five screening and evaluation guidelines for culturally and linguistically diverse
children.

Page 33

Articles and Books with Resources on Early Childhood Special

Education Evaluation
Assessment and Intervention for Communication Disorders in Culturally and
Linguistic Diverse Populations
This text provides specific information on the major cultural and linguistic groups a
speech-language pathologist may encounter, as well as best practices when assessing
and working with a student or adult from a culture that is not shared by the service
provider. As speech-language pathologists serve more clients from culturally and
linguistically diverse backgrounds, there is a growing need for strategies to provide
successful and appropriate assessment and treatment. This resource helps practitioners
determine the most effective and appropriate ways to provide services to all clients.
Langdon, H.W. (2008). Assessment and intervention for communication disorders in culturally and
linguistically diverse populations. Clifton Park, NY: Delmar, Cengage Learning.

The Bilingual Special Education Interface (4th Edition)

This book describes the major needs of bilingual children who have disabilities and balances
practical information with strong research. Chapters highlight the connections between the
common knowledge base and programs and methodologies of special education and those of
bilingual education. Other topics include: the legal background supporting bilingual special
education; bilingual language development and second language acquisition; issues,
considerations, procedures and techniques related to assessment; development of
individualized educational programs, curriculum, methods and materials; family involvement;
and issues in policy development and implementation. This book is an excellent resource for
teachers, social workers, psychologists and speech/language pathologists. It covers evaluation
in all areas of development and looks at standardized tests, criterion-referenced measures,
work sampling and how to use observations as ways of determining a diagnosis. There is
discussion of developing the IEP and a thorough review of federal law.
th

Baca, L.M. and Cervantes, H.T. (2003). Bilingual special education interface (4 ed.). Upper Saddle
River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Developmental Delay or Cultural Difference? Developing Effective Child Find Practices

for Young Children from Culturally and Linguistically Diverse Families.
This article considers the extent to which Child Find procedures, discussed in the literature, are
responsive to families from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds. Discussion of the
legal basis for Child Find activities targeting these young children and challenges in early
identification of children from diverse backgrounds is followed by seven suggested guidelines
and possible resources for developing culturally sensitive Child Find programs.

Page 34

Pavri, S. (2001). Developmental delay or cultural difference? Developing effective child find practices for
young children from culturally and linguistically diverse families. Young Exceptional Children,
4, 2-9

Linguistically Culturally Diverse II: American Indian and Spanish Speaking

The Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction produced this manual to provide information on
linguistic and cultural differences of American Indian and Spanish-speaking students. The
manual provides information on developing guidelines for assessment procedures used with
American Indian and Spanish-speaking students who are experiencing academic and
communication difficulties in the educational environment. Although this guide is specific to
American Indian and Spanish-speaking students, educators in both regular and special
education will find the information useful in their work with students from other bilingual and
cultural groups.
Christine Freiberg (2003). Linguistically Culturally Diverse II: Populations: American Indian and Spanish
Speaking. Milwaukee, WI: Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction.
http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/search/detailmini.jsp?_nfpb=true&_&ERICExtSearch_SearchValu
e_0=ED482754&ERICExtSearch_SearchType_0=no&accno=ED482754

Page 35

Web Resources on Early Childhood Special Education Evaluation

Bilingual Therapies Website
This Website provides a variety of clinical resources for speech-language pathologists working
with Spanish-speaking children and families. Lists of informative Websites, electronic
educational forms translated into Spanish, and speech-language articles and materials are all
available without charge. Two monthly columns, Hortencia Kaysers From the Hart and
Henriette Langdons Que Tal? are archived here as well. A series of 10-minute webinars
cover evaluation of phonology in bilinguals, intervention with phonologically disordered bilingual
children and autism in bilingual populations.
Bilingual Therapies, Inc. (n.d.). Bilingual therapies Spanish speech-language pathology.
http://www.bilingualtherapies.com

ELL Companion to Reducing Bias in Special Education Evaluation - Minnesota

Department of Education
This online resource provides guidelines for reducing bias in special education evaluation for
English Language Learners (ELL). The manual was developed as a companion to the existing
guidelines, Reducing Bias in Special Education Assessment for American Indian and African
American Students, and can be found on the Minnesota Department of Education Website.
Topics covered in the manual include legal requirements for evaluation; diversity among English
Language Learners; language acquisition; how to work with cultural liaisons, interpreters and/or
translators; collecting and using background information; assessment tools; eligibility; and
mental health issues affecting immigrants and refugees. More chapters with information on how
to evaluate achievement, intellectual functioning and eligibility determination and documentation
will be updated as they are completed.
Minnesota Department of Education. (2003). ELL companion to reducing bias in special education
evaluation.
http://education.state.mn.us/MDE/Learning_Support/Special_Education/Evaluation_Program_Pla
nning_Supports/Cultural_Linguistic_Diversity/ELL_Companion_Manual/index.html

Language Ability Assessment of Spanish-English Bilinguals: Future Directions

This short online article summarizes research on bilingual language development and describes
the limitations of current approaches to testing the language skills of culturally and linguistically
diverse populations such as translating tests and comparing monolinguals with bilinguals. It
provides suggestions for developing new tests that are designed for and normed on bilingual
children.

Page 36

Kester, E.S. & Pena, E.D. (2002). Language ability assessment of Spanish-English bilinguals: Future
Directions Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 8(4).
http://PAREonline.net/getvn.asp?v=8&n=4

PACER
This Parent Advocacy organization has produced many materials in Spanish, Hmong and
Somali to help parents understand their rights in special education, how the evaluation process
works, how to prepare for an IEP meeting, emotional/behavioral disorders, mental health
services, and assistive technology, to name just a few topics. Find "Translated Materials" in the
Publications section.
www.pacer.org

Reducing Bias in Special Education Assessments Manual - Minnesota Department of

Education
American Indian and African American students are disproportionately represented in special
education programs in Minnesota. This manual provides data and analysis of the causes of
disproportional representation, its positive and negative impacts, and legal requirements of
school districts for reducing bias in assessment practices.
Minnesota Department of Education. (1998). Reducing bias in special education assessments manual.
http://education.state.mn.us/MDE/Learning_Support/Special_Education/Evaluation_Program_Pla
nning_Supports/Cultural_Linguistic_Diversity/Reducing_Bias_Manual/index.html

Screening and Assessment of Young English-Language Learners

In 2003, the National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC) and the
National Association of Early Childhood Specialists in state Departments of Education published
the joint position statement, Early Childhood Curriculum, Assessment, and Program Evaluation:
Building an Effective, Accountable System in Programs for Children Birth through Age 8. The
position statement explains what effective assessment looks like for all young children. One of
the indicators of a good assessment is that it is linguistically and culturally responsive for all
children, including those whose first language is not English. The purpose of this supplement to
the original position statement is to: (1) explain and expand on the meaning of linguistically and
culturally responsive; (2) discuss issues specifically related to the screening and assessment of
young English-language learners; and, (3) make recommendations to increase the probability
that all young English-language learners will benefit from appropriate, effective assessments of
their learning and development. This document, as well as a two-page summary, can be
downloaded from the NAEYC Website at www.naeyc.org . Both documents also are available
in Spanish.
National Association for the Education of Young Children. (2005). Screening and assessment of young
English-language learners. http://www.naeyc.org/positionstatements/cape

Page 37

Legal Requirements According to IDEA and MDE Regarding ELL

Evaluations
Federal and Minnesota state laws require that:
1. Special education testing must be done in the childs primary language or
languages, or in the case of a young child, the language normally used by the
parents of the child.
2. No single procedure can be used to determine eligibility.
3. Testing materials and procedures should be used that are not racially or
culturally discriminatory.
4. Communication to the parents and due process forms must be provided to them
in the parents language. This must be documented.
Implementing legal guidelines and due process requirements for evaluations of children who
speak languages other than English involves being aware of cultural and linguistic differences
and making accommodations so as to ensure unbiased testing and eligibility determination.
When striving to limit bias in evaluation, traditional evaluation methods need to be modified and
additional information must be gathered. It is not necessary to override state eligibility when
using alternative evaluation methods for culturally and linguistically diverse children.
The Minnesota Department of Education (MDE) outlines how to evaluate and determine
eligibility for ELL students. An override is not necessary. The evaluation team should gather
additional evaluation data and document all types of data that were used to determine eligibility.
A statement should be made as to why standard procedures needed to be modified for the
student. A statement should be made as to which data had the greatest relative importance to
the eligibility decision. Please see ELL Companion Chapter 8 found at:
http://education.state.mn.us/MDE/Learning_Support/Special_Education/Evaluation_Program_Planning_S
upports/Cultural_Linguistic_Diversity/ELL_Companion_Manual/index.html

A statement such as the following can be included in the evaluation summary report (ESR) to
explain how and why standard testing procedures were modified:
The standards and procedures (standardized, norm-referenced scores) used with the majority
of children were not used with this child, as the instruments were not normed on bilingual
children who speak languages other than English. Such norm-referenced scores are not
considered valid for this child. The objective data used to conclude that this child has a disability
and is in need of specialized instruction included: (MODIFY AS APPROPRIATE) parent
comments, Head Start teacher comments, developmental data, observation of the child in the
home/school setting, the childs responses to items from standardized instruments used with
young children, and comparison of his/her skill development with that of siblings (or peers from
the same culture).

Page 38

A List of the federal and Minnesota laws pertaining to special education evaluations of CLD
children can be found on the MDE Website ELL Companion, Chapter 2:
Minnesota Department of Education. (2003). ELL companion to reducing bias in special education
evaluation.
http://education.state.mn.us/MDE/Learning_Support/Special_Education/Evaluation_Program_Pla
nning_Supports/Cultural_Linguistic_Diversity/Reducing_Bias_Manual/index.html

Minnesota due process forms in other languages

(Arabic, Bosnian, Khmer, Hmong, Lao, Russian, Somali, Spanish, Vietnamese) such as:
Parental Rights and Procedural Safeguards, Notice of Team Meeting, Evaluation Summary
Report, Individual Education Plan, and others are available at:
http://education.state.mn.us/MDE/Accountability_Programs/Compliance_and_Assistance/Recom
mended_Due_Process_Forms/index.html

Minnesota Rules for speech or language impairments 3525:1343 can be found at:
https://www.revisor.mn.gov/rules/?id=3525.1343

In reference to communication evaluations of culturally and linguistically diverse students, it

should be noted that the Minnesota criteria for Language Disorder, Subpart 4, Part B, #4 states
that speech-language pathologists do not need to show scores of -2.0 standard deviations on
two standardized language tests if those tests are not deemed technically adequate for the
student being tested. The criteria specifically states that alternative measures can be used,
including: "additional language samples, criterion-referenced instruments, observations in
natural environment, and parent reports."
Minnesota Rules for Early Childhood: Special Education 3525:1350 for Birth to Age Three
can be found at:
https://www.revisor.mn.gov/rules/?id=3525.1350

Minnesota Rules for Early Childhood: Special Education 3525.1351 for ages 3 to 6 can be
found at:
https://www.revisor.mn.gov/rules/?id=3525.1351

MDE Contact: ELL and Minority Issues Specialist regarding legal questions:
Elizabeth Watkins, 651-582-8678, Elizabeth.watkins@state.mn.us
MDE Contact Specialists in Early Childhood:
Lisa Backer, ECSE Specialist: 651-582-8473 Email: lisa.backer@state.mn.us
Michele Bedor, ECSE Specialist: 651-582-8753, Email: michele.bedor@state.mn.us
Kara Hall, Interagency Specialist: 651-582-8495 Email: kara.hall@state.mn.us

Page 39

Loraine Jensen, Part C Coordinator: 651-582-8523 Email: loraine.jensen@state.mn.us

Shivani Pandit, ECSE Specialist: 651-582-8266 Email: shivani.pandit@state.mn.us

Home Language Interview/Ethnographic Interview

In planning for the evaluation of a culturally/linguistically diverse child, one of the first things that
needs to be accomplished is to determine what languages the child is exposed to and what
languages he/she speaks. There are many parent interview forms available to help staff learn
about the language environment of the child. Some are listed below. Others are available in
the resources described in Chapter 1.
An ethnographic interview style is appropriate to use with CLD families since it allows Early
Childhood Special Education (ECSE) staff to get to know the family, the child and the family's
child-rearing practices through open-ended questions that focus on the whole family rather than
just on the child. The goal of this process is to understand the family's perspective and needs in
order to provide family-centered early intervention.

Examples of Home Language/Ethnographic Interview Forms

The following forms can be used to gather information about the languages that the child hears
and uses.
ELL Student and Family Background Information adapted for use in Early Childhood from the
MDE ELL Companion Web manual (See Appendix 3B.)
Parent Interview for Communication Evaluation of Students who are CLD - adapted from
Minneapolis Public Schools Special Education Department (See Appendix 3C. )
Questionnaire for the Family - Home language and developmental history interview in English
(Durn, 2008) (See Appendix 3D.)
Cuestionario Para La Familia - Home language interview in Spanish (Durn, 2008) (See
Appendix 3E.)

Page 40

Minnesota Department of Education Home Language Questionnaire - available in English and

12 different languages: Cambodian, Amharic, Arabic, Bosnian, Chinese, Hmong, Lao,
Oromo, Russian, Somali, Spanish, Vietnamese. Minnesota requires that every child in the
districtregardless of native language (including native English speakers) have a home
language questionnaire on file. The questionnaire is the first step in determining a student's ELL
status. It need only be collected once during a childs time in the district. The designation of
home language stays the same throughout the child's school career. The HOME PRIMARY
LANGUAGE is the language first spoken by students when they begin speaking, the language
spoken most of the time, or the language usually spoken in the home.
http://education.state.mn.us/mde/Learning_Support/English_Language_Learners/Communication
With_Parents/index.html

Health History Interview

Part of the information gathering process for both Early Childhood Screening and Early
Childhood Special Education evaluation is to obtain health history and developmental history.
View samples of Health History forms. The Ramsey County Information did the Spanish
translation.
Early Childhood Health Information: English (See Appendix 3F)
Early Childhood Health Information: Spanish (See Appendix 3G)

Articles, Books and Websites with Information on Ethnographic

Interviewing
Interviewing Bilingual Parents - From the Hart
This issue of Hortencia Kayser's monthly newsletter discusses the importance of discovering
how much exposure a bilingual child has had in each of his/her languages and in what context
the languages are heard and used. She gives specific examples of case history questions that
one could ask of parents to get this information. This and other Hortencia Kayser newsletters
can be found on the Bilingual Therapies Website:
http://www.bilingualtherapies.com/kayser-newsletter/2000/interviewing-bilingual-parents/

Discovering Family Concerns, Priorities, and Resources: Sensitive Family Information

Gathering
This article provides an overview of the family information gathering process in early
intervention and the effect of cultural and linguistic diversity on family information gathering.
Practical strategies that early intervention providers can use in interviews, surveys, and
observations are discussed, as well as implications for personnel preparation.
Banks, R. A., Santos, R. M., Roof, V. (2003). Discovering family concerns, priorities, and resources:
Sensitive family information gathering. Young Exceptional Children, 6, 11-19.

Page 41

Toward a Thick Description of Families - Using Ethnography to Overcome the Obstacles

to Providing Family-Centered Early Intervention Services
This article describes the use of ethnographic interviewing to develop a description of the whole
family from the family's perspective through observations and open-ended questions, such as,
"Tell me about your child" or "Tell me about your child's experience in the hospital." It is based
on family-systems theories and ecological theories of child development. It is necessary to
explore with families their understanding of 'disability'. Speech-language pathologists who are
members of the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA) are able to access
the entire article online.
Hammer, C.S. (1998). Toward a thick description of families. American Journal of Speech Language
Pathology, 7, 5-22. http://ajslp.highwire.org/cgi/content/citation/7/1/5

Asking the Right Questions in the Right Ways: Strategies for Ethnographic Interviewing
This five-page article provides suggestions for interviewing parents in an open-ended manner in
order to reduce bias and to allow parents to share with you their experiences with their child.
Westby, C., Burda, A., and Mehta, Z. (2003). Asking the right questions in the right ways: Strategies for
ethnographic interviewing. The ASHA Leader, 4/29/2003, Vol. 8 Issue 8, p4, 4p
http://www.asha.org/Publications/leader/2003/030429/f030429b.htm

Finding and Working with Interpreters

Collaboration between service providers and families forms the basis upon which all early
childhood services are given. Therefore, interpreters and translators play a critical role in the
special education process when educators are faced with serving linguistically diverse children
and families. The follow resources are directly applicable to this topic.
Collaborating with Interpreters and Translators: A Guide for Professionals in the
Communication Disorders Field
This book addresses federal guidelines and best practices for working with interpreters and
translators in a variety of settings. It gives options for overcoming typical challenges in this area
and also provides a variety of sample forms to use in implementing work with interpreters and
translators. The authors provide standards for planning collaborations with interpreters and
translators and gives useful suggestions for making appropriate assessment decisions. This
resource is useful when training interpreters, translators, speech-language pathologists, and
audiologists to work together to serve the growing population of people whose primary language
is not English.
Langdon, H.W. and Cheng, L.L. (2002). Collaborating with interpreters and translators: A guide for
professionals in the communication disorders field. Austin, TX: PRO-ED. www.proedinc.com

Interpreters and Translators in Communication Disorders: A Practitioner's Handbook

This companion book by Henriette Langdon provides an interpreter training program to assist
speech-language pathologists in training interpreters to work in special education. This is a
useful resource to share with your interpreters. It is a quick reference that covers all of the
Page 42

essentials during training. This guide assists the professional and the interpreter in operating
within a common framework.
Langdon, H.W. (2002). Interpreters and translators in communication disorders: A practitioners
handbook Austin, TX: PRO-ED. www.proedinc.com

Its a Three-Way Conversation Families, Service Providers and Interpreters

This article reviews literature on the use of interpreters and offers recommendations that will
promote effective communication among family members, service providers and interpreters
who speak the family's language but have not been trained formally as interpreters or special
educators. The complexity of the interpretation process is discussed.
Ohtake, Y., Santos, R., Fowler, S. (2000) Its a three-way conversation families, service providers and
interpreters. Young Exceptional Children, 4, 1, 12-18

A Three-Way Conversation - Effective Use of Cultural Mediators, Interpreters and

Translators
This booklet and videotape discuss how cultural mediators, interpreters and translators can be
effectively utilized as key special education team members, integral to the process of working
with families from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds. The intended user audience
includes service delivery personnel and professionals who are working with children with
disabilities and their families. It would be appropriate for early childhood educators, service
providers and early interventionists.
Moore, S., Perez-Mendez, C., Beatty, J., & Eiseman, W. (1999). A Three-Way Conversation: Effective
use of cultural mediators, interpreters and translators. Denver, CO: Western Media Products
http://ecap-webserver.crc.uiuc.edu/cgi-bin/clas/viewitem.asp?rp=2&cl=2666

Minnesota Department of Education Resources for Special Education Staff

1. ELL Companion - Chapter 5: Cultural Liaisons, Interpreters and Translators in the Special
Education Process - MDE has gathered many resources on training and using interpreters in
special education. Definitions and job descriptions are provided for cultural liaisons, interpreters
and translators. In addition, sample codes of ethics and a list of Ten Core Competencies for
interpreters are included.
http://education.state.mn.us/MDE/Learning_Support/Special_Education/Evaluation_Program_Pla
nning_Supports/Cultural_Linguistic_Diversity/ELL_Companion_Manual/index.html

Page 43

2. MDE Interpreter Database - lists names of interpreters, contact information, languages

spoken and the areas within Minnesota to which the interpreter is willing to travel. School
districts can contact these interpreters and make their own arrangements for hiring these
individuals. New interpreters who wish to be included in the database should contact the
Minnesota Department of Education.
http://education.state.mn.us/InterpreterDB/

3. Let's Talk - Holding IEP Meetings with ELL Families and Interpreters - a reproducible trifold informational brochure that contains basic information on how to work with interpreters
effectively in IEP meetings including Briefing, Interacting and Debriefing. This can be distributed
to IEP team members before or during meetings held with an interpreter.
http://education.state.mn.us/MDE/Learning_Support/Special_Education/Evaluation_Program_Pla
nning_Supports/Cultural_Linguistic_Diversity/index.html

4. Working with Interpreters - a brief three page description of interpreter/translator duties as

well as how to hire and pay them.
General Principles for Working with Interpreters - this one page handout summarizes best
practice in working with interpreters. Both of these documents can be found at:
http://education.state.mn.us/mdeprod/groups/specialed/documents/instruction/036852.pdf

Resources for Interpreters

1. Special Education Glossary of Terms - Hmong and Somali - for use by special education

interpreters. This dictionary is arranged in categories according to topics (ESR reports, IEP's,
Due Process forms, etc.) The words are in English alphabetic order. Available to download and
print from the Minnesota Department of Education.
http://education.state.mn.us/MDE/Learning_Support/Special_Education/Evaluation_Program_Pla
nning_Supports/Cultural_Linguistic_Diversity/index.htm l

English-Spanish Special Education Glossary/Glosario Ingles-Espaol de Educacin

Especial - a collection of English terms used in special education services that are translated
into Spanish. It was designed to assist translators and interpreters in the difficult task of
conveying accurate information in Spanish to parents of children with special needs.
http://mpls.k12.mn.us/cms/lib/MN01001471/Centricity/Domain/83/AdditionalInformationForELL/En
glish-SpanishSpecialEducationGlossary.pdf

Page 44

3. Training for Interpreters Working in Special Education - There is no degree program for
training interpreters for special education in the state of Minnesota. However, the Minnesota
Department of Education has regular training sessions that are run by Elizabeth Watkins, the
ELL and Minority Issues Specialist. She can be reached at:
Elizabeth Watkins, 651-582-8678, elizabeth.watkins@state.mn.us

4. International Institute of Minnesota - Interpreter Ethics and Skills Training - workshops

for interpreters and interpreter managers - The International Institute occasionally offers training
on the role of the interpreter, the interpreter's Code of Ethics and suggestions for conducting
interpreted encounters.
The International Institute of Minnesota, 1694 Como Avenue, Saint Paul, Minnesota
(651) 647-0191
http://www.iimn.org

Sample Forms for Orientation of New Interpreters

When hiring a new interpreter, it is important to get contact information from the person, discuss
the duties and expectations and review the code of ethics. Here you will find some sample
forms that can be adapted, as appropriate, for your district.
1. Early Childhood Special Education Interpreter Contact Information - Keep track of your
interpreters and how best to contact them and when they are available. (See Appendix 3H)
2. Early Childhood Special Education - Basic expectations of interpreters and
information about payment. You will want to inform your new interpreter of what will be
expected and how much he/she will be paid. (See Appendix 3I)
3. Sample Code of Ethics for Cultural Liaisons/School Interpreters. This is a document
that your bilingual school employee or new interpreter can read through and sign if in agreement
to uphold standards of confidentiality and impartiality. (See Appendix 3J)
4. Working with Interpreters: Suggested Script to Use for Evaluation Summary Report
Meetings. This handout walks an interpreter through possible topics covered in an Evaluation
Summary Report. Ideas are given regarding how to describe the content of the different areas
of evaluation. (See Appendix 3K)

Working with Interpreters During Evaluations

The federal law says:
1. Testing must be conducted in the childs primary means of communication.
2. Testing must be nonbiased.
3. Parents must be informed of their rights in their language. Parent Rights brochures are
available in eight other languages on the MDE Website: Arabic, Bosnian, Hmong,
Page 45

Khmer, Lao, Russian, Somali, Spanish, Vietnamese.

http://education.state.mn.us/MDE/Accountability_Programs/Compliance_and_Assistance/Recom
mended_Due_Process_Forms/index.html

4. Parents must understand and agree to the evaluation plan.

The Interpreters role is to:
Facilitate communication between school staff and families and students.
Help the staff provide information about special education to families.
Provide information to school staff about students background and the familys view of
the student.
Provide cultural information to staff and families that may impact interactions, evaluation
or educational planning.
Who should interpret for ELL evaluations?
A trained special education interpreter.
An interpreter from an agency.
An hourly contracted low-incidence interpreter.
Bilingual school district staff.
Last resort is: family member (only when there are no other options).
Low incidence interpreters can be found through:
Community organizations.
Churches.
Colleges and universities.
Private interpreter agencies.
Using a family member should be a last resort since it is difficult for family members to be
objective. It is not appropriate to use bilingual children as interpreters for their parents.
When talking to parents with the help of the interpreter, special education staff should:
Avoid jargon.
Keep sentences short.
From time to time ask if the parents have any questions or ask them to restate what was
said to them to be sure it is clear.
Look at the parents and speak directly to them, not to the interpreter.
Evaluations with an Interpreter
Ask the interpreter to interpret exactly what you say and to do it just one time, unless further
instructions are given. It is hard not to give cues, because the interpreters want the children to
do well. In some cultures, talking with your hands is second nature and is done unconsciously.
You may need to suggest that they sit on their hands.
Page 46

We may want to determine how the child responds to specific stimuli given different levels of
cueing, for example,
Following a one-step direction with a cue.
Following a one-step direction with no cue.
Following a two-step direction with no cues.
If so, there needs to be a discussion about cues. We give cues by pointing to the correct object
or picture, by looking at it, by changing the instructions or by giving more information. If the
instruction is "point to the shoe, saying additional cues such as: the top one, the one by
Mommy, the one you put on your foot would change the amount of information that the child is
given and would change what is being tested.
An evaluation of the home language is better completed in the home. The child associates the
home language with the home environment. A child may be reluctant to use his home
language in a school setting, even with an interpreter who speaks the language.
For speech clinicians, interpreters may be asked to:
Take a language sample (in their language or in English).
Estimate how intelligible the childs speech is.
Read a book with the child or play with a toy informally.
Do an imitative articulation test.
Identify the dialect of the language spoken by the family and make sure that it matches
their dialect.
For assistance in evaluating the speech and language skills of children who speak other
languages, consider contacting a bilingual speech-language pathologist see list of bilingual
speech-language pathologists at: www.MSHA.net. The list contains 58 bilingual speechlanguage pathologists and audiologists in Minnesota who speak 25 different languages.
http://msha.affiniscape.com/displaycommon.cfm?an=1&subarticlenbr=20

Page 47

The BID procedure: Briefing, Interaction, Debriefing, described by Henriette Langdon was
developed to help interpreters and special education staff complete an evaluation together:

BID: Briefing
We can help interpreters by going over the evaluation plan ahead of time. Show them any
questionnaires that will need to be interpreted and administered to the parent, such as,
Receptive-Expressive Emergent Language Scale-3, Sensory Profile, Scales of Independent
Behavior, etc., so they can get clarification on any terms used that are unfamiliar.
Explain the purpose of the testing.
Review the materials and procedures.
Explain strategies you will use to maintain the child's interest and motivation
(reinforcements toys, food).
Give the interpreter time to review and translate items ahead of time if necessary.
Clarify terms.
If needed, work with the speech-language pathologist to make an Imitative Articulation
Measure for the language, using a list of all of the consonant sounds in the language
and the interpreter's skills in thinking of simple words that start with or contain those
sounds.

BID Interacting
The interpreter should introduce himself/herself to the child. State that the talking will be
in the home language.
The interpreter may engage the child in informal conversation to establish rapport.
Special education staff directs the interpreter during the evaluation, records responses,
makes notes on behavior, and makes the determination as to special education
eligibility.

BID Debriefing
When the evaluation visit is over, away from the student and family, review how the child
responded. Discuss general impressions with the interpreter. Ask about cultural issues that
may have been confusing. Were some test items culturally inappropriate? Answer questions
that the interpreter may have. Give the interpreter feedback on his/her interaction during the
evaluation and what could be done differently next time.
Using an interpreter to give a standardized test invalidates the standardization. None of the
tests available in Early Childhood Special Education were normed having items given by an
interpreter with the exception of some bilingual and Spanish speech and language tests. It is
not appropriate to report the scores. What can be done is to give a description of what the child
could do and what was difficult.

Page 48

Canceling Appointments Without an Interpreter

What if you have an appointment to visit a family at home and the appointment has been
cancelled, but you do not have the interpreter available to let the family know? Here are some
short phrases you could say over the phone to alert the family that the appointment is not going
to happen:
No visit today.
Spanish: No visita hoy. (No bee-see-ta oy)
Somali:

Maanta booqasho ma jirto. (Ma-anta bow-kah-show ma chirto)

The teacher is not coming today:

Spanish:

La maestra no viene hoy.

(La ma-es-tra no bee-en-ay oy)

Somali:

Macalimadii manta ma imaaneyso.

(Ma-a-lima-dee manta ma ee-mah-ney-so)

Hmong:

Nyob zoo! Nais khu tsis tuaj hnub no.

(Nyah Zhong! Nai kou chee toua new nah.)

Screening of CLD Children in Early Childhood

There are many challenges in screening culturally and linguistically diverse (CLD) children. To
start, it can be difficult to conduct effective outreach activities in CLD communities in a way that
adequately informs all families with young children about community-wide early childhood
screenings and other Child Find activities. Community-wide screenings often have a standard
protocol for all families, making it difficult to individualize the screening process to meet the
needs of CLD children and families. Another challenge is determining a childs proficiency in
his/her native language and English. Parents typically are the ones who provide this
background information, and they might be inclined to say their child knows English even when
he/she is more proficient in the home language. In some situations an interpreter might be
needed but not available. Obviously, it would be unfair and invalid to test a child in a language
that he/she does not speak or understand.
Screening of CLD children often over-identifies or under-identifies children for special education
referral. Over-identification can occur when the skills of CLD students are compared to children
of the majority culture who hear and speak only English. Even when test items are translated, it
is unfair to make this comparison. It would be ideal to measure the child's abilities in both of
Page 49

his/her languages. Screening conducted in only one language provides incomplete information
regarding the child's performance and can lead to an inaccurate referral. Under-identification
can occur when significant delays are attributed to lack of exposure to English without
considering the childs skills in his/her home language. An evaluation of the home language
and/or a parent interview may be needed to identify possible delays in the first language. Early
Childhood Special Education teachers, therefore, need to carefully plan follow-up to these
referrals in order to gather more information regarding the child's language background (For
examples of home language and ethnographic interview forms see Appendices 3B, 3C, 3D, 3E).

Effective Child Find Practices for CLD Populations

Many Early Childhood Special Education teachers participate in local Child Find activities (e.g.,
district-wide preschool screenings) and/or serve on local Interagency Early Intervention
Committees (IEIC). Reaching out to culturally and linguistically diverse populations for Child
Find purposes continues to be a challenge faced by most communities in Minnesota. Edmunds,
Martinson and Goldberg (1990) interviewed a parent and three early intervention professionals
in four different states with large culturally and linguistically diverse populations. They found
that the following four strategies were used in all of the effective Child Find programs that target
CLD populations:
1. Culturally and Linguistically Appropriate Outreach: All Child Find outreach activities
were conducted in the native language of the target community. Involvement of leadership
from the target community was a priority to provide advice regarding the direction of Child
Find activities that might be most successful and culturally acceptable. In some cases,
programs focused more on oral communication via advertisements on popular local radio
stations, messages delivered by clergy at churches serving the CLD population in that
community or announcements at large community events such as street fairs, county fairs,
etc. This approach to outreach was found to be particularly important when literacy in the
native language of the target community was uncommon. In addition to the verbal
strategies, all written early intervention information was published in the native language of
the target community and made accessible at locations frequented by the target population.
Some examples of culturally appropriate locations include local ethnic grocery stores,
clinics, churches, community centers and other agencies (e.g., public health and social
services agencies).
2. Active and Ongoing Participation of the CLD Community in Child Find Planning:
Prominent members of the CLD community should serve on the local Interagency Early
Intervention Committee (IEIC). Their ongoing participation on the committee will allow the
group to understand the needs, cultural norms and the best means of communication with
the target CLD population in the area. These community leaders can serve on the IEIC as
interested community members, even if they are not directly involved in Early Intervention,
and can be recruited from local churches, community centers or by soliciting
recommendations from CLD families currently being served.
Page 50

3. Recruitment and Retention of CLD Professionals: It is widely recognized that there are
too few early childhood professionals who are from culturally and linguistically diverse
backgrounds. An important step in Child Find practices is to have a CLD professional from
the same cultural and linguistic community as your target population represents early
intervention services in your area. In order to do this, there needs to be a focus on the
recruitment and retention of professionals with diverse backgrounds. This means that the
culture of the IEIC, as well as participating agencies in the community, should be open to
new ideas and supportive of diversity. Professionals from culturally diverse backgrounds are
needed to strengthen the ability to more effectively reach traditionally underserved CLD
populations and ultimately have higher rates of success with Child Find.
4. Ongoing Training: Unfortunately, attempts to recruit and retain CLD early childhood
professionals are often unsuccessful. It is increasingly important for local agencies involved
in early intervention to sponsor workshops and trainings in the area of serving CLD young
children and their families. Practitioners serving this population need to be aware of their
own cultural backgrounds and sensitive to the needs of individuals from different
backgrounds. They also need to know how to best reach out to diverse communities and to
communicate and interact in culturally appropriate ways. Additionally, it is imperative that
local service providers know what resources are available to them when questions arise. If
local service providers and administrators who sit on the IEIC are well informed this will also
improve Child Find efforts targeting CLD populations in your area.

Referral to Early Childhood Special Education

When there is a concern about the development of a young child in Minnesota prior to
Kindergarten entrance, a referral is made to the local Interagency Early Intervention Committee
(IEIC). An Interagency Referral Team (IRT) reviews referrals and decides what action is
appropriate. It generally follows that an Early Childhood Special Education (ECSE) teacher will
be given the referral and called upon to decide whether to screen the child to determine a need
for further evaluation or to go ahead and fully evaluate the child for eligibility for special
education services. In this process, ECSE teachers often carry the responsibility of judging the
childs developmental functioning and whether or not he/she is in need of special education.
Many questions have arisen in the field about best practices regarding the process of screening
young CLD children, including what screening tools to use, how to ascertain the childs
language ability in both their native language and English, and how to appropriately identify a
developmental delay versus a cultural difference. The first and most important step in screening
young children from CLD backgrounds is to gather information from the family regarding the
childs development. (For examples of home language and ethnographic interview forms see
Appendices 3B, 3C, 3D, 3E.)
Sensitive and culturally appropriate information gathering is critical to the screening process.
The manner in which information is gathered from families who are CLD may differ from the way
the process is currently organized. In many communities the first visit to a family is conducted
Page 51

by an Individualized Family Service Plan (IFSP) facilitator (0-3) or ECSE teacher (3-5) who
interviews the family to gather information. This includes: basic family demographics; thoughts
the family has regarding their childs development; medical information regarding the mothers
pregnancy, labor, and delivery; and the health of the child following birth. Consent forms are
signed, the evaluation process is explained and packets of information are distributed from all
participating agencies. For some families whose cultural values and practices differ from those
of the mainstream (on which the intake process has been established) this initial visit may seem
overwhelming, intrusive and inappropriately personal for a first visit. Banks, Milagros-Santos,
and Roof (2001) suggest that formal interviews and surveys should be used cautiously with this
population. Instead they suggest that family information gathering should be conducted
informally over time with a sensitivity to and respect for the cultural values of the family. The
early intervention system should have flexibility about how much information is collected and
when it is collected.
The early childhood special education team, in collaboration with the local IEIC and IFSP
facilitator, should develop a list of relevant information that needs to be gathered to complete
the screening and/or evaluation process. This information can then be gathered over
subsequent visits to the home as the team learns more about cultural norms, family members'
roles and language patterns in the home. The initial visit then should be less of a formal
interview and more of an open-ended discussion with the family about their perception of their
childs strengths and weaknesses, any concerns they might have regarding their child's
development and the language patterns in the home that will directly affect decisions made after
the childs screening or evaluation. Some sample, open-ended questions are listed below:
How well do you understand your child?
How well do others understand your child?
Does your child talk using several words together? Please give an example.
What kinds of questions does your child ask?
What kinds of things does your child tell you about?
Please describe your childs speech. Is it similar to or different from siblings/cousins?
How does your child play/get along with others?
What kinds of directions does your child follow?
Simple, one-step directions?
Two-step directions?
How many times do you have to repeat the direction?
Do you have to do anything to help your child understand the direction?
Describe how your child behaves when you are out in the community.
Can you go to the store or a friends house without behavior problems?
What concerns do you have related to your childs learning or development?
Does your child seem to learn like other children?
Does your child learn new skills at a rate you would expect?
Additional home visits during the evaluation process may be necessary to complete the process
in a culturally sensitive and conversational manner. Establishing a relationship with the family
and respecting their cultural norms will take precedence over completing all paperwork during
Page 52

the initial visit. Understandably, special education due process forms may need to be signed,
but sensitive information about pregnancy, birth and delivery and more details about concerns
they may have regarding their child may need to wait for subsequent visits.
Banks, Santos and Roof (2001), offer seven suggestions for interviewing culturally and
linguistically diverse families:
1. It is recommended that a conversational approach be adopted with families.
2. The purpose of the interview should be made clear to the families prior to the visit.
3. A rapport should be established with the family prior to gathering sensitive information.
Small gestures such as greeting all of the people present, thanking everyone for their
time and sharing background information about yourself and your program can help
with that relationship building.
4. Using open-ended questions along with close-ended questions can lend to more of a
conversation rather than just a question-and-response format to the dialogue.
5. Practitioners should be sensitive to the fact that some families may see information
gathering as an invasion of their privacy or as threatening or demeaning. They should
be sure to use interpreters or cultural liaisons whenever possible.
6. Including as many family members that are present as possible in your interview will
broaden the scope of the information you are able to gather about the child and their
home life. This also recognizes that many times extended family members may play
vital roles in the childs development.
7. Practitioners should begin with more general information and get more specific as the
interview progresses.

Re-screening Referrals from Universal Screening

It is important to differentiate between universal screening procedures implemented in districtwide early childhood screening efforts and screenings conducted by special education teams
based on a referral to special education. Universal screenings are large scale and generally
conducted in a central location such as the public library or a local school building on specified
dates throughout the year. The child and family are generally led through a prescribed series of
activities and interviews to gather information regarding the child's overall development
including vision and hearing. This section does not relate specifically to these screening
situations; however, information from this section can be incorporated into universal screening
efforts to improve the cultural responsiveness and linguistic appropriateness of current
procedures. This section more specifically addresses the situation in which after these universal
screenings children are referred to special education as a "rescreen." In this instance or in other
instances where a special education teacher or team decides to re-screen a child instead of
initiating a full evaluation process, it is important that the special education team use appropriate
screening procedures with culturally and linguistically diverse (CLD) children and their families
to gather accurate information about the child's need for further evaluation.
One of the main difficulties in appropriately screening CLD preschoolers is that Early Childhood
Special Education (ECSE) preschool teachers responsible for processing referrals often do not
have the time and flexibility built into their schedules to make home visits. Or if they do, their
Page 53

home visiting time is much more limited than teachers who work with children birth to 3 years
old. This time constraint may lead the focus of the home visit to be on the expediency of the
screening rather than on the quality of the information obtained. Unfortunately, there is no
perfect screening tool that shortcuts the need for a process of information gathering that
includes interviewing the family to gather information regarding the child's exposure to child care
environments, the family's language usage in the home, and cultural norms that might cause
this child's development to look different. Best practice continues to include gathering
information first from the family by involving them as much as possible in the screening process.
Additionally, it is important to observe a CLD child in their natural setting to obtain a native
language sample and to observe their typical functioning within their home context. Given this
information, school districts will hopefully become more sensitive to the need to allot home
visiting time for teachers of culturally and linguistically diverse 3- to 5-year olds in ECSE
programs.

Early Childhood Screening Tools

Decisions regarding the use of a specific screening tool are up to local discretion. In selecting
screening measures, the most important point to remember is that no one tool is perfect, and it
is instead the early childhood teachers ability to gather information about the child and their
family in a culturally appropriate manner, in the childs natural setting, that will ultimately provide
valid developmental information to make an informed decision regarding the childs need for
further evaluation. The following list of screening tools has been provided to assist in the
process of making informed decisions regarding the childs need for further evaluation.
American Academy of Pediatrics List of Recommended Developmental Screeners
This table provides information on available screening tools. Information includes the cultural
considerations of the norming sample used for each screening tool as well as which of the tools
are available in languages other than English (Arabic, Chinese, French, Indonesian,
Japanese, Korean, Lao, Malaysian, Portuguese, Russian, Somali, Spanish, Swahili,
Taiwanese, Thai, Turkish, Vietnamese).
American Academy of Pediatrics
http://aappolicy.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/pediatrics;118/1/405/T1

The Ages and Stages Questionnaire-3 (ASQ-3) (Squires & Bricker, 2009)
The ASQ-3 is suitable for use with children birth to 5 years, 6 months, and covers the areas of
gross and fine motor, expressive and receptive language, cognition, self-help, and socialemotional development. The new edition is normed on the largest and most diverse sample of
any screener including 12,695 children from all regions of the United States with representation
of many different ethnic groups. The ASQ-3 can be completed as a caregiver report or through
informal play sessions with the child and observation in the home. The ASQ-3 is available in
English, French, Korean, and Spanish. The Spanish version is not normed specifically on
Spanish speakers. The cut-off scores for bilingual children in the language section should be
Page 54

interpreted cautiously, but the information gathered regarding the childs abilities in each of the
six domains on the questionnaire, in addition to the information provided to you by the family,
can be combined to provide a solid foundation of information that can help you determine
whether or not the child is functioning within normal limits given his/her cultural and linguistic
background.
Available from Brookes Publishing:
http://www.brookespublishing.com/store/books/squires-asq/index.htm

Denver II (Frankenburg, Dodds, Archer, et al., 1992)

The Denver II can be administered to children birth through age 6. In 1992, it underwent a
major re-standardization process to include a more representative sample of the U.S.
population. The Denver II also has separate norms that can be used for subgroups within the
larger sample including norms based on sex of the child, ethnicity and maternal education.
There are no separate norms, however, for bilingual children. The Denver II has been translated
into Spanish and covers language, fine and gross motor, language and personal/social
development.
Available from Denver Developmental Materials, Inc.
http://www.denverii.com/DenverII.html

Developmental Indicators for the Assessment of Learning--3 (DIAL-3) (MardelCzudnowski & Goldenberg, 1998)
The DIAL-3 covers motor, language, concept, self-help and social development and is for use
with children ages 3 years to 6 years, 11 months. It is widely used by Head Start in Minnesota
and is well-known nationally. It was normed on 1,560 English-speaking children and 605
Spanish-speaking children, representing various ethnic groups in the U.S. There is a Spanish
version that is included in every kit, but test administrators should be aware of whether the child
is a monolingual Spanish speaker or if he/she is a bilingual English and Spanish speaker. If the
child speaks both languages they should be tested in both languages on the language and
concept sections on separate days for an accurate picture of their overall language and concept
knowledge. The DIAL-3 also has many pre-academic skills embedded in the screener and the
evaluator should take the child's background experiences into consideration when interpreting
the results of the screening. If the child has not had exposure to a formal preschool program
and if the child is living in poverty with a family that has low educational attainment, it could be
that the child has not had adequate exposure to many of the concepts on the DIAL-3. In this
case, Dynamic Assessment may be a good approach to determining whether the child is
demonstrating a "difference" or a "delay."
Available from Pearson Assessments:
http://www.pearsonassessments.com/dial.aspx

Page 55

Early Screening Inventory-Revised (ESI-R) (Meisels, Wiske, Henderson, 2008)

The ESI-R is available in two versions: the ESI-P for children ages 3 years to 4 years, 5 months,
and the ESI-K for children ages 4 years, 6 months, to 5 years, 11 months. Both versions cover
visual motor/adaptive, language and cognitive development, and both are available in Spanish.
The new examiner's manual includes two appendices that contain administration and scoring
criteria when administering the screener to Spanish-speaking preschoolers.
Available Pearson Assessments:
http://www.pearsonassessments.com/esir.aspx

Learning Accomplishment Profile-Diagnostic Normed Screens (LAP-D) (Hardin, PeisnerFeinberg, Weeks, 2005)
The Learning Accomplishment Profile - Diagnostic Normed Screens has one screening for each
of the following age levels, 3-4, and 5-year olds. The LAP-D Screens contain a hierarchy of
developmental skills arranged in chronological sequence by age level in four developmental
domains, including gross motor, fine motor, language and cognition. The LAP-D is available in
Spanish.
Available from Kaplan Early Learning Company:
http://www.kaplanco.com/store/trans/productDetailForm.asp?CatID=related&CollID=31467

Minneapolis Preschool Screening Instrument-Revised (MPSI-R, 2004)

This screening tool was developed for use with children ages 3 years to 5 years, 11 months.
Items address gross and fine motor, language, literacy, and perceptual development. The
revised version also has a social-emotional subtest. Versions of the MPSI-R are available in
Hmong, Somali and Spanish, and local norms for CLD children are provided based on sample
populations from Minneapolis, Saint Paul, Saint Anthony, Cambridge, Fridley, North Branch and
Woodbury in Minnesota.
Available from: The Funded Programs Office of the Minneapolis Public Schools (612) 668-0470, or online
at: http://www.mpls.k12.mn.us/22821063144026113/site/default.asp

Adapting Screening Tools

In order to adapt your screening tool for language groups other than English:
Use informal nonverbal tasks to measure concept development (block designs, drawing,
matching).
Do not do the language tasks in English. Instead, try informal language tasks in the
home language with the help of an interpreter. One example of an informal tool is the
Bilingual Early Language Assessment (BELA) developed by Tabors and HeiseBaigorria, 2004. There are many other tools listed in the "Informal language tools"
section of this chapter.
Page 56

Carefully consider the prerequisite skills and culturally specific knowledge that may be
embedded in each item on the screener. If the child has recently arrived in the U.S. or
has come from impoverished conditions in another country or in the U.S. do not judge
their development based on a lack of pre-academic concepts such as color, shape, and
letter names. Instead investigate their general development and ability to acquire new
skills.
Ask the parent if they have concerns. If parents have concerns we should look more
carefully at the child's development.
Add Parent Questions to Early Childhood Screening for CLD children:
Do you understand your child?
Do others understand your child?
Does your child talk using several words together?
Does your child ask questions?
Can your child tell a story?
Does your child play and talk like siblings?
Can your child follow two-step directions?
Can you go to the store or a friends house without behavior problems?
Are you concerned with your childs learning or development?
Does your child seem to learn like other children?
Do you see your child learning new skills at a rate you would expect?

Selected Resources for Early Childhood Screening

Screening and Assessment of Young English-language Learners
In 2003, the National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC) and the
National Association of Early Childhood Specialists in State Departments of Education
published the joint position statement, Early Childhood Curriculum, Assessment, and Program
Evaluation: Building an Effective, Accountable System in Programs for Children Birth through
Age 8. The position statement explains what effective assessment looks like for all young
children. One of the indicators of a good assessment is that it is linguistically and culturally
responsive for all children, including those whose first language is not English. The purpose of
this supplement to the original position statement is to: (1) explain and expand on the meaning
of linguistically and culturally responsive; (2) discuss issues specifically related to the
screening and assessment of young English-language learners; and (3) make
recommendations to increase the probability that all young English-language learners will
benefit from appropriate, effective assessments of their learning and development. This
document, as well as a two-page summary, can be downloaded from the NAEYC Website at
www.naeyc.org . Both documents also are available in Spanish.
National Association for the Education of Young Children. (2005). Screening and assessment of
young English-language learners.
http://www.naeyc.org/positionstatements/cape

Page 57

ECHO Emergency and Community Health Outreach Early Childhood Screening

This 30-minute DVD describes the process of early childhood screening in Minnesota and is
available in English, Spanish, Hmong, Somali, Vietnamese, Lao and Khmer (Cambodian).
This DVD is available from ECHO or it can be viewed from the Website in all languages.
Emergency and Community Health Outreach
www.echominnesota.org
125 Charles Ave., Saint Paul, MN 55103 651-224-3344
View the shows at: http://www.echominnesota.org/library/early-childhood-screening

Evaluation of CLD Children in Early Childhood Special Education

The state of Minnesota is becoming increasingly more diverse. The 10 most common home
languages of students in Minnesota schools are, in order of frequency: English, Spanish,
Hmong, Somali, Vietnamese, Russian, Lao, Khmer , Arabic and Oromo. The Minnesota
Department of Education provides language-specific maps indicating, by county, where
speakers of these languages live. These maps can be accessed through the Department of
Educations Website (www.education.state.mn.us). You will find maps listed under the Data
tab on the home page or you can directly link to the maps at the following Web address:
http://education.state.mn.us/mde/Data/Maps/Home_Primary_Languages/index.html

This variety in native languages presents a unique challenge to special educators who are
involved in assessing children whose native language varies their own. The tests that are
typically administered are not appropriate for children who are learning a language other than
English since these children do not have the same background as the children used in the
standardization samples. Traditional tests may contain items or developmental expectations that
are not appropriate for this population. The standardized method of administering the test may
not match the typical play or interaction patterns of children from other cultures. The manner in
which parents are typically involved and the amount of involvment in the assessment process
may not be comfortable to parents from other cultures. When testing is not adapted for culturally
and linguistically diverse (CLD) children, the result has often been over-representation or underrepresentation of these children in special education. Included in this section are some basic
facts about CLD students and some suggestions for evaluation practices in Early Childhood
Special Education (ECSE).

Important Factors in Evaluating CLD Children

When possible, see the preschool-aged child at home. The parent and the child will be
more comfortable. You can observe the child playing with siblings and compare the
siblings performance to that of the child being evaluated.
Testing may take several visits. It can be helpful to observe the child in more than one
setting: in the home, at preschool, playing in the park, etc.

Page 58

If the parents are concerned with their childs development, the childs skills should be
evaluated. Parents are able to describe their childs skills if asked specific questions, and
research supports that parent information is a valid evaluation tool. Use evaluation
measures that make use of the parents input.
Obtain information on the child from other sources if available (with parent permission):
public health nurse, physician, Head Start teacher or preschool teacher, early childhood
screening, etc.
Do not translate tests and then score them. A standardized test that is given in a nonstandardized manner cannot be scored.
Do not give a standardized test in the usual manner to CLD children. Our usual tests
were not designed for children who speak other languages or dialects and were not
normed on CLD children. Therefore, the scores would not be valid.
If items from a standardized test are given to a CLD child, the items must be adapted to
eliminate bias.
Play-based assessment procedures are appropriate to use in place of standardized
tests.
When the home visit is complete, ask the parents whether the childs performance was
typical.
Adaptations in scoring are often appropriate. Use local norms if available. Consider
alternate scoring, such as combining the correct answers given in any language. Basals
and ceilings may not be appropriate test beyond the limits. Age of acquisition of
certain skills varies across cultures. For example, the acquisition of color labels occurs
later in Spanish-speaking children than in English-speaking children.

ECSE Evaluation Planning

Preparing for the Evaluation: Key Decisions
What languages are spoken in the childs environment?
How should the evaluation procedures be adapted?
How will language and culture be considered?
Is an interpreter needed?
What domains will be evaluated?
Can CLD status and lack of exposure to certain tasks or materials be ruled out as
primary causes of delays?
Where and by whom will observations in the natural environment be conducted?
Interviewing Parents
Involve as many family members as possible.
Take time to introduce yourself, describe for whom you work and explain the purpose of
your visit.
Ask general questions, open-ended questions and routines-based questions first before
asking more specific questions.

Page 59

Obtaining a Language History

Use a Home Language Questionnaire to start the discussion.
Where were parents born and how long have they lived in the United States?
What was the childs first language?
What language(s) does the child hear from mother, father, siblings, grandparents,
daycare provider, preschool, TV?
What language(s) does the child prefer to speak?
What language(s) does the child understand?

Planning to Observe Young Children who are English Learners

This four-page worksheet is found in Assessing Children with Disabilities who are English
Learners. It can be downloaded from the Desired Results System - California Department
of Educations Website (www.draccess.org ). The printed form can be used in planning to
observe and gather information about a child's language environments and in estimating a
childs language skills in the home language and in English. This information will help you
plan for the support you may need to ensure that the assessment will be a valid measure of
a childs abilities.
http://www.draccess.org/pdf/guidancefordrdp/ELGuidance.pdf#xml=http://draccess.org.
master.com/texis/master/search/mysite.txt?q=assessing+children+with+disabilities+who
+are+english+learners&order=r&id=901930fa40149a55&cmd=xml
Collecting Data
Educational history, including daycare, preschool, Head Start, and Early Childhood
Family Education programs.
Basic family background and health information.
Home language development and current skills.
Current English skills and progress compared with peers from the same cultural
background.
Current educational environment and teacher report.
Conducting Preschool Observations - What to Look for:
What language or dialect does the student use with peers with adults?
How do others respond to the childs communication attempts?
How does the student respond in different situations (structured and unstructured)?
Do the student and teacher have the same linguistic background?
Legal Requirements (IDEA 2004): Tests and other evaluation materials
Are selected and administered so as not to be discriminatory.
Are given in the students native language or mode unless clearly not feasible
Materials and procedures measure the disability, not English language skills.
No single procedure should be used to determine eligibility.
Page 60

Transitioning From Part C to Part B

At age three, children who are receiving special education services under Part C criteria must
be re-evaluated to determine their need for continuing services under the Part B criteria. The
initial evaluation procedures described in this section apply to re-evaluations as well. One
difference is that for re-evaluations the ECSE team should have information documenting the
child's growth while receiving services, and this information can be factored into the decision
when determining the child's need for ongoing services. The child's rate of growth can be
compared to siblings or other similar children that are being served. The team should also
gather information from the family regarding the child's performance at home and in their home
language(s). If the parents have concerns these should be further investigated.
When I'm 3, Where Will I Be? A Family's Transition Workbook
The following links contain a workbook in English and Spanish that can be used with families to
help ensure a planned and thoughtful transition from Part C to Part B services. It is available
from the Illinois State Board of Education at http://www.isbe.net/default.htm
English workbook http://www.isbe.net/earlychi/pdf/transition_workbook.pdf
Spanish workbook http://www.isbe.net/earlychi/pdf/transition_workbook_sp.pdf

Evaluation for Developmental Delay

There is some confusion about what early childhood evaluation instruments are available for
use with culturally and linguistically diverse (CLD) children. The simple answer to this question
is that the standardized early childhood evaluation tools that are currently used in the field, such
as, The Mullen Scales of Early Learning (Mullen, 1995), The Battelle Developmental Inventory2nd Edition (Newborg, 2005), The Bayley Scales of Infant Development-3rd Edition (Bayley,
2006), etc., are not adequate for evaluating children with diverse cultural or language
experiences. What is much more important than the results of a single test is the ability of an
evaluation team to follow a process that will lead to the gathering of accurate and unbiased
developmental information about the child. Solid training in early childhood development, a full
understanding of special education eligibility criteria, and knowledge of the child's cultural and
linguistic background must guide the process of evaluating CLD children. In the section that
follows best practices will be explained.
Evaluation Tools for Eligibility Determination
The specific evaluation tools a team decides to use will be based on district practices and
personal preference, but remember the choice of the tool is not nearly as important as the
interpretation of the information that it actually provides. In the field, the most prominent early
childhood standardized instruments being used to determine eligibility under the developmental
delay criteria include, but are not limited to, The Mullen Scales of Early Learning (Mullen, 1995),
The Bayley Scales of Infant Development--3rd Edition (Bayley, 2006), and the Battelle
Developmental Inventory-2nd Edition (Newborg, 2005). Each of these tools has its strengths
and weaknesses, and outlining those is beyond the scope of this chapter. The most important
Page 61

consideration when using any of these tools with young CLD children is to recognize their
limitations and possible cultural bias. These tests can be used as part of information gathering
with CLD children by using an interpreter to administer the items. However, if the test is
administered using an interpreter or if testing procedures are otherwise modified to meet the
cultural or linguistic needs of a student, the standard scores are not reportable and should not
be used to determine eligibility. ECSE teachers can instead write about the child's ability level
by describing his/her performance in each area of the test. Specifically when reporting the
results of standardized ECSE assessments with CLD populations, teachers should:
1. Describe each task the child completed in each sub-domain of the evaluation. They
should also be specific about at which level the items became difficult.
2. Describe HOW the child completed each item. Specifically, what supports or prompts
may have been offered? They should provide information on the quality of the child's
performance. What was his/her attention to task? Did he/she appear to understand what
was being asked?
3. Explain how specific items on the test may have presented a cultural bias. For example,
in an adaptive section of a test the child may specifically need to use a fork to feed
his/herself, but if the child is Chinese and their family uses only chopsticks, the child may
not able to achieve a score for that item. The evaluator should describe these types of
items in his/her report.
When a standardized test has been modified by the use of an interpreter or when the
standardization sample does not include children that share the same background as the child
you are evaluating, the information gained from testing should be augmented with other data.
The ECSE team should compare the standardized test information with other sources of
information, such as parental/care provider report, observation in natural settings, and
ecological evaluations to determine eligibility. The standardized evaluation in this scenario
provides supportive developmental information to other data sources that are more culturally
and linguistically sensitive.

Criterion-Referenced Measures
Criterion-referenced measures can be used for gathering developmental information. An
argument for using this type of instrument with CLD children is that information can be recorded
via observation and parent report in a childs natural setting over several sessions. These
instruments provide a developmental profile of the child which can be used to corroborate
standardized testing and the parents and other care providers reports. These tools also provide
the important option of continuing to document the childs growth in the specific domains over
time. Whether or not the child qualifies for special education, staff can continue using the same
instrument over the course of a year to document the trajectory of development for that child.
This will provide valuable supportive information to determine whether or not the correct
decision was made regarding the childs need for special education.
Special considerations regarding the cultural appropriateness of various items on each criterionreferenced measure should be taken into account. Be sure to consider the family's cultural and
linguistic background when administering all items. If the child cannot perform a task, just like
Page 62

with a standardized evaluation, consider whether or not the child has been exposed to the
activity or the materials involved in certain items on the test. If the child is a dual-language
learner, be sure to note in the language and cognitive sections of the evaluation in which
language the child completed each skill. Commonly used criterion-referenced instruments are
listed below.
Assessment, Evaluation, and Programming System (AEPS) (Bricker, 2007).
Carolina Curriculum (Johnson-Martin, Attermeier, & Hacker, 2004).
Early Learning Accomplishment Profile (E-LAP) (Glover, M.E., Preminger, J.L., Sanford,
A.R., 2002).
Hawaii Early Learning Profile (HELP) (Furuno, OReilly, Hosaka, Inatsuka, Allman &
Zeisloft, 1985), also has developmental activity hand outs for families in Spanish.
Learning Accomplishment Profile-3 (Sanford, A.R., Zelman, J.G., Hardin, B.J., PeisnerFeinberg, E., 2004).
Transdisciplinary Play-Based Assessment, 2nd Edition (TPBA2) (Linder, 2007)
Another option for evaluation is the Transdisciplinary Play-Based Assessment-2 (TPBA2)
(Linder, 2007). The TPBA2 was developed to provide a functional approach to the evaluation of
young children ages birth to six in the cognitive, social-emotional, communication and
sensorimotor domains. To complete the evaluation, the child is observed by an ECSE team that
can include an early childhood special education teacher, a speech-language pathologist, a
physical therapist and an occupational therapist during structured and unstructured play
sessions. The evaluation is organized into four sections in which the child plays with a familiar
care provider, a play facilitator (i.e., a member of the ECSE team), a peer, and in conclusion is
provided a snack and observed while eating and socializing. The TPBA2 is conducted by a
team over at least three sessions, involves both parents as well as professionals, and is scored
based on observation of functional skills during structured and unstructured play with both peers
and adults. Developmental level, learning style, interaction patterns and other relevant
behaviors are analyzed based on the TPBA2 guidelines. The TPBA2 does not provide standard
scores; instead, it summarizes information in terms of a developmental profile, and this new
version provides a "percent of delay". The TPBA2 provides a functional and holistic picture of
the childs development which ultimately is what is needed for the determination of special
education eligibility for CLD children.
There are some limitations to this evaluation process for CLD children as well. Not all cultures
promote adult-child play, which may place some family members in an awkward situation if they
are asked to play with their child while being observed. The child may also not be accustomed
to this type of interaction. To determine whether or not this section of the TPBA2 is appropriate
for administration in a given situation, rely on your previous data gathering to judge the cultural
norms of a particular family. The goal is for observation of the family and the child in a natural
context, not to simply complete all portions of the TPBA2. Also, the developmental guidelines
provided by the TPBA2 should be used cautiously with CLD populations, and once again
professional judgment and knowledge of the family must be paramount in deciding whether or
Page 63

not the child is exhibiting a developmental delay given the cultural and linguistic context of
his/her family.
Available from Brookes Publishing at:
http://www.brookespublishing.com/store/books/linder-tpbai2/index.htm

Child Developmental Inventory (CDI) (Ireton, 1990)

This comprehensive tool is useful to summarize parental input in a form that is comparable with
other evaluation tools. It provides a concrete comparison between the formal evaluation results
and a parents perception of their childs developmental functioning across all domains. The CDI
can be used for children who are 15 to 72 months old. The CDI is a family questionnaire with
300 items that can be used to gather a significant amount of developmental information from the
parents in the social-emotional, self-help, language comprehension, expressive language, and
gross and fine motor domains. It includes a section on both letters and numbers to investigate
pre-academic skill development in preschoolers. In addition, there is a section for families to
express behavioral concerns regarding their child. There is also an Infant Developmental
Inventory (IDI) (Ireton, 1994) that is less comprehensive but still useful for children ages birth to
2 years old. Both are available in English and Spanish but would need to be translated into all
other languages. The Spanish version is only translated and does not have separate norms.
Available from Pearson Assessments at: http://www.pearsonassessments.com/cdi.aspx

Standardized Evaluation Tools Available in Spanish

Battelle Developmental Inventory, 2nd Edition-Spanish (Newborg, 2005)
The BDI-2 Spanish is an adaptation/translation of the BDI-2 English materials and is designed
for the screening, diagnosing and evaluating of early childhood development of non-English
proficient children and their caregivers. It includes items administered to the child as well as
items which rely on parent report. This evaluation tool is designed for use by a bilingual
examiner, by an English-speaking examiner and a Spanish-speaking colleague or by a team of
professionals. The BDI-2 Spanish can be administered entirely in Spanish or English, or in both
languages.
Available from Riverside Publishing: http://www.riverpub.com/products/bdi2/spanish.html

Learning Accomplishment Profile-Diagnostic, 3rd Edition (LAP-D) (Hardin, PeisnerFeinberg, Weeks, 2005)
The Learning Accomplishment Profile-Diagnostic 3rd Edition is a standardized norm-referenced
developmental evaluation tool for children between the ages of 30 to 72 months. It may also be
used with children who are functioning in the 30 to 72 months developmental age-range even
when their chronological age is older. The test evaluates fine motor skills, language skills,
cognitive ability and gross motor development. The LAP-D Third Edition is based on research
conducted over a two-year period (2002 to 2004) in order to provide updated norms as well as
to develop a Spanish version of the instrument. The research included representative samples
Page 64

of both English-and Spanish-speaking children in order to update norming for the LAP-D in
English as well as to develop and establish norms for the LAP-D in Spanish. Furthermore,
psychometric properties, such as test construction, reliability and validity, were examined for
both the English and Spanish versions to ensure the technical competence of the LAP-D for
each language group.
Available from Kaplan Early Learning Company:
http://www.kaplanco.com/store/trans/productDetailForm.asp?CatID=17%7CEA1035%7C0&CollID=22189

Motor Evaluation
When conducting motor evaluations with CLD populations, carefully consider how the child's
background experiences may have influenced his/her motor development. Consider the
opportunities the child has had to engage in gross and fine motor activities. Additionally, if the
child's home language is not English, an interpreter may need to interpret directions into the
child's language in order to yield accurate results, especially if there is a considerable amount of
receptive language embedded into the motor evaluation. In general, the same considerations
that have been outlined throughout this chapter apply to motor evaluations. The Battelle
Developmental Inventory-2 and The Learning Accomplishment Profile-Diagnostic, 3rd Edition
both have gross and fine motor sections and are both available in Spanish. For other
languages you will need to have an interpreter help administer the tools that you currently use.

Cognitive Evaluation
When assessing CLD children in the area of cognitive functioning, many of the same general
testing guidelines already presented apply. Tests of very young children tend to be more
developmentally based, using motor and visual-motor tasks and, therefore, are inherently less
biased than tests which measure learned skills. Cognitive evaluation tools should be used to
look at current strengths and weaknesses and to help determine special education eligibility.
They should not be used as a predictor of future intellectual functioning. The results of this
testing combined with parent report and observations and test results in other areas help to
create a picture of the childs current level of functioning.
In testing, the examiner should rely heavily on more performance-based tools to help determine
eligibility. For preschool children, the Differential Ability Scales (DAS) and the Weschler
Preschool and Primary Scales of Intelligence (WPPSI) are some of the tools used by school
psychologists in looking at a childs cognitive ability. Standardized scores are not used with
children who do not speak English, but a description of what the child can do and how his/her
performance relates to other children of the same age and cultures are the important eligibility
factors. The test-teach-retest method of testing can help rule out lack of experience with certain
skills. It is often important to see a child over a period of time to help determine if a child has a
developmental disability.

Page 65

Resource for Cognitive Evaluation

Portraits of the Children: Culturally Competent Assessment [Video and CD-ROM]
This multimedia professional development resource package highlights four culturally diverse
case studies that feature students from preschool to high school age levels with challenging
learning issues. Interviews with leading psychological assessment experts and general
educators, related services personnel, ESL (English as a Second Language) specialists,
administrators, and parents create meaningful discussion on the use of interpreters, bilingual
assessment, and the role of culture, race, and language on school performance. The CD-ROM
includes: (1) the entire video in an interactive format; (2) a Users Guide with suggested
previewing and post-viewing discussion questions; (3) extensive hand-outs, reference lists, and
Web links; and (4) Office of Special Education Policy (OSEP) discretionary grant information.
National Association of School Psychologists (Producer). (2003). Portraits of the children: Culturally
competent assessment [Video and CD-ROM]. Available from the National Association of School
Psychologists at www.nasponline.org . The direct link to the document is:
http://www.nasponline.org/resources/culturalcompetence/featuredresources.aspx

Functional Skills-Adaptive Evaluation

The age at which self-sufficiency and independence are fostered varies along a continuum
between dependence and independence in all populations. When assessing functional and
adaptive skills in CLD children, information should be gathered regarding the family's
expectations for the child in a variety of developmental tasks, including the self-care skills of
dressing, feeding and toileting. If the child is performing these tasks at a level that is consistent
with other children in the family at his/her age, then there may not be a reason for concern.
Resources for Functional Skills-Adaptive Evaluation
Currently there are no functional/adaptive standardized assessments that have been normed on
culturally diverse populations especially populations newly arrived in the United States. Our
published evaluation tools do not adequately reflect a broad diversity in parenting practices and
expectations. The following non-standardized assessments can provide a starting place for
eligibility determination in the area of Functional Skills-Adaptive for children who do not fit within
the norming population of standardized assessments.

The ELL Adaptive Behavior Assessment (See Appendix 3L)

This assessment is an adaptation of standardized functional evaluation tools. Items from the
Adaptive Behavior Assessment System (ABAS), Scales of Independent Behavior-Revised (SIBR) and the Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales were selected and reviewed by Hmong, Somali
and Hispanic staff to choose items that did not present cultural bias toward children from those
cultural groups. This tool has not been standardized; therefore, no score will be derived. It is
designed to be given by professional staff knowledgeable in normal early childhood
development and informed about the culture and child-rearing practices of the family.
Page 66

Determining a childs functional independence and the level of support they need in
accomplishing adaptive skills and developmental tasks is the ultimate purpose of an Adaptive
Behavior Assessment.
Routines-Based Interview (RBI)
This type of interview is an alternative way to gather information about a child's typical
functioning within daily routines in their natural setting. Asking the family if they have any
concerns about their child's performance or ability level during daily routines is an important part
of a Routines-Based Interview. This information will provide a much better picture of the child's
functional and adaptive skills within their natural context than an evaluation tool that may be
inherently biased because of the limitations of the sample on which it was normed.
For more information on the Routines-Based Interview go to:
http://education.state.mn.us/mdeprod/groups/EarlyLearning/documents/Instruction/0315
18.pdf
Scott, S., & McWilliam, R. A. (2000). Scale for Assessment of Family Enjoyment within Routines
(SAFER). Frank Porter Graham Child Development Center, University of North Carolina at
Chapel Hill.

Social-Emotional-Behavior Evaluation
As with all other areas of development, care must be taken to avoid applying an inappropriate
metric to a child's Social-Emotional-Behavioral presentation. Consider the familys typical
expectations regarding the childs behavior and social-emotional development, in addition to
keeping in mind normative developmental expectations for a child of that age. Interview the
family regarding the childs behavior, and include questions such as:
Who disciplines the child and how?
What level of activity is typical in the home?
What experiences might the child have had that could impact his/her development in this
area?
How does the childs behavior compare to siblings or cousins or peers from the same
culture?
Additional family information is usually helpful in evaluating children. That said, attention should
be given to the interview process so questions regarding potentially sensitive issues will not be
offensive or appear judgmental. For example, it might be useful to know if anyone else in the
family has or has had emotional or behavioral issues. However, mental health-related concerns
may be considered a source of embarrassment or shame from a cultural perspective.
Gathering relevant information that tends to be more private is best done when the early
childhood special education teacher has established a good relationship with the family.
If social-emotional-behavioral development is an area of concern, consider how to gather
pertinent data both from the family and from direct behavioral observation for a Functional
Behavior Assessment (FBA). An interview with the family (and child care provider or teacher) is
an important part of a FBA. Questions related specifically to behaviors of concern can be used
Page 67

to gather information in order to develop a hypothesis regarding how the behaviors function for
the child. Examples of questions are listed below.
What are the behaviors of concern, and how intense are they?
How often do the behaviors occur?
What might be setting off the behavioral episodes?
In what ways have caretakers intervened and what were the results of the intervention?
What in the environment might be contributing to or helping maintain the maladaptive
behaviors?
Tools that support systematic observations include simple written logs of activities, checklists,
ABC charts (Antecedent-Behavior-Consequences) and scatter-plot graphs, which can all
potentially be used as part of the FBA. The information gathered for the FBA will be
instrumental in the development of a behavior intervention plan should the child qualify for
special education services.
If social-emotional-behavioral concerns appear to be the child's primary area of disability, be
sure to consider using the Emotional Behavior Disorders (EBD) criteria rather than the
Developmental Delay criteria for eligibility determination.
Children who are in the process of acquiring English may exhibit what looks like challenging
behavior in the classroom. They may appear to have difficulty paying attention, or they may not
follow directions. Rather than be evidence of an underlying problem, these behaviors may
simply reflect lack of understanding of English. Other challenging behaviors may be attributed
to incongruence between behavioral norms in their household or community and those in the
classroom. The ECSE teacher should carefully consider these factors when evaluating a referral
made because of a CLD child's challenging behavior in a classroom setting. The teacher should
be aware of the child's norms at home and he/she should investigate what instructional
strategies have been implemented to help the child maintain interest and be actively involved
during activities that involve a significant amount of language.
Resources for Social-Emotional-Behavioral Evaluation
Functional Behavior Assessment (FBA)
The Early Childhood Behavior Project Website housed at the University of Minnesota provides
high quality and concise information on conducting functional behavior assessments in early
childhood including the various tools that can be used.
http://slhslinux.cla.umn.edu/Topic2/index.html

Understanding the Impact of Language Differences on Classroom Behavior

This article highlights some typical behaviors of ELL children that can be misinterpreted as
challenging behaviors in the classroom, such as playing in isolation, not talking, difficulty
following directions, difficulty expressing ideas and feelings, and difficulty responding to
questions consistently.

Page 68

Understanding the Impact of Language Differences on Classroom Behavior, Center on the Social and
emotional Foundations for Early Learning, Santos, R. M. and Ostrosky, M.M. What Works Series
#2 http://journal.naeyc.org/btj/200307/Understanding.pdf

Autism Evaluation
Autism is a qualitative impairment in social interaction and communication and is also
characterized by restricted, repetitive and stereotyped patterns of behavior, interests and
activities. How these three areas of development are viewed is shaped by cultural values and
expectations, and cultural differences must be considered and addressed. A few recent studies
(Oliver, Robins, Hazzard, 2009; Inada, Koyama, Kamio, 2009; Perera, Wijewardena,
Aluthwelage, 2009) have explored how ones cultural background might impact responses on
parent report screening measures. Results indicate that there may be culturally based
differences in how questions are interpreted by caregivers. These findings have suggested a
need for culturally sensitive follow-up questions and possible changes in how the questions are
asked. Lastly, cultural views towards disability may pose an additional challenge when
conducting an evaluation for autism spectrum disorders in culturally and linguistically diverse
children.
According to the Common Questions about Children with ASD section in the Promising
Practices for the Identification of Individuals with Autism Spectrum Disorders Manual published
by the Minnesota Department of Children, Families and Learning (now the Minnesota
Department of Education), when assessing children for the educational category of ASD, the
impact of diverse cultures and languages must be considered. Areas for team discussion as to
individual or cultural differences may occur in the following areas:
expectations for eye-to-eye gaze and amount of eye contact
reactions to physical touch and acceptable areas for touch
social games/interactions used to evaluate reciprocity
social play routines and toys used to evaluate imagination and interaction responses
reactions and responses to an interpreters language/behaviors
cultural reactions in warming up to new situations and issues of anxiety regarding
authority figures
presentation of material regarding Autism Spectrum Disorders given to parents in the
language spoken in the home
All of the accommodations and considerations described in earlier sections of this chapter as
well as those described in the section titled Communication Evaluation pertain to autism
evaluations as well.
Resources for Autism Evaluation
Autism Speaks Website (www.autismspeaks.org)
This Website has many resources for parents and professionals. The two resources described
below are specifically related to serving CLD children and families.
Research Summaries from the eighth annual International Meeting for Autism Research
(IMFAR) contain a section titled Culture and Diagnosis. This section summarizes four
Page 69

studies related to culturally diverse and bilingual children with autism. You can read
individual abstracts, by visiting http://imfar.confex.com/imfar/2009/webprogram/start.html
100 Day Kit for families of children newly diagnosed with ASD is available in English and
Spanish. This kit provides information about autism and resources to families. Families
whose children have been diagnosed within the past 6 months, and are age 5 or
younger, may request a complimentary 100 Day Kit after completing a survey. Families
with children diagnosed more than 6 months ago and/or over the age of 5, as well as
other interested professionals, can download a PDF of the kit or view a PDF of each
section.
English: http://www.autismspeaks.org/press/100_day_kit.php
Spanish: http://www.autismspeaks.org/press/100_day_kit_spanish.php
Differences in Educational Services for English Language Learners with Autism
Spectrum Disorders (See Appendix 3M)
This research study describes the number of children in Minnesota schools who receive autism
services, including those who are English language learners (ELL), and the age at which they
began receiving educational services under the categorical label of autism spectrum disorders.
The research questions were: What percentage of Minnesota students who are ELL have ASD,
and how has it changed between 2001 and 2008? and What is the association between the
primary language spoken at home and the age at which children first begin receiving special
education services under the autism categorical label? In addition to answering these
questions, Dr. Estrem provides a list of selected references related to CLD diagnostic
differences with ASD.
Estrem, T.L. (2009). Differences in Educational Services for English Language Learners with Autism
Spectrum Disorders. Paper submitted to Talk With Me-Revised on June 21, 2009.

Is This Your Child?

This handout on the characteristics of autism, developed by the Autism Society of Minnesota, is
available in English, Somali, Spanish, Hmong, French, and Arabic. It lists possible red flags
for autism and resources for parents if they have concerns about their childs development.
Is This Your Child? (English) (See Appendix 3N)
Is This Your Child? (French & Arabic) (See Appendix 3O)
Is This Your Child? (Hmong) (See Appendix 3P)
Is This Your Child? (Somali) (See Appendix 3Q)
Is This Your Child? (Spanish) (See Appendix 3R)

Page 70

Promising Practices for the Identification of Individuals with Autism Spectrum Disorders
This manual is available on the Minnesota Department of Educations Website. It contains a
description of autism spectrum disorder (ASD), myths about ASD, common questions, a list of
characteristics of autism in children under the age of 36 months (p. 20) and a description of
state eligibility criteria.
Minnesota Autism Project (November 2000). Promising Practices for the Identification of Individuals with
Autism Spectrum Disorders. Roseville, MN: Minnesota Department of Education
http://education.state.mn.us/mdeprod/groups/SpecialEd/documents/Manual/000824.pdf

Promising Practices: Effective Early Intervention in Autism (Spanish transcript) Spanish

transcript of video with information about early intervention for autism
http://education.state.mn.us/mdeprod/groups/SpecialEd/documents/Publication/019540.pdf

Promising Practices: Effective Early Intervention in Autism (transcript) English and

Somali transcript of videos with information about early intervention for autism
http://education.state.mn.us/mdeprod/groups/SpecialEd/documents/Publication/017210.pdf

Promising Practices: Effective Early Intervention in Autism (video-Somali) Information

about early intervention for autism presented in Somali.
http://education.state.mn.us/mdeprod/idcplg?IdcService=GET_FILE&dDocName=017104&Revisi
onSelectionMethod=latestReleased&Rendition=primary

Promising Practices: Effective Early Intervention in Autism (video-Spanish) Information

about early intervention for autism presented in Spanish.
http://education.state.mn.us/MDE/Learning_Support/Special_Education/Categorical_Disability_Inf
ormation/Autism_Spectrum_Disorders/index.html

Promising Practices: Effective Early Intervention in Autism (video-Spanish) Information

about early intervention for autism presented in Spanish.
http://education.state.mn.us/MDE/Learning_Support/Special_Education/Categorical_Disability_Inf
ormation/Autism_Spectrum_Disorders/index.html

Page 71

Tools for Autism Spectrum Disorders Available in Other Languages

The Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule (ADOS) (Lord, Rutter, DiLavore, Risi, 1999)
Autism Diagnostic Interview-Revised (ADI-R) (Rutter, LeCouteur. Lord, 2003)
The ADOS and ADI-R, commonly used in the United States, are available in several different
languages (Danish, Dutch, Finnish, French, German, Hungarian, Icelandic, Italian, Korean,
Norwegian, Romanian, Spanish, Swedish) through a variety of international publishers
posted on the Western Psychological Services Website. According to the Website, these
translated versions are available for use in funded, qualified research studies by properly
trained, scholarly investigators.
http://portal.wpspublish.com/portal/page?_pageid=53,82771&_dad=portal&_schema=PORTAL

Modified Checklist for Autism in Toddlers (M-CHAT) (Robins, Fein, & Barton, 1999)
The M-CHAT is a 23-item parent report screener for autism spectrum disorders. It is designed
to be used with a follow up interview. It can be downloaded for free for clinical, research and
educational purposes. It is available in a number of different languages: Arabic, Bangla,
Chinese, Dutch, French, French Canadian, German, Gujarati, Icelandic, Japanese,
Japanese with illustrations, Kannada, Kurdish, Portuguese-Brazil, Portuguese-Portugal,
Sinhala, Somali, Spanish-Western Hemisphere, Spanish-Spain, Tamil, Turkish,
Vietnamese, Urdu. Users should be aware that validation of these translations is still under
way. Italian and Thai translations will be available soon.
http://www2.gsu.edu/~psydlr/Diana_L._Robins,_Ph.D..html

Communication Evaluation
Who are Culturally/Linguistically Diverse (CLD) children?
Who are the children we consider to be Culturally/Linguistically Diverse? Recognizing that
children cannot be diverse in and of themselves but only in relation to someone else, CLD is a
term that encompasses children who have a heritage or cultural background that differs from
what is considered to be mainstream American. The term also refers to those who speak
languages or dialects other than standard American English. Culture includes values, beliefs,
patterns of thinking, behavioral norms, symbol systems and ways of communication.
Children we consider to be culturally-linguistically diverse may:
Speak only English but have a strong cultural heritage that has been maintained (i.e.,
third generation Hmong-Americans).
Speak a dialect of English (e.g., Black English, Appalachian English, Liberian English).
Speak only a language other than English (no English at all).
Speak English and another language equally well.
Speak another language and have emerging English skills (some comprehension and
little expressive language in English).
Page 72

Be experiencing loss of the native language as they become more proficient in English.
Speak more English and have only limited receptive and/or expressive language abilities
in a language other than English.
Speak three or more languages.
The languages that the child hears and speaks must be determined as part of the special
education evaluation, preferably at the onset, so that arrangements can be made to have an
interpreter available when appropriate.
The 10 most common home languages of students in Minnesota schools are English,
Spanish, Hmong, Somali, Vietnamese, Russian, Lao, Khmer, Arabic and Oromo. The
Minnesota Department of Education provides maps indicating where speakers of these
languages live by county.
http://education.state.mn.us/MDE/Data/Maps/Home_Primary_Languages/index.html

Factors to Consider in Communication Evaluations for CLD Children

Determine which language is the childs primary language.
Always test the child in his/her native language.
Test the child in English if English skills are emerging.
A peer comparison can be useful if the child is in a Head Start or other preschool
program. A systematic comparison can be done with another child who is from the
same culture and language group as the child being evaluated and shares that childs
length of exposure to English.
If a child is learning English as a second language, determine if the native language is
continuing to develop, has plateaued or if the child is losing proficiency in the native
language.
Use a trained interpreter to complete a language sample and a tally of intelligibility in the
native language.
A hearing screening and impedance testing will provide critical information.
To look at articulation, have an interpreter read a prepared list of sounds and words in
the native language and have the child repeat them, one at a time. Then ask the child to
repeat English sounds, such as the alphabet, or simple words.
Parents can be asked to list the words they have heard their child say in order to obtain
an estimate of expressive vocabulary.
When calculating expressive vocabulary for a bilingual child, count each concept/item for
which the child has a word, whether it is in English, the native language, or both. For
example, if a child says both table and mesa (the Spanish word for table) count it as
only one vocabulary item.
Parents can answer questions from a tool such as the Receptive-Expressive Emergent
Language Scale-2 (REEL-2) - a parent report language evaluation tool for children aged
birth to three that is based on the universals of early language development. Their
responses can provide an estimate of the level of the childs receptive and expressive
language development.
Significant delays must be present in the native language as well as in English to qualify
for speech or language services.

Page 73

Language Evaluation for Special Education

Using two standardized tests to determine eligibility for language disorders, as the Minnesota
state criteria requires, is often not possible with CLD children because of the lack of
standardized tests available for children speaking other languages at home. As explained in the
Legal Requirements section earlier in this chapter, the Minnesota criteria for Language
Disorder, Subpart 4, Part B, #4 states that speech-language pathologists do not need to show
scores of -2.0 standard deviations on two standardized language tests if there are no tests that
are deemed technically adequate for the student being tested. The criteria specifically states
that alternative measures can be used, including "additional language samples, criterionreferenced instruments, observations in the natural environment and parent reports."

The Ethics of Assessment with Culturally and Linguistically Diverse Populations

Sometimes speech-language pathologists are caught in an ethical bind regarding their
CLD students. Some administrators require test scores for special education eligibility,
but altering the standardized administration by using an interpreter, for example, or
testing a child in English when English is not the childs language makes scoring of tests
invalid. This article relates a personal story of one individuals ethical dilemma. (See
Appendix 3S)
Crowley, C. J. (2004, March 16). The ethics of assessment with culturally and linguistically diverse
populations. The ASHA Leader, pp. 6-7, 26.

Language Evaluation Tips and Strategies

Cheng (2002) described a process for evaluating language skills of CLD students which is
abbreviated as: R.I.O.T.
Review: Gather information from other sources including medical records and previous
evaluations.
Interview: With the help of an interpreter, interview the parents, teachers, public health
nurses or others who know the child. Discover which languages are spoken in the home
and the language history of the child. Learn what concerns others have about the child.
Observe: Ideally it would be best practice to observe the child over more than one day
with different communication partners. Much can be learned about child-rearing practices
and parent expectations by observing parent/child interactions in the home. Often CLD
children are more verbal with peers (siblings, cousins, neighbors) than with a new adult
visiting their home.
Test: Cheng suggests that language testing can be dynamic assessment, portfolio
assessment, naturalistic assessment and language sample analysis (using wordless
books, pictures or photos).

Page 74

Dynamic Assessment
Dynamic Assessment was described by Gutirrez-Clellan and Pea in 2001 as a modification to
standardized evaluation procedures with CLD students in order to determine if adult assistance
or training of a skill during an evaluation changes the child's performance. A child who improves
his/her performance on a task given extra practice or explanation of what is expected may not
be truly delayed. Rather this improvement could indicate that the initial difficulty was due to
unfamiliarity with the task. The researchers stated that there is much variability in dynamic
assessment methods. They described three types of dynamic assessment:
1. Testing the limits.
2. Graduated prompting.
3. Test-teach-retest.
Of these three, they found that test-teach-retest was the most effective modification to use when
testing CLD children. They described two goals of
using dynamic assessment: 1) to ensure that the evaluator obtains the child's best performance
during testing, and 2) to aid in setting appropriate treatment strategies.
Dynamic assessment of diverse children: A Tutorial
The complete Gutirrez-Clellan and Pea article can be viewed in its entirety by SpeechLanguage pathologists who are members of ASHA. The authors have included the Learning
Strategies Checklist and Modifiability Scale in the appendix to the article. Practitioners may find
these rating scales to be useful in their evaluations of CLD children.
Gutirrez-Clellan, V.F., and Pea, E., (2001). Dynamic assessment of diverse children: A tutorial.
Language, Speech and Hearing Services in the Schools, 32, pp. 212-224.
http://lshss.asha.org/cgi/content/abstract/32/4/212

Fast Facts: Dynamic Assessment

This one-page summary gives examples of four methods of dynamic assessment: testing the
limits, clinical interview, graduated prompting and test-teach-retest.
Colorado Department of Education, Special Education Services Unit. CDE, Special Education Services
Unit, 201 E. Colfax, Denver, CO 80203. 303-866-6694
http://www.cde.state.co.us/cdesped/download/pdf/FF-CLD-DynamicAssess302.pdf

Language Samples
Tips for Gathering a Culturally Fair Language Sample
Use pictures or items familiar to the child.
Use family photographs (yours or the childs).
Observe the child talking with a familiar native language communication partner (parent,
sibling, friend, cousin).
Page 75

Avoid asking questions to which you already know the answer.

Gather samples in different contexts.
Getting a Language Sample - From the Hart
In this newsletter article on the Bilingual Therapies Website, Hortencia Kayser describes
techniques for eliciting a language sample from Hispanic preschool- aged children.
http://www.bilingualtherapies.com/kayser-newsletter/2000/getting-a-language-sample/

Milestones of Normal language Development in Other Languages

CPLOL (Standing Liaison Committee of Speech and Language Therapists) is an international
organization that provides posters, parent handouts, and parent questionnaires in several
languages that describe the milestones of normal speech and language development and point
out red flags that may indicate the need for an evaluation. Leaflets regarding language
development for children from 0-4 years are provided in Danish, Dutch, Estonian, English,
Finnish, French, German/Deutschland, German/ sterreich, Greek/Greece, Greek/Cyprus,
Italian, Norwegian, Portuguese, Russian, Spanish, Swedish.
http://www.cplol.eu/eng/guidelines.html

Lists of Language Tests in Various Languages:

The American Speech-Language-Hearing Association compiled a list of speech and
language tests for multicultural populations. This is available for purchase from ASHA.
http://www.asha.org/eweb/OLSDynamicPage.aspx?title=Guide%20to%20SpeechLanguage%20Pathology%20Assessment%20for%20Multicultural%20and%20Bilingual%20Populatio
ns&webcode=olsdetails

Assessment Instruments for Linguistically Diverse Populations

The Midwest Equity Assistance Center of Kansas State University organized a list of speech
and language tests for a variety of languages. The 14-page chart lists the name of the test, the
language(s) for which it is designed, standardization information (if available), age ranges and
where it can be purchased.
http://www.meac.org/resources/pdf/Assessment_instrument.pdf

Formal and Informal Language Tools for Speakers of Any Language

Bilingual Oral Language Development Sample Pragmatic Communication Checklist
(BOLD) (See Appendix 3T)
This checklist can be used to record observations of the child's communicative behavior in
English and in the home language. By Academic Communication Associates, 1991. May be
reproduced.
Page 76

Bilingual Vocabulary Checklist (See Appendices 3U, 3V)

This list of early vocabulary words is used to gather input from the parent on which words they
have heard their child say spontaneously. It is adapted from Patterson (1998) and Rescorla
(1989). The list is in English and has two columns (English and Home Language) which can
be checked to indicate which words the child says in each language. The words are ordered in
groups by category, such as food, toys, actions, people, animals, etc. Patterson concludes that
bilingual children should be referred to a speech-language pathologist if they are not combining
two words into phrases by age 27 months.
Diagnostic Protocol (See Appendix 3W)
This bilingual diagnostic protocol was developed by the University of Texas at Austin as a
planning sheet to help prepare for an evaluation of a bilingual child, including gathering
background data, determining the areas of evaluation, the language of evaluation and which
evaluation procedures will be used.
ELL Early Language Assessment Tool (See Appendix 3X)
This is an informal language measure that can be used to look at receptive and expressive
language skills in any home language and/or in English. It provides opportunities for the child to
demonstrate understanding of body part words and basic concepts (size, position, number), to
follow one and two-step directions and to answer questions. There are no norms; it is a
framework for looking at general comprehension and expressive language skills in other
languages with the help of an interpreter.
Informal Multicultural Communication Measure (See Appendix 3Y)
This language tool was developed for use with elementary-aged children. It can be given in
English or translated into another language. It contains questions about personal information,
direction-following, labeling objects, describing the function of objects, making comparisons and
retelling a story. These tasks may be appropriate for Kindergarten and 1st graders but are often
too difficult for preschool children.

Page 77

MacArther/Bates Child Development Inventory (CDI)

This inventory is available in 47 different languages: American Sign Language, Arabic,
Bangladesh, Basque, Catalan, Cantonese (Hong Kong), Chinese, Croatian, Danish,
Dutch, English (British), English (Zealand), English (Singapore), Farsi, Finnish, French
(Canadian), French (European), Galacian, German (Austrian), German, Greek, Hungarian,
Hebrew, Icelandic, Italian, Japanese, Kiswahili and Kigiriama, Korean, Malay, Malawian,
Mandarin (Beijing), Mandarin (Singapore), Mandarin (Taiwan), Norwegian, Polish,
Portuguese (Brazilian), Romani, Romanian, Russian, Tamil, Thai, Turkish, Spanish
(Cuban), Spanish (Mexican), Spanish (European), Swedish and Yiddish. This parent report
evaluation tool was designed for children 16 to 30 months old. It measures comprehension of
words and phrases, vocabulary production and use of gestures.
http://www.sci.sdsu.edu/cdi/cdiwelcome.htm

Information on Languages of the World

Concise Compendium of the World's Languages
This book provides information on more than 100 languages spoken today by populations of at
least 5-10 million people. Minor languages that figure prominently in the contemporary sociopolitical context also are included. This combination allows less familiar languages, such as
Akan, Navajo, Basque, and Zulu, to figure prominently alongside mainstream languages such
as Arabic, French, Chinese, and Russian. Each entry considers the phonological, morphological
and lexical features of a specific language. This information is especially useful when
interpreting perceived errors in grammar and/or phonology.
Campbell, G.L. (1998). Concise Compendium of the Worlds Languages. New York: Routledge.

Ethnologue
The Center for Applied Linguistics' Ethnologue, an online resource, is an encyclopedic
reference work cataloging all of the worlds 6,912 known living languages.
http://www.ethnologue.com/web.asp

Language Transfer Issues for English Language Learners

This 16-page reference book contains two charts. One explains differences in language
structures between English and six other languages (Cantonese, Haitian-Creole, Hmong,
Korean, Spanish and Vietnamese). The other chart compares the sounds of English to those
sounds found in the languages listed above.
Language Transfer Issues for English Learners. Carmel, CA: Hampton-Brown. (ISBN: 0-7362-1554-9)
Available at http://ngsp.com/

Page 78

English Sounds Lacking in Other Languages (See Appendix 3Z)

This chart lists the consonant sounds and vowels in English. Then it notes whether or not each
sound exists in each of the following languages: Cantonese, Hmong, Japanese, Cambodian,
Korean, Lao, Mandarin, Portuguese, Samoan, Spanish, Tagalog, Tai Dam (Black Tai) and
Vietnamese.
Project E.S.L. (English as a second language) by Carol Martinez and Carol Fea. (Lafayette School
Corporation, Indiana, 1980-81)

UCLA Language Materials Project

This project, which is accessible online, provides profiles of over 100 languages, describing the
language family, the areas where it is spoken, the dialects of the language, as well as
information about the phonology, grammar and orthography.
http://www.lmp.ucla.edu/Profile.aspx?menu=004

Hmong Language Evaluation Tools

Hmong Test for Auditory Comprehension of Language-3 (TACL-3) (See appendices 3AA,
3BB, 3CC, 3DD)
Here you will find a test protocol and pictures for an adapted version of the TALC-3. Items that
do not have a clear translation into Hmong have been eliminated from the English TACL-3.
Some data has been collected from the performance of Hmong-speaking students in Saint Paul
Schools from Kindergarten to grade 6 on language comprehension tasks that range from
understanding single words to understanding more grammatically complex sentences. A
scoring protocol is provided along with the data obtained with normally developing children who
speak Hmong in the home.
The adapted Hmong TACL-3 can be given to children ages 3 years and up who hear Hmong in
the home. There are two different ways to use the tool.
1. The adapted Hmong TACL-3 can be given on one day with the English TACL-3 given on
another day. This allows you to compare comprehension skills for the child in the two
languages. Average scores and ranges for the Hmong version do not apply when
administered in this manner. Norms for the English TACL-3 do not apply when given to
a bilingual child.
2. The adapted Hmong TACL-3 or the English TACL-3 can be given first in the stronger
language with only error items presented later in the other language. Results are
combined. This allows you to compare the child's performance to Hmong grade peers
using the average scores and ranges provided on the scoring protocol.
Hmong TACL-3 Subtest I selected items (See Appendix 3AA)
Hmong TACL-3 Subtests II and III selected items (See Appendix 3BB)
Page 79

Hmong TACL-3 Adaptation Score Sheet with comparison data from Kindergarten
through grade 6 (See Appendix 3CC)
Hmong TACL-3 Performance Data by grade (Kindergarten through grade 6) (See
Appendix 3DD)
Hmong Expressive Vocabulary Test
This expressive vocabulary measure was developed for use with children 3 to 5 years old who
speak Hmong in the home. It contains 50 pictures that children are asked to label. You may
print out the protocol and the pictures (in color or black and white) to make a picture stimulus
book. There are five pages of pictures, with 10 pictures per page.
Hmong Picture Naming Task Test Protocol (See Appendix 3EE)
Hmong Picture Naming Task 1 (See Appendix 3FF)
Hmong Picture Naming Task 2 (See Appendix 3GG)
Hmong Picture Naming Task 3 (See Appendix 3HH)
Hmong Picture Naming Task 4 (See Appendix 3II)
Hmong Picture Naming Task 5 (See Appendix 3JJ)
Test developed by Pui Fong Kan, CCC-SLP, Ph.D.
Kan, Pui Fong and Kohnert, Kathryn. Preschoolers learning Hmong and English: lexical-semantic skills in
L1 and L2. Journal of Speech-Hearing-Language Research. April, 2005 48: 372-383

Hmong Receptive Vocabulary Test

This receptive vocabulary measure was developed for use with children 3 to 5 years old who
speak Hmong in the home. It contains 50 items. The child points to one of a set of four pictures
when named in Hmong. You may print out the score sheet and the pictures (in color or black
and white). Each page contains two test items. These can be left together or cut apart to make
a picture stimulus book.
Hmong Receptive Vocabulary Score Sheet (See Appendix 3KK)
Hmong Receptive Vocabulary Pictures (See Appendix 3LL) 25 pages in one folder
Test developed by Pui Fong Kan, CCC-SLP, Ph.D.
Kan, Pui Fong and Kohnert, Kathryn. Preschoolers learning Hmong and English: lexical-semantic skills in
L1 and L2. Journal of Speech-Hearing-Language Research April, 2005 48: 372-383

Hmong Translation of Frog Where Are You? (See Appendix 3MM)

Mercer Mayer's wordless book Frog Where Are You? has been given words in Hmong that can
be used in a Story Retell task with the help of a Hmong interpreter. Developed by Pui Fong
Kan, CCC-SLP, Ph.D.
Somali Language Tools
Boehm Concept Chart - Somali Adaptation (See Appendix 3NN)
Page 80

Using the Boehm Test of Basic Concepts with an interpreter to get information about
comprehension of concept words in Somali with this translation sheet can help the evaluator
understand some of the challenges in translating concept terms into Somali. Somali interpreters
have reviewed the test and given appropriate equivalents for several of the concept words on
the Boehm which do not have exact translations from English.
Spanish Language Tools
Language Sample Analysis for Spanish-Speaking Preschoolers
The use of mean length of response (MLR) is recommended for analyzing the spontaneous
utterances of Spanish-speaking preschool children, according to Gutierrez-Clellen, et. al.
Gutierrez-Clellen, V.F. Restrepo, M.A. Bedore, L., Pena, E. & Anderston, R (2000). Language sample
analysis in Spanish-speaking children: Methodological considerations. Language, Speech, and
Hearing Services in Schools, 31, 88-98.

Miller (1981) outlined the steps for calculating MLR:

Eliminate imitations and self-repetitions (within a speech turn).
Eliminate yes/no responses.
Eliminate routines (alphabet, counting, singing).
Count the number of words per utterance.
Divide the total number of words by the total number of utterances to get MLR.
Norms for the acquisition of morphology and syntax in Spanish-speaking children and
bilingual children aged 2 years to 7 years are listed in several charts in Chapter 1, pages 28-33
of Goldsteins book: Cultural and Linguistic Diversity Resource Guide for Speech-Language
Pathologists. One chart gives average number of words spoken by Spanish-speaking children
and bilingual children 12 months to 31 months. Goldstein compiled data from a variety of
research studies. It is important to note that the acquisition of specific grammatical structures
occurs at different ages in Spanish and English.
Goldstein, B.A. (2000). Cultural and linguistic diversity resource guide for speech-language pathologists.
San Diego, CA: Singular Publishing Group.

Spanish/English Vocabulary Checklist (See Appendices 3OO and 3PP)

This parent report tool can be used with children who are just beginning to talk. It asks the
parent to indicate which words they have heard their child say in English and/or in Spanish in
order to obtain an estimate of total vocabulary combining words in both languages. The words
are ordered by category, such as food, toys, actions, people, animals, etc. Patterson concludes
that bilingual children should be referred to a speech-language pathologist if they are not
combining two words into phrases by age 27 months. She also recommends referral of children
21 to 22 months with a total expressive vocabulary (Spanish plus English) of less than 20
Page 81

words; at age 23 to 25 months if less than 37 words

and at 26 to 27 months if less than 82 words.
Patterson, J 1998. Expressive Vocabulary Development and Word Combinations of Spanish-English
Bilingual Toddlers. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology. 7-4, 46-56. Adapted from the
Language Development Survey by L. Rescorla.

Commercially Available Spanish Language Tests

The following list contains common Spanish language tools used in Early Childhood Programs.
It is not designed to be all-encompassing or exhaustive. Please refer to the section titled Lists
of Language Tests in Various Languages for additional assessment tools.
Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals-P-2 Spanish (Wiig, Secord, &
Semel, 2009)
CELF Preschool2 Spanish is a parallel edition to the CELF Preschool2 English, not a
translation. This tool was designed to be appropriate for a wide range of Spanishspeaking children. Items are ordered by difficulty based on research conducted with
monolingual and bilingual preschoolers tested throughout the United States and Puerto
Rico. Four levels of testing are offered: Level 1 tests for the presence of a language
disorder, Level 2 determines the nature of the disorder, Level 3 pinpoints the critical
clinical skills or behaviors that underlie the disorder, and Level 4 evaluates how the
disorder affects classroom performance. Standard scores are provided for children ages
3 years to 6 years, 11 months.
http://pearsonassess.com/haiweb/cultures/en-us/productdetail.htm?pid=015-8036-727

Compton Speech and Language Screening Evaluation Spanish Adaptation

(Compton & Kline)
This screening tool was designed for Spanish-speaking children ages 3 to 6 years. It is
not a direct translation of the English screening tool, but it does parallel it. It has been
adapted to reflect Spanish phonology and grammar. Objects are used to elicit
vocabulary, memory span, grammar and spontaneous language. It also has an
articulation screener.
http://www.carouselhouse.com/language_screening_-_spanish.php

Expressive One-Word Picture Vocabulary Test Spanish Bilingual Edition (Ed.

Brownell, 2000)
The Spanish-Bilingual Edition of this vocabulary test allows students to respond to the
picture labeling task in either Spanish or English. Examiners must be fluent in both
languages or be assisted by someone fluent in the language not spoken by the principal
examiner. Norms are based on a sample of Spanish-bilingual students between 4-0 and
12-11 years of age, residing in the U.S. Available from a number of publishers:
http://www.superduperinc.com

Page 82

http://www.linguisystems.com
http://pearsonassess.com
http://slosson.com
http://academictherapy.com
http://www3.parinc.com

Inventarios del Desarrollo de Habilidades Comunicativas (Maldonado, et. al.,

2003)
This standardized parent report tool focuses on current behaviors and emerging
behaviors in the areas of gestures, words, and sentences in bilingual children from 8
months to 37 months. Parents indicate which words their child understands or has used.
It is the adapted Spanish language version of the MacArthur/Bates Child Development
Inventory (CDI).
Jackson-Maldonado, D., Thal, D., Marchman, V., Fenson, L., Newton, T., & Conboy, B. (2003).
MacArthur inventarios del desarrollo de habilidades comunicativas. Baltimore, MA: Paul
H. Brookes Publishing Co. Inc. http://www.brookespublishing.com/store/books/fensoncdi/index.htm

Preschool Language Scale 4th Edition Spanish ( Zimmerman, Steiner, & Pond,
2002)
The PLS4 Spanish Edition is designed for children from birth to 6 years, 11 months of
age. While similar to the English version, it is not simply a translation. It has separate
norms based on 1,188 Spanish-speaking children living in the United States that are
different from the norms for the English version. Furthermore, items were reviewed by
experts in the field to ensure that they are appropriate for all Spanish speakers and
original PLS items were modified to reflect cultural experiences common to all Spanish
subgroups. Alternate vocabulary that reflects regional differences are accepted and are
listed on the Record Form. A total language standard score is calculated by combining
the standard scores of the two subtests: Auditory Comprehension and Expressive
Communication. Parents and caregivers can complete the reproducible Cuestionario
para los padres (parent questionnaire) to share their knowledge of the child's typical
communication at home. A Spanish Articulation Screener is also included.
http://pearsonassess.com/haiweb/cultures/en-us/productdetail.htm?pid=015-8659-473

Receptive One-Word Picture Vocabulary Test Spanish Bilingual Edition (Ed.

Brownell, 2000)
The Spanish Bilingual Edition of this test allows students to demonstrate understanding
of words in either Spanish or English, giving a measure of total acquired receptive
vocabulary. Examiners must be fluent in both languages or be assisted by someone
fluent in the language not spoken by the principal examiner. Norms are based on a
sample of Spanish-bilingual students between 4-0 and 12-11 years of age, residing in
the United States.
Page 83

Available from a number of publishers:

http://www.superduperinc.com
http://www.linguisystems.com
http://pearsonassess.com
http://slosson.com
http://academictherapy.com
http://www3.parinc.com

Additional Resources for Spanish Language Tests

Spanish Language Assessments for Dual Language Programs
This list provides details about 28 Spanish language assessment tools, many of which are
designed for early elementary-aged children. It describes the tests, explains how they can be
used, and gives information on where they can be purchased.
Center for Applied Linguistics, July, 2007 http://www.cal.org/twi/assessments.pdf

Spanish-Language Tests Available on Loan from the Minnesota Department of Education

Spanish-language tests must be selected and used with careful consideration for the norming
population and the dialect of Spanish of the child. In addition, Spanish-language instruments are
designed to be given by a licensed speech-language pathologist who is bilingual in Spanish and
English. Elizabeth Watkins, Elizabeth Watkins, the ELL and Minority Issues Specialist at MDE,
has set up a small lending library of Spanish-language evaluation tools. Schools may borrow
these instruments on a first-come, first-served basis. Schools that have a large Spanishspeaking population are invited to borrow tests on a trial basis and then purchase their own
copies, since it is not possible to guarantee that a specific test will be available when it is
needed. Schools that have only a few Spanish-speaking students may be able to rely on
borrowing tests. The specific tests were selected based on recommendations from members of
the Minnesota Speech-Language-Hearing Associations (MSHA) Multicultural Affairs
Committee.
Expressive One Word Vocabulary Test Spanish Bilingual Edition
Receptive One Word Vocabulary Test Spanish Bilingual Edition
Preschool Language Scale 4th Edition Spanish
Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals 3rd Edition Spanish
Several members of the MSHA Affairs Multicultural Committee collaborated to develop
instructions for administration of these tools by a monolingual clinician working with an
interpreter. These instructions are available to download. If your district already owns one of
these Spanish-language instruments, please print these instructions and place them in the kit so
that they are readily available to all who use the test.
Page 84

http://education.state.mn.us/MDE/Learning_Support/Special_Education/Evaluation_Program_Pla
nning_Supports/Cultural_Linguistic_Diversity/index.html

If you would like to borrow one of the test kits or if you have questions about the instructions,
please contact Elizabeth Watkins via e-mail at: Elizabeth.Watkins@state.mn.us . You can also
reach her by phone at 651-582-8678.
Articles, Books and Websites with Information on Language Evaluation
American Speech-Language-Hearing Association: Knowledge and Skills Needed by
Speech-Language Pathologists and Audiologists to Provide Culturally and Linguistically
Appropriate Services
This document specifies the cultural competence and language competence needed by
bilingual as well as monolingual speech-language pathologists when working with CLD
students. It describes the role of the speech-language pathologist in distinguishing typical from
disordered language, evaluating CLD students and providing therapy to CLD students with
disorders of language, articulation, voice, swallowing and hearing/balance.
http://www.asha.org/docs/html/KS2004-00215.html

Assessing Asian/Pacific Languages

Dr. Li-Rong Lilly Cheng provides a wealth of information regarding the cultural and linguistic
characteristics of the following languages for populations now living in the United States:
Chinese, Vietnamese, Lao, Hmong, Cambodian, Filipino, Korean, Japanese, Hawaiian,
Guamanian and Micronesian. Dr. Cheng stresses the importance of a team approach to
evaluation and determination of eligibility. She outlines procedures and provides a step-by-step
process for determining language difference vs. language disorder. She provides checklists for
evaluation procedures, articulation tests for Vietnamese and Chinese, language tests, word
lists, and pictures for storytelling tasks.
Cheng, Li-Rong Lilly (1991) Assessing Asian Language Performance - Guidelines for Evaluating LimitedEnglish-Proficient Students - Second Edition. Oceanside, CA: Academic Communication
Associates.

Bilingual Speech-Language Pathologists in Minnesota

The Minnesota Speech-Language-Hearing Association's (MSHA) Multicultural Affairs
Committee has compiled a list of 58 speech-language pathologists in the state who speak a
total of 25 different languages. Also listed are Websites that specific MSHA members have
developed related to the Hmong, Chinese, and Vietnamese languages, specifically for speechlanguage pathologists. The list of bilingual speech-language pathologists can be found in the
section titled: Consumer Information: Resources for speech-language pathologists and
audiologists.
Page 85

www.msha.net

Multicultural Affairs Committee

Cultural and Linguistic Diversity Resource Guide for Speech-Language Pathologists

This comprehensive guide is designed for speech-language pathologists who work with
individuals from culturally and linguistically diverse populations. It bridges the gap between
existing research and the use of that information in clinical practice. It includes easy to access
information on normative data, evaluation techniques, intervention approaches, and resources.
Practical information is included to help readers provide speech and language services that
meet the needs of culturally and linguistically diverse populations.
Goldstein, B.A. (2000). Cultural and linguistic diversity resource guide for speech-language pathologists.
San Diego, CA: Singular Publishing Group.

Dual-Language Development and Disorders

This book explains normal and impaired dual language development and the differences
between monolingual and bilingual development. This information can assist professionals with
successful diagnosis and treatment of children with language delays and disorders. The book
divides children into two types of language learners: simultaneous bilingual children, who have
learned two languages from infancy; and sequential bilingual children, who are learning a
second language after significant progress has been made learning a first language. The book
also breaks dual-language learners into two types according to whether or not their primary
language is widely used, has a high social value and is typically associated with socioeconomic
power. Case studies of four children representing each of these four groups are introduced in
chapter one and reoccur throughout the book. The final section of the book discusses
evaluation and intervention issues related to dual-language children with impaired development.
Genessee, F., Paradis, J., Crago, M.B. (2004). Dual language development and disorders. Baltimore:
Brookes

Increasing Language Skills of Students from Low-Income Backgrounds: Practical

Strategies for Professionals
This is a practical book for speech-language pathologists, educators and other professionals
attempting to gain an understanding of the effects of socio-economic status on children's
language development. This resource provides readers with strategies for supporting these
children and their families. Factors that impact low income childrens language skills, strategies
for nonbiased evaluation and suggestions for structuring school environments are discussed.
Roseberry-McKibbin, C. (2007). Increasing language skills of students from low-income backgrounds:
Practical strategies for professionals. San Diego, CA: Plural Publishing.

Page 86

Language Disorders in Bilingual Children and Adults

This book offers speech-language pathologists information on how to provide effective services
to bilingual children and adults with suspected or confirmed language disorders. Emphasis is
placed on functional aspects of bilingualism as opposed to mere analysis of proficiency in a
second language. This book provides the reader with an understanding of both typical and
atypical language skills in bilingual children and adults. Assessment and intervention information
is provided with consideration given to social, cognitive and communicative systems. Sections
on bilingual children focus primarily on developmental language disorder (i.e., specific language
impairment, language learning impairment, isolated language impairment and late talkers) as
opposed to language disorders that are secondary to other conditions (e.g., autism, Down
Syndrome).
Kohnert, K. (2007). Language disorders in bilingual children and adults. San Diego, CA: Plural Publishing.

Multicultural Students with Special Language Needs: Practical Strategies for

Assessment and Intervention, 3rd Edition
This third edition provides the reader with practical strategies for evaluation and intervention of
students from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds. Specific information about the
cultural and linguistic variables that may affect speech and language evaluation and intervention
for the following cultural groups: Anglo-European, African American, Hispanic, Asian,
Native American, Pacific Islander, Middle Eastern and Russian. These variables are
important to consider when assessing and planning programs for students with language
disorders and other special learning needs.
Roseberry-McKibbin, C. (2008). Multicultural students with special language needs: Practical strategies
rd
for assessment and intervention (3 ed.). Oceanside, CA: Academic Communication Associates

Articulation Evaluation in CLD Children

Testing articulation skills in other languages involves eliciting a sample of the child's speech to
determine overall intelligibility as judged by a native speaker as well as eliciting production of
the different sounds in the language in isolation, words or connected speech. By using a
phonemic sound inventory or an informal articulation measure a speech-language pathologist
can begin to determine:
Which sounds are the same in the child's home language and in English
Chart on English Sounds Lacking in Other Languages (See Appendix 3Z)
Whether the child's acquisition of the native language is influencing the production of
sounds in English.
Whether English phonology is influencing the child's production of sounds in the native
language.

Page 87

Subtle differences in the production of the same sound can be detected with the help of
an interpreter. For example, in Spanish the two ds in the word dedo are pronounced
differently. Initial /d/ is similar to the English /d/; whereas, medial /d/ is pronounced with
an inter-dental tongue placement and is less plosive than the English /d/ (more similar to
voiced th as in the).
For children who speak English as well as another language, articulation skills in English must
also be evaluated. To do this, you can use published English articulation measures with which
you are familiar. Be cautious when interpreting the childs performance, as any errors that are
due to dialect and/or influence of the other language cannot be counted as errors but rather
reflect normal, expected cross linguistic transfer. Learning about the phonology of the other
language(s) and completing a contrastive analysis between the sound systems of English and
that/those language(s) will aid in interpretation. For example, there are no final consonants in
Hmong, therefore it would be expected that a Hmong speaker would have difficulty hearing and
producing final consonant sounds in English. This would be considered a typical difference
and not a disorder. Be advised that the norms on the English articulation measures may not
be valid for bilingual children.
Suggested Procedures for Evaluating Articulation Skills in a Language Other than
English
Arrange for an interpreter.
Listen to the speech of the parents and with the help of the interpreter, determine the
language and dialect the child is hearing at home.
Review the words on the articulation measure that you will be using, to determine if they
are appropriate for the dialect of the family.
You may wish to use audio or video recording to review the child's speech production
afterwards.
You may use pictures to elicit the words spontaneously.
If pictures are not available, the interpreter can ask the child to imitate each word, one at
a time.
Make sure the interpreter and the speech-language pathologist each have a copy of the
protocol.
Establish scoring parameters ahead of time.
o For example, will the interpreter make a judgment on just the targeted sound in a
word or the production of the entire word?
The interpreter makes a judgment of correct/incorrect and informs the speech-language
pathologist.
o Try having the interpreter use a code such as saying:
"Good" when the child correctly produces the target sound/word
"OK" - when there was an error in the child's production in the interpreter's
judgment.
Ask the interpreter to describe the child's ability to appropriately use tonal markers, if
used in the language being tested.
Ask the interpreter to describe how intelligible the child's speech was during
spontaneous conversation:
Page 88

o
o
o
o

Rarely understandable (less than 50 percent of the time)

Sometimes understandable (between 50 and 75 percent of the time)
Usually understandable (more than 75 percent of the time)
Always understandable (nearly 100 percent of the time)

Creating Your Own Articulation Screener

If you do not have an articulation measure available to test the speech sounds in a particular
language, you can make your own screener.
Contract an interpreter for that language.
Obtain information on the phonological system of the language (refer to the following
section for a list of resources).
Make a list of all of the consonant sounds in the language and ask your interpreter to
give you a simple word that starts with each sound. If a particular sound is not found in
the beginning of words, you will need to find a word that has the sound in the middle or
the end of a word.
You now have an informal articulation measure that can be used as an imitation tool.
Resources on Phonology in Other Languages
Concise Compendium of the World's Languages
This book provides information on more than 100 languages spoken today by populations of at
least 5-10 million people. Minor languages that figure prominently in the contemporary sociopolitical context also are included. This combination allows less familiar languages, such as
Akan, Navajo, Basque and Zulu to figure prominently alongside mainstream languages such
as Arabic, French, Chinese and Russian. Each entry considers the phonological,
morphological and lexical features of a specific language. This information is especially useful
when developing an articulation screener for an unfamiliar language and when interpreting
perceived errors in grammar and/or phonology.
Campbell, G.L. (1998). Concise Compendium of the Worlds Languages. New York: Routledge.

International Guide to Speech Acquisition

The International Guide to Speech Acquisition serves as a comprehensive guide for speechlanguage pathologists working with children from a wide variety of language backgrounds.
Descriptions of phonetic inventories, syllable structures, and phonological processes as well as
the age of acquisition of speech sounds are given for 12 dialectal variations of English and
24 other languages. This information is valuable when identifying speech difficulties in children
and when choosing age-appropriate prevention and intervention targets.
McLeod, S. (2007). International guide to speech acquisition. Clifton, NY: Thomson-Delmar Learning.

Page 89

The International Guide to Speech Acquisition Web Summary

In this handout, Sharon McLeod provides charts summarizing the information in her book (listed
above). She lists the consonants, vowels, syllable structure, presence of tones, availability of
speech acquisition research and available articulation tests in 24 languages and several
dialects of English.
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/educat/teached/staff/docs/McLeodASHA05Internationalspeechacq
uisition.pdf

Speech Accent Archive - Native Phonology Inventory

This Website has the phonetic inventories of 220 different languages and dialects. It also has
recordings of native speakers of more than 100 different languages reading a passage in
English. The articulation errors made by the speakers are described. This helps to point out
the kinds of articulation errors that are due to influence of the native language on English and
therefore would not be considered a disorder.
http://accent.gmu.edu/browse_native.php

UCLA Language Materials Project

This Website provides profiles of over 100 languages, describing the language family, the
areas where it is spoken, the dialects of the language as well as information about the
phonology, grammar and orthography.
http://www.lmp.ucla.edu/Profile.aspx?menu=004

Wikipedia
This Website has phonological and linguistic descriptions of many languages. Search by the
target language + phonology.
http://wikipedia.org/

World Atlas of Language Structures Online

This site contains information from more than 40 authors on the phonological, grammatical and
lexical features of 2500 languages. Maps and linguistic comparisons are available.
http://wals.info/

Informal Articulation Screening Measures for Other Languages

The following 22 articulation screening measures provide a method for systematically evaluating
a child's sound system in other languages. These are informal measures without scores and
should be considered one part of an evaluation of articulation skills.
Amharic:

Amharic Imitative Articulation Measure (See Appendix 3QQ)

Amharic Consonant Chart (See Appendix 3RR)
Page 90

Arabic:

Arabic Imitative Articulation Measure (See Appendix 3SS)

ASHA Arabic Phonemic Inventory
http://www.asha.org/uploadedFiles/practice/multicultural/ArabicPhonemicInventory.pdf#s
earch=%22ASHA%22

Bosnian-Serbo-Croation: Bosnian/Serbo-Croation Imitative Articulation Measure (See

Appendix 3TT)
Cantonese:

Phonemic Inventory and Contrastive Analysis Cantonese/English ASHA

Website
http://www.asha.org/uploadedFiles/practice/multicultural/CantonesePhonemicInventory.p
df#search=%22cantonese%22

Super Duper Contrastive Analysis - Communication Differences among AsianAmerican Speakers

http://www.superduperinc.com/handouts/pdf/02_comm_diff_asian.pdf

German:

German Imitative Articulation Measure (See Appendix 3UU)

Hmong:

Contrastive Analysis Hmong/English (See Appendix 3VV)

White Hmong Articulation Test (See Appendix 3WW)
Hmong (White) Imitative Articulation Measure (See Appendix 3XX)
Hmong English Bilingual Speakers. This Website by Pui Fong Kan, Ph.D., CCCSLP, provides in depth information on the phonology, word order, and tones in
Hmong. There is a chart of Hmong consonants and vowels organized by manner
and placement with recorded samples of words from native speakers for each
sound in the language. Information on the Hmong culture is also provided.
http://www.tc.umn.edu/~kanx0004

Japanese:

Contrastive Analysis Japanese/English in Super Duper - Communication

Differences among Asian-American Speakers
http://www.superduperinc.com/handouts/pdf/02_comm_diff_asian.pdf

Karen Sgaw dialect: Karen Imitative Articulation Measure (See Appendix 3YY)
Khmer:

Khmer Imitative Articulation Screener (See Appendix 3ZZ)

Contrastive Analysis Khmer/English (See Appendix 3AAA)

Korean:

Phonemic Inventory and Contrastive Analysis ASHA Website

Page 91

http://www.asha.org/uploadedFiles/practice/multicultural/KoreanPhonemicInventory.pdf#s
earch=%22korean%22

Super Duper Communication Differences Among Asian-American Speakers

Korean/English
http://www.superduperinc.com/handouts/pdf/02_comm_diff_asian.pdf

Korean Articulation Measure (See Appendix 3BBB)

Lao:

Lao Imitative Articulation Measure (See Appendix 3CCC)

Mandarin:

Mandarin Articulation Measure and accompanying pictures

http://home.comcast.net/%7Ebilingualslp/

Phonemic Inventory and Contrastive Analysis Mandarin/English ASHA Website

http://www.asha.org/uploadedFiles/practice/multicultural/MandarinPhonemicInventory.pdf
#search=%22mandarin%22

Tao Yuan Li's Website has information for parents and speech language
pathologists on speech and language development and delays in Mandarin
speaking children. Includes a chart of normal developmental expectations of
speech sounds in Mandarin by age.
http://home.comcast.net/~bilingualslp

Mandingo:

Mandingo Imitative Articulation Measure (See Appendix 3DDD)

Oromo:

Oromo Imitative Articulation Measure See Appendix 3EEE)

Oromo Consonant Chart (See Appendix 3FFF)

Portuguese: Portuguese Imitative Articulation Measure (See Appendix 3GGG)

Russian:

Russian Imitative Articulation Measure (See Appendix 3HHH)

Somali:

Somali Imitative Articulation Measure (See Appendix 3III)

Spanish:

Spanish articulation measures are described in the section

immediately following this list (there are published tools available).

Swahili:

Swahili Imitative Articulation Measure (See Appendix 3JJJ)

Tagalog:

Tagalog Imitative Articulation Measure (See Appendix 3KKK)

Heritage Voices - Language: Tagalog Center for Applied Linguistics
Page 92

http://www.cal.org/heritage/research/voices_tagalog.pdf

Tibetan:

Tibetan Imitative Articulation Measure (See Appendix 3LLL)

Tigrinya:

Tigrinya Imitative Articulation Measure (See Appendix 3MMM)

Tigrinya is also spelled Tigrigna, Tigrina, and Tigria

Vietnamese: Vietnamese Imitative Articulation Measure (See Appendix 3NNN)

Vietnamese Language and Phonology Information (See Appendix 3OOO)
ASHA Phonemic Inventory and Contrastive Analysis
http://www.asha.org/uploadedFiles/practice/multicultural/VietnamesePhonemicInventory.
pdf#search=%22Vietnamese%22

VN Speech Therapy. Information in English and Vietnamese on speech and

language disorders for parents, clinicians, and researchers. Contains a list of
books in Vietnamese for children.
http://vnspeechtherapy.com/default.html

Crosslinguistic Analysis of Vietnamese and English (See Appendix

3PPP)
This article has three parts. Section 1 discusses previous studies on first
language (L1) maintenance among Vietnamese Americans. Section 2
presents a cross-linguistic comparison of Vietnamese and English across
speech-sound, word, and grammatical language levels. A cross-linguistic
analysis may help educators better understand speaking patterns of
Vietnamese American students. Based on this cross-linguistic
comparison, Section 3 presents potential bi-directional interactions
between Vietnamese and English within an individual speaker.
Tang, G. Cross-Linguistic Analysis of Vietnamese and English with Implications for
Vietnamese Language Acquisition and Maintenance in the United States (2007)
Journal of Southeast Asian American Education & Advancement, 2, 1-33.

Online Spanish Phonology Resources

ASHA Spanish Phonemic Inventory and Contrastive Analysis
This chart, based on the work of Brian Goldstein, lists all of the consonant sounds in Spanish
by manner and place of articulation. It cautions that the specific dialect of Spanish needs to be
considered when using any phonemic chart.
http://www.asha.org/uploadedFiles/practice/multicultural/SpanishPhonemicInventory.pdf

Page 93

As Hablamos
This online resource allows you to type in a word in Spanish to find out what country it is used
in, its meaning, and show it used in a sentence. You can also do a search for words from just
one country. This Website is entirely in Spanish.
http://www.asihablamos.com/

Common Articulation Variations between English and Spanish

This downloadable handout describes contrasts between English and Spanish highlighting
which sounds in English may be difficult for Spanish speakers because of lack of practice
hearing and using the sounds which are not present in Spanish.
Super Duper - Common Articulation Variations between English and Spanish by Melanie Frederic M.S.
CCC-SLP http://cfbstaff.cfbisd.edu/boyerk/pdf_files/Artic_Eng_Span_Variations.pdf

Dialects of Latin American Spanish

The Omniglot Website has information on the different dialects of Spanish.
http://www.omniglot.com/language/articles/latin_american_spanish.htm

Spanish Dialects and Varieties - Wikipedia article

This article has links to information on many dialects of Spanish.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_dialects_and_varieties

Other Resources on Spanish Phonology

Spanish Phoneme Development Chart (See Appendix 3QQQ)
This chart compares data on the acquisition of phonemes in Spanish-speaking children from
four different studies.
Cultural and Linguistic Diversity Resource Guide for Speech-Language Pathologists
Goldstein provides information on normal speech sound acquisition in Spanish-speaking
children and dialectal variation across Spanish-speaking countries in charts on pages 22 to 27.
Goldstein, B.A. (2000). Cultural and linguistic diversity resource guide for speech-language pathologists.
San Diego, CA: Singular Publishing Group.

Educating Latino Preschool Children

Hortencia Kayser's book has a chart of Spanish pronunciations in the appendix that lists the
various phonemes in Spanish and the variations on their pronunciation from one Spanishspeaking country to the next.

Page 94

Kayser, H. (2008). Educating Latino Preschool Children. San Diego, CA: Plural Publishing, 181-187
http://www.pluralpublishing.com

Linguistically Culturally Diverse II: American Indian and Spanish-Speaking

The Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction produced this manual to provide information on
linguistic and cultural differences of American Indian and Spanish-speaking students. The
manual provides information on developing guidelines for assessment procedures used with
American Indian and Spanish-speaking students who are experiencing academic and
communication difficulties in the educational environment. It has detailed information about the
phonological differences among the various dialects of Spanish.
Christine Freiberg (2003). Linguistically Culturally Diverse II: Populations: American Indian and Spanish
Speaking. Milwaukee, WI: Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction
http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/search/detailmini.jsp?_nfpb=true&_&ERICExtSearch_Sea
rchValue_0=ED482754&ERICExtSearch_SearchType_0=no&accno=ED482754

Commercially Available Spanish Articulation Tests

Compton Speech and Language Screening Evaluation Spanish Adaptation (Compton &
Kline)
One portion of this screening tool provides a way to screen Spanish articulation skills in
children ages 3 to 6 years by listening to a child label toy objects. A concurrent score for
vocabulary is also obtained. Cut-off scores are provided for each age group.
http://www.carouselhouse.com/language_screening_-_spanish.php

Contextual Probes of Articulation Competence - Spanish (CPAC-S) (Goldstein & Iglesias,

2006)
This tool has a Quick Screen that assesses all Spanish phonemes and many frequently
occurring phonological patterns. In addition, it contains a criterion-referenced full assessment
that provides a comprehensive analysis of a childs articulation and phonological skills. It also is
a vehicle for monitoring progress and changing treatment goals. Norm referenced scores are
available for children 3 years, 0 months to 8 years, 11 months.
http://www.superduperinc.com/products/view.aspx?pid=CPACS69

La Medida Espaola de Articulacin (La MEDA)

This Spanish articulation test has norms for Spanish-speaking children from California ages 4
years to 9 years. It can be purchased from SanYsidro School District, 4350 Otay Mesa Road,
San Ysidro, CA 92073.
Preschool Language Scale - 4 Spanish Edition Articulation Screener (PLS-4 Spanish)
(Zimmerman, Steiner, & Pond, 2002)
Page 95

This imitative articulation screener has cut-off scores for Spanish-speaking children living in the
United States ages 2 years, 6 months, to 6 years. This comes attached to the PLS-4 Spanish
Language Test. Available from Pearson Assessment.
Zimmerman, I., Steiner, V., Pond, R. (2002). Preschool language scale-4, Spanish edition
(articulation screener). San Antonio, TX: Harcourt Assessment.
http://www.pearsonassessments.com/haiweb/cultures/en-us/productdetail.htm?pid=015-8659708&Community=CA_Speech_AI_CompLang

Spanish Articulation Measures (SAM) (Mattes, 1995)

Normative data is available for this spontaneous word production task beginning at age 3
years. In depth testing of a particular sound, an imitative Spanish articulation test and a
stimulability task are also included.
Academic Communication Associates www.acadcom.com

Spanish Preschool Articulation Test (SPAT) (Tsugawa, 2004)

Articulation test with norms for Spanish-speaking children living in the United States ages 2 1/2
to 5 1/2 years old. The pictures and scoring protocol come on a CD. Available from Lexicon
Press.
Tsugawa, L. (2004). The Spanish preschool articulation test. Billings, MT: Lexicon Press. (406-2481180).http://lexiconpress.com/catalog/c18_p1.html

Additional Resources Related to Articulation in CLD Children

Bilingual Speech-Language Pathologists in Minnesota
The Minnesota Speech-Language-Hearing Association's Multicultural Affairs Committee has
compiled a list of 58 speech-language pathologists in the state who speak a total of 25 different
languages. Also listed are Websites that Minnesota speech-language pathologists have
developed related to Hmong, Chinese and Vietnamese languages, specifically for speechlanguage pathologists.
http://msha.affiniscape.com/displaycommon.cfm?an=1&subarticlenbr=20

Fonetics - The Sounds of Spoken Language Spanish and German

This lively and informative Website contains animated libraries of the phonetic sounds of
English, German, and Spanish. An animated diagram with sound is available for each
consonant and vowel in the language. You can watch a native speaker saying a word, hear the
word, and see the written word as well as the International Phonetic Alphabet (IPA) symbols.
Spanish sounds are defined by the dialect they belong to. There is also an animated diagram of
tongue placement that shows how the tongue and palate move during the production of each
sound.
Page 96

http://www.uiowa.edu/~acadtech/phonetics/#

International Dialects of English Archive

This Website contains recordings of speakers of various dialects of English and native speakers
from many different countries reading a standard passage in English. Listening to these
recordings can help speech-language pathologists identify normal accented English in speakers
of many languages.
http://web.ku.edu/~idea/index.htm

Language Transfer Issues for English Language Learners

This 16-page reference book contains two charts. One explains differences in language
structures between English and six other languages (Cantonese, Haitian-Creole, Hmong,
Korean, Spanish and Vietnamese). The other chart compares the sounds of English to those
sounds found in the languages listed above.
Language Transfer Issues for English Learners. Carmel, CA: Hampton-Brown. (ISBN: 0-7362-1554-9)
Available at http://ngsp.com/

Phonological Assessment and Treatment of Bilingual Speakers

This paper provides speech-language pathologists information about common and uncommon
phonological patterns across a variety of languages, the influence of the sound patterns of one
language on another and guidelines for assessment and intervention.
Yavas, M & Goldstein, B. (1998. May) Phonological assessment and treatment of bilingual speakers.
American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology 7, 49-60.
http://ajslp.asha.org/cgi/content/abstract/7/2/49 ASHA members can access the full text of the
article.

Other Speech and Language Disorders

Cleft Palate Speech: Cross-linguistic Considerations
This section was contributed by Kelly Nett Cordero, Ph.D., CCC-SLP, and Anna Thurmes,
M.A., CCC-SLP
*For treatment information and additional resources please see the Cleft Palate section of
Chapter 4 Intervention in this Talk with Me resource guide.
Core Knowledge
Information regarding the nature and impact of cleft palate on communication can be reviewed
through:

Page 97

American Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Association (ACPA) Core Curriculum in SpeechLanguage Pathology

http://www.acpa-cpf.org/educMeetings/CoreCur/speech_language_pathology.html

Kuehn, D.P. & Moller, K.T. (2000). Speech and language issues in the cleft palate
population: The state of the art. Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Journal, 37, 348-383.
http://www.cpcjournal.org/doi/pdf/10.1597/15451569%282000%29037%3C0348%3ASALIIT%3E2.3.CO%3B2

Listening samples of various degrees of hypernasality can be reviewed at

http://www.acpa-cpf.org/educMeetings/speechSamples/index.htm

Cleft Palate Speech Assessment

Goal: To determine if resonance distortions and articulation errors are anatomically and/or
behaviorally based and what treatment is needed. Systematic evaluation should gather
information regarding what the speaker is capable of with current speech structures. This
information will assist you and the cleft palate team in the process of initiating speech treatment
and/or planning surgical intervention.
Assessment tools for cleft palate speech examine the following components:

Presence of articulation errors commonly associated with cleft palate, including glottal stops,
pharyngeal fricatives/stops, and nasal fricative substitutions.
Speech production during oral versus nasal consonants.
Degree of intraoral pressure and nasal air emission perceived during the production of high
pressure consonants (stops, fricatives, and affricates).
Resonance variation in vowels (high versus low).

There are specific tasks recommended to assess cleft palate speech that can be reviewed in
the following article:
Kummer, A.W & Lee, L. (1996). Evaluation and treatment of resonance disorders. Language,
Speech, and Hearing Services in the Schools, 27, 271-281.
Cross-Linguistic Assessment
Assessment of non-English speakers with cleft palate speech requires knowledge regarding the
phonetic inventory of the target language and the potential impact on the evaluation
components listed above. Speech characteristics that are considered disordered in English
may be typical of other languages. Examples include:

Glottal, pharyngeal and uvular consonant productions are phonemic in Somali. In English,
these are articulation errors commonly associated with cleft palate.
English has three nasal consonants and Hmong has 27 consonants with some nasal
component. However, the frequency of occurrence is relatively similar across the
languages.
Page 98

English has 16 high pressure consonants while the native Hawaiian language has 2 high
pressure consonants.
Phonemic nasalization of vowels is present in languages such as Hmong, Portuguese and
French and should be considered in addition to vowel height.
Lexical tones, characteristic of many Asian languages, add another dimension to assessing
resonance cross-linguistically.

During the phonetic inventory review, audio samples will facilitate the ability to identify these
potential differences. This can be accomplished through various Websites and with the
assistance of interpreters. Some Websites include the following:
Hmong http://www.tc.umn.edu/~kanx0004/
Spanish http://www.uiowa.edu/~acadtech/phonetics/about.html
Somali http://www.cal.org/co/somali/ssound.html
In addition to Internet searches, resources to examine phonetic inventories include the
following:
Campbell, G. (1998). Concise Compendium of the Worlds Languages. New York:
Routledge.
Goldstein, B. (2000). Cultural and Linguistic Diversity Resource Guide for SpeechLanguage Pathologists. San Diego: Singular.
McLeod, S. (2007). International Guide to Speech Acquisition. Clifton Park, NY:
Thomson Delmar.
Information on the development of cleft palate speech evaluation protocols across
languages is described in the following resources:
Brndsted, K., Grunwell, P., Henningsson, G., Jansonius, K., Karling, J., Meijer, M.,
Ording, U., Sell, D., Vermeij-Zierverink, E., Wyatt, R. (1994). A phonetic framework for
cross-linguistic analysis of cleft palate speech. Clinical Linguistics and Phonetics, 8,
109-125.
Cordero, K.N. & Thurmes, A. (2008). Assessing Velopharyngeal Function in a
Developing Nation. Presentation at the Surgical Teams to Developing Nations
Conference, St. Paul, MN.
http://surgicalteamsconference.googlepages.com/Cordero_Thurmes_Handoutpdf.pdf

Henningsson, G., Kuehn, D., Sell, D., Sweeney, T., Trost-Cardamone, J., & Whitehill, T.
(2008). Universal Parameters for Reporting Speech Outcomes in Individuals with Cleft
Palate. Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Journal, 45(1), 1-17.
http://www.cpcjournal.org/doi/pdf/10.1597/06-086.1

Page 99

Hutters, B. & Henningsson, G. (2004). Speech outcome following treatment in crosslinguistic cleft palate studies: methodological implications. Cleft Palate-Craniofacial
Journal, 41, 544-549.
For more information, or for specific questions about cleft palate assessment and treatment of
CLD speakers, feel free to contact the authors of this section directly.
Kelly Nett Cordero, Ph.D., CCC-SLP Anna K. Thurmes, M.A. CCC-SLP
Bilingual/Craniofacial SLP, Supervisor

Craniofacial SLP / Program Coordinator

Center for Craniofacial Services

Cleft Palate-Craniofacial / VCFS Clinics

Gillette Childrens Specialty Healthcare

University of Minnesota

St. Paul, Minnesota

Minneapolis, Minnesota

Email: knettcordero@gillettechildrens.com

Email: thur0080@umn.edu

Selective Mutism Versus the Silent Period in ELL Students

Helping Young ELL Children Who are Not Speaking at School - Tips and Ideas - by Janell
Norman, M.A., CCC-SLP, 2009 (See Appendix 3RRR)
After retiring from the St. Paul Public Schools, Janell Norman opened a private practice in
speech language pathology that specializes in Selective Mutism. She consults with school
districts throughout Minnesota, Iowa, Wisconsin, North Dakota and South Dakota. She has
found that 9 of 10 of students who do not talk at school when they first begin preschool will talk
by the end of their first year. She has prepared a three-page handout, clinician to clinician, with
suggestions on how to support ELL children in their regular education programs as they learn
English and begin to feel comfortable speaking in school. She also points out red flags that may
indicate which children truly are developing selective mutism.
Language Immersion Programs and Children with Disabilities
Understanding Language and Learning Disabilities in Immersion Education: Immersion
Educators Top Questions, and Research-Based, Practitioner-Informed Responses
Tara Fortune of the Center for Advanced Research on Language Acquisition (CARLA) at the
University of Minnesota is preparing this CARLA working paper that will be available for
purchase from the CARLA Website in the fall of 2009. Immersion educators propose 10
important questions related to immersion programs and children with disabilities. Research
based/practitioner informed responses are provided. One of the topics discussed is looking at a
range of pre-referral procedures and assessment practices that can provide feedback on
students' language development and learning.
Center for Applied Linguistics. (2006). Retrieved May 30,2009, from http://www.cal.org

Page 100

Struggling Learners & Language Immersion Education Researched-based Practitionerinformed Responses to Educators Top Questions
Tara Fortune of the Center for Advanced Research on Language Acquisition (CARLA) at the
University of Minnesota along with Mandy Menke have written this book to address 10
important questions and answers related to immersion programs and children with
disabilities. Some issues covered include: For whom might immersion not be
appropriate? and Who is likely to struggle and stay in the immersion program? and
What kind of assessments can be given to language immersion students who are not
progressing?
Fortune, T.W. with Menke M.R. (2010). Struggling Learners & Language Immersion Education: ResearchBased, Practitioner-Informed Responses to Educators Top Questions (CARLA Publication
Series). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, the Center for Advanced Research on Language
Acquisition. http://www.carla.umn.edu/resources.html

Information on Immersion Schools in Minnesota

There are 44 immersion language programs listed in Minnesota for the school year 2008-2009.
There are three types of immersion programs:
1. One-way (foreign language) immersion programs are designed to serve students whose
native language is English.
2.
3. Two-way immersion programs are designed to serve a combined population of native
English speakers and native Spanish speakers (all two-way programs in Minnesota are
Spanish/English).
4. Indigenous language immersion programs promote the revitalization of Native languages
and cultures and typically enroll Native American children whose first language is
English.
(See Appendix 3SSS)
Voice Issues in CLD Children
When conducting a voice evaluation with CLD children, it is imperative that speech-language
pathologists gather information about the childs cultural and language backgrounds. This
information is needed to determine whether or not the presenting problem is a difference or a
disorder. In addition, cultural views towards disability may be a factor to consider when
planning and conducting the evaluation and when interpreting and sharing the results.
Minnesota state criteria specifically address these issues in its definition of a voice disorder.
According to Minnesota Rules 3525.1343, Subpart 2, "Voice disorder means the absence of
voice or presence of abnormal quality, pitch, resonance, loudness, or duration. Voice patterns
that can be attributed only to dialectical, cultural, or ethnic differences or to the influence of a
foreign language, must not be identified as a disorder.
A pupil has a voice disorder and is eligible for speech or language special education when:
Page 101

A. The pattern interferes with communication as determined by a speech-language

pathologist and either another adult or the pupil; and,
B. Achievement of a moderate to severe vocal severity rating is demonstrated on a voice
evaluation profile administered on two separate occasions, two weeks apart, at different
times of the day.
https://www.revisor.mn.gov/rules/?id=3525.1343

Voice and Voice Disorders in Multicultural Populations

(American Speech-Language-Hearing Association) ASHA prepared this bibliography of
readings and related materials focused on voice and voice disorders in multicultural populations.
http://www.asha.org/practice/multicultural/readings/voice.htm

Fluency Issues in CLD children

About three-quarters of children who demonstrate dysfluencies during childhood will recover by
late childhood. Girls are more likely to spontaneously recover from stuttering than boys.
Children with an early onset (before age 3 years, 6 months) and those who have been
stuttering for no more than 18 months to 2 years are also more likely to recover. Other factors
that increase the likelihood for recovery include a lack of family history of chronic stuttering and
average language ability. Families and clinicians should not rely on spontaneous recovery but
rather implement indirect or direct intervention to assist in alleviating the disorder when
concerns arise.
Research does not support the idea that bilingualism causes stuttering or makes it more difficult
to recover from stuttering. When one evaluates stuttering in a bilingual child, the most important
factors to investigate are the presence of language disorders or family history of stuttering. It is
also important to obtain information from the family regarding their beliefs about stuttering and
its cause.
Evaluation of fluency in CLD preschoolers should involve:
Tallying the fluency rate in both languages, looking at the frequency and type of
stuttering. It is possible that there is a difference in the frequency of dysfluency in the
two languages. If that is the case, it would be important to investigate the possibility that
language loss of the home language is occuring.
The types of dysfluency have been found to be similar across languages: within-word
dysfluencies (sound and syllable repetitions), blocks, and prolongations. Speechlanguage pathologists who do not speak the language can detect these dysfluencies. If
the type of dysfluency consists of revisions and interjections (between word
dysfluencies) the problem may be linguistic rather than chronic stuttering.
The presence of struggle or tension during dysfluencies often indicates a chronic
stuttering condition.
It is important to determine the role of linguistic complexity and to look at this aspect in
each language. More instances of stuttering may be noted during code-switching or at
higher levels of linguistic complexity.
Page 102

The following fluency problems may be related to limited English proficiency rather than chronic
stuttering:
No secondary characteristics (such as tension or struggle) during dysfluent moments.
No self-awareness of difficulty talking.
No stuttering in the stronger language.
Dysfluencies which are present at moments of complex language formulation attempts in
the weaker language.
Assessment and Treatment of Fluency Disorders in Bilingual Children
Kerry Danahy, SLP Ph.D. uses this PowerPoint/video presentation which discusses fluency
issues in bilingual children.
Powerpoint slides handout: http://slhs.umn.edu/assets/pdf/Bil-fluency%20lecture.ppt#256
Assessment and Treatment of Fluency Disorders in Bilingual Children

Does Language Influence the Accuracy of Judgments of Stuttering in Children?

This research study required Icelandic speech-language pathologists (SLPs) and American
English-only speaking SLPs to rate speech samples of Icelandic speaking children by tallying
fluency. The study concluded that American SLPs were able to rate fluency accurately for the
most part in the speech of children who speak other languages. This article can be downloaded
from the ASHA website by ASHA members.
Einarsdottir, Johanna and Ingham, Roger J. (2009) Does language influence the accuracy of judgment of
stuttering in children? Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research 52, 766-779 June 2009

Fluency in CLD populations Bibliography

The American Speech-Language-Hearing Association prepared this bibliography of readings
and related materials focused on fluency in multicultural populations
http://www.asha.org/practice/multicultural/readings/Fluency.htm

Fluency and Stuttering in Bilingual Children

This chapter is found in Bilingual Language Development and Disorders in Spanish-English
Speakers (Goldstein, 2004). The revised edition of this book is due out in October of 2011. It
reviews basic information about stuttering and then covers general principles of culture-sensitive
assessment, treatment, and counseling as it pertains to Latinos. While much of the chapter is
geared towards older children and adults, clinicians may find the information about cultural
views towards this disability helpful as they assess young Hispanic children.

Page 103

Bernstein Ratner, N. (2004). Fluency and Stuttering in Bilingual Children. In B. Goldstein (Ed.), Bilingual
Language Development and Disorders in Spanish-English Speakers (pp. 287-308). Baltimore:
Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co.

Stuttering Foundation
This organization has information on stuttering in bilingual children.
http://www.stutteringhelp.org/Default.aspx?tabid=55

Writing the Evaluation Summary Report (ESR)

It is challenging to summarize the data collected while making sure to include all of the
information that is legally required to be in an evaluation report. Revisit the manuals published
by the Minnesota Department of Education that were described the section on legal
requirements, as each of these provides guidance as to what information needs to be included
specifically in the evaluation of young CLD children in order to meet the requirements of both
federal and state special education law.
The section that follows will summarize what information and documentation should be included
in each section of the Evaluation Summary Report (ESR).

Background Information
What is the cultural background of the family?
How long has the family been in the United States?
Where have they lived in the United States?
How many siblings are in the home and what are their ages?
What language(s) is/are primarily spoken in the home (by parents, siblings, and
extended family members)?
Who is the primary care provider for the child? What language does he/she speak?
Do parents work outside of the home? If so, has the child been in any daycare,
preschool or other community childcare/classroom settings? What language was spoken
in those settings?

Information from the Parents

What are the parents thoughts about the childs strengths and weaknesses?
What are their primary concerns?
What would they like help with?
What language do they think their child knows best?

Page 104

Modifications to Testing Procedures

Was an interpreter used? Include the name and title of the interpreter.
What language or combinations of languages were used during testing?
Were testing items or materials otherwise modified to be more culturally or linguistically
appropriate? List any modifications and why they were made.
Based on these modifications, are standard scores reportable? If not, what other data
sources will be used specifically to determine eligibility?

Test Results and Developmental Information

What specific skills did the child display in each area of development that was evaluated
including expressive and receptive language, cognitive functioning, fine and gross motor,
social/emotional/behavior and self-help?
How does this compare with other peers his/her age from the same cultural
background?
Based on your knowledge of child development was his/her performance at a level that
would be expected for his/her age?
Do multiple sources of data (i.e., parental report, observation, testing and criterionreferenced instruments) support your conclusions about the childs developmental
functioning?

Documentation of Eligibility
The Minnesota Department of Education outlines how to evaluate and determine eligibility for
English Language Learners (ELL) students. An override is not necessary when cultural and
linguistic diversity are factors. The evaluation team should gather additional evaluation data and
document all of the types of data that were used to determine eligibility. A statement should be
made as to why standard procedures needed to be modified for the student. See Appendix 3A
A statement should be made as to which data had the greatest relative importance to the
eligibility decision. Please see ELL Companion, Chapter 8 at:
http://education.state.mn.us/MDE/Learning_Support/Special_Education/Evaluation_Program_Pla
nning_Supports/Cultural_Linguistic_Diversity/ELL_Companion_Manual/index.html

The following statement was provided in the manual Assessment Instruments: A Selected
Review for Use in Minnesota, published by the Minnesota Department of Education, as a
guideline for how to document a culturally and linguistically diverse childs need for special
education without the use of standard scores.
The standards and procedures (standardized, norm-referenced scores) used with the
majority of children were not used with this child, as the instruments were not normed on
bilingual children. Such norm-referenced scores are not considered valid for this child.

Page 105

The objective data used to conclude that this child has (or does not have) a disability and is
(or is not) in need of specialized instruction included: parent comments, teacher comments,
developmental data, observation in the childs home setting, the childs responses to items
from standardized instruments used with young children and comparison of his/her skill
development with that of siblings (or peers from the same culture).
The determination of eligibility for special education is ultimately a team decision based on the
results of the entire evaluation process.

Resources for Writing an ESR

ELL ESR "Audit" Checklist for Early Childhood Special Education (See Appendix
3TTT)
This informal checklist provides a way to look at an ESR and determine if key elements have
been included in the report. It can be used by an individual or as part of an internal monitoring
process. It includes information for the background section, discussion of the use of an
interpreter, interpreting the evaluation data and determining eligibility.

Writing an ESR - A Speech-Language Pathology Perspective

In her newsletter on the Bilingual Therapies Website, Hortencia Kayser offers suggestions on
what to include in an ESR that describes the speech and language evaluation of a bilingual
child.
http://www.bilingualtherapies.com/kayser-newsletter/2000/summertime-blues/

Writing the Individual Education Program (IEP)

Findings from the evaluation regarding the child's performance in all languages the child
was tested in should be included in the present levels of performance in each
developmental area on the IEP.
Goals and objectives should reflect exactly how native language support will be
incorporated into intervention and should specify the language(s) the child will use
during service delivery times.
Parent report should also be included under each objective as a source of information
about the child's progress on each objective.
Under adaptations on the IEP, a statement can be made describing the parent's
preference for having an interpreter available at Due Process meetings.
Facilitating the Meaningful Participation of Culturally and Linguistically Diverse Families
in the IFSP and IEP Process
This article briefly reviews literature regarding the involvement and participation of culturally and
linguistically diverse (CLD) families in the special education process. Barriers to family
participation and strategies for facilitating family participation are summarized. The authors
Page 106

highlight the importance of developing collaborative and effective IFSPs and IEPs with all
families. (See Appendix 3UUU)
Zhang, C. and Bennett, T. (2003) Facilitating the meaningful participation of culturally and linguistically
diverse Families in the IFSP and IEP process. Focus on autism and other developmental
disabilities. 18, 1, 51-59

Writing the Individualized Family Service Plan (IFSP)

Helping the family understand the culture of special education and become an advocate for their
child is a process that begins at the evaluation and the IFSP process for children birth to three
years old. Please see the Parent Resources Chapter (Chapter 6) for articles, Websites and
videos in other languages that will help parents understand the special education process. The
following family considerations page from the IFSP form has been translated from English to
Spanish to help you, your interpreter, and your Spanish-speaking families think about the family
needs.
Family Considerations and Concerns page from the Individualized Family Service Plan
(IFSP) English (See Appendix 3VVV)
Spanish Version: Consideraciones y preocupaciones de la Familia por el Plan De Servicio
indiviualizados de la Familia (IFSP) (See Appendix 3WWW)

Early Childhood Outcomes (ECO)

Beginning in 2005, the Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) began requiring State
Early Intervention and Preschool Special Education programs to report on child and family
outcomes. These outcomes are designed to reflect where a child's skills are at in relation to
age-expected development in three areas: positive social-emotional skills (including social
relationships), acquisition and use of knowledge and skills (including early
language/communication and early literacy) and use of appropriate behaviors to meet their
needs. In addition, families of children who receive early intervention services are asked to
complete a survey that addresses how well early intervention services have helped them know
their rights, effectively communicate their children's needs, and help their children develop and
learn. Data used to complete outcome summary forms should come from multiple sources,
including age-referenced tools that can compare the child to same-age peers as well as
information about the child in natural contexts. Therefore, when working with CLD children and
families, the culture and language of the family need to be considered in much the same was as
discussed in the preceding sections.

The Early Childhood Outcomes (ECO) Center

This organization is a national center that supports state agencies as they implement outcome
requirements. Their Website provides up-to-date information and resources for state and local
administrators, technical assistance providers, teachers and other direct-service providers, and
families. Specific items from their Website are highlighted below.
http://www.fpg.unc.edu/~eco/index.cfm

Page 107

ECO Questions and Answers

Under "ECO Resources" in the menu on the home page, you can find "ECO Q&A."
Selecting this item will provide you a list with a quick reference to frequently asked
questions and answers.
Issues in Using Assessments in Accountability Systems for Young Children with
DisabilitiesOPEP Think Tank on Assessment
This is an archived presentation about the issues of assessment with young children for
the purpose of program accountability. It can be accessed under "ECO Resources" in
the main menu and then under "Archive of ECO Presentations" or through this direct
link: http://www.fpg.unc.edu/~eco/assets/pdfs/OSEP%20_Think_Tank_presentation_207.pdf
Family Outcome Surveys in Different Languages
The family outcomes surveys have been translated into 11 different languages
including: Arabic, Cambodian, Croatian, Hmong, Lao, Simplified Chinese, Oromo,
Russian, Somali, Spanish, and Vietnamese. These surveys are found under "ECO
Resources" in the main menu, under "Family Outcomes Survey," and then under the tab
"Survey Versions." You can directly link to the surveys at
http://www.fpg.unc.edu/~eco/pages/tools.cfm#SurveyVersions
List of Links to Age-Expected Child Development Resources
The ECO Center developed a list of links to Age-Expected Child Development from birth
to five years. It can be found under "ECO Resources" in the menu on the home page,
under "Professional Development Resources," under the Tab "COSF Topics," and under
the heading "Suggested Participant Materials." The direct link to the list is
http://www.fpg.unc.edu/~eco/assets/pdfs/Age-expected_Resources.pdf
Desired Results System - California Department of Education http://www.draccess.org
This system is California's ECO program developed to evaluate the effectiveness of California
Department of Educations child development and early childhood special education services
and programs. Their project Website provides key resources to help families, assessors and
administrators understand, use, and benefit from ECOs. The following resource specific to
assessing children with disabilities who are English Language Learners can be found on their
Website.
Assessing Children with Disabilities who are English Learners: Guidance for the
DRDP access and the PS DRDP-R for Children with IEPs
This manual, while specific to California's procedures, has information on planning
observations, working with interpreters and a list of annotated resources.
http://draccess.org/assessors/guidancefordrdp/ELGuidance.html

Page 108

Staff Training and Continuing Education Opportunities Related to

CLD Evaluation
Assessing Children Who Speak Spanish: Milestones in Spanish Grammar Development
(Audio CD and Manual)
This two-hour audio course is available through the American Speech-Language-Hearing
Association (ASHA) for .2 CEUs. Discover the patterns of grammar development in young
Spanish-speaking children between the ages of two and five. This seminar addresses ways in
which language contact situations may affect Spanish-speaking childrens grammatical
development. Strategies for developing sound assessment procedures for Spanish grammar in
young children (both typical and atypical learners) are presented by Raquel T. Anderson, Ph.D.,
CCC-SLP. Available for CEUs until 7-21-13.
www.asha.org View Continuing Education Opportunities - Multicultural Issues
http://www.asha.org/eWeb/OLSDynamicPage.aspx?kwrd=Assessing+Children+who+Speak+Spa
nish%3A++Milestones+in+Spanish+Grammar+Development&x=15&y=16&webcode=olsresults

Assessment and Treatment of Fluency Disorders in Bilingual Children

Kerry Danahy, CCC SLP Ph.D., uses this PowerPoint/video presentation to discuss fluency
issues in bilingual children.
Handout of PowerPoint slides:
http://slhs.umn.edu/assets/pdf/Bil-fluency%20lecture.ppt#256

Assessment of Bilingual Learners Difference or Disorder

This DVD course and accompanying manual is available through ASHA for .3 CEUs until 7-612. In the DVD Celeste Roseberry-McKibbin, Ph.D., CCC-SLP, provides information about
normal second language acquisition processes, phenomena of bilingualism as a foundation for
distinguishing between language differences and disabilities in ELL students, assessment
considerations, and techniques used to differentiate between language difference and disability
in ELL students. Available for purchase.
www.asha.org View: Continuing Education Opportunities - Multicultural Issues
http://www.asha.org/eWeb/OLSDynamicPage.aspx?Webcode=olsdetails&title=Assessment+of+Bilingual+
Learners%3a+Language+Difference+or+Disorder%3f

Assessment of Phonology
Brian Goldsteins 10-minute video covers completing a case history specific to phonological
skills, completing an independent analysis, completing a relational analysis and linking results
from the assessment to intervention goals.
Page 109

On Bilingual Therapies Website http://blog.bilingualtherapies.com/2008/03/

Bilingual Phonological Development and Disorders

In this audio CD and manual, Brian Goldstein, Ph.D., CCC-SLP, provides you with critical
information on Spanish and English phonology, bilingual phonological development in Spanishand English-speaking children and current approaches for least-biased assessment and
intervention. It is available for purchase through ASHA. You can earn .2 CEUs through 5-1313.
www.asha.org View: Continuing Education Opportunities - Multicultural Issues
http://www.asha.org/eWeb/OLSDynamicPage.aspx?kwrd=Bilingual+Phonological+Development+
and+Disorders&x=17&y=9&webcode=olsresults

Conversations for Three

This excellent one-hour video by Deborah Chen, Sam Chan and Linda Brekken provides an
overview of the process of working with interpreters in early childhood special education from
the perspective of several interpreters, parents and service providers. It comes with a
discussion guide. It can be effectively used for inservice staff training. This video is no longer
available for purchase. Please contact Elizabeth Watkins, Specialist in ELL Special Education
at the Minnesota Department of Education to ask about borrowing it for staff training.
Elizabeth Watkins, 651-582-8678, elizabeth.watkins@state.mn.us
Phonological and Speech Sound Disorders in Bilingual Children
Explore ways to enrich your work with culturally and linguistically diverse clients, students and
families through this journal self-study. This collaborative project between ASHAs Professional
Development and Special Interest Division 14 presents four articles by experts in the field of
child bilingualism. Topics include common theories of language organization in bilingual
individuals, the implications of typical phonological development for assessment and
intervention strategies, tailoring phonological assessments for bilingual children, and the use of
evidence-based practice in treating speech sound disorders. The journal can be accessed
online or downloaded and printed. You can earn .2 CEUs through 5-3-2013.
www.asha.org View: Continuing Education Opportunities - Multicultural Issues
http://www.asha.org/eWeb/OLSDynamicPage.aspx?Webcode=olsdetails&title=Phonological+an
d+Speech+Sound+Disorders+in+Bilingual+Children
Portraits of the children: Culturally competent assessment [Video and CD-ROM]
This multi-media professional development resource package from the National Association of
School Psychologists highlights four culturally diverse case studies that feature students from
preschool to high-school-age levels with challenging learning issues. Interviews with leading
psychological assessment experts and general educators, related services personnel, English
as a Second Language specialists, administrators, and parents create meaningful discussion on
the use of interpreters, bilingual assessment, and the role of culture, race and language on
school performance. The CD-ROM includes the entire video in an interactive format, a Users
Guide with suggested previewing and post-viewing discussion questions, extensive hand-outs,
Page 110

reference lists and Web links and Office of Special Education Programs discretionary grant
information.
National Association of School Psychologists (Producer). (2003). Portraits of the children
Culturally competent assessment [Video and CD-ROM].
http://www.nasponline.org/resources/culturalcompetence/featuredresources.aspx
Speech, Language, and Hearing in Developing Bilinguals
A hallmark of developing bilingualism is variability in time frames and patterns of language
acquisition. This journal self-study course, edited by Brian Goldstein, is available in print form or
online through ASHA. It specifically addresses sources of this variability and the clinical
challenges of serving developing bilinguals. Topics include comparison of phonological skills,
language processing, conceptual scoring, and effects of classroom noise. .9 CEUs are
available through 9-12-2013.
http://www.asha.org/eWeb/OLSDynamicPage.aspx?kwrd=Speech%2C+Language%2C+
and+Hearing+in+Developing+Bilinguals+&x=15&y=14&webcode=olsresults
Working with Interpreters to Serve Bilingual Children and Families
This videotape and manual authored by Henriette Langdon, Ed.D, CCC-SLP, provides learning
about:
The importance of speech-language pathologists being able to work effectively with
interpreters in schools and other clinical settings.
The knowledge, skills and standards of professional conduct you should look for in an
interpreter.
The respective roles and responsibilities of the speech and language pathologist and
interpreter in parent conference and client assessment.
The manual provides a step-by-step layout of what is covered in the video. Appendices offer
three valuable reference articles from ASHA publications on code of ethics, clinical
management of communicatively handicapped minority language populations and the code of
fair testing practices in education. .2 CEUs available until May 31, 2011.
www.asha.org View Continuing Education Opportunities - Multicultural Issues
http://www.asha.org/eWeb/OLSDynamicPage.aspx?Webcode=olsdetails&title=Working+
With+Interpreters+to+Serve+Bilingual+Children+and+Families
Also available from SuperDuper Inc.
www.superduperinc.com
http://www.superduperinc.com/products/view.aspx?pid=TPX21503&stid=

Page 111

Chapter 3 Appendices
3A - 3Z
3A

Limited English Proficient Students Eligibility Determination

3B

ELL Student and Family Background Information

3C

Parent Interview Home Language

3D

Questionnaire for the Family

3E

Cuestionario Para La Familia

3F

Health History English

3G

Health History Spanish

3H

Interpreter Contact Information

3I

Interpreter Basic Expectations

3J

Interpreter Code of Ethics

3K

Interpreter Script for ESR Meetings

3L

Adaptive Behavior Assessment ELL

3M

Differences in Services for ELL with ASD

3N

Is This Your Child? English

3O

Is This Your Child? Arabic-French

3P

Is This Your Child? Hmong

3Q

Is This Your Child? Somali

3R

Is This Your Child? Spanish

3S

Ethics of Assessment

3T

BOLD Language Test

3U

Vocabulary Checklist English-Home Language Page 1

3V

Vocabulary Checklist English-Home Language Page 1

3W

Diagnostic Protocol

3X

ELL Early Language Assessment Final

3Y

Informal Multicultural Communication Measure

3Z

English Sounds Lacking Chart

Chapter 3 Appendices
3AA - 3ZZ
3AA

Hmong TACL3 Subtest I

3BB

Hmong TACL3 Subtests II and IIII

3CC

Hmong TACL3 Score Sheet

3DD

Hmong TACL3 Performance Data

3EE

Hmong Picture Naming Task Test Score Sheet

3FF

Hmong Pic Naming Task 1

3GG

Hmong Pic Naming Task 2

3HH

Hmong Pic Naming Task 3

3II

Hmong Pic Naming Task 4

3JJ

Hmong Pic Naming Task 5

3KK

Hmong Receptive Vocabulary Score Sheet

3LL

Hmong Receptive Vocabulary Pictures

3MM

Hmong Eng Frog Where Are You?

3NN

Somali Boehm Concepts

3OO

Spanish English Vocabulary Checklist Page 1

3PP

Spanish English Vocabulary Checklist Page 2

3QQ

Amharic Imitative Articulation Measure

3RR

Amharic Consonant Chart

3SS

Arabic Imitative Articulation Measure

3TT

Bosnian Serbo-Croatian Imitative Articulation Measure

3UU

German Imitative Articulation Measure

3VV

Hmong Contrastive Analysis

3WW

Hmong (white) Articulation Test

3XX

Hmong Imitative Articulation Measure

3YY

Karen (Sgaw) Imitative Articulation Measure

3ZZ

Khmer Articulation Screener

Chapter 3 Appendices
3AAA - 3WWW
3AAA

Khmer Language Information Sheet

3BBB

Korean Imitative Articulation Measure

3CCC

Laotian Imitative Articulation Measure

3DDD

Mandingo (Liberian) Imitative Articulation Measure

3EEE

Oromo Imitative Articulation Measure

3FFF

Oromo Phonology Chart

3GGG

Portuguese Imitative Articulation Measure

3HHH

Russian Imitative Articulation Measure

3III

Somali Imitative Articulation Measure

3JJJ

Swahili Imitative Articulation Measure

3KKK

Tagalog Imitative Articulation Measure Revised

3LLL

Tibetan Imitative Articulation Measure

3MMM

Tigrinya Imitative Articulation Measure Revised

3NNN

Vietnamese Imitative Articulation measure

3OOO

Vietnamese Language Information Sheet

3PPP

Vietnamese Cross Linguistic Analysis 1

3QQQ

Spanish Phoneme Development Chart

3RRR

Helping Young ELL Children Not Speaking at School

3SSS

Immersion Programs in Minnesota

3TTT

ESR Audit Checklist

3UUU

Facilitating Meaningful Participation

3VVV

IFSP English Family Thoughts

3WWW

IFSP Consideraciones y Preocupaciones de la Familia

Appendix: 3A Limited English Proficient Students Eligibility Determination

MEMORANDUM
To:

Directors of Special Education

From:

Barbara L. Troolin
Director
Division of Special Education

Amy L. Roberts
Director
Division of Compliance and Assistance

Subject: Determination of Eligibility for Limited English Proficient Students

Date:

March 9, 2011

Special education directors and staff often ask for guidance in the determination of special
education eligibility for English Language Learners (ELL) students for specific learning
disabilities or other disabilities. This is of particular concern when staff members modify the
administration of standardized tests through use of interpreters or through other means,
thus limiting the validity of derived scores. As in the past, the Department of Educations
(MDE) position in the case of ELL students is that the use of alternate procedures and
sources of data for the purpose of reducing bias in eligibility determination does not
constitute an override of state eligibility criteria so long as all criteria components are
addressed. However, the override process can serve as a decision-making model as
outlined below. MDE offers the following additional guidance:
When determining eligibility for a disability category for a student who is ELL, teams
must address all parts of the eligibility criteria, including exclusionary factors.
When working with ELL students, teams should gather additional evaluation data to
supplement and support data gathered through standardized tests.
If teams determine that standardized test scores are not valid for an ELL student, the
team is recommended to follow a decision-making procedure similar to that found in
Minnesota Rule 3525.1354 (complete reference attached). This decision-making
procedure allows the team to document all types of data that were gathered and
considered as part of the eligibility determination. Following this practice will also help
districts ensure that they are in compliance with requirements to conduct fair, unbiased
and comprehensive evaluation procedures.

Decision-Making Model
The teams evaluation report should contain the following information for all criteria
components:
1. Information explaining why procedures used with the majority of pupils resulted in invalid
or inconclusive findings for this pupil;
2. a summary of the data that were used to determine that the student has a disability. This
may include test scores, work products, self-reports, teacher comments, previous
testings, observational data, ecological assessments; and other developmental data. In
addition, the summary should describe any modifications made during the
administration of standardized procedures including the use of interpreters (34 C.F.R.
300.532(c)(2)); and
3. an indication of which data sources had the greatest relative importance for the eligibility
decision.
MDE provides ongoing technical assistance to districts and professional organizations
regarding appropriate materials and methods for evaluating English Language Learners.
For further information concerning the contents of this memorandum or other technical
assistance needs, please contact Elizabeth Watkins at 651-582-8678
(elizabeth.watkins@state.mn.us).

Appendix: 3B

ELL Student and Family Background Information

School use only:

Name of Interviewer
Interview format
(check all that apply)
Date of interview:

face to face telephone interpreter used other

Location of interview

I.
General Information
1. Information about child (name):
Childs name:

2. Information about parent:

Name:

Date of birth:

Relationship to child:

Age:

Years of formal education:

Preschool program:

Employment:

School:

Date school was completed:

Parent(s)

Have you always been the primary caretaker of

the child?
Parents first Language:

Childs first Language:

3.

Child currently lives with: (check all that apply)

mother
grandparents
other (describe)

father
other relatives

siblings
fosterparents

4. Information from health/vision/hearing screening:

vision screening done. Results: ____________________________

hearing screening.

health/information: ______________________________________

Results: _____________________________

General instructions: review the basic and follow-up questions for each section. Fill in
information that you already know. Check those items where information is needed.

Section 1. Language Use in the Family

A. Basic Information to Gather
Tips for the person gathering information, including the interpreter:
Try to identify if anyone new has been added to the household in the past 6 months.
If you are comfortable asking for specific information about who lives in the family, write
down or check off exactly who lives in the home with the student.
Consider asking what percentage of time do various family members speak the native
language? And English? This will provide the team with information about the students
language background. It helps the school to determine how much English the student is
exposed to on a daily basis.

1.How many people live in the household?

2. What languages do the adults in the family speak?

3. What languages do the children in the family speak?

4. What languages does the child speak with important adults in the family? In school? In
the community?

5. What languages does the child use with the other children in the family?

6. What languages do other childcare providers use with the child? How much time does
the child spend in childcare?

7. Does the child have opportunities to travel to another country to visit relatives? What
country? How often?

B. Follow-up information for Section 1

Tips for the person gathering information, including the interpreter:
This is a follow-up section to gather more in-depth information about what language the
student uses for a variety of activities. This helps the team learn about the types of
language the student is exposed to. For example, if the student attends church services in

their native language, they are probably exposed to higher level language than is used
playing sports.
1. List everyone living with the child and the languages they speak together.
Name

Age

Relationship to Child

Language the child and this

person use together
English other
both
English other
both
English other
both
English other
both
English other
both
English other
both

2. Indicate what language the child hears/uses for these activities.

Activity

Native
Language

English Both

playing at home
watching TV
playing in the neighborhood
going to the store
using the computer
listening to books
listening to music
at church, temple, mosque, etc.
other community activities
at preschool
at daycare
other:
Section 2. Language Development
Tips for the person gathering information, including the interpreter:

The questions in this section are separated into two categories: basic and follow-up.
Information about the basic questions should be gathered for all students before
entering into evaluation.
Keep in mind that families have different cultural expectations about how young
children learn and also have different ways of remembering when children learned to do
things. Lots of American families keep a baby book that records the date when the
baby said his/her first word and lots of other information. Families from different
cultural backgrounds may not keep track of these kinds of details.
When appropriate, the information should be gathered for both native language and
English. Some questions pertain only to the native language or only to English,
depending on the specific student.
A. Basic Information
1. What language did the child first learn to speak?

2. How old was the child when he/she first said words?
In native language _________
in English ________

3. What language did the child first hear?

4. Does the child speak as much as other children in the family?

5. Do you (parents) have any concerns about the childs language development?

6. When did the child start talking compared with your other children (or other
children that you know):
At the same time as other children __________
Earlier than other children
__________
Later (older) than other children
__________
7. Does the child talk like other children his/her age?
In native language _________
in English ________

8. Does the child understand your questions and directions?

In native language _________
in English ________
Tips for the person gathering information, including the interpreter:
Some of these questions have one or more alternate forms. Read through the alternates
and pick the one that seems most appropriate.

If the student is referred for a special education evaluation, the speech clinician may also
gather information about some or all of the follow-up questions.
However, be careful about asking the follow-up questions if you think they will make the
family uncomfortable. It is a good idea to talk about the follow-up questions with the
cultural liaison or interpreter.
B. Follow-up Information
1. Does the child often repeat sounds or struggle to get words out?

2. Do you understand what your child is saying?

3. Does the child use mostly one and two word sentences?
Alternate: Does the child usually say only one or two words at one time or does
he/she say a lot of words at one time?

4. Can the child answer questions?

In native language _________

in English ________

5. Does the child speak in complete sentences?

In native language _________

in English ________

6. Does the child pronounce sounds correctly in your native language?

7. Does the child know as many words as other children do in your language?
Alternate: Does the child often not know the word for something or use the
wrong word? Does the child communicate frequently with gestures?

8. Can the child follow a two-part direction? For example: Go to your room and
bring me your shoes?
9. Did anyone else in the childs family have trouble learning to speak? If yes,
please tell us about those problems.

Appendix: 3C Parent Interview Home Language

Minneapolis Public Schools
Special Education Department

Parent Interview for Communication

Evaluation of Students who are Culturally/Linguistically Diverse

Childs Name: ____________________________

School: _______________

Age: _________
Teacher: _____________________ Date of Interview: ________________
Interviewer: ___________________ Interpreter: _____________________
Information obtained from:
_______________________________________________________________
1. Birth history
a. Complications during pregnancy?
b. At birth?
2. Past and current health history
a. Has child had any serious illnesses?
What? ________________________

When?________________________

b. Does child have history of ear infections or hearing loss?

_______________________________
c. Who is childs primary health care provider? ______________________________
3. Communication history
a. How old was your child when he/she said his first words?
____________________________________________________________________
b. Did he/she start talking sooner, at the same time or later than your other children?
____________________________________________________________________

c. If your child did not talk well did he/she have other ways of communicating with you?
_____________________________________________________________________
d. What language did your child first hear? __________________________________
e. What language(s) is spoken in the home? _________________________________
f. What language did your child first use? ___________________________________
4. Current communication skills
a. Can you understand your child? ___________ If no, why not?
b. What language does your child use with you? _____________________________
With brothers and sisters? _____________________________________________
c. Does your child pronounce sounds correctly in your home language?____________
What sounds or words are not said correctly? ______________________________
d. Do you have any concerns about your childs voice? ________________________
Is it hoarse or different from brothers and sisters? ____________________________
e. Does your child often repeat sounds or seem to struggle to get words out?________
f. Does your child use correct grammar in your native language?_________________
g. Can he/she express himself in complete sentences? __________________________
h. Does your child ask questions? _________________________________________
i. Can your child follow simple directions?___________________________________
j. Does your child generally use one word responses or does he/she speak in longer sentences?
_____________________________________________________________________
5. Parent concerns
In what areas of communication would you like your child to improve?

Appendix: 3D Questionnaire for the Family

Date: ___/____/____
Childs Name ____________________________________________________
Childs Date of Birth____/____/____ Childs age:_____________
Name of the person completing this form:______________________________
Your relationship to the child:_______________________________
1. (a) At what age did your child begin to attend
school?___________________________________________________
(b) In what type of educational programs has you child participated? (for example
preschool) Were they bilingual programs or English-only settings?
________________________________________________________
2. (a) Does your child speak Spanish?
YES
NO
(b) If so, at what age did your child begin to speak Spanish?
____________________________________________________________
(c) Does he/she speak Spanish often?
YES
NO
(d) With whom does your child speak Spanish?
_______________________________________________________________
3. (a) Does your child speak English?
YES
NO
(b) If so, at what age did your child begin to speak English?_______________
(c) Does he/she speak English often?
YES
NO
(d) With whom does your child speak English?
______________________________________________________________
4. (a) In what languages do you speak at home: ________________________
(b) Please list the people that live in your home, and the languages that each person speaks.
(For example: grandmother-Spanish, older brother-English and Spanish, etc.)
_______________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________

5. Does your child have any medical or cognitive conditions that could limit his/her participation
in academic activities?
YES

NO

6. In comparison with other children of the same age, do you feel that your child has any
problems in speaking?
YES

NO

7. Do you have any concerns regarding your childs development, behavior, language or learning
level?
YES

NO

Appendix: 3E Cuestionario Para La Familia

Fecha___/___/___

Nombre del nio/a

Fecha de nacimiento del nio/a ___/___/____ Edad del nio/a

Nombre del informante

Relacin con el nio/a:
1. (a) A qu edad empez su hijo/a a asistir a la escuela?
(b) Cuales programas educativos ha participado su hijo/a? (Por ejemplo clases
preescolares) Eran estos programas bilinges o solo ingls?

2. (a) Su hijo/a habla espaol?

SI
NO
(b) Si habla espaol, a qu edad lo empez a hablar?
(c) Lo habla con mucha frecuencia?
SI
NO
(d) Lo habla bien, en comparacin a otros nios de su edad?
SI
NO
(e) Con quin(es) habla el espaol?

3. (a) Su hijo/a habla ingls?

SI
NO
(b) Si habla ingls, a qu edad lo empez a hablar?

(c) Lo habla con mucha frecuencia?

SI
NO
(d) Lo habla bien, en comparacin a otros nios de su edad?
SI
NO
(e) Con quin(es) habla el ingles?

4. (a) En qu idioma(s) hablan en casa?

(b) Favor de nombrar las personas que viven en casa, y los idiomas que hablan (por
ejemplo: abuela- espaol, hermano mayor- ingls y espaol etc.):

5. Su hijo/a tiene alguna debilidad mdico o cognitivo que podra limitar su participacin
en actividades escolares?
SI
NO
6. En comparacin a otros nios de la misma edad, piensa usted que su hijo/a tiene
problemas en usar el lenguaje para expresarse o hacerse entender?
SI
NO
7. Usted tiene alguna preocupacin actual acerca del desarrollo, conducta, lenguaje o
aprendizaje de su hijo/a?
SI
NO

Appendix: 3F Health History - English

EARLY CHILDHOOD HEALTH INFORMATION
GENERAL INFORMATION
Childs name_________________________________________Sex_____Birthdate__________
Completed by_______________________________ School child will attend_______________
Date completed________________________________________________________________
FAMILY INFORMATION
PLEASE LIST FAMILY/HOUSEHOLD MEMBERS INCLUDING ADULTS AND CHILDREN:
Name
Relationship to Child
Birthdate
Male or
Female

CHILDS DOCTOR AND CLINIC________________Date of last physical examination____________

nosis or ongoing health problems? ______
________________________________________________________________
Has any emergency action plan been established?______________________________________
PAST MEDICAL HISTORY
PREGNANCY AND BIRTH
No
Was child adopted? If YES, at what age and country? __________________
Any problems during pregnancy (i.e. toxemia, diabetes, vaginal bleeding)?
Circle one.
Other _________________________________________________________
Did the mother use any prescription meds, alcohol, cigarettes, street drugs
before she knew she was pregnant or throughout the pregnancy? Circle.
Did your child stay in the hospital after mother was discharged?
Describe_______________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
Was the child born by C-section?
Any problems at birth? Describe___________________________________
______________________________________________________________
Was your child born outside the United States?

Lives at
Home

GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT

AGE YOUR CHILD DID THE FOLLOWING:
___________ Sat alone
__________ First words
___________ Walked alone
__________ Talked in sentences
___________ Weaned from bottle
__________ Became toilet trained
Do you think your child should be doing more than he/she is doing for his/her
age? If YES, explain_____________________________________________________________
CHILDHOOD ILLNESSES
HAS YOUR CHILD HAD ANY OF THE FOLLOWING DISEASES? :
Chicken Pox
When?________
Yes
German or 3-Day Measles (Rubella)
Yes

No
No

Pneumonia
Red or Hard
Measles (Rubeola)
High Fever (104o - longer than 2 days)
Yes No Meningitis Encephalitis
Seizures because of a fever
Yes No BPD Bronchopulmonary
Dysplasia
Mumps
Yes No Strep Infections
Esophogeal Reflux
Yes No Other
Was your child ever hospitalized? If YES, when? ________________________
Why? ___________________________________________________________
Has your child had other important illnesses in which he/she was not
hospitalized?
What illness (es)? ____________________________ When? _______________

SPECIAL HEALTH CARE

Does your child have any physical limitations or restrictions? If YES, what?
_______________________________________________________________
Has your child ever undergone any special tests for health problems? If YES,
What? _________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________
Is your child taking medication regularly? If YES, what?________________
_______________________________________________________________
ALLERGIES
Has your child ever had problems with allergic reactions to foods, airborne
pollens, insects, animals or medications? Please state age and type of reaction
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
Does your child take any medications related to the allergies? If YES, what?
_______________________________________________________________
Epi Pen?

ACCIDENTS
Has your child ever had any serious accidents or head injuries? Date_______
Describe_______________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
Was he/she seen by a Dr.?_________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
Has your child ever become poisoned? Date __________________________
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
FAMILY HISTORY (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY) (PARENTS, GRANDPARENTS, BROTHERS, SISTERS)
Who:________________________________________________________
Who:________________________________________________________
Who:________________________________________________________
izures
Who:________________________________________________________
Who:________________________________________________________
Who:________________________________________________________
depression

Who:________________________________________________________
Who:________________________________________________________
Who:________________________________________________________
Who:________________________________________________________
Who:________________________________________________________

physical/mental problems?________________________________________________________
PRESENT HEALTH
NUTRITION
Do you have concerns about your childs nutrition/eating habits?
Describe_______________________________________________________________
_______
Do you have concerns about your childs growth?
Describe_______________________________________________________________
on a special diet?_____ What?____________________________
SKIN
Does your child have problems with hives, rashes, or eczema? (Circle)
Describe_______________________________________________________________
Do they use medication or creams? _________________________________

EYES/EARS/NOSE/THROAT/DENTAL
Does your child have any problems with his/her eyes? Headaches?
Has your childs eyes/vision been evaluated by a vision specialist?
Date ______________________ Who ______________________________
Has your child had ear problems? How often? ____________________
Most recent________________
How treated___________________
Has your childs hearing been formally tested?
Newborn Screen? ________________________________________________
Other: Date/Who ________________________________________________
Does your child seem to have any trouble hearing?
Has your child ever had PE tubes in his/her ears?
Date_______________________ Still in?____________________________
Does your child have trouble with teeth, gums, or mouth?
Has your child seen a dentist? When___________ Reason_______________
RESPIRATORY
Does your child have shortness of breath at times?
Asthma?
Hospitalized? _____________________________
Wheezing?
Cough at night?
Is your child on medications?
If YES, what and how often? ___________________________________
Nebulizer?
Last used ________________________________
Inhaler?
Oxygen?
Asthma triggers: (What brings on symptoms) _________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
CARDIOVASCULAR
Does your child have heart trouble? Describe__________________________
_______________________________________________________________
Does your child have a heart murmur?
GASTROINTESTINAL
Does your child have frequent:
stomach aches?
diarrhea?

Yes
Yes

No
No

constipation?
vomiting?

URINARY
Do you have any concerns about your childs toileting?
Has your child ever had kidney or bladder problems? Describe____________
_______________________________________________________________
SKELETAL
Does your child complain of joint pain?

Has your child had any broken bones, cast, brace, or corrective shoes?
(Circle) Describe_______________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
Does your child toe in, toe out, limp, walk on tip toes or walk with difficulty?
(Circle) Describe_______________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
NEUROMUSCULAR
Does your childhave seizures? Started when?_________________________
What type of seizures?____________________________________________
Emergency plan:______________ Neurologist________________________
Does your child have any unexplained movements or jerks, staring spells,
seizures, falls, or weakness in body? (Circle)
Is your child on any medications? If YES, what? ______________________
LEAD
Has your child ever been tested for lead? When?_______________________
Results___________________________Follow-up_____________________
BEHAVIOR
DOES YOUR CHILD SHOW ANY OF FOLLOWING BEHAVIORS:
Usually content or happy

Repetitive behaviors
such as head banging
Adjusts well to changes in routine
hand flapping (circle)
Shows and accepts affection
Cries a lot, easily
upset
Seeks for help when frustrated
Sleeping difficulties
Easily soothed or calmed when upset
Wanting too much
attention, comfort or
support
Plays or works independently
Contrary, stubborn,
uncooperative
Uses imagination in play
Too much energy
Plays well with others
Too little energy
Any concerns about behaviors not indicated above?____________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
Would you like information about any of the following?
Meeting other families with children the same age
Recreational programs in the community
Finding a parenting group
Help with personal problems or family problems

Adult reading programs, GED, English classes

Child care
Jobs
Public assistance
Transportation
Housing
Clothing
Food
Other ____________________________________________________________
Is there anything else you would like to discuss?
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
________________________
rev. 08/04wordifspforms

IMMUNIZATIONS
Give date (month, day and year) for each of the following immunizations.
TYPE OF VACCINE

1ST
IMMUNIZATION

2ND
IMMUNIZATION

3RD
IMMUNIZATION

4TH
IMMUNIZATION

5TH
IMMUNIZATION

MM/DD/YY

MM/DD/YY

MM/DD/YY

MM/DD/YY

MM/DD/YY

DIPHTHERIA
,TETANUS
,PERTUSSIS
(DTaP, DT)
POLIO (OPV OR
IPV)

HEPATITIS B
(HBV)**
MEASLES , MUMPS,
RUBEOLA (MMR)

VARICELLA
(CHICKEN POX)
MANTOUX (MOST
RECENT DATE &
RESULT)
HIB
(HAEMOPHILUS
INFLUENZA B)

*May be given at pre-kindergarten physical

What clinic or health care provider gave your childs immunizations?______________________

Appendix: 3G Health History - Spanish

INFORMACIN DE SALUD DE LA NIEZ TEMPRANA
INFORMACIN GENERAL
Nombre del nio(a)
Completado por
Fecha de hoy

Sexo
Fecha de nacimiento
Escuela donde asistir el nio(a)

INFORMACIN DE LA FAMILIA
POR FAVOR, ESCRIBA LOS MIEMBROS DE LA FAMILIA INCLUYENDO ADULTOS Y NIOS:
Nombre
Par Parentesco al nio Fecha de nacimiento Hombre o Vive en
Mujer
la casa

EL DOCTOR Y CLNICA DEL NIO(A)

Fecha del ltimo examen fsico
Si No Tiene un diagnosis mdico o problemas crnicos de salud?____________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
Han establecido un plan de accin en caso de una emergencia?
HISTORIAL DE SALUD PASADA
EMBARAZO Y PARTO

S
S

No
No

No

No

S
S
S

No
No
No

Fue adoptado(a) el nio(a)? Si S, a qu edad y de cul pas?

Tuvo complicaciones durante su embarazo (Ej. Toxemia, diabetes, sangrada vaginal)? (Circule)
Otra razn
La madre us medicamentos recetados por el mdico, alcohol, cigarros, drogas de la calle antes de que
supiera que estaba embarazada o durante el embarazo? (Circule)
El nio(a) se qued en el hospital por motivos mdicos despus de haber nacido?
Describa
Naci por cesrea?
Tuvo problemas durante el parto? Describa
Naci su hijo(a) fuera de los Estados Unidos?

CRECIMIENTO Y DESARROLLO

EDAD A LA CUAL HIZO LO SIGUIENTE SU HIJO(A):

Sentarse solo(a)
Caminar solo(a)
Dejar la mamila / el bibern
S

No

Primeras palabras
Hablar en oraciones
Ir al bao solo(a)

Usted cree que su hijo(a) debe de estar haciendo ms de lo que hace a su edad?
Si S, explique

ENFERMEDADES DE LA NIEZ

HA TENIDO CUALQUIERA DE LAS SIGUIENTES ENFERMEDADES?:

S No Varicela
S No Neumona
S No Sarampin
S No Rubola
S No Fiebre Alta (104 - por ms de 2 das)
S No Meningitis o Encefalitis
S No Convulsiones causadas por la fiebre
S No BPD - Displasia Bronco Pulmonar
S No Paperas
S No Infecciones de Estreptococos
S No Reflujo Gastroesofgico
S No Otra
S No Su hijo(a) ha sido hospitalizado? Si S, Cundo?
Por qu?
S No Ha tenido otras enfermedades importantes por las cuales no ha sido hospitalizado?
Cules enfermedades?
Cundo?
CUIDADO ESPECIAL DE SALUD

No

Tiene limitaciones o restricciones fsicas? Si S, Cules son?

No

Su hijo(a) ha tenido estudios especiales para problemas de salud? Si S, Cules?

No

Su hijo(a) est tomando medicina regularmente? Si S, Cules?

ALERGIAS

No

Su hijo(a) ha tenido problemas con reacciones alrgicas a la comida, polen en el aire, insectos, animales
o medicamentos?______________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
S No Toma medicamento su hijo(a) relacionado a las alergias? Si S, Cules?_________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
S No Usa el EpiPen?

ACCIDENTES

No

No

No

Su hijo(a) ha tenido accidentes serios o lesiones serias? Fecha

Describa
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
Su hijo(a) tiene accidentes frecuentemente? Fecha
Describa
____________________________________________________________________________________
Su hijo(a) se ha envenenado accidentalmente? Fecha
Describa_____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________

PRCTICAS DE SEGURIDAD

S
S
S
S

No
No
No
No

Sabe usar Jarabe de Ipecac?

Usa asientos/cinturones de seguridad?
Tiene detectores de humo en la casa y funcionan?
Tiene un detector de monxido de carbn?

SALUD DE LA FAMILIA (MARQUE TODOS QUE APLIQUEN PADRE, MADRE, ABUELOS, ABUELAS, HERMANOS,
HERMANAS)

Alergia o Fiebre del Heno Quin:

Asma
Quin:
Sordera
Quin:
Diabetes
Quin:
Epilepsia o Convulsiones Quin:
Problemas de crecimiento Quin:
Problemas del corazn
Quin:
Hepatitis
Quin:
Presin Alta
Quin:
Problemas de salud mental Quin:
Anemia Falciforme
Quin:
Otros problemas de sangre Quin:
Problemas de lectura
Quin:
Problemas de aprendizaje Quin:
Tuberculosis
Quin:

No

Hay problemas serios de salud o problemas fsicos/mentales que varios miembros de la familia tienen?

No

Hay otros nios en su familia que podran tener problemas con su desarrollo?

SALUD ACTUAL
NUTRICIN

No

Tiene preocupaciones acerca de la alimentacin de su hijo(a) o sus hbitos de comer? Describa

No

Tiene preocupaciones acerca del crecimiento de su hijo(a)? Describa

No

Su hijo(a) tiene una dieta especial?

No

Su hijo(a) tiene problemas con urticarias, ronchas o eccema? (Circule) Describa___________________

____________________________________________________________________________________

Cul es?

PIEL

OJOS/ODOS/NARIZ/GARGANTA/DENTAL

S
S

No
No

S
S

No
No

No

Su hijo(a) tiene problemas con sus ojos? Dolores de cabeza?

Su hijo(a) ha tenido problemas con los odos? Con que frecuencia?
Lo ms reciente
Como lo trataron
Parece que su hijo(a) tiene dificultad en or?
A su hijo(a) le han puesto tubos en sus odos?
Fecha
Todava los tiene?
Su hijo(a) ha sido chequeado(a) por un dentista? Cundo?

RESPIRATORIO

S
S
S
S
S

No
No
No
No
No

S
S
S

No
No
No

Su hijo tiene dificultad para respirar de vez en cuando?

Asma?
Hospitalizado?
Silbido en el pecho?
Tos en la noche?
Su hijo(a) est tomando medicinas?
Si S, Cules y con que frecuencia?
Usa un nebulizador?
ltimo uso
Usa inhalador?
Usa oxgeno?
Qu provoca los sntomas del asma de su hijo(a)?

CARDIOVASCULAR

No

Su hijo(a) tiene problemas con el corazn? Describa

No

Su hijo(a) tiene un murmullo en el corazn?

GASTROINTESTINAL

Su hijo(a) frecuentemente tiene?:

S No dolores del estomago
S No diarrea

S
S

No
No

estreimiento
vmito

Razn

URINARIA

S
S

No
No

Usted tiene preocupaciones acerca de cmo usa el bao su hijo(a)?

Su hijo(a) ha tenido problemas con sus riones o con su vejiga? Describa

ESKELETAL

S
S

No
No

Su hijo(a) se queja de dolor en sus articulaciones?

Ha tenido huesos quebrados, yeso, plantillas, o zapatos correctivos su hijo(a)? Describa

No

Su hijo(a) camina con las patitas hacia adentro o hacia fuera, cojea, camina de puntitas, o camina con
dificultad? (Circule) Describa

NEUROMUSCULAR

No

No

No

Su hijo(a) ha tenido convulsiones? Cundo le empezaron?

Qu tipo de convulsiones?
Plan de emergencia
Neurlogo
Su hijo(a) tiene inexplicables movimientos espasmdicos, se queda mirando fijamente, convulsiones,
cadas, o debilidad en su cuerpo? (Circule)
Su hijo(a) est tomando medicina? Si S, Cules?

PLOMO

No

A su hijo(a) le han hecho un anlisis para chequear el nivel de plomo en la sangre? Cundo?
Resultados
Prximo chequeo

COMPORTAMIENTO
SU HIJO(A) MUESTRA SEALES DE LOS SIGUIENTES COMPORTAMIENTOS?:
S No Usualmente contento(a) o feliz
S No Acciones repetitivas como pegarse en la
S No Ajustarse a cambios en su rutina
cabeza, altear con las manos (Circule)
S No Dar y recibir cario
S No Llora mucho, molestarse fcilmente
S No Buscar ayuda cuando est frustrado(a)
S No Dificultad con dormir
S No Tranquilizarse fcilmente
S No Querer demasiada atencin, consuelo, o
apoyo
S No Jugar o trabajar independientemente
S No Llevar el contrario, necio(a), no cooperar
S No Usar imaginacin en el juego
S No Demasiada energa
S No Jugar bien con otros nios
S No Poca energa
Tiene preocupaciones acerca de otros comportamientos no mencionados anteriormente?

A usted le gustara ms informacin acerca de cualquier de lo siguiente?

No

Conocer a otras familias que tienen hijos de la misma edad

No

Programas recreacionales en la comunidad

No

Encontrar un grupo para padres

No

Ayuda con problemas personales o familiares

No

Programas de alfabetizacin de adultos, GED, clases de Ingls

No

Cuidado infantil

No

Trabajos

No

Asistencia pblica

No

Transportacin

No

Alojamiento

No

Ropa

No

Comida

No

Otro

Hay otra cosa de que a usted le gustara platicar?

Appendix: 3H Interpreter Contact Information

Early Childhood Special Education

Interpreter Contact Information
This information will be shared with Special Education staff who may need your services as an
on-call/low incidence interpreter.
NAME:
ADDRESS:

LANGUAGE(S):
HOME PHONE:
CELL PHONE:
WORK PHONE:
FAX:
EMAIL ADDRESS:
WHAT IS THE EASIEST
WAY TO REACH YOU?

home phone cell phone work phone

AVAILABILITY:
Services are mostly needed
M-F/8am 4pm

Monday

Tuesday

Wednesday

How much notice do you

need/prefer to be able to schedule a
meeting?

I have received a copy of basic

expectations of interpreters and
information about payment.

Please sign

If you have any questions please contact:

Please return this form to:

email

Thursday

Friday

Appendix: 3I Interpreter Basic Expectations

Early Childhood Special Education

Basic expectations of interpreters and information about payment
Thank you for your interest in providing language interpreting services to assist with Special
Education in the __________ Public Schools. We enroll students from many languages and/or
dialects in ___________ Schools. We employ full-time interpreters for some languages most
heavily represented in our schools, and have an on-call need for interpreters for languages with
low incidence in our district.
In the area of Special Education, interpreters complete parent interviews by telephone, make
phone calls to schedule meetings with parents and school staff, interpret for due process
meetings (evaluation planning meetings, evaluation summary (ESR) meetings and Individual
Education Plan (IEP) meetings) and assist with evaluations in both home and school.
To achieve our goal to communicate with families we have the following needs/expectations for
language interpreters:
1. Fluency in English and in your native language.
2. Ability to act as an impartial interpreter in facilitating communication between school
staff, children and families.
3. Respect for the confidential nature of the information being shared.
4. Availability during the school day.
5. Willingness to provide information about language or cultural background to help
school staff work effectively with families and meet the special needs of students.
Our school board has authorized $____/hour for interpreting services. Time is tracked by
invoice. If you are asked to come to a meeting we can offer a minimum of 2 hours. This would
include travel time. If more than two hours is required you would be paid for the actual time
spent at the meeting + travel time. Time spent on phone calls can be tracked in 15 minute
increments. Special Education staff will sign and submit the invoice.
I would be happy to meet with you to provide an overview of our Special Education services and
process and am available to answer questions or provide information.
Please complete the attached information sheet and return to the person listed below.
Again thank you.

Appendix: 3J Interpreter Code of Ethics

SAMPLE CODE OF ETHICS FOR CULTURAL
LIAISONS/SCHOOL INTERPRETERS
Directions: this code of ethics is designed for school employees who carry the dual role of
cultural liaison as well as interpreter and who function somewhat independently.
Introduction
Many students and parents have difficulty participating in education because of limited English
proficiency. When a child has a disability, parents must understand the special education process
and their legal rights so that they can make a good decision for their child. Interpreters and
cultural liaisons help to make sure that non-English speaking parents and students receive the
same services and benefits enjoyed by other Minnesota residents. It is important that interpreting
services be accurate and confidential. Please read the following information and, if you agree to
follow these guideline, sign your name at the bottom.
Accuracy and Completeness
When serving as an interpreter, I will render a complete and accurate interpretation without
altering, omitting, or adding anything to the meaning of what is stated or written.
Impartiality
I will be impartial and unbiased and shall refrain from conduct that may give an appearance of
bias. I will disclose any real or perceived conflict of interest (for example, a personal
relationship with a family that I am asked to interpret for).
Confidentiality
I will protect the confidentiality of all information about students, families and staff that I work
with.
Restriction of Public Comment
I will not publicly discuss or report on cases in which I have been involved as the interpreter or
liaison, except to help train other school staff members.
Scope of Practice
I will not give legal advice other than the information found in the Parental Rights and
Procedural Safeguards document. I will not try to influence parents decisions regarding their
child. If asked by staff about general cultural practices, I will answer based upon my knowledge
of the local community and refer the staff member to cultural experts if needed. If asked for my
opinion by parents or staff, I will clearly state the basis for that opinion.
Assessing and Reporting Impediments to Performance
I will reflect upon my ability to function effectively. If I have any reservation about their ability
to satisfy an assignment competently, I will immediately convey that reservation to the
appropriate staff.
I have read, understand, and agree to the above description of the requirements for interpreting
and translating.
Interpreters Signature

Date

Developed by the ESL program in North St. Paul/Maplewood Public Schools, based upon the Code of Ethics for court
interpreters. Reproduced with permission
009 KRJ 3/2SAMPLE CODE OF ETHICS.DOC

Appendix: 3K Interpreter Script for ESR Meetings

Working with Interpreters:
Suggested Script to use for
Evaluation Summary Report Meetings

Setting up the Meeting

Define the purpose of the meeting in simple terms
Define the role of the interpreter and how interpretation is to occur
Make introductions

Evaluation Summary Report Meetings

Overview:
Background Information and results in each area will be summarized
Discussion will be held
Decision will be made regarding eligibility for services
Parent and Teacher input is essential
Summarize intellectual and communication information before results in other
areas

Reason for Referral/Background Information

Briefly review the reason for referral and interventions that were tried (in the
classroom)
Summarize information from parents
If a teacher is present, ask teacher how the child is currently functioning in class

Intellectual or Developmental/Cognitive
In simple, lay terms
State why this area was assessed
State what has been learned about how student processes information
State how results reflect on student's performance in the classroom
For Example: School Psychologists test nonverbal manual ability. This gives us some
information on how students think (use their hands and eyes) to solve problems and how
we might expect them to learn in the classroom. The testing does not involve the use of
language and compares the student's performance to students of the same age.
I worked with your child individually and noted how s/he approached problems to solve
them. I then tried to identify strengths and weaknesses and how your child takes in

information and reacts to the environment. Knowing the student's ability and style of
learning can help the teacher to plan instruction.

Example: "... the student's scores when using a paper and pencil are in the average range
and do not suggest any problems. Most likely the student will not have difficulties with
routine written tasks (copying from the blackboard also). Modifications in the classroom
(providing extra time to finish routine written work) do not appear to be needed."

Communication

Area Assessed and Why

"With help from (INTERPRETER NAME), a communication assessment was done in
(HOME LANGUAGE) and in English. When a student speaks a language other than
English at home we gather information about the student's ability to speak and understand
their home language and look at their progress in learning English. This provides
information about listening and speaking skills in both languages and how (STUDENT'S
NAME) communication skills might impact his/her learning in school."
What we did
Information was gathered by having (STUDENT'S NAME) answer information and
problem solving questions, use words for describing and sequencing, listen and retell
stories and make up stories of their own. We also looked at their understanding of
concepts and how they say sounds in both languages.
What was Learned
(STUDENT'S NAME) had (no difficulty, difficulty, significant difficulty) understanding
questions, concepts, expressing ideas, developing stories and saying sounds in (HOME
LANGUAGE).
Briefly comment on areas of weakness or strength, student's language
preference and possible reasons e.g. language loss, development, below
expectations considering exposure and background.
(STUDENT'S NAME) is showing (difficulty, adequate progress, good
progress) acquiring English.
Briefly comment on areas of weakness or strength and relationship to
skills needed for school and compare to skills in home language.
"Similar (strengths, weaknesses) were observed in (HOME LANGUAGE)
and developing English skills." Or "S/he did better in English than in
(HOME LANGUAGE)" Or "S/he did better in (HOME LANGUAGE)
and needs to develop more English skills".
How Communication Skills Impact Student's Classroom Performance
EXAMPLES:
(STUDENT'S NAME) is hard for friends and adults to understand.
(STUDENT'S NAME) needs information repeated or shortened so they can understand.
S/he does not understand the words used to give directions.
(STUDENT'S NAME) does not give adequate information that can be understood by
adults. S/he uses short sentences and does not know the words in either language to
express ideas.

Home or Classroom Observation

Be Brief!
"I observed (STUDENT'S NAME) in (AREA OF CONCERN) to gather information on
how s/he performs in the classroom. It was observed thatthe observation
supports/doesn't support the evaluation findings and teacher's concerns."

Social/Emotional/Behavior:

Areas Assessed and Why:

My portion of the evaluation was completed to discover how (STUDENTS NAME)
social emotional development and behavior is affecting his/her performance at school
and/or home.

What we did:
Procedures used in this area included observations at school, a review of school records, a
social skills checklist, mental health screening and interviews with teacher, parent and
(STUDENTS NAME). The evaluation does include a summary of the interview that
was completed with you.

What was learned:

I will summarize the findings of these procedures. If there are any questions or you need
more information, please ask me and I can provide more detailed information.
Overall, the strengths in this area are
Overall the main concerns in this area are. (The evaluator should begin to describe the
issues that are identified as the target behavior in the FBA)
The evaluation data shows that (TARGET BEHAVIOR) is frequently triggered by
Usually occurs this behavior occurs (FREQUENCY OF TARGET BEHAVIOR) and
lasts this (DURATION OF TARGET BEHAVIOR)
I completed (NUMBER) systematic classroom observations. During these observations,
(BRIEFLY DESCRIBE BEAHVIORS NOTED AND THE DATA GATHERED
DURING THE OBSERVATIONS)
The interventions that were tried to address this behavior include
I feel that (STUDENTS NAME) would work best with staff that (DESCRIBE
INTERACTION STYLE THAT WOULD BE BEST FOR STUDENT)
It is hypothesized that this behavior occurs because

How the results reflect on the students classroom performance:

In conclusion, (STUDENTS NAME)s behavior is/is not interfering with his/her
learning. (IF THE BEHAVIOR IS INTERFEREING GIVE A COUPLE SENTENCE
EXPLANATION OF HOW)
The behaviors described in this evaluation are/are not discrepant from the behaviors of
(STUDENTS NAME)s peers.

Adaptive:

Areas Assessed and Why

I gathered the adaptive information from the interview I had with you on (Date). The
information you gave me tells us a lot about how much and how well (Students Name)
can perform his/her daily tasks at home and in the community. The information you
provided also tells us how much support he/she needs in order to complete specific tasks
during his/her daily living activities. The school uses this information, and other
information that we have gathered through reviewing of school data, testing and
observations; to help us decide whether or not (Students Name) is eligible to receive
special education services.

Determination of Eligibility

Intellectual
"These results rule out a cognitive disability as a primary cause of (STUDENT'S NAME)
difficulty making progress." Or, "This information suggests low cognitive functioning
and is supported by information from the adaptive evaluation which looks at daily living
skills."

Discussion of EBD Criteria

"There are three areas that are needed when identifying a child with an Emotional
Behavioral Disorder (EBD). The first area states that a student must demonstrate an
established pattern of behavior in one or more of the following categories: Withdrawn or
Anxious behaviors, Disordered Thought Processes and/or Aggressive, Hyperactive or
Impulsive Behaviors. [I have included descriptors of each category below.]
(STUDENT'S NAME) does/does not demonstrate a pattern of behavior in (one, two or
all) of these areas, as evidenced by (describe specific behaviors)."
(STUDENT'S NAME) pattern of behavior does/does not adversely affect educational
performance resulting in:(CHOOSE WHICH APPLY).
(1) An inability to demonstrate adequate social competence significantly different
from age, cultural or ethnic norms,
(2) A pattern of unsatisfactory educational progress or for children
under kindergarten age, developmental or social interaction.
If (STUDENT'S NAME) is not making adequate social or education progress, the team
must determine that the lack of progress is NOT primarily due to:

intellectual, sensory, physical health, cultural or linguistic factors, illegal chemical

use, autism spectrum disorders or inconsistent educational programming.
DISCUSS EXCLUSIONARY FACTORS."
The combined results of previous documented interventions and the evaluation data must
also establish significant impairments in one or more of the following areas:
intrapersonal, academic, vocational, or social skills. (STUDENT'S NAME) is
experiencing significant impairment in [list which areas and where documented].
(GIVE A FEW UNDERSTANDABLE EXAMPLES)"(STUDENT) has difficulty
managing frustration when interacting with peers. He responds to this frustration
by hitting, kicking or screaming at peers approximately 8 times per week."
The data shows that (STUDENT NAME)'s behavior IS/IS NOT severely interfering with
the student's or other student's educational performance, AND occurs consistently in at
least three settings, including in the classroom, in another school setting (such as
lunchroom, gym, playground), except for kindergarten students, and at home, child care
or in the community."
(STUDENT NAME)'s behavior has/has not been occurring for [indicate length of time
that behavior has been documented as occurring - must be a minimum of six months.
If a time period less that 6 months is documented, then the team must establish a sudden
onset of a serious mental health disorder by a licensed mental health professional.]
"(STUDENT NAME) has been demonstrating difficulties with physical aggression
toward peers for the last three school years. The behaviors have been escalating each
year according to school disciplinary records."
In examining the results of this evaluation, (STUDENT'S NAME) does/does not meet
eligibility criteria for Emotional Behavioral Disorder.
"Do you have any questions?"

KRJ 3/24/09 Use of Interpreters for ESR meetings.doc

Appendix: 3L Adaptive Behavior Assessment ELL

ELL Adaptive Behavior Assessment
Childs name:____________________________
Age:_______Date of Birth:__________________
Informant: _______________________________
Date of Interview: _________________________

Interviewer: ___________________
Interpreter: ___________________
Relationship:__________________

This interview tool is to be used when evaluating the functional adaptive skills of an ELL student.
The interview is to be completed with the parent or guardian of the child.
The primary goal of this interview is to evaluate how independently the student does a task, or how much support he
or she needs to complete a task. Do not simply ask if they can do the task.
During the interview, keep in mind the age of the child and what is developmentally and culturally appropriate for a
child when assigning a level of support needed.
The following are gridlines for rating a childs ability. These guidelines are consistent with the levels of support used for
determining DCD eligibility.

P:

Pervasive or extensive support

Needs constant, intensive support
Cannot do the task
Needs someone in the same room, providing side by side support

F:

Frequent support
Needs direct nearby support
Needs an adult close by o within hearing distance providing support

L:

Limited or intermittent support

Needs some support, such as prompts or reminders

I:

Infrequent or no support
Needs no support
Completes task independently, without assistance

Daily Living Independent Living Skills

Levels of Support

Is your child able to:

1. Feed himself?

2. Dress and undress himself?

3. Toilet independently? (Age toilet trained? ______)

4. Maintain personal hygiene?

_____ wash his face
_____brush his teeth
_____ bathe/shower

5. Help with simple chores in the home? (describe what child can do)

6. Prepare a snack or a simple meal

7. Recognize and avoid danger?

8. Know what to do in an emergency situation?

Are there things you wish you child could do? ______________________________________________________

Social and Interpersonal Skills

Levels of Support

Is your child able to:

1. Turn his head when his name is called?

2. Imitate actions when asked?

3. Take part in simple group games?

4. Behave as expected by family at home and in the community?

5. Follow daily routines moving from one activity to another?

6. Know the difference between family, friends and strangers and

treat them differently?

7.

Stay on topic in a conversation?

8.

Seek friendships with peers?

9.

Accept unexpected changes in routine?

10. Function in crowded busy environments?

11. Accept responsibility when he hurts others?

Are there things you wish your child could do? _____________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________

Communication Skills

Levels of Support

Is your child able to:

1. Make sounds and gestures to get attention?

2. Listen when spoken to?

3. Show understanding of Yes and No?

4. Indicate wants and needs? _______ verbally ______ nonverbally

5. Follow directions? _____ 1 part _____2 or more parts

6. Name 15 common objects?

7. Engage in and take turns in conversations?

8. Initiate conversation and ask simple questions?

9. Summarize an event and tell a story that someone else

10. Report home and school events?

11. How much support does your child need in communicating his ideas?

can understand?

Do you have difficulty understanding your child? ______ much of the time ______ sometimes ______ never

Are there things you wish your child could do? _____________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________

Academic Skills

Levels of Support

Is your child able to:

1. Point to familiar pictures in a book on request?

2. Recognize symbols in print? (restaurant or store names, etc.)

3. Recognize his name in print?

4. Write his name?

5. Give personal information? _____ name _____ age

6. Understand and tell time?

7. Use money to purchase goods?

8. Use the phone to call friends, family and take messages?

9. Complete homework and return it to school?

10.Talk about current events?

11.Read and follow directions to prepare a food product?

_____ address _____ DOB _____phone number

Are there things you wish your child could do? _____________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________

Recreational and Leisure Skills

Levels of Support

Is your child able to:

1. Play with age appropriate toys, games or activities?

2. Wait for his turn in games?

3. Follow the rules of a game?

4. Participate in group activities within the home or community?

5. Try new activities with successful outcomes?

6. Plan activities with friends?

How does your child spend his free time?____ _____________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________

Are there things you wish your child could do? _____________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________

Community Participation Skills

Levels of Support

Is your child able to:

1. Play independently with supervision in the yard, park or playground?

2. Wait with others for the school bus?

3. Find his way to a friends house (1 block away, 3 blocks away)?

4. Locate restrooms, etc. in an unfamiliar place?

5. Use public transportation?

6. Use community resources such as a library or rec. center

Are there things you wish your child could do? _____________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________

Work and Work Related Skills

Levels of Support

Is your child able to:

1. Complete chores at home? Which chores? ___________________

2. Keep track of his personal belongings?

3. Follow the daily routine and schedule without reminders?

4. Complete work assignments in required time limits?

5. Return to work after lunch or break?

6. Seek help from supervisor when problems arise?

7.

Find and keep a job?

8.

Follow required procedures on the job including arriving on time,

__________________________________________________

using a time card, and calling in sick?

Are there things you wish your child could do? _____________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________

Items were adapted from the ABAS, SIB-R and Vineland and reviewed by Hmong, Somali and Hispanic staff.
5/2003

Talk with Me

Saint Paul Schools Special Education

Appendix: 3M Differences in Services for ELL with ASD

Differences in Educational Services for English Language Learners
with Autism Spectrum Disorders
Theresa L. Estrem, PhD, CCC-SLP
Department of Communication Sciences & Disorders, St. Cloud State University
Immigration from poor and war-torn countries has resulted in large and growing numbers of language
minority children and families in our communities and schools. Many of these children, especially if they
have disabilities, exhibit some of the lowest academic performance rates on statewide tests required by
No Child Left Behind, yet limited research has examined the prevalence of children who are learning
English as a second (or other) language (ELL) with disabilities, much less their specific educational and
communication needs. In particular, there is a dearth of research on the prevalence and needs of
immigrant children with autism spectrum disorders (ASD). Many researchers have indicated that there are
no racial or ethnic differenes in prevalence of ASD (e.g. Fombonne, 2005). Yet, there are numerous
studies that report differences in prevalence rates of various racial and ethnic groups. Looked at
collectively, research suggests that differences may exist, but research findings are sometimes
contradictory and inconsistent.
Research to date suggests that the prevalence rate of ASD among Black and White children is similar
(Nicholas, Carpenter, King, & Jenner, 2007; Yeargin-Allsopp, Rice, Karapurkar, Doernberg, et al, 2007),
but significantly lower for Hispanic children (Schieve, Rice, & Boyle, 2006). However, a study by
Mandell and colleagues (2009) found that White children were more likely to have a diagnosis of ASD
than Black or Hispanic children, and Begeer and colleagues (2008) reported that studies in the United
States indicated underdiagnosis of ASD in children of Hispanic descent when compared to children of
European American and African American descent. These research findings do not identify the primary
languages of the children, so there is no indication of whether children identified as Black were AfricanAmerican or from another country, such as Somalia or Jamaica, or whether Hispanic childrens primary
language was Spanish or English.
Several researchers have found increased risk for having a child diagnosed with ASD when at least one
parent was an immigrant (Gillberg, Steffenburg, & Schaumann, 1991; Magnussen & Saemundsen, 2001).
Conversely, Croen, Grether, and Selvin (2002) found Mexican mothers who were immigrants were less
likely than US-born Mexican mothers to have a child with ASD. Most recently and closer to home, a
recent study conducted by the Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) found that Minnesota-born
preschoolers of Somali-immigrant mothers received ASD services more often than non-Somali
preschoolers (MDH, 2009).
If there are differences in identification of racial/ethnic groups, we also have reason to be concerned about
the differences in age at which parents are first concerned about their childs behavior, the age at which
children are first identified with ASD, or the age at which they first receive intervention services. A
literature search found only one published study on this topic. Mandell and colleagues (2007) found that
European American children were diagnosed earlier than African American children by an average of 16
months (6.3 years versus 7.9 years, respectively).
In summary, research to date strongly suggests that there may be differences in how we identify children
with ASD when the individuals being studied are heterogeneous with respect to racial/ethnic, immigrant,
or primary language status. It is important to determine if these differences are real, or if they are related
to differences in how we identify and serve children with ASD from culturally and linguistically different

communities. Thus, this research study describes the number of children in Minnesota schools who
receive autism services, including those who are ELLs, and the age at which they began receiving
educational services under the categorical label of autism. Specific questions were
1. What percentage of Minnesota students who are English Language Learners (ELL) have ASD,
and how has it changed between 2001 and 2008?
2. What is the association between primary language spoken at home and the age at which children
first begin receiving special education services under the autism categorical label?
Using the Minnesota Department of Educations (MDE) large database (the MN Automated Reported
Student System [MARSS]) from 2001 to 2008 for children with ASD from birth to 21 years of age, I
compared Minnesotas largest immigrant groups to English-speaking children. The MARSS data is
collected from all of Minnesotas schools and is used to produce national reports of unduplicated child
count information. Before I obtained the dataset, the MDE encrypted student identification numbers so
that anonymity and confidentiality of individual students was ensured.
It must be kept in mind that the following statistics are based on reported information from school
districts. The criteria for reporting categorical labels (e.g. autism or developmental delay) may not
accurately reflect the number of children served with that diagnosis. Thus, prevalence or incidence are not
reported in this article. Rather, the number of children reported as being served with a designated
categorical label of autism (ASD) are described here.
Changes in ASD Students Served from 2001 to 2008
As reported in studies on prevalence, the total number of children served in Minnesota under the autism
categorical label increased from 2001 and 2008 (Table 1). Figure 1 illustrates that this increase was
evident across the six largest ELL groups in Minnesota. These data reflect the rise in number of children
served with the categorical label of autism, but not the percentage of increase within each group. Because
the total number of children in each ELL group was not available at the time this article was beomg
written, the total number of children in each language group could not be compared to the number of
children with autism in each group.
Table 1: Number of Minnesota Children with ASD From 7 Largest Language Groups Served 2001-2008
Language
English
Spanish
Somali
Hmong
Vietnamese
Chinese
Russian
Total ELL

2001-02
3638
30
9
25
6
6
5
81

2002-03
4606
45
11
35
12
7
7
117

2003-04
5711
59
16
33
19
6
8
141

2004-05
7011
84
33
37
23
11
11
199

Figure 1: Rate of Increase for ELL Children with ASD

2005-06
8307
112
57
42
30
17
13
271

2006-07
9464
118
73
50
40
19
14
314

2007-08
10,732
148
96
59
55
29
20
407

Totals
49,469
596
295
281
185
95
78
1530

Home Language and Special Education Services

Age at which children first received services under the autism categorical label varied across language
groups, with the youngest (younger than 12 months) and the oldest (21 years) being English-speaking.
The mean age was 8.45 years for English-speaking children, and 6.5 years for ELL children (Table 2). An
analysis of variance revealed that these differences were significant (F = 22.62, p < .001). A post hoc
analysis indicated that English speakers on average were older when they first began receiving special
education services under the autism category than Spanish, Somali, Vietnamese, and Chinese speakers,
and Somali speakers were younger than Hmong, English, Spanish speakers (Table 2). As illustrated in
Figure 2, approximately 60% of Somali children first entered the autism category between 3- and 5-years
of age, while 60% of Hmong children first entered between 4- and 8-years of age, and approximately 55%
of Spanish-speaking children entered between 3- and 8-years of age. The majority of English-speaking
children also enter into the autism category between 3- and 8-years of age, but many English-speaking
children were identified earlier than 3- and later than 8-years of age.
Table 2: Mean Age of Entry into Special Education Autism Category
Language

Count

English

13,893

Minimum
Age (Yrs)
0

Spanish
Somali
Hmong
Vietnamese
Chinese
Russian

189
111
80
57
34
24

1
2
2
2
2
2

*Significant difference at p < .001

Maximum
Age (Yrs)
21

Mean Age
(Yrs)
8.45*

SD

18
19
17
14
18
16

6.47*
4.75*
7.69*
5.81*
6.47
7.58

3.2
2.3
3.3
2.9
3.2
3.5

4.2

Figure 2: Age of Entry into Autism Services

Age of Entry into ASD Categorical Services
25.0%

Language
English
Spanish
Somali
Hmong

% of ELL Group at each age

20.0%

15.0%

10.0%

5.0%

0.0%

<1

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

Age Dec 1

Discussion
The results of this study suggest that large and important differences exist in the detection and services
provided to children in Minnesota with autistic characteristics. In this study, children in all of the largest
language categories increased in their rate of identification over the seven years. While English-speaking
children entered into special education autism services on average later than all other language groups, the
age of entry was spread across all age groups, with most children first receiving autism services between
3- and 8-years of age. Somali, Spanish, and Hmong groups were younger on average than Englishspeaking children, but varied among each other with youngest and oldest age of entry into autism
services.
There are several potential explanations for the discrepancies among language groups. First, children with
more severe characteristics of ASD may have begun receiving services under the autism category at an
earlier age. A second possible explanation for the difference may be that many children were served
under the general categorical label of developmental delay, which is possible in Minnesota until the age of
seven, rather than under the autism categorical label. Future research should examine if age of entry
under a specific categorical is affected by severity, and if the categorical label impacts what services a
child receives. Theoretically, services should be based on each individual childs needs, and not on his/her
categorical label. A third possible explanation for the differences among language groups is that some
children may have received intervention services through other non-educational agencies (e.g. applied
behavior analysis services). Anecdotally, more parents of English-speaking children appear to access
these services than parents of ELL children, although this trend may be changing within the Somali
community. A fourth explanation for differences in age that children first receive autism services may be
that some language groups were treated differently. This may be due, for example, to more effective
outreach to and identification of Somali children. Alternatively, it could be related to biases in how and
when medical and educational professionals respond to parents first concerns.
Although this study describes several interesting characteristics of children with ASD from several
language groups and the services that they receive, it poses many more questions. Where were children
before they received autism services? Future analyses will follow these children back to the time when
they first entered the special education system in Minnesota to explore the age differences among
language groups and the categorical label under which they were served before autism. This should
provide more precise information about the ages at which children began receiving services. Also of
interest is whether the instructional setting varies with age or language group. Preliminary analysis

suggests that it does. If this turns out to be true, we must ask why we serve language groups differently,
and examine if this is in the childrens best interests.
The information in this article represents some of the first research about the services that children with
ASD who are ELLs receive. Although these data are from Minnesota, this line of research has
implications for anyone who provides services to these children. Research has proven that early
intervention results in the best outcomes for children with ASD (National Research Council, 2001). Thus,
while it is imperative that we identify and provide services to children of all cultural and linguistic groups
as early as possible, we must be aware of cultural differences to ensure sensitive assessment and
intervention services. Future research should explore whether there are alternative methods to assess and
provide intervention for children that may be more culturally sensitive, and that are responsive to parent
concerns. Important next steps should explore parent perspectives about their initial concerns and their
access to services, describe interactions between parents and their children of other cultures, and compare
preferred interventions across cultural groups. Research in these areas will provide a model for
understanding clinician and family behaviors across other situations and with other communication
disorders.
Selected References
Barnevik-Olsson, M., Gillberg, C., Fernell, E. et al. (2008). Prevalence of autism in children born to
Somali parents living in Sweden: A brief report. Developmental medicine & child neurology, 50,
598-601.
Begeer, S., El Bouk, S., Boussaid, W., Terwogt, M., & Koot, H. (2008). Under diagnosis and referral bias
of autism in ethnic minorities. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 11-5.
Croen, L.A., Grether, J. K., Hoogstrate, J., & Selvin, S. (2002). The changing prevalence of autism in
California. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 32(3), 207-224.
Fombonne, E. (2005). Epidemiology of autistic disorder and other pervasive developmental disabilities.
Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, 66, 3-8.
Gillberg, C., Steffenberg, S., & Schaumann, H. (1991). Is autism more common now than 10 years ago?
The British Journal of Psychiatry, 158, 403-409.
Magnussen, P. & Saemundsen, E. (2001). Prevalence of autism in Iceland. Journal of Autism and
Developmental Disorders, 31(2), 153-163.
Mandell, D.S., Listerud, J., Levy, S., & Pinto-Martin, J.A. (2002). Differences in the age of diagnosis
among Medicaid-eligible children with autism spectrum disorders. Journal of the American
Academy of Child Psychiatry, 4 (12), 1447-1453.
Mandell, D., Wiggins, L. Carpenter, L. (2009). Racial/ethnic disparities in the identification of children
with autism spectrum disorders. American Journal of Public Health, 99, 493-498.
Minnesota Department of Health. (2009). Autism Spectrum Disorders Among Preschool Children
Participating in the Minneapolis Public Schools Early Childhood Educational Programs.
Retrieved April 2009 from
http://www.health.state.mn.us/ommh/projects/autism/report090331.pdf.
National Research Council. (2001). Educating Children with Autism. Washington, D.C.: National
Academic Press.
Nicholas, J. S., Charles, J. M., Carpenter, L. A., King, L. B., Jenner, W., & Spratt, E. G. (2007).
Prevalence and characteristics of children with autism spectrum disorders. Annals of
Epidemiology, 18 (2), 130-136.
Oliveira, G., Ataide, A., Marques, C. et al. (2007). Epidemiology of autism spectrum disorders in
Portugal: prevalence, clinical characteristics, and medical conditions. Developmental Medicine
and Child Neurology, 49, 726-733.
Schieve, L.A., Rice, C., & Boyle, C. (2006). Mental health in the United States: parental report of
diagnosed autism in children age 4-17 years. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 55(17),
481-486.

Yeargin-Allsop, M., Rice, C., Karapurkar, T., Doernberg, N., Boyle, C., & Murphy, C. (2003).
Prevalence of autism in a US metropolitan area. Journal of the American Medical Association,
289, 49-55.
Biography
Dr. Theresa Estrem has been a SLP for 25 years. She received her MA in Communication
Sciences/Disorders (1984) and PhD in Educational Psychology (2003) from the University of Minnesota.
Currently an assistant professor in Communication Sciences/Disorders at St. Cloud State University, she
teaches and does research with an emphasis on autism and ELL children.

Appendix: 3N Is This Your Child? (English)

Please scroll down for appendix.

Appendix: 3O Is This Your Child? (Arabic-French)

Please scroll to next page for appendix.

Appendix: 3P Is This Your Child? (Hmong)

Please scroll to next page for appendix.

Appendix: 3Q - Is This Your Child? (Somali)

Please scroll to next page for appendix.

Appendix: 3R Is This Your Child? (Spanish)

Please scroll to next page for appendix.

Appendix: 3S Ethics of Assessment

The Ethics of Assessment with Culturally and

Linguistically Diverse Populations
cite as:
Crowley, C. J. (2004, March 16). The ethics of assessment with culturally and linguistically
diverse populations. The ASHA Leader, pp. 6-7, 26.
by Catherine J. Crowley
Your supervisor asks you to evaluate a Cantonese-speaking 7-year-old. Her family came from
China. No Cantonese-speaking speech-language pathologist is available in your district, so you
evaluate her through an interpreter. This interpreter knows the dialect spoken by the child, and
understands the purpose of a speech-language evaluation and her role in the evaluation. You
know of no standardized speech-language tests in Cantonese, and you know you shouldn't report
scores on translated tests. You have kept up to date on all the research, and your evaluation is
consistent with current preferred practice guidelines for the assessment of bilingual/bicultural
children.
A few days after you submit the evaluation, you receive a phone call. Your district has rejected
your evaluation because it does not contain any test scores. You explain that translated tests are
invalid because they do not take into account differences between the two languages. You also
explain why what you have done is a good estimate of the child's communication skills.
Your district supervisor, however, reminds you that up until this point you and every other SLP
in the district provided test scores. These scores, she explains, were an easy way to see the child's
level of performance to determine eligibility for services. So, you must go back, re-test the child
using a translated test, and report those test scores.
Your ethical dilemma: Do you go back with your interpreter, have her translate the tests,
and then determine eligibility based upon the child's scores?
Before the first case is resolved, you are asked to evaluate a bilingual third-grader who is having
trouble mastering the curriculum. His family came to your town from the Dominican Republic a
number of years ago. At home he tends to use Spanish with his parents and mostly English, but
some Spanish, with his older brothers.
You are bilingual in Spanish, with near-native proficiency. You have several tests published in
Spanish, but you have reviewed their normative samples and determined they are flawed. You
also question their validity because their discriminate accuracy findingsa test accuracy in
identifying whether a child has a communication disorderare inadequate.

You do the evaluation based upon current preferred practices, and again provide an estimate of
the child's functioning level in the various areas assessed based upon the information elicited
during the evaluation and your clinical judgment. This time your supervisor contacts you within
a day of handing in your report. You explain that you used some subtests on the Spanish tests to
probe for information, but you could not report scores because of the psychometric limitations.
She complains that the district purchased the Spanish tests for you, and there should be no reason
why the test scores can't be reported.
Your ethical dilemma: Do you go back, give the student the tests, and report the scores?
Your supervisor decides that until the issue is resolved she will not ask you to do any more
bilingual evaluations because you are creating so many administrative problems for her. So, she
asks you to evaluate an 11-year-old boy who speaks African American English as his primary
dialect of English. The boy is from a low-income family with many of the cultural characteristics
of the "Trackton" community (a working-class African American community in the southeastern
United States, where most of the adults have had little schooling and most of the community
speaks African American English; Heath, 1982). You are aware that the test biases will
negatively affect his performance and may erroneously indicate that he needs special education
services. Your evaluation conforms to preferred practice guidelines. Once again, you decide not
to report scores.
Your supervisor cannot understand why there is a problem reporting test scores for children who
speak English. This is unbelievable to herespecially because all your colleagues report scores
for all the English-speaking students they evaluate.
Your ethical dilemma: Do you report the scores on the tests to determine eligibility?
New Dilemmas
What happened? Just a few years ago, you were in blissful ignorance of the problems with using
test-derived scores to determine eligibility. You gave the tests and reported scores, and everyone
was happy. Why are you now faced with ethical dilemmas when there weren't any in the past? If
only you hadn't read the research articles or attended the ASHA conferences, you never would
have questioned the practice.
When did this become an ethical issue and not just a difference of opinion? ASHA's Code of
Ethics requires us to provide "all services competently" (ASHA, 2003b). The challenge is that as
our field develops, matures, and expands, the standard for what are competent services changes
(ASHA, 2003a). This means that what were once competent services may not be considered
competent today.
But, you say, it is just too difficult to stay current and have to deal with the ethical issues. You
consider telling your supervisor that you don't want to evaluate these students anymore. That
way, you hope, you won't violate your ethical code, and you won't have to deal with an unhappy
supervisor. Sorry to say, but this does not resolve your dilemma. The ASHA Code of Ethics also

prohibits discriminationincluding on the basis of race, ethnicity, or national originin the

delivery of professional services (ASHA, 2003b).
There is some good news. SLPs and audiologists across the country are finding themselves in
situations just like yours. Many of them have worked with their colleagues and administrators to
change the way things are done with the goal of providing more effective services for culturally
and linguistically diverse children. Also, since the passage of the 1997 amendments to the
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, districts can be in violation of federal law if too
many of its minority children are referred for special education services, so administrators may
be more open to alternative assessment procedures.

Catherine J. Crowley, an SLP who holds a law degree, teaches at Teachers College Columbia
University where she coordinates the bilingual/bicultural emphasis track in the graduate program
in speech-language pathology and the Bilingual Extension Institute. She also works as a
consultant in the children's program of United Cerebral Palsy of New York City.

Appendix: 3T BOLD Language Test

Sample Pragmatic Communication Checklist
Bilingual Oral Language Development (BOLD)
Bilingual Oral Language Development (BOLD) is an informal checklist that can be used to record
observations of the childs communicative behavior in English and in the minority language. The child
should be observed in a variety of natural speaking situations. Twenty pragmatic behaviors are evaluated.
Other behaviors can be listed in the blank spaces at the bottom of the form.
Bilingual Oral Language Development (BOLD)
Childs name: _____________________________

Date: _________________

Childs first language: _______________ Childs second language: __________________

First
Language

Second
Language

________
________
________
________
________
________
________
________
________
________
________
________
________
________
________
________
________
________
________
________

________
________
________
________
________
________
________
________
________
________
________
________
________
________
________
________
________
________
________
________

Communicative Behavior
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.

Comments on own actions

Comments on others actions
Describes experiences accurately
Describes events sequentially
Attends to the speaker
Follows directions
Initiates conversations
Takes turns during conversations
Maintains topic
Answers questions
Requests attention
Requests information
Requests action
Requests clarification
Expresses needs
Expresses feelings
Describes plans
Supports viewpoints
Describes solutions
Expresses imagination

Additional skills may be listed below:

____________________
__________________
__________________
__________________
__________________
Comments:
Talk with Me

________
________
________
________
________

________
________
________
________
________

Copyright 1991 by Academic Communication Associates. This form may be reproduced.

Appendix: 3U Vocabulary Checklist-English-Home Language- page 1

Please place a check ( ) next to the words that the child says. Do not include words that the child understands but doesn't
yet say. It is fine to count words that are not pronounced clearly. Remember to only mark the words that the child says.

TOYS
ball
balloon
blocks
book
bubbles
crayons
doll
picture
present
slide
swing

English

Home
Lang.

grapes
gum
hamburger
ice cream
juice
meat
milk
orange
potatoes/fries

OUTSIDE
flower
house
moon
rain
sidewalk
sky
snow
star

English

Home
Lang.

pizza
raisins
pop
soup

street
sun
tree

spaghetti
tea
toast
water
BODY
PARTS
arm
belly button

ANIMALS
bear
bird
bee

FOOD
apple
banana
bread
butter
cake
candy
cereal
cheese
coffee
cookie/cracker
drink
egg

English

English

Home
Lang.

Home
Lang.

bug
bunny
cat

PEOPLE
aunt
uncle
child/kid
baby
boy
girl
daddy
mommy
doctor
grandma
grandpa
lady

Home
Lang.

Home
Lang.

English

Home
Lang.

man
own name

PLACES
church
home
hospital
English

English

library
McDonalds
outside
park
school
store

Home
bottom
chicken
CLOTHING English Lang.
chin
cow
belt
ear
dog/puppy
boots
elbow
duck
coat
eye
elephant
diaper
face
fish
dress
finger/toe
frog
gloves
foot
horse
hat
hair
monkey
jacket
hand
pig
pajamas
knee
pig
pants
leg
snake
shirt
mouth
tiger
shoe
neck
turkey
sneakers
nose
turtle
socks
teeth
sweater
tummy
Modeled after Patterson, J, (1998). Expressive vocabulary development and word combinations of SpanishEnglish bilingual toddlers. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology 7 (4) pp 46-56. Adapted from the
Language Development Survey by L. Rescorla

Appendix: 3V Vocabulary Checklist-English-Home Language-page 2

ACTION
(or a form of the
word)
bath
breakfast
bring
catch
clap
clean
close
come
cough
cut
dance

Englis
h

Home
Lang.

PERSONAL
ITEMS

English

Home
Lang.

brush
comb
glasses
key
money
paper
pen
pencil
penny
purse
umbrella

dinner
down
eat
finish
fix
get
give
go
have
help
hide
hit
hug
jump
kick
kiss

HOUSEHOLD
bed
blanket

knock
look
love
lunch
make
open
patty-cake
pee
poop
push
rad
ride
run
see
show
sing
sit
sleep

mirror
pillow
plate
potty
radio
room
sink
soap
sofa/couch
spoon
stairs
table
phone
towel
trash
t.v.
window

stop
take
throw
tickle
up
walk
want
wash

VEHICLES
bicycle/bike
boat
bus
car
motorcycle
plane
train
truck

MODIFIER
S

English

Home
Lang.

English

Home
Lang.

all right
bad
big
little
pretty
ugly
dry
wet
dark
dirty
clean
heavy
English

Home
Lang.

bottle
bowl
chair
clock/watch
crib
cup
door
floor
fork
glasses
knife
light

happy
cold
hot
tired
hungry
broken
nice
blue
red
white
yellow
black
mine
more
that
this
OTHERS
a, b, c, etc.
1, 2, 3, etc
yes
no
bye-bye
hi/hello
thanks
please
excuse me
welcome
night-night
me
you
my
what?
where?
why?

English

Home
Lang.

woo-woof
meow-meow
off
in
out
under
away
here
there
boo-boo/owie
shut up

Appendix: 3W Diagnostic Protocol

Step 1: Referral
Gather relevant data
_____health history
_____hearing screening results
____ vision screening results
____ parent information
_____home language survey
_____native language proficiency
_____English language proficiency
____ teachers observations (classroom, playground, cafeteria)
____ previous diagnosis of handicapping condition
_____previous special education programming
Step 2: Comprehensive Evaluation
Notice/Consent
_____ explain the rights, reason for testing, type of testing in the native
language and mode of communication understood by parents.
_____ obtain parents signature.
Determine the Language of Evaluation
_____ if English dominant, test in English and determine the childs
native language functioning level.
_____ if native language dominant, test in the native language and
determine the childs English language functioning level.
_____ if there is no clear dominance, test in both the native language and
English. Consideration should be given to the order of the
language used and to the amount of time between testing of
the two languages.
Select Evaluation Procedures
_____ Determine evaluation instruments including standardized and
Non-standardized procedures.
_____ coordinate schedules for testing.
_____ review cultural checklist.
_____ review test instrument for potential bias.
_____ consider modification of assessment instruments due to test bias.
Select Evaluation Personnel
_____ determine special education personnel to conduct testing in the native
language, in English, or both.
_____ select interpreter.

Adapted from: The University of Texas at Austin, Bilingual Methods

Course, 1998

Appendix: 3X ELL Early Language Assessment Final

ELL EARLY LANGUAGE ASSESSMENT TOOL
Name:

DOB:_____________

Age:_______ Date: ____________

Directions: Administer all items in stronger language. Re-administer items in the other
language(s) that the child speaks.
English

Other

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

Concepts: Body Parts

Show me your nose.
Show me your eyes.
Show me your ears.
Show me your mouth.
Show me your hands.
Show me your feet.
Show me your hair.

Introduce three objects: key, cup, chair.

For the items 8-10, first present as a verbal task. If child does
not respond, then use a hand gesture as a cue.
English

Other

8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15

Concepts: Position
Give me the key.
Give me the cup.
Give me the chair.
Put the key in the cup.
Put the key on the chair
Put the key under the chair.
Put the key behind the chair.
Put the key in front of the chair.

Introduce two new objects: shoe, spoon

Do NOT use gestures when giving the directions
English
16
17
18
19
20
21

Other

Following Directions
Give me the shoe.
Give me the spoon.
Give me the cup and the spoon.
Give me the shoe and the key.
Put the key on the chair and give me the shoe
Put the shoe on the chair and you hold the cup.

Introduce 1 small block, 1 large block, 1 small ball, 1 large ball

English
22
23

Other

Concepts: Size
Give me the big block.
Give me the small ball.

Introduce 5 small blocks

English

Other

24
25
26

Concepts: Number
Give me one block
Give me one more.
Give me all the blocks

Show the child the page with 5 pictures

English

Other

English

Other

27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34

Identifying pictures by name

Point to the key
Point to the shoe
Point to the ball
Point to the car
Point to the chair
Identifying pictures by function
Show me what you sit on.
Show me what you wear on your foot.
Show me what you use to unlock the door.

Ask the child the following questions and record their responses.
English

Other

35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46

Additional Observations:

Answering questions
Where is mommy?
What is your name?
How old are you?
What do you wear on your feet?
What says "meow?"
What do you play at home?
What is a key for?
What is a shoe for?
What do you do when you are hungry?
When do you go to sleep?
When do you go to school?
Why do we wear a coat outside?

ELL Early Language Assessment

(Items 27-34)

Appendix: 3Y Informal Multicultural Communication Measure

This language instrument is developed primarily for use in the initial screening of
elementary school children who are being considered for referral to a speech-language
pathologist because of a possible communicative disorder. Prior to administering the
instrument, translate the individual items and record the translations on the record form.
Make photocopies of the master copy for use with individual children. The content
should be modified, as necessary, based on information available about the childs
cultural experiences and classroom language performance. The results should be
reviewed with the speech-language pathologist to determine if further assessment is
warranted. It is recommended that this screening instrument be used in conjunction with
Bilingual Oral Language Development (BOLD).
Childs Name:

Date of Birth:

Age:

______________________________

___________________

___________

Language Tested:

Teacher:

______________________________

___________________

Reason for Testing:

Tested by:

______________________________

___________________________________

___________

Task AGiving Personal Information

1. What is your name?
Answer:_____________________________________________________________
2. How old are you?
Answer:_____________________________________________________________
3. Where do you live?
Answer:_____________________________________________________________
4. What do you like to do at home?
Answer: ____________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________
5. What do you like to do at school?
Answer: ____________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________

Task BFollowing Simple Directions

Give the child these instructions:
____1. Walk to the door.
____2. Touch your foot.
____3. Put this book under the table.

Task CLabeling Objects and Giving Functions

Ask, What is this? Then ask, What is this used for?
What is this?

What is this used for?

1. ball

____________________

______________________

2. shoe

____________________

______________________

3. chair

____________________

______________________

4. table

____________________

______________________

Task DMaking Comparisons

1. How is a car different from a bicycle?
Answer:
2. How is a car like a bicycle?
Answer:
3. How is a shoe different from a hat?
Answer:
4. How is a shoe like a hat?
Answer:

Task ESolving Simple Problems

1. You see a fire in a house. What should you do?
Answer:
2. You are tired because you have been working all day. What should you do?
Answer:
3. You lose your friends ball. What should you do?
Answer:

Task FNatural Communication Activities

Ask an adult speaker of the childs language to make an audiotape of communication
samples in the situations checked below:
____1. Describing a picture book. Present the child with a book in which the pictures
show the essential action. Allow the child to look at all of the pictures in the book.
Then ask the child to describe the action in each picture.
____2. Describing an experience. Ask the child to describe an experience at school
(e.g., field trip) or an event that occurred at home.
____3. Retelling a story. Present a story in the childs language.The child is then asked
to retell the story. A sample story appears below:
Mo was a young boy. He lived with his mother in the forest. One day he went for a walk.
He was looking for something to eat. When he was walking, it got dark.
Then he fell into a hole. He couldnt get out of the hole. In the morning, he heard a noise.
It was his mother. His mother helped him out of the hole. They went home together and
ate a big meal.
____4. Conversing with peers. Audiotape conversations between the child and
Members of his or her peer group.
Describe any other assessment tasks that should be administered by the teacher or bilingual
paraprofessional below:
Informal Multicultural Communication Measure, Copyright 1991 by Academic Associates. May be reproduced.

Talk with Me

Appendix: 3Z English Sounds Lacking Chart

Please scroll to next page for appendix.

English Sounds Lacking in Other Languages

Languages
Cantonese
Hmong
Japanese
Cambodian
Korean
Lao
Mandarin
Portuguese
Samoan
Spanish
Tagalog
Tai Dam*
Vietnamese

English Sound
p b
t d k g ch j

m n

w y hw

*Tai Dam = Black Tai

Sound key
church
judge
think
then
ship
vision
sing
beet
bit

late
let
fat
above
pool
pull
note

caught
father

ch
j

o
a

From Project E.S.L. (English as a Second Language) by Carol Martinez and Carol
Fea. (Lafayette School Corporation, Indiana, 1980-81). P. 1-23.

Appendix: 3AA Hmong TLAC 3 Subtest I

SUBTEST I. VOCABULARY
Score
1 or 0

Correct
Response

C
B
A
A
A
C
B
C
C
C
C
C
C
A
A
A
B
A
C
A
C
C
B
A
B
A
B
B
A
A
A
C

Item
English
1. cat
2. bird
3. girl
4. box
5. blue
6. yellow
7. cutting
8. running
9. little
10. Jumping
12. two
14. writing
15. together
16. fast
17. drawing
18. half
19. four
20. full
21. giving
23. coming
24. high
25. caught
26. letters
29. alike
30. most
31. few
33. second
34. equal
35. left
36. pair
42. obstacle
45. descending

Total correct __________

32

Item
Hmong
1. miv
2. noog
3. ntxhais
4. thawv
5. xiav
6. daj
7. tab tom txiav
8. tab tom khiav
9. me
10. tab tom dhia
12. ob
14. tab tom sau
15. nyob ua ke
16. ceev
17. tab tom kos duab
18. ib sab
19. plaub
20. puv
21. tab tom muab rau
23. tab tom los
24. siab
25. nuv tau
26. cov tsiaj ntawv
29. zoo ib yam
30. ntau tshaj
31. ob peb tug
33. thib ob
34. ntau ib yam
35. sab laug
36. ib khub
42. thaiv kev
45. tab tom nqis

Appendix: 3BB Hmong TACL3 Subtest II and III

SUBTEST II. GRAMMATICAL SENTENCES
Score
1 or 0

Correct
Response
A
C
B
B
C
C
B
A
B
A
A
C
C
B
B
A
C
B
B
C
A
A
A
C
C
A
A
C
A
C

Item
English
1. The cat is in the box.
2. The cap is off the toothpaste.
3. The boy is beside the car.
4. The girl is jumping.
5. The farmer is big.
6. The boys ran.
7. The rope is through the box.
8. The dog is in front of the car.
9. Father said, I have these.
13. The circle is around the car.
16. Show me the shortest man.
17. The cat is between the chairs.
18. The ball is over the book.
19. The man sees the children play.
21. Mother gave the ball to them.
22. I see the drummer.
23. The cat drank milk.
25. The man looks at the dogs ear.
26. The fish swim away.
27. They swam.
28. The men ran.
29. She is going to shop.
30. The sheep drink water.
31. The fish is eating.
32. The man has been cutting trees.
33. She feeds the bird.
36. She will hit the ball.
37. The man painted the house.
38. The lady said, This shoe is hers.
39. She sewed the dress.

Total correct__________
30

Item
Hmong
1. Tus miv nyob hauv lub thawv.
2. Lub hau tshuaj txhuam hniav qhib lawm.
3. Tus tub nyob ib sab ntawm lub tsheb.
4. Tus ntxhais tab tom dhia.
5. Tus neeg ua teb loj.
6. Cov tub khiav.
7. Txoj hlua chaws tshab lub thawv.
8. Tus dev nyob tom hauv ntej lub tsheb.
9. Txiv hais tias, kuv muaj cov nov.
13. Lub voj voog nyob ncig lub tsheb.
16. Qhia rau kuv tus txiv neej qis tshaj.
17. Tus miv nyob nruab nrab ntawm ob lub rooj zaum.
18. Lub pob nyob saum toj phau ntawv.
19. Tus txiv neej saib cov me nyuam yaus ua si.
21. Niam tau muab lub pob rau lawv.
22. Kuv pom tus neeg ntaus nruas.
23. Tus miv haus 2ut us2 lawm.
25. Tus txiv neej saib tus aub (dev) lub pob ntseg.
26. Cov ntses ua luam dej khiav lawm.
27. Lawv ua luam dej tas lawm.
28. Cov txiv neej khiav.
29. Nws tab tom mus yuav khoom.
30. Cov yaj haus dej.
31. Tus ntses tab tom noj.
32. Tus txiv neej txiav cov ntoo tas lawm.
33. Nws pub khoom rau tus noog noj.
36. Nws tseem yuav ntaus lub pob.
37. Tus txiv neej tha lub tsev tas lawm.
38. Tus poj niam hais tias, sab khau no yog tus ntxhais li.
39. Nws twb xaws tau daim tiab lawm.

SUBTEST III. ELABORATED PHRASES AND SENTENCES

Score
1 or 0

Correct
Response

B
B
C
B
C
A
B
B
A
A
B
B
A
B
C
A
C
C

Item
English
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.

A big blue ball.

A bird and a cat.
Who is beside the table?
The cat has no eyes.
Where do you sleep?
The boy and the man ate popcorn.
The baby kisses the mother.
The girls are eating and watching TV.
The boy rode his bicycle home and his
sister went home in the car.
10. While the girl watched the movie,
she ate some popcorn.
11. The man isnt drinking.
12. Its not a cup.
13. The boy who was laughing saw the
girl.
14. Its not round.
15. The lady is eating a banana and the
man is drinking milk.
17. The little bird is eating.
18. Instead of walking, he rode.
19. She wouldnt hold the clowns hand.

20. The man spoke to the little girls

mother, who was in the car.
21. She danced while the cat looked in the
mirror.
22. After he cut her hair, the hairstylist
took a coffee break.
23. She shows the boy the girl.

25. She takes the puppy to the boy.

A
A

27. Mother said, Is it raining?

28. Mary, her student, drank some milk.

29. He couldnt reach it even though he

was tall.
30. With what do you eat?
32. Before she jumped in the pool, the girl
waved to her mother.
33. She wanted a blouse, however, she got
a skirt.

B
B
B

C
C
C

Item
Hmong
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.

Lub pob xiav loj.

Tus noog thiab tus miv.
Leej twg nyob ib sab ntawm lub rooj?
Tus miv tsis muaj qhov muag.
Koj pw qhov twg?
Tus tub thiab tus txiv neej noj paj kws.
Tus me nyuam hnia tus niam.
Cov ntxhais tab tom noj thiab saib TV.
Tus tub caij nws lub luv thij mus tsev hos nws
tus muam caij lub tsheb mus tsev.
10. Thaum tus ntxhais saib movie, nws noj paj
kws.
11. Tus txiv neej tsis haus dej.
12. Nws tsis yog lub khob.
13. Tus tub uas luag luag ntawd pom tus
ntxhais.
14. Nws tsis kheej.
15. Tus poj niam tab tom 3ut us lub txiv tsawb
thiab tus txiv neej tab tom haus mis.
17. Tus me nyuam noog tab tom noj.
18. Nws tsis taug kev, tiam sis nws caij.
19. Nws tsis kam tuav tus neeg tas lauv (clown)
txhais tes.
20. Tus txiv neej nrog tus me nyuam ntxhais
niam uas nyob hauv tsheb tham.
21. Thaum nws tseem seev cev tus miv tau ntsia
hauv daim iav.
22. Tom qab nws txiav tus ntxhais cov plaub
3ut us3, nws tau so haus kav fes.
23. Nws muab tus ntxhais daim duab rau tus tub
saib.
25. Nws coj tus me nyuam aub (dev) mus rau tus
tub.
27. Niam hais tias, Puas yog los nag?
28. Mary, uas yog nws tug me nyuam kawm
ntawv haus mis.
29. Txawm nws siab los nws ncav tsis cuag.
30. Koj noj nrog dab tsi?
32. Ua ntej nws yuav dhia rau hauv lub pas dej,
tus ntxhais co tes rau nws niam.
33. Nws xav tau lub tsho tiam sis nws tau daim
tiab.

A
C
B

34. The baby the woman held clapped her

hands.
35. The girl asked her father to throw her
the ball, but he didnt.
38. Having put her coat in the closet, she
took off her shoes.

39. The man said, Can you reach it?

40. The boy called to the girl with the

baseball cap.
41. Subsequent to getting her books, she
ate breakfast.
42. The boy the dog watched was eating.

B
B
A

46. The girl the boy pulled wore a baseball

cap.

Total correct __________

37

34. Tus me nyuam uas tus poj niam puag npuaj

teg.
35. Tus ntxhais hais kom nws txiv pov lub
pob los rau nws, tiam sis nws tsis pov.
38. Nws muab nws lub tsho tiv no tso rau hauv
chav khuam tsho, ces nws hle nws nkawm
khau.
39. Tus txiv neej tau hais tias,Koj ncav puas
cuag?
40. Tus tub tau 4ut us ntxhais uas ntoo lub kaus
mom.
41. Tom qab tau nws cov phau ntawv, nws noj
tshais.
42. Tus tub uas tus aub (dev) saib ntsoov tab tom
noj.
46. Tus ntxhais uas tus tub cab, ntoo ib lub
kaus mom.

APPENDIX: 3CC Hmong TACL3 score sheet

Test of Auditory Comprehension 3
Hmong Adaptation
Student name:___________________
School:_________________________
Date of testing:__________________

Date of birth:____________
Grade:_____________

Directions for administration:

Use training plates to teach task. If task cannot be taught consider
discontinuing and using alternate tools. Administer selected items in best
language, usually Hmong. After presenting all items, present error items in
other language usually English. For Kindergarten students administer only
subtests I and II.
Hmong
English
Combined
Subtest I:
Vocabulary
Total Items

_______
32

_________

________
32

Subtest II.
Grammatical Sentences
Total Items

_______
30

_________

________
30

Subtest III.
Elaborated Sentences
Total Items

_______
37

_________

________
37

Add home/native language and English items to obtain combined score.

*Total Kindergarten
Subtest I & II

___/62

Total Test
___/99
Subtest I, II, III
Comparison information (2007-2008)
Average
*Kindergarten
47
First Grade
86
Second Grade
90
Third Grade
91
Fourth Grade
95
Fifth Grade
96
Sixth Grade
96

___/62
___/99

Range
34-61
70-93
72-97
83-98
88-99
90-99
93-99

APPENDIX: 3DD Hmong TACL3 performance data

TEST OF AUDITORY COMPREHENSION OF LANGUAGE 3
HMONG ADAPTATION (Sept. 2008)
Below is the data collected across the 2007-2008 school year. The data to
consider for initial eligibility is the Subtest Total (combined) score and
range.
Kindergarten students were given only 2 of the 3 subtests.
*Kindergarten
Vocabulary
Grammatical Sentences
Total 2 subtests

Combined language average

26/32
22/30
47/62

Range
14-32
16-27
**34-61

* Kindergarten students were not included in the norming so fewer results are in this average (N=20).
**Scores for kindergarten students varied widely with 20% of the students scoring from 34-39.

First grade
Vocabulary
Grammatical Sentences
Elaborated Sentences
Total 3 subtests

Combined language average

29/32
22/30
30/37
86/99

Range
24-32
16-30
24-35
*70-93

*The score of 70 was obtained by a newly arrived student identified as DHH after 6 months who
may be a student with overall cognitive delay. Only 3 of the students tested scored in the 70s
(N=45).

Second Grade
Vocabulary
Grammatical Sentences
Elaborated Sentences
Total 3 subtests

Combined language average

31/32
27/30
33/37

Range
28-32
21-30
22-37

90/99

72-97

Vocabulary
Grammatical Sentences
Elaborated Sentences

31/32
28/30
33/37

24-32
25-30
24-37

Total 3 subtests

91/99

83-98

Third Grade

Fourth Grade
Vocabulary
Grammatical Sentences
Elaborated Sentences
Total 3 subtests

Combined language average

31/32
29/30
33/37

28-32
27-30
31-37

95/99

88-99

Vocabulary
Grammatical Sentences
Elaborated Sentences

31/32
29/30
35/37

30-32
26-30
32-37

Total 3 subtests

96/99

90-99

Vocabulary
Grammatical Sentences
Elaborated Sentences

31/32
29/30
35/37

31-32
27-30
34-37

Total 3 subtests

96/99

93-99

Fifth Grade

Sixth Grade

APPENDIX: 3EE Hmong Picture Naming Task score sheet

(Scroll to next page for appendix)

The Language Skills in Hmong-English Bilinguals

Date
Subject No.
Examiner

Picture Naming Task

Language being tested:

English

Hmong

Trial
STIMULUS

RESPONSE

ear
boy
crab
fly
mop
man

STIMULUS
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.

potato
eye
jacket
finger
sock
girl
dog
noodles
hand
table
airplane
nose
banana
chicken
duck
horse
pig
ball
button
spoon
bowl
toothbrush
police
teeth
clock

Total # correct

RESPONSE

qos yaj ywm / qos

qhov muag
tsho sov / tsho loj
ntiv tes
thom khwm
menyuam ntxhais
aub / dev
fawm/mij
txhais tes
rooj
dav hlau
qhov ntswg/taub ntswg
txiv tsawb
qaib
os
nees
npua
pob
nyias khawm / khawm
diav
phiab / tais
txhuam hniav
tub ceev xwm
kaus hniav
moo

/50

Center for Cognitive and Social Processes in Language

STIMULUS
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
34.
35.
36.
37.
38.
39.
40.
41.
42.
43.
44.
45.
46.
47.
48.
49.
50.

milk
bed
elephant
squirrel
book
belt
egg
bottle
fish
sun
dress
sink
baby
basket
boat
pillow
cow
bird
camera
tree
coat
bus
fork
flower
pencil

mis
txaj
ntxhw
nas hooj twm
phau ntawv
siv tawv
qes
lub lam hwj
ntses
hnub
tiab
chaw ntxuav
mob liab / mob ab
pob tawb
nkoj
hauv ncoo
nyuj
noog
koob yees duab
ntoo
tsho loj
tseb
rawg
paj
cwj mem / xaum

RESPONSE

APPENDIX: 3FF HMONG PIC NAMING TASK 1

APPENDIX: 3GG HMONG PIC NAMING TASK 2

APPENDIX: 3HH HMONG PIC NAMING TASK 3

APPENDIX: 3II HMONG PIC NAMING TASK 4

+

APPENDIX: 3JJ HMONG PIC NAMING TASK 5

Appendix: 3KK Hmong Receptive Vocab score sheet

(Scroll to next page for appendix)

Picture Identification
Date ______________________
Age ____

mouse

scissor

arm

bubbles

hat

sofa

lamp

mittens

8 grandmother
9

water

10

shoulder

11

juice

12

corn

13

stairs

14

grapes

15

neckless

16

key

17

mop

18

monkey

Tria
l

Tria
l

No. ____ Name __________________________ Date of Birth ___________________________

shoe

19

orange

20

pants

21

paper

22

street

23

girl

24

candy

25

foot

26

blanket

27

butter

28

plate

29

tiger

30

pumkin

31

salt

32

glasses

33

owl

34

face

35

sky

36

glue

37

garden

38

garbage

39

window

40

man

41

door

42

frog

43

rain

44

farm

45

boot

46

store

47

butterfly

48

teacher

49

scarf

50

towel

Total

Appendix: 3LL Hmong Receptive Vocabulary Pictures

(Scroll to next page for appendix)

10

11

12

15

16

13

14

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

43

44

41

42

43

44

45

SCHOOL

46

47

48

49

50

Appendix: 3MM Hmong Eng Frog Where Are You?

(Scroll to next page for appendix)

Hmong translation of Frog, Where Are You?

by Chandra Chong Xiong
Thaum tsaus ntuj ib tug menyuam tub thiab nws tus aub nrhiav tau ib tug qav.
When dark sky one child boy and his a/the dog find one frog.
Lawv muab tus qav cia rau ib lub hwj.
They give the frog put in one a/the jar.
Thaum tsaus ntuj thaum tus menyuam tub thiab tus aub pais pw lawm,
When dark sky when the child boy and his a/the dog go sleep
tus qav nrhia pais ces nus khiav mus lawm.
the frog jump go then it run go
Thaum pom kev, tus menyuam tub thiab tus aub sawv,
When see way, the child boy and the dog rise/wake- up
tabsis lawv nrhiav tsis tau tus qav, lawv tsis pom tus qav.
but they find not the frog, they not see the frog.
Tus menyuam tub thiab tus aub nrhiav qhov txhia qhov chaw saib pos pom tus qav.
The child boy and the dog find everywhere if see the frog.
Nkawv nyob ntawm qhovrais.
They stay at window.
Nkawv saib saib nraum qhovrais saib pos pom tus qav, tabsis tus qav tsis nyob ntawv.
They look look out window see if see the frog, but the frog not at there.
Tus menyuam tub saib saib tab sis tsis pom.
The child boy look look but no see.
Tus aub saib ntawm qhovrais ces nws poob ntawm qhovrais ces nws ua lub hwj tawg lawm.
The dog look the window then it fall the window then it do the jar break.
Tus menyuam tub ua npau taws rau tus aub, tabsis tus aub tsis paub dabtsi,
The child boy do mad at the dog, but the dog not know anything,
ces nws yaimyaim tus menyuam tus lub ntsejmuag xwb.
so it lick lick the child boy the face.
Nkawv nyob nraum zoov nkawv nrhiav tus qav, tabsis tsis pom tus qav li.
They at outside they find the frog, but not see the frog.
Tus aub nyob ntawm tsob ntoo nws nrhiav hauv lub tsev mub,
the dog at the tree it find/look in the house bee,
tus menyuam tub saib hauv av.
the child boy look in ground/dirt
Nws saib hauv ib lub qhov hauv av saib pos pom, tabsis pom ib tug tsiaj xwb.
They look in one the hole in ground if find, but find one a/the animal only.
Tus menyuam tub tsis pom tus qav.
the child boy not find the frog.
Tus aub qwqw rau saum lub tsev mub, ua lub tsev mub poob- poob los hauv av.
the dog yellyell at up the house bee, do the house bee fall-fall to in ground.
Tus menyuam tub nce sau- saunce saum ib tsob ntoo saib pos pom tus qav.
The child boy climb -- --climb up one tree if see/find the frog.
Cov mub caum tus aub.
The (plural) bee chase the dog.

Ib tug plas tawm tsob ntoo los caum tus menyuam tub.
One the owl come out tree go chase the child boy.
34
Tus plas caum tus menyuam tub pais saum ib lub pob zeb.
The owl chase the child boy go up to one the rock.
Tus menyuam tub muab tus aub nyob ntawm pob zeb nhriav tus qav saib pos pom tus qav,
the child boy give the dog at the rock find the frog if can see the frog,
tabsis lawv nhriav tau ib tug moslwj.
but they find one a moose.
Tus moslwj nqa tus menyuam tub thiab caum tus aub pais tom pas dej.
the moose carry the child boy and chase the dog go the pond (area of water).
Tus moslwj muab tus menyuam tub poob rau hauv pas dej
the moose give the child boy fall to in pond
thiab caum tus aub poob rau hauv pas dej.
and chase the dog fall to in pond.
Nkawv nyob rau hauv pas dej nkawv hnov abtsi qwqw.
They at to in pond they hear something yellyell.
Nkawv saib (nahas ua cas) pom ib tug qav.
They look ( ) see one a frog.
Nkawv nhriav tau ob tug qav.
They find two the frog.
Ces nkawv pais ze rua pom ib tsev neeg qav.
Then they go nearer see one house people (family) frog.
Tus menyuam tub thiab tus aub nqa ib tug menyuam qav pais tsev
The child boy and the dog carry one the child frog go house/home
ces lawv hais sib ntsib rua rau tsev qav ntawv. Thab.
then they say meet again (farewell) to house frog (family of frog) there. End.

Appendix: 3NN Somali Boehm Concepts

(Scroll to next page for appendix)

SOMALI ADAPTATIONS FOR ENGLISH BOEHM CONCEPTS

English word

= Somali translation

Widest

Biggest

Between

Middle Through = Middle

Center

Middle

Beginning

Starting

Below

Under

Matches

Same

Medium-sized

Middle

Above

Over

Pair

Two

Skip

Jump Over

In order

(No word/phrase in Somali)

Least

Smallest Amount

Appendix: 3OO Spanish English Vocabulary Checklist page 1

Por favor haga una marca ( ) al lado de las palabras que el nio/la nia dice. No incluir las palabras que el nio/la nia entiende pero no dice
todava. Est bien contar las palabras que no estn pronunciadas claramente. Acurdese de indicar solamente las palabras que su nio dice.

COMIDA
manzana
pltano/banana/o
pan
mantequilla
torta/pastel
dulce
cereal
queso
caf
galleta
bebida
huevo
uvas
chicle
hamburguesa
helado/nieve
jugo
carne
leche
naranja
papa(s)
pizza
pasas
soda/coca
sopa/caldo
spaghetti
t
tostada
agua
PARTES DEL CUERPO
brazo
ombligo
nalgas
mentn/barba
odo/oreja
codo
ojo
cara
dedo
pie
pelo
mano
rodilla
pierna
boca
cuello
nariz
dientes
panza/estmago

FOOD
apple
banana
bread
butter
cake
candy
cereal
cheese
coffee
cookie/cracker
drink
egg
grapes
gum
hamburger
ice cream
juice
meat
milk
orange
potatoes/fries
pizza
raisins
pop
soup
spaghetti
tea
toast
water
BODY PARTS
arm
belly button
bottom
chin
ear
elbow
eye
face
finger/toe
foot
hair
hand
knee
leg
mouth
neck
nose
teeth
tummy

JUGUETES
pelota/bola
globo
bloques/cubos
libro
burbujas
creyones
mueca
dibujo/foto
regalo
tobogn/resbaldera
columpio

TOYS
ball
balloon
blocks
book
bubbles
crayons
doll
picture
present
slide
swing

AFUERA
flor
casa
luna
lluvia
acera
cielo
nieve
estrella
calle
sol
arbol

OUTSIDE
flower
house
moon
rain
sidewalk
sky
snow
star
street
sun
tree

ANIMALES
oso
pjaro
abeja
insecto/bicho
conejo
gato
pollo
vaca
perro
pato
elefante
pez
rana/sapo
caballo
mono/chango
cerdo/cochino/
marano/puerco
culebra/vbora
tigre
pavo
tortuga

ANIMALS
bear
bird
bee
bug
bunny
cat
chicken
cow
dog/puppy
duck
elephant
fish
frog
horse
monkey
pig
pig
snake
tiger
turkey
turtle

PERSONAS
ta
to
nio/nia
bebe/nene
muchacho/chico
muchacha/chica
pap
mam
doctr/mdico
abuelita
abuelito
mujer
hombre
su nombre

PEOPLE
aunt
uncle
child/kid
baby
boy
girl
daddy
mommy
doctor
grandma
grandpa
lady
man
own name

LUGARES
iglesia
hogar/casa
hospital
biblioteca
McDonalds
afuera
parque
escuela
tienda

PLACES
church
home
hospital
library
McDonalds
outside
park
school
store

LA ROPA
faja/cinturn
botas
abrigo
paal/pmper
vestido
guantes
sombrero/gorro(a)
chaqueta/chamarra
pijamas
pantalones
camisa
zapato
tenis
calcetines/medias/
calcetas
suter

CLOTHING
belt
boots
coat
diaper
dress
gloves
hat
jacket
pajamas
pants
shirt
shoe
sneakers
socks
sweater

Source: Patterson, J, (1998). Expressive vocabulary development and word combinations of Spanish-English bilingual toddlers.
American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology 7 (4) pp 46-56. Adapted from the Language Development Survey by L. Rescorla

Appendix: 3PP Spanish English Vocabulary Checklist page 2

ACCIONES
(o una forma de la palabra)
baarse/bano
desayuno/arse
traer
coger
aplaudir
limpiar
cerrar
venir
toser
cortar
bailar
cena/r

ACTION

bajar/baja
comer
acabar
arreglar
agarrar/obtener
dar
ir
tener
ayudar
esconderse
pegar
abrazar
saltar/brincar
patear
besar/beso
tocar

down
eat
finish
fix
get
give
go
have
help
hide
hit
hug
jump
kick
kiss
knock

mirar
amar
almorzar/almuerzo
hacer
abrir
juega tortillas
pip
pop/caca
empujar
leer
montar
correr
ver
mostrar
cantar
sentar
dormir/mim
parar
tomar
tirar
hacer cosquillas
arriba
caminar
querer
lavar

look
love
lunch
make
open
patty-cake
pee
poop
push
rad
ride
run
see
show
sing
sit
sleep
stop
take
throw
tickle
up
walk
want
wash

bath
breakfast
bring
catch
clap
clean
close
come
cough
cut
dance
dinner

A___ Items Spanish only

COSAS PERSONALES
cepillo
peine
lentes/anteojos
llave
dinero
papel
pluma
lpiz
centavo/cora
bolsa
paraguas

PERSONAL ITEMS
brush
comb
glasses
key
money
paper
pen
pencil
penny
purse
umbrella

DE LA CASA

HOUSEHOLD

cama
frazada/manta/
cobija
botella/teta
escudilla/cuenco
silla
reloj
cuna
taza
puerta
suelo
tenedor
vaso
cuchillo
luz
espejo

bed
blanket

almohada
plato
escusado/bacn
radio
cuarto
lavadero/fregadero
jabon
sof
cuchara
escalera
mesa
telfono/celular
toalla
basura
televisin/tele
ventana

pillow
plate
potty
radio
room
sink
soap
sofa/couch
spoon
stairs
table
phone
towel
trash
t.v.
window

VEHICULOS
bicicleta/bici
bote/barco
autobus
carro/coche
motocicleta
avin
tren
camin/troca

VEHICLES
bicycle/bike
boat
bus
car
motorcycle
plane
train
truck

B___ Items English only

bottle
bowl
chair
clock/watch
crib
cup
door
floor
fork
glasses
knife
light
mirror

C___ Items in both languages

MODIFICADORES
bien
mal
grande
chiquito/pequeo
bonito
feo
seco
mojado
oscuro
sucio
limpio
pesado
feliz

MODIFIERS
all right
bad
big
little
pretty
ugly
dry
wet
dark
dirty
clean
heavy
happy

fro
caliente
cansado
hambre
roto/quebrado
simptico
azul
rojo
blanco
amarillo
negro
mo
mas
eso
esto
OTROS

cold
hot
tired
hungry
broken
nice
blue
red
white
yellow
black
mine
more
that
this
OTHERS

a, b, c, etc.
1, 2, 3, etc
si
no
adis
hola
gracias
por favor
perdname
de nada
buenas noches
yo
tu
mi
qu?
donde?
por que?
guauguau
miau miau
apagado
en
fuera
abajo
lejos
ac/aqu
all
yaiya
cllate

a, b, c, etc.
1, 2, 3, etc
yes
no
bye-bye
hi/hello
thanks
please
excuse me
welcome
night-night
me
you
my
what?
where?
why?
woo-woof
meow-meow
off
in
out
under
away
here
there
boo-boo/owie
shut up

____Total Vocab Items (A+B+C)

Appendix: 3QQ Amharic Imitative Articulation Measure

AMHARIC IMITATIVE ARTICULATION MEASURE
Childs Name: _____________________ Interpreter: _________________
Date: _____________________________ SLP: ______________________
Score: # of Correct _______ of 19

1.

Target L1 Word Record production here IPA English Word

Sound Stimulus
Meaning
p
Police
/p/ Police

2.

Anate

/n/

Mother

3.

Bete

/b/

House

4.

Chama

Shoes

5.

dm

Dmte

Cat

6.

Gebere

/g/

Farmer

7.

Ktema

/k/

City

8.

Lomy

/l/

Lemon

9.

Mekina

/m/

Car

10. r

Radio

/r/

Radio

11. s

Selame

/s/

Peace

12. t

Tuto

/t/

Bottle (baby)

13. y

Yete

/j/

Where

14. z

Zefene

/z/

Music

15. f

Fera

/f/

Scared

16. mbl

Mblate

Eat

17. dz

Leje

Baby

18. /sh/

Saye

/sh/

Tea

19. /w/

Weha

/w/

Water

Talk with Me

Appendix: 3RR Amharic Consonant Chart

(Scroll to next page for appendix)

Ethiopian Languages
Amharic Consonants
Bilabial/
Dental
Labiodental
Stops

Voiceless
Voiced
Ejective

Affricates

Voiceless
Voiced
Ejective

Fricatives

Voiceless
Voiced

Nasal
Approximants
Flap Trills
Amharic Vowel Chart
Front
Central

p
b
p

s
z

m
w

n
l
r

Back

i:,

, u:

Mid

, o:

Talk with Me

a:

Glottal
?

t
d,
t

High

Low

Alveolar/ PalatoVelar
Retroflex Alveolar/
Palatal
t
k
d
g
t
k

Appendix: 3SS Arabic Imitative Articulation Measure

ARABIC IMITATIVE ARTICULATION MEASURE
Childs Name:
Date:

_____________________ Interpreter: _________________

_____________________ SLP: ______________________

Score: # of Correct _______ of 28

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.

Target
Sound
b
m
n
t
t
d
dh
h
ha
ha
f
k
k
kh
g
g
l
r

L1 Word
Stimulus
Bab /
Maa /
Nama /
Talmez /
Tabut /
Doob /
Dhifdaw /
Hira /
Himaur /
Haleeb /
Feel /
Kalb /
Kavlb /
Khroof /
Ghamel
Ghanima /
Lebon /
Rakadhuh

Record
production here

IPA

/g/
/g/
/l/
/r/

English Word
Meaning
Door
Water
Sleep
Student
Ball
Bear
Frog
Cat
Donkey
Milk
Elephant
Dog
Heart
Ram
Camel
Lamb
Yogurt
To run

/b/
/m/
/n/
/t/
/t/
/d/
/h/
/f/
/k/
/k/

19. s

Samakat

/s/

Fish

20.
21.
22.
23.

s
z
z
sh

Souss /
Zahra /
Zarf /
Schems

/s/
/z/
/z/
/sh/

Chick
Flower
Envelope
Sun

24. th

Thaalbu

/th/

Fox

25.
26.
27.
28.

Theeb /
Yed /
Aain /
Walid /

/th/
/j/

Wolf
Hand
Eye
Boy

th
y
aa
o

Talk with Me

Appendix: 3TT Bosnian Serbo-Croatian Imitative Articulation

Measure
BOSNIAN/SERBO-CROATIAN IMITATIVE ARTICULATION MEASURE
Childs Name:
Date:

_____________________ Interpreter: _________________

_____________________ SLP: ______________________

Score: # of Correct _______ of 34

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
34.

Target
Sound
a
b
c
d
f
g
h
d

k
l
m
n
p
r
r
s
t
v
z

lj
nj
kv
kv

a
e
i
o
u

Talk with Me

L1 Word Record production here

Stimulus
Auto
Beba
Cigla
Drvo
Frula
Grana
Hladno
Dzem
Djak
Kuca
List
Most
Novine
Put
Riba
Torba
Sto
Tri
Vrata
Zub
ovjek
Kua
Ljeto
Konj
Kvaka
Kvoka
Mi
imi
No
Tata
Devet
Mi
Osam
Kua

IPA English Word

Meaning
/a/ Automobile
/b/ Baby
[] Brick
/d/ Tree
/f/
Flute
Branch
[g]
/h/ Cold
/] Jam
[j] Pupil
/k/
House
/l/
Leaf
/m/ Bridge
/n/ Newspaper
/p/ Road
/r/
Fish
/r/
Backpack
/s/
Table
/t/
Three
/v/
Door
/z/
Tooth
[] Man
[c] House
/] Summer
[] Horse
/kv/ Door handle
/kv/ Hen
[] Mouse
[] Bat
Knife
[]
[a] Father
[] Nine
Mouse
[i]
[] Eight
/u/ house

Appendix: 3UU German Imitative Articulation Measure

GERMAN IMITATIVE ARTICULATION MEASURE
Childs Name:
Date:

_____________________ Interpreter: _________________

_____________________ SLP: ______________________

Score: # of Correct _______ of 23

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.

Target
Sound
p
b
t
d
k
g
f
v
s
z
tz
tz
sh
zh
h
hh
m
n
ng
l
rr
r
y

Talk with Me

L1 Word
Record production here
Stimulus
Puppe
Bad
Tier
Dame
Kche
Gut
Feder
Vase
Lastwagen
Sand
Zimmer
Zug
Schiff
Garage
Heiss
Ich
Malen
Nett
Finger
Lego
Rot
Lehrer
Ja

IPA

English Word
Meaning
/p/
Doll
/b/
Bath
/t/
Animal
/d/
Lady
/k/
Kitchen
/g/
Good
/f/
Feather
/v/
Vase
/s/
Semi-truck
/z/
Sand
Room
Train
/sh/ Boat
/zh/ Garage
/h/
Hot
/x/
I
/m/ Paint
/n/
Nice
/ng/ Finger
/l/
Lego
Red
/r/
Teacher
/j/
Yes

Appendix: 3VV Hmong Contrastive Analysis

Hmong Language Information
Phonology
There are two variations: White Hmong and Green Hmong.
1. Problem English sounds:
Th
pl
e (bed)
bl
ae (bat)
d (occurs in White Hmong but
not in Green Hmong)
z
2. Sounds that may be confused or substituted for each other:
b, v, w
t, d
l, r
ch/sh
p, b
d/dz
k, g
3. /r/ is a stop rather than a liquid. Aspirated /r/ sounds like /t/ or /d/.
4. Vowels are nasalized.
5. The only final consonant is /ng/. Clusters are especially difficult.
6. Consonant clusters only occur in initial positions. May include nasal and stop
(e.g., /np/, /nt/, /nts/).
7. Hmong is a tonal language (7 tones) with tones marking each syllable to
Show different meanings.
8. There are 32 consonant sounds.

Morphology and Syntax

1. No s marker for plurals and possessives.
2. No specific gender words.
3. Negatives formed by word addition before the verb.
4. Tenses are indicated by a system of adding words to indicate past and future.
5. A word is put before the verb to indicate a question.
6. Compound sentences with clauses are common.
Minneapolis Public Schools, Special Education/LEP

Appendix: 3WW Hmong (white) Articulation Test

WHITE HMONG ARTICULATION TEST

Nasals

Fricatives

Pre-nasalized
w/ Aspiration

txiv
father
txhuam
Scrape-mop
ntxov

pig
nphoo

Rice in field
nplhaib

early
ntxhw

climb
nchos

scatter

ring

ladder
nthab
storage
loft

elephant

shake

vau
fall
down
fuab
cloud

Voicless
Voiced
Voiceless

Voiceless

mus
go
hmoob
Hmong

mlom
idol
hmlos
dent

xib xub
arrow
noog
bird
hnab
bag
laus
old
hluas
young

cuaj
nine
choj
bridge
nce

dev
dog
dhia
jump

tsev
house
tsho
shirt
ntsia
look
ntshau
v
lice
zaum
sit
suav
count

rauj
hammer
rho
take it out
nruas

kooj
grasshopper
khau
shoe
nkoj

qav
frog
qheb
open
nqos
to
swallow
nqhuab
dried up
water

drum
nrhiav

boat
nkhaus

to seek

crooked

xyoo
year
nyuj
cow
hnyav
heavy

Glottal

Palatal

Lamino-alveolar

Apico-alveolar

Lamino-dentalpalatal
Offglide

tua
kill
thoob
bucket
ntaiv

Voiced

Voiced
Glides

plaub
four
plhu
face
nplej

Uvular

Pre-nasalized

paj
flower
phom
gun
npua

Velar

Stop and Afficates

Voiceless,
Unaspirated
Voiceless
Aspirated

Apico-dental

Affi
cat
ed

w/
lateral
releas
e

Bilabial

Labio-dental

white/green

Apico-post
alveolar
w/ rhotic release

Name__________________________________
Age/DOB_______________________________
School__________________________________
Clinician________________________________
Interpreter______________________________
Date___________________________________

By Her, Kraus, Lay, 1991

L.E.P. Special Education Unit
St. Paul Public Schools

huab
cloud

Total Correct_____

yug
born

Error Patterns
_______________
_______________

Appendix: 3XX Hmong Imitative Articulation Measure

Childs Name:
Date:

HMONG (WHITE) IMITATIVE ARTICULATION MEASURE

_____________________ Interpreter: _________________
____________________ SLP: ______________________

Score: # of Correct _______ of 26

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.

Target L1 Word
Record production here
Sound Stimulus:
English spelling/
Hmong spelling
/p/
Pay / peb
/p/
Pay / phem
/t/
Tay / them
/d/
Tay / teb
/d/
Trouah / dua
/ty/
Tyay / cheb
/dy/
Tyay / ceg
/k/
Kee / khi
/g/
Kay / kev
/nk/
Kay / qhev
/ng/
Kee / qij
/ts/
Tsaw / txhom
/tz/
Tzee / txiv
/ch/
Chay / tsheb
/ch/
Chooah / tsuag
/sy/
Syooah / xyuas
/zh/
Zhaw / zos
/hm/
Hmong / hmoob
/hn/
Hnah / hnab
/hny/
Hnyeh / nyhav
/zh/
Zhong / zoo
/hl/
Hlee / hli
/sh/
Suav / suav
/f/
Foo / fwj
/v/
Vaw / vov
/h/
Houa / huab

Talk with Me

IPA

/p/
/p/
/t/
/d/
/d/

English Word
Meaning

Three
Bad
Pay
Farm
Tear down
Sweep
Leg
/k/
Tie
/g/
Road
Servant
Garlic
/ts/ Catch
/tz/ Father
ch Vehicle
ch Flavorless
Visit
zh Village
Hmong
Bag
Heavy
Good
Moon
/sh/ Count
/f/
Bottle
/v/
Cover
/h/
Cloud

Appendix: 3YY KAREN (SGAW) IMITATIVE ARTICULATION MEASURE

Childs Name: _____________________________
Interpreter: ____________________
Date: ____________________________________
SLP: __________________________
Score: # of Correct _______ of 21
Target
ROMANIZED
Record production here:
IPA
English Word Meaning
Sound
SGAW KAREN
1.
One
Te/wX

17.

cH
Se/ oX
Lwi/ vGH>
Yai/ ,J>
Hru/Ck
Nwi/ EGH
Hrau/ Cd;
Khwi/ cGH
Tsi/ wqH
Ti/ xH
Ka fai/ cDzH.
Mo/ rd
Pu/ yg
Hutha/ [ko;
Da nya/ w>n.
He/ [H.

18.

Swaw / shaw /

2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.

Khi/

Two
Three
Four
Five
Six
Seven
Eight
Nine
Ten
Water
Coffee
Mother
Father
Rice in the field
Meat
House
Otter

qSD
19.

They tha/ Da tha/

Fruit

20.

oh.o.AwRo.
Hwi/ Ch>
Rue/ l

Running

21.

Office

Appendix: 3ZZ Khmer Articulation Screener

(Scroll to next page for appendix)

Appendix: 3AAA Khmer Language Information Sheet

Khmer Language Information Sheet
Articulation Differences between English and Cambodian (Khmer)
Sounds which occur in similar patterns in both languages:
p t k b d s h m n ng l y w r (like Spanish r)
Sounds which occur in English but not in Cambodian:
r g v j th th z ch sh zh
Possible articulation confusions that the Cambodian child could have
with English consonants:
g could be confused with k
th could be confused with t, s
v could be confused with w, f
sh could be confused with s
j could be confused with y
ch could be confused with ts
r could be confused with l, y
Final s, d, g, and r sounds may be dropped
The English vowels E, I, ae, do not occur in Cambodian.
There are 85 initial consonant clusters in Khmer, most of which do not
exist in English
There are approximately 50 different vowels and diphthongs in Khmer.
Most words are monosyllabic or disyllabic (stress always falls on the
second syllable).
Other language information:
Khmer is not closely related to Vietnamese, Laotian or Hmong, rather it is
heavily influenced by the language of India.
Khmer is not a tonal language.
Khmer has many prefixes, infixes and suffixes.
Plurals and tenses are not formed by adding s or suffixes.
There are no gender words corresponding to he and she.
Negatives and questions are formed differently in Khmer and English.
Interrogative statements are formed by placing the word Ta (similar to the
English word do) at the beginning of the sentence.

Appendix: 3BBB Korean Imitative Articulation Measure

(pants)

(; s.)

(/ s)

(/ s)

(/ s)

()

()

()

(1)

(6)

(19)

p'

p'

(12-1)

(12-1)

(2)

p(16)

m(3)

m(4)

m(17)

n(4)

n(17)

n(2)

h(5)

(23)

k(6)

g(18)

k'(11-1)

k'(8)

(8)

(10)

t(9)

d(12)

t'(10)

t'(18)

(11)

(7)

(balloon)

3
4
5

(hat)

(tree)

(tiger)

(bag)

(candy)

k(14)

(elephan
t)

9
10

(button)

(peanut)

(rabbit/bun

11
11-1

t(20)

ny)

(How
do the rabbits
jump?)

(car)

12

12-1

(what
sound does a

(6)

s(7)

s(2)

s'(22)

s'(21)

car make?)

(what is

13

this game?
Game of
clapping
hands)

14

(desk)

c(12)

j(1)

c'(13)

c'(13)

c(14)

c(9)

r(15)

r(5)

15

(robot)

16

(pencil)

17

(toy)

l(16)

18

(grassho

(%)

pper)
(Korean

19

roll)

()

20
21
22
23

(nail)

%)

(%)

(eye lash)

%
(

/18)

%
(

/18)

%
(

/43) :

/43) :

/7)

(fighting)

(doll)

< (); (,1994) >

Talk with Me

Circle = Initial
Triangle = medial
Square = final position

Youngtae Kim, Ph.D. CCC-SLP

Appendix: 3CCC Laotian Imitative Articulation Measure

LAO IMITATIVE ARTICULATION MEASURE
Childs Name: _____________________________
Date: ____________________________________
Score: # of Correct _______ of 27

1.

Target L1 Word Stimulus:

Sound English spelling
Gai/

Interpreter: ____________________
SLP: __________________________

Record production here:

IPA

English Word Meaning

Chicken

2.

Kha/

Leg

3.

Khoui/

Water Buffalo

4.

Ngu/

Snake

5.

Jan/

Dish

6.

Seua/

Tiger

7.

Xang/

Elephant

8.

Nhung/

Mosquito

9.

Dek/

Child

10.

Ta/

Eye

11.

Thai/

Plough

12.

Thung/

Flag

13.

Nok/

Bird

14.

Bed/

Hook

15.

Pa/

Fish

16.

Pheung/

Bee

17.

Pha/

Wall

18.

Phou/

Mountain

19.

Fai/

Fire

20.

Ma/

Horse

21.

Nha/

Cigarette

22.

Rod/

Car

23.

Ling/

Monkey

24.

Wee/

Fan

25.

Hai/

Jar

26.

Oh/

Basin

27.

Heua/

Boat

Appendix: 3DDD Madingo (Liberian) Imitative Articulation Measure

MANDINGO (LIBERIAN) IMITATIVE ARTICULATION MEASURE
Childs Name:
Date:

_____________________
_____________________

Interpreter: _________________
SLP: ______________________

Score: # of Correct _______ of 18

1.

Target L1 Word
Sound Stimulus
p
Papa

2.

3.

/p/

English Word
Meaning
Daddy

Bi

/b/

Today

Mini

/m/

Where?

4.

Nato

/n/

Im coming

5.

Wati

/w/

Hour

6.

Tus

/t/

Nothing

7.

Duma

/d/

Down

8.

dzh

Jama

9.

Fama

/f/

Father

10. v

Va

/v/

My father

11. k

Kaba

/k/

Rock

12. gb

Gbe

13. l

Lolo

/l/

Star

14. s

Sanjio

/s/

Rain

15. y

Yano

/j/

Im here

16. z

Zazamou

/z/

Water

17. ng

Cotung

/ng/ Again

18. ny

Nyato

/ny/

Talk with Me

Record production here IPA

Many

White

Before

Appendix: 3EEE Oromo Imitative Articulation Measure

OROMO IMITATIVE ARTICULATION MEASURE
______________________ Interpreter: _________________
______________________ SLP: ______________________

Childs Name:
Date:

Score: # of Correct _______ of 33

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.

Target
Sound
a
a
b
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
i
j
k
l
m
n
o
p
q
r
s
t
u
v
w
x
y
z
chaa
dhaa
ny
phaa
xa

L1 Word
Stimulus
Aadaa
Aduu
Bara
Barataa
Caqasuu
Damma
Eda
Fayyaa
Gaara
Haadha
Irriba
Jia
Kolfa
Laga
Maqaa
Nama
Oduu
Poolisii
Qubee
Rooba
Saree
Tapha
Uummata
Waraqaa
Xalayaa
Yeroo
Zeeroo
Chaayaa
Dhadha
Nyaata
Qophawwa
Xalayaa

Talk with Me

Record production here IPA English Word

Meaning
/a/ Culture
/a/ Sun
/b/ Year
/b/ Student
Listen
/d/ Honey
Last night
/f/
Health
Mountain
/h/ Mother
Sleep
Month
/k/
Laughter
/l/
River
/m/ Name
/n/ Human
News
/p/ Police
Alphabet
/r/
Rain
/s/
Dog
/t/
Play
People
/w/
/z/

Paper
Letter
Time
Zero
Butter
Food
Ready
Letter

Appendix: 3FFF Oromo Phonology Chart

(Please scroll to next page for appendix)

ETHIOPIAN LANGUAGES
Oromo Consonants
Bilabial/
Aleolar/
PalatoLabiodental Retroflex Alveolar/
Palatal
Voiceless
p
t
Voiced
b
d
Ejective
p'
t'
Implosive

Stops

Affricates

Voiceless
Voiced
Ejective

Fricatives

Voiceless
Voiced

f
v

s
z

m
w

n
l
r

Oromo Vowel Chart

Front
Central Back
i

Mid

Low

Talk with Me

k
g
k'

Glottal
?

t
d
t

Nasal
Approximants
Flap Trills

High

Velar

u
o

Appendix: 3GGG Portuguese Imitative Articulation Measure

PORTUGUESE IMITATIVE ARTICULATION MEASURE
Childs Name:
Date:

_____________________
_____________________

Interpreter: _________________
SLP: ______________________

Score: # of Correct _______ of 17

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.

Target
Sound
p
b
m
n
t
d
k
g
f
v
s
sh
z
ch
l
r

L1 Word Record production here

Stimulus
Po
Bao
Mo
Noite
Toma
Da
Caneta
Gato
Feliz
Vou
Sim
Chuva
Zebra
Ciao
Luz
Rua

17. r

Cara

18.
19.
20.
21.

Janela
Olhe
Prato
Blusa

zh
ly
pr
bl

Talk with Me

IPA
/p/
/b/
/m/
/n/
/t/
/d/
/k/
/g/
/f/
/v/
/s/
/sh/
/z/
/ch/
/l/
/r/
Velar
/r/
Tap
/zh/
/lj/
/pr/
/bl/

English Word
Meaning
Bread
Bathroom
Hand
Night
Take it
Give
Pen
Cat
Happy
I go
Yes
Rain
Zebra
Bye
Light
Street
Face
Window
Look
Plate
Blouse

Appendix: 3 HHH Russian Imitative Articulation Measure

RUSSIAN IMITATIVE ARTICULATION MEASURE
Childs Name:
Date:

_____________________
_____________________

Interpreter: _________________
SLP: ______________________

Score: # of Correct _______ of 28

1.

Target
Sound
a

L1 Word
Stimulus
Sad /

2.

3.

/a/

English Word
Meaning
Garden

Baraban /

/b/

Drum

Vanna /

/v/

Bathtub

4.

Pogoda /

/g/

Weather

5.

Derevo /

/d/

Tree

6.

zh

Zhuk/

//

Beetle

7.

Zvezda /

/z/

Star

8.

Vishnja/

/i/

Cherry

9.

aj

Chaj/

/aj/

Tea

10.

Karandash /

/k/

Pencil

11.

Koleso /

/l/

Wheel

12.

Mysh/

/m/

Mouse

13.

Nitki /

/n/

Thread

14.

Krylo /

/o/

Wing

15.

Pero /

/p/

Feather

16.

Rot/

/r/

Mouth

17.

Sobaka/o

/s/

Dog

18.

Tufli/

/t/

Shoes

19.

Kapusta/

/u/

Cabbage

20.

Fasol/

/f/

Kidney Bean

21.

Khleb /

/x/

Bread

22.

ts

Ogurets /

/ths/

Cucumber

23.

ch

Kljuch /

/th/

Key

24.

sh

Shariki/

//

Balloons

25.

shch

Shcheka/

/ht/

Cheek

26.

Byk/

//

Bull

27.

Etot/

//

This (is)

28.

Yabloko/

/j/

Apple

Talk with Me

Record
production here

IPA

Appendix 3III Somali Imitative Articulation Measure

SOMALI IMITATIVE ARTICULATION MEASURE
Childs Name:
Date:

1.

_____________________ Interpreter: _________________

_____________________ SLP: _______________________
Score: # of Correct _______ of 20
Target L1 Word
Record production here IPA English Word
Sound Stimulus
Meaning
b
Baabuur
/b/ Automobile

2.

Cab

/b/

Drink

3.

Dayuurad

/d/

Airplane

4.

Fure

/f/

Key

5.

Gabar

/g/

Daughter

6.

Hooyo

/h/

Mother

7.

ch

Jiir

8.

Kulul

Mouse
/k/

Hot

9.

Dhisey

10. m

Maalin

/m/

Day

11. n

Cun

/n/

Eat

12. g

Qabow

/g/

Cold

13. m

Miro

/m/

Fruit

14. s

Saaxiib

/s/

Friend

15. sh

Shidaal

/sh/ Fuel

16. b

Aabe

/b/

Father

17. t

Taabasho

/t/

Touch

18. r

Khatar

/r/

Danger

19. w

Wiil

/w/

Son

20.

Xaggee

Talk with Me

Built

Where

Appendix 3JJJ: Swahili Imitative Articulation Measure

SWAHILI IMITATIVE ARTICULATION MEASURE
Childs Name: _______________________
Date: ______________________________

Interpreter: _________________
SLP: _______________________

Score: # of Correct _______ of 24

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.

Target
Sound
p
b
t
d
k
g
ch
dzh
f
v
s
z
sh
h
m
n
ng
l
r
y
w
ny
nd
mt

Talk with Me

L1 Word
Record production here
Stimulus
Pale
Baba
Tupa
Dada
Kuku
Gani
Chumba
Jambo
Futa
Vitu
Sasa
Zinatosha
Shule
Hapana
Macho
Nini
Ngapi
Leo
Robo
Yeye
Watu
Nyumba
Ndizi
Mtoto

IPA

English Word
Meaning
/p/
There
/b/
Father
/t/
Throw away
/d/
Sister
/k/
Chicken
/g/
What kind?
Room
Hi
/f/
Pull
/v/
Things
/s/
Now
/z/
Enough
School
/h/
No
/m/ Eyes
/n/
What
/ng/ How many
/l/
Today
/r/
Quarter
/j/
Her, him
/w/ People
House
Banana
Child

Appendix: 3KKK Tagalog Imitative Articulation Measure Revised

TAGALOG IMITATIVE ARTICULATION MEASURE
Childs Name:
Date:

_____________________
_____________________

Interpreter: _________________
SLP: ______________________

Score: # of Correct _______ of 15

1.

Target L1 Word
Sound Stimulus
p
Patong

2.

Balik

/b/

Return

3.

Tayo

/t/

Us

4.

Duyan

/d/

Cradle

5.

Kung

/k/

When

6.

Gilid

/g/

Edge

7.

Sil

/s/

They

8.

Hukay

/h/

Dig

9.

Maya

/m/

Sparrow

10. n

Naghint

/n/

Stopped

11. ng

Ngayn

12. l

Langgm

/l/

Ant

13. r

Raw

/r/

It is said

14. w

Wal

/w/

Nothing

15. y

Yuk

Talk with Me

Record production here IPA English Word

Meaning
/p/ On top of

Today

Stoop or bent over

Appendix: 3LLL

Tibetan Imitative Articulation Measure

(Please scroll to next page for appendix)

TibetanImitativeArticulationScreen/Measure
ChildsName:_____________
Assessor:
Age:
____

Interpreter:
Date:
_________

School:

#
L130
Target Tibetan
L1Word

Consonant Sound
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30

ka
kha
ga
nga
cha
chha
ja
nya
ta
tha
da
na
pa
pha
ba
ma
tsa
tsha
dza
wa
zha
za
a
ya
ra
la
sha
sa
ha
a

4Vowels

2
3
4

u
eh
o

_____________
_____________
_________

Stimulus

Record
Production

TibWordMeaning

Word

kawa

pillar

khatak

scarf

gawu

charmbox

nga

I(pronoun)

chalak

things

chharpa

rain

ja

tea

nya

fish

ta

horse

thamak

cigarette

dara

buttermilk

natsha

disease

palaak

father

phama

parents

bachook

cow

mar

butter

tsa

grass

tsha

salt

dzamling

world

wamo

fox

zhamo

hat

zampa

bridge

ohma

milk

yalga

branch

ramo

shegoat

lakpa

hand

shawa

deer

sachha

land

hampa

greedy

ama

Mother

nyima

sun

shook

strength

sempa

mind

shokpa

wing

Appendix: 3MMM Tigrinya Imitative Articulation Measure Revised

TIGRINYAN IMITATIVE ARTICULATION MEASURE
Childs Name: _____________________ Interpreter: _________________
Date: ____________________________ SLP: _______________________
Score: # of Correct _______ of 18

1.

Target L1 Word Record production here IPA English Word

Sound Stimulus
Meaning
b
Babur
/b/ Train

2.

Bannie

/b/

Bread

3.

Perpper

/p/

Jalapeno pepper

4.

Mai

/m/

Water

5.

Manka

/m/

Spoon

6.

Weay

/w/

Hot

7.

Feres

/f/

Horse

8.

Nebri

/n/

Tiger

9.

Hiab

/h/

Gift

10. g

Geza

/g/

Home

11. g

Gemel

/g/

Camel

12. k

Kolo

/k/

Popcorn

13. d

Derho

/d/

Chicken

14. s

Selam

/s/

Hello

15. sh

Shehani

16. r

Ruba

17. ts

Tselal

18. l

Lamba

Talk with Me

Dish
/r/

River
Umbrella

/l/

Gas

Appendix: 3NNN Vietnamese Imitative Articulation Measure

(Please scroll to next page for appendix)

VIETNAMESE IMITATIVE ARTICULATION MEASURE

Childs Name:
Date:

_____________________
_____________________

Interpreter: _________________
SLP: ______________________

Score: # of Correct _______ of 28

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.

Target
Sound
a
b
c
ch
d

e
g
h
i
k
kh
l
m
n
nh
ng
o
ph
qu
r
s
t
th
u
v
x
y

L1 Word Record production here

Stimulus
n
Ba
C
Cho
Da
en
Em
G
Ht
Im
Kim
Khng
La
M
No
Nh
Ngi
Ong
Phim
Qut
Rng
Sch
Tn
Th
i
Vit
Xinh
Yu

IPA

English Word
Meaning
/a/
Eat
/b/
Father
/k/
Fish
/ch/
Give
/j/ or y
Skin
/d/
Black
//
Younger sibling
// or g
Chicken
/h/
Sing
/i/
Quiet
/k/
Needle
/x/ or kh
No
/l/
Yell
/m/
Mother
/n/
Full
// or ny Small
// or ng Sit
//
Bee
/f/
Film
/kw/ or /w/ Fan
/r/
Tooth
/s/
Book
/t/
Name
/th/
Rabbit
/u/
Iron
/v/
Write
/s/
Pretty
/i/
Love

Appendix: 3OOO Vietnamese Language Information Sheet

Vietnamese Language Information Sheet
Articulation differences between English and Vietnamese:
A. Sounds which occur in similar patterns in both languages:
Sound
m
Phonetics lm

n
n

ng

t
t

y
j

w
w

h
h

ee
i

ay
e

oh
o

ah
a

ai

ow
au

oy
i

B. Sounds which occur in English but not in Vietnamese.

Sound
th
Phonetics

th

p
p

g
g

j
d

zh

oo

C. Few consonants occur in the final position in Vietnamese: p, t, k, m, n, j

D. There are no consonant clusters in Vietnamese (i.e., English consonant blends may be
difficult).
E. Possible articulation confusions that the Vietnamese child may have with English
consonants:
g
j /d/
v
th //
th //
p
t

will be confused with k

will be confused with ch, z or y
will be confused with f, w or b
will be confused with
d or z
will be confused with s or t
will be confused with b
will be confused with d

l
will be confused with r
r
will be confused with
l or w
s
will be confused with sh or z
z
will be confused with
s
sh / will be confused with s or z
zh // will be confused with z, j, s, sh

F. English short vowels may cause pronunciation problems, especially the following:
i /I/
a //
oo //
e //
G. Most Vietnamese words are one syllable.
H. The Vietnamese language is tonal, using six different inflections.
Vietnamese and English Language (morphology and syntax) differences:
A. There are no verb tenses in Vietnamese to show time.
B. Adjectives come after nouns in Vietnamese.
C. Plurals do not end in s in Vietnamese.
D. There is no possessive s in Vietnamese.
E. There are no -ly adverbs in Vietnamese.
F. There are no comparative (er) or superlative (est) forms in Vietnamese.

uh

Appendix: 3PPP Vietnamese Cross-Linguistic Analysis 1

(Please scroll to next page for appendix)

Journal of Southeast Asian American

Education & Advancement
Volume 2

www.JSAAEA.org

A peer-reviewed
scholarly journal
published by the
National Association
for the Education &
Advancement of
Cambodian, Laotian,
and Vietnamese
Americans (NAFEA)

Cross-Linguistic Analysis of Vietnamese and English with Implications

for Vietnamese Language Acquisition and Maintenance
in the United States
Giang M. Tang
University of Minnesota

Abstract
Two overall goals of this paper are a) to provide a linguistic basis for promoting first
language maintenance of Vietnamese in a larger United States context and b) to stimulate
future research in language acquisition of Vietnamese-English speakers. This paper is
divided into three sections. Section 1 discusses previous studies on first language (L1)
maintenance among Vietnamese Americans. Section 2 presents a cross-linguistic
comparison of Vietnamese and English across speech-sound, word, and grammatical
language levels. A cross-linguistic analysis may help educators better understand
speaking patterns of Vietnamese American students. Based on this cross-linguistic
comparison, Section 3 presents potential bi-directional interactions between Vietnamese
and English within an individual speaker. These predictions are intended to provide a
framework for future empirical studies related to bilingual development.

Sociologists have documented a pattern of shift in relative language dominance from the
first language (L1) to the second language (L2) of immigrant populations that occurs
within three generations of arrival to the United States (Fishman, 1972; Veltman, 1983).
It has been found that the grandchildren of immigrants tend to shift toward English
monolingualism and may not be able to speak the language of their grandparents. This
three-generation model of language shift was documented among European immigrants
of the 19th and early 20th centuries, and continues to occur in contemporary immigrant
populations from Latin America and Asia (Alba, Logan, Lutz, & Stults, 2002).
Many studies have shown that immigrant children who speak their parents
language as well as English fluently are more likely to succeed academically than
children who become monolingual English speakers (see Schmid, 2001, for review). In a
study of high school students from immigrant families, Feliciano (2001) found that
bilingual students were less likely to drop out of school than their English-only speaking
peers. Rumbaut (1995) and Stanton-Salazar and Dornbusch (1995) found that bilingual
students who are fully proficient in both English and another language had better grades
and higher academic success than their monolingual English-speaking peers. In addition,
maintenance of the immigrant language provides a critical means for transmitting cultural

Readers are free to copy, display, and distribute this article, as long as the work is
attributed to the author(s) and the Journal of Southeast Asian American Education & Advancement, it
is distributed for non-commercial purposes only, and no alteration or transformation is made in the work.
More details of this Creative Commons license are available at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-ncnd/2.5/. All other uses must be approved by the author(s) or JSAAEA.
Journal of Southeast Asian American Education & Advancement, 2

Tang Cross-linguistic Analysis of Vietnamese and English

values across generations and within ones ethnic community, which in turn promotes
emotional and social balance in childrens self-perception and identity (Kohnert & Derr,
2004; Wong-Fillmore, 1991).
One way educators can promote home language maintenance while helping
students acquire the majority language (English) is to better understand how languages
develop and what factors may facilitate or hinder this process. The purpose of this paper
is to establish a linguistic basis for future investigation of language learning patterns in
individuals who speak Vietnamese as a first or home language (L1) and learn English
(L2) shortly after. A clearer understanding of how children learn two languages may
promote L1 maintenance as well as L2 learning among Vietnamese Americans through
the creation of appropriate educational materials and resources.
This article is divided into three sections. Section one addresses the issue of
language maintenance, which is operationally defined as L1 preservation across
generations. Previous studies on the language maintenance of Vietnamese Americans as
well as social ramifications of L1 use and disuse are presented. The studies emphasize the
importance of maintaining L1 while learning L2 to promote strong social identification
and overall well-being. Section two presents a cross-linguistic comparison of Vietnamese
and English across the language levels of phonology (sound), lexical semantics (word
meaning), and morpho-syntax (grammar). This cross-linguistic comparison provides the
background for section three, which posits potential bidirectional language interactions
between Vietnamese and English within an individual speaker. There has been little to no
research on the language characteristics of Vietnamese-English speakers. Predictions of
within-speaker cross-linguistic interactions are intended to provide a framework for
future empirical studies in the areas of language acquisition and bilingual development of
Vietnamese-English bilinguals.

Language Maintenance Among Vietnamese Americans

Social Issues
Although there were small numbers of Vietnamese in the United States in the 1950s and
1960s, the large Vietnamese presence began in 1975. According to the 2000 U. S. Census
(Reeves & Bennett, 2004), there are an estimated 1.12 million Vietnamese in the United
States, making this group the fourth largest Asian American population following
Chinese, Filipinos, and Asian Indians. Within the past 30 years, there have been various
studies on Vietnamese socialization, adaptation to the United States, and language
maintenance and shift (Bankston & Zhou, 1995; Chung, 2000; Luong, 1990; McDonald,
2000; Nguyen, Shin & Krashen, 2001; Pham, 1990; Young & Tran, 1999; Zhou &
Bankston, 1994, 1998, 2000).
In the field of sociology, researchers have used survey and ethnographic methods
to underscore the importance of maintaining the home language as a means to remain
connected to ones family and community, to support a strong social identity, and to
promote high academic success. Zhou and Bankston (1994, 1998) found that the
Vietnamese students of eastern New Orleans who were more integrated into their ethnic
community demonstrated higher academic achievement than those who were not. The
level of integration into the Vietnamese community was based on self-reported measures

Journal of Southeast Asian American Education & Advancement, 2

Tang Cross-linguistic Analysis of Vietnamese and English

of speaking Vietnamese at home, ability to read and write in Vietnamese, selfidentification as Vietnamese, and having close friends of the same ethnicity. Factors such
as the adherence to traditional family values, commitment to a high work ethic, and the
level of integration into the ethnic community all had significant effects on academic
success.
Bankston and Zhou (1995) found a strong positive linear relationship between
Vietnamese literacy and high academic achievement in English as well as between
proficiency in spoken and written Vietnamese and orientation toward higher education in
the majority English-speaking community. Of the students surveyed, the ability to read
and write in Vietnamese was associated with a strong sense of social identification.
Students who were literate in Vietnamese as well as English were more likely to place a
high importance on college attendance, to spend more time on homework, and to receive
high grades in school. The researchers suggested that the positive contribution of
bilingualism to high academic performance was both of a cognitive transference (e.g.,
transfer of reading or decoding skills from Vietnamese to English) as well as a social
transference of work habits and attitudes.
In contrast to the academic success reported in Vietnamese students with high
levels of integration into their ethnic community, Zhou and Bankston (2000) found
disproportionately high dropout levels and delinquency among less integrated youth. Less
integrated youth were those who were less involved in their local ethnic community and
who assimilated to the oppositional youth culture of other economically disadvantaged
young Americans (p. 54). Zhou and Bankston reported that Vietnamese adolescents
ranked second highest among racial/ethnic minority groups to be in correctional
facilities210 youths per 100,000which ranked this ethnicity higher than all other
Asian groups. In addition, they reported the results of a national longitudinal study of
adolescent health, which indicated that Vietnamese American adolescents were more
prone to uncertainty, self-doubt, fearfulness, and depression than their white and black
peers. Zhou and Bankston interpreted these results as feelings of rejection from the
American mainstream as well as a disconnect with ones own social and linguistic
community, which may directly contribute to negative self-perceptions and may
indirectly contribute to the high rates of institutionalization and gang involvement. Given
these results, it is clear that the issue of language maintenance is relevant to promoting
balance and stability in ones own linguistic and ethnic identity alongside academic and
vocational success in the broader majority English-speaking community. The
preservation of ones native language and culture promotes social and mental well being
of individuals that in turn benefits the larger society.

Linguistic Issues Across Generations

Several studies have documented L1 maintenance and cross-generational shift from L1 to
L2 among Vietnamese Americans. Young and Tran (1999) surveyed over 100
Vietnamese parents on the language use of their families and children. These families had
lived in the United States an average of 13 years, although there was a wide range of
variability in the length of stay (approximately 70% of the parents reported 6 to 20 years
in the United States). Of parents surveyed, Vietnamese was reported to be the sole home
language in 84.6% of homes, while both Vietnamese and English were spoken in 15.4%

Journal of Southeast Asian American Education & Advancement, 2

Tang Cross-linguistic Analysis of Vietnamese and English

of homes. At that time, no families reported speaking only English at home. Based on
parent report, 59.2% of the children spoke Vietnamese, while less than 8% spoke mostly
English. Among children, Vietnamese was still the preferred language in 45.1% of
families. Approximately 33% of children were reported to speak both languages, and
21.6% of children spoke only English among themselves. Given that the length of stay
for the majority of families was relatively short (less than 20 years), the children in these
families seemed to be learning English quickly, with a growing number of children
choosing to speak English with their friends.
Based on these results, Young and Tran (1999) reported a rapid rate of shift from
Vietnamese to English in this population. Language shift was defined as a decrease in the
number of speakers of a language or a decrease in L1 use across domains. Examined
factors relating to language shift included family income, mothers education, fathers
education, and length of stay in the United States. Based on survey results, length of stay
appeared to be the only factor that significantly affected language shift. The longer a
family stayed in the United States, the greater the shift toward English use, whether in
addition to Vietnamese or solely English. Although not statistically significant, there was
an additional and rather unexpected trend related to length of stay: it seemed that the
longer the stay in the United States, the more parents encouraged children to retain
Vietnamese. These data suggested an increased awareness of the importance of
maintaining ones heritage language among families who have been in the United States
for longer periods of time and who are more likely to experience a shift towards English
monolingualism. Young and Tran emphasized the danger of rapid language shift and its
affect on personal identity. They suggested that the children in these families who speak
only English may experience feelings of ambivalence, shame, or rejection of the home
language and culture, which may contribute to a lowered self concept.
Nguyen, Shin, and Krashen (2001) surveyed over 500 Vietnamese elementary
school students, grades first through eighth, in the Central Valley area of California.
Seventy-one percent of the students surveyed were born in the United States Of the 29%
born outside the United States, the majority (67%) had lived in the United States for five
years or more. The students were given a Likert-scale questionnaire on their perception of
Vietnamese and English proficiency, language preference, and attitudes towards the
maintenance of Vietnamese language and culture. Of the students surveyed, 67% selfreported speaking Vietnamese well. In contrast, only 23% of students reported good
literacy skills in Vietnamese, and 58% reported little to no literacy skills in Vietnamese.
The vast majority of these students (84%) self-reported speaking English very well.
There was a trend among students surveyed to speak Vietnamese with parents,
Vietnamese and English with siblings, and primarily English with friends. When asked
about student attitudes toward L1, most felt it was important to speak, read, and write
Vietnamese and to maintain Vietnamese culture. They also reported that they would like
to learn Vietnamese in school. In contrast to beliefs that retention of an immigrant
language will inhibit the acquisition of English (L2), Nguyen et al. (2001) concluded that
during the elementary school years, there seemed to be a strong trend of maintaining
Vietnamese (L1) oral skills while gaining strong English (L2) skills.
According to a U. S. 2000 Census Special Report on Asian Americans (Reeves &
Bennett, 2004), approximately 93% of Vietnamese Americans reported speaking
Vietnamese as the home language. Of these homes, 31% reported speaking English very

Journal of Southeast Asian American Education & Advancement, 2

Tang Cross-linguistic Analysis of Vietnamese and English

well, and 62.4% reported speaking English less than very well. It should be noted that
these percentages reflect overall language proficiency within a household that may
include multiple generations. Older generations may speak less English and may be
inflating the statistic of 62.4% of limited English speakers.
Based on these studies of L1 maintenance and shift toward greater English (L2)
proficiency, it appears that language use among Vietnamese Americans currently fits
within the three-generation model of language shift, originally posited by Fishman
(1972). Although Vietnamese continues to be spoken in the vast majority of homes, the
trend to speak Vietnamese with parents, Vietnamese and English with siblings, and
English with friends indicates a gradual shift towards English. In addition, low
Vietnamese literacy rates reported by Nguyen et al. (2001) may become an area of
concern regarding language maintenance, particularly due to the important role literacy
plays in maintaining and increasing ones oral language skills.

Cross-Linguistic Comparison of Vietnamese and English

Section 1 of this article presented the social and linguistic issues related to language
maintenance among Vietnamese Americans. This information was presented as the
rationale of why L1 maintenance is important in the process of participating in the larger
English-speaking society. Based on previous research, we now know that children of
immigrants who speak their parents language as well as English are more likely to have
high academic success (Bankston & Zhou, 1995; Feliciano, 2001; Schmid, 2001; Zhou &
Bankston, 1994; 1998) as well as have an overall stronger self-concept and social identity
(Kohnert & Derr, 2004; Wong-Fillmore, 1991).
One way educators can promote L1 maintenance is to better understand the
language structures and possible interactions between Vietnamese (L1) and English (L2).
This section presents a cross-linguistic comparison of Vietnamese and English across
levels of phonology (speech-sounds), lexical semantics (word meaning), and morphosyntax (grammar). This cross-linguistic analysis may help educators who work with
Vietnamese Americans have a better understanding of their students language skills and
error patterns. Both languages have various dialects with distinct linguistic features.
Since this paper focuses on Vietnamese Americans, cross-linguistic comparisons are
made between the General American English dialect and primarily the northern dialect of
Vietnamese with certain features from the southern Vietnamese dialect included for
comparison. The northern dialect of Vietnamese was chosen as the main comparison
because it is considered the official dialect of Vietnam (D. H. Nguyen, 2001). Southern
dialectal features of Vietnamese are included because of the wide use of this dialect
among Vietnamese Americans.
This section begins at the phonological (speech-sound) level, in which a
comparison of Vietnamese and English consonants, vowels, tones, and syllable structures
are presented. Then, a comparison at the lexical semantic (word meaning) level includes
a description of lexical tone in Vietnamese as well as word formation processes in both
languages. Finally, features from the morpho-syntactic (grammatical) level are compared
across languages in the phrase or sentence context.

Journal of Southeast Asian American Education & Advancement, 2

Tang Cross-linguistic Analysis of Vietnamese and English

Phonology
A comparison of Vietnamese and English may begin at the smallest unit of language: the
phoneme or speech sound. A phoneme is defined as the smallest phonetic unit in a
language that is capable of conveying a distinction in meaning (American Heritage
Dictionary, 2000). Vietnamese has three types of phonemes: tones (sometimes referred to
as tonemes), consonants, and vowels. English phonemes consist of consonants and
vowels; this language does not have lexical tones. Vietnamese uses tones as phonemes
since a change in tone indicates a change in meaning. For example, ma ghost and m
cheek are two distinct words that only differ in tone, the level (khng du) tone and
rising (sc) tone, respectively. D. H. Nguyen (2001) describes the six tones of the
northern Vietnamese dialect: level (khng du), falling (huyn), creaky (ng), dippingrising (hi), rising (sc), and constricted (nng). In the southern dialect, the creaky (ng)
and the dipping-rising (hi) tones are both produced as the dipping-rising tone (hi).
Therefore, there are only five tones produced in the southern regions.

Consonants
Table 1 compares Vietnamese and English consonant sounds that occur at the
beginning (syllable-initial) and end (syllable-final) of words or syllables. Speech sounds
are represented using International Phonetic Alphabet (IPA) symbols. Orthographic
letters that correspond to how speech sounds are written are underlined in the word
examples in parentheses. Consonant sounds from both northern and southern Vietnamese
dialects are listed to represent the primary dialects spoken by Vietnamese Americans.
Information on Vietnamese phonemes is gathered from Dinh and Nguyen (1998) and D.
H. Nguyen (2001). Information on English phonemes is gathered from Erickson (2001)
and Harris (1994).
At the beginning of words (syllable-initial), Vietnamese and English share the
following consonant sounds: /p, b, d, k, m, n, f, v, s, z, h, l/, the r-flap in utter and y
in yard. It should be noted that /p, k/ in Vietnamese are unaspirated (Dinh & Nguyen,
1998) and may sound like b and g to an English speaker. In English, /p, k/ may be
aspirated depending on context (Harris, 1994). At the end of words (syllable-final),
Vietnamese and English share the following consonant sounds: /p, t, k, m, n/ and ng. In
Vietnamese, syllable-final /p, t, k/ are unreleased or held in, whereas these sounds may
be released in English.
Although Vietnamese and English share certain sounds, there are multiple
consonant sounds specific to each language. In the initial position, Vietnamese-specific
consonants include the dental t as in to big (much like a Spanish t) and the dental
aspirated t as in th rabbit, which is similar to the English t but produced between
the teeth. The Vietnamese g in g chicken and the kh in khng no are produced
with continuous air flow (fricatives) much like a Spanish g in lago lake and j in
jaula cage. Other fricatives include the r in rn snake (in southern dialects and
certain northern dialects), and its voiceless counterpart s as in sng morning (in the
southern dialect), which is similar to the English sh (see table 1 for precise IPA
symbols).

Journal of Southeast Asian American Education & Advancement, 2

Tang Cross-linguistic Analysis of Vietnamese and English

Table 1
Comparison of Vietnamese and English Consonant Sounds in Syllable-Initial and Final
Position
Vietnamese Only
Shared Sounds
English Only
Syllable- t (to), th (th)
p (pin or pie),
t (time), g (go), (thing), (then),
Initial
b (b or bear),
1
(tri), c (chi), ,
(shoe), (measure), (chain), (june),
d (en or doll),
1
(rn), (sng)
(rope), w (water),
k (ko or kite),
s-clusters (sk, scr, sm, sn, str)
m (m or me)
(g), x (khng)
r-clusters (br, cr, scr, dr, gr),
n (nm or note),
(ng), (nh)
l-clusters (bl, cl, fl, gl),
f (ph or fire),
w-clusters (dw, sw, tw, qu)
v (v2 or very)
s (xin or send),
z (ri2 or zebra),
h (ht or hair),
l (lm or love)
j (d1 or yard)
(rn3 or utter)
SyllableFinal

p (lp or hop)
t (t or bat),
k (gc or luck),
m (lm or lamb),
n (sn or sun),
(sng or song)

b (lab), d (sod), g (bag), (bath), (bathe),

f (laugh), v (love), s (kiss), z (buzz),
(ash), (rouge), (itch), (bridge),
l (ball)
-pt (slept), -ps (oops), -kt (walked),
-ks (licks) , -ft (laughed), -sp (lisp),
-st (list), -sk (brisk) lp (help), -lb (bulb),
-lt (wilt), -ld (wild), -lk (bulk), -lf (elf),
-lv (delve), -l (wealth), -l (belch),
-l (bulge), -lm (balm), -mp (bump),
-mf (triumph), -m (warmth), -nt (mint),
-nd (wand), -n (tenth), -nz (lens),
-n (wrench), -n (binge), - k (bank),
-ks (sixth), -kst (whisked), -lpt (helped),
-mpt (bumped), -mps (bumps)

Note: Consonant sounds from both northern and southern dialects of Vietnamese are based on Dinh and
Nguyen (1998) and D. H. Nguyen (2001). General American English consonant sounds are based on
Erickson (2001) and Harris (1994). Sounds are represented by IPA symbols. Letters that correspond to the
sounds are underlined in the example words in parentheses.
1
Found mainly in southern Vietnamese dialects.
2
Found mainly in northern Vietnamese dialects.
3
Allophone of the Vietnamese r in southern dialects and certain northern dialects.

Vietnamese has many consonant sounds that are produced with the tongue tip curved
upward and towards the back of the mouth (retroflex) such as the tr in tri sky, and
ch in chi to play (similar to the English ch). In addition, Vietnamese has a glottal

Journal of Southeast Asian American Education & Advancement, 2

Tang Cross-linguistic Analysis of Vietnamese and English

stop before words that are written with an initial vowel as in n to eat (Cao, 2004).
There are certain Vietnamese sounds that are found in English but not found in the initial
position such as the ng in ng to sleep found in final position of English words such
as song as well as the Vietnamese nh in nh small found in the middle of English
words such as the ny in Kenya (similar to a Spanish ). It should be noted that some
Vietnamese-specific consonants are produced with the tongue tip retroflexed (3 of 11) as
in tri sky or produced in the back of the mouth or velar position (4 of 11) as in g
chickentwo articulatory places that are considered relatively complex (or marked,
following Jakobson, 1968).
English also has consonant sounds not found in Vietnamese. In the initial
position, English-specific sounds include /w/ in water, /t/ in toy (generally aspirated;
Harris, 1994), /g/ in girl, ch in chair, dg in judge, sh in shoe and its rare
voiced counterpart in measure. Possibly the most well known consonant sounds specifc
to English which are very difficult for second language learners include the English r,
soft th as in thing, and hard th as in this. In addition to single consonants,
English has numerous consonant clusters (two or more consonant combinations) that
involve /s, r, l, w/ (Harris, 1994; see Table 1). Since Vietnamese only has six consonant
sounds at the end of words (syllable-final), there are numerous sounds specific to English
in the syllable-final position including /b, d, g, f, v, s, z, l/, soft th, hard th sh, its
voiced counterpart in measure, ch dg in judge, and consonant clusters that
involve /p, f, t, d, k, l, m, n/. English appears to have a wider variety of more complex
consonant sounds and sound sequences across syllable positions (see Table 1 for
examples).

Vowels
Table 2 compares the vowel systems of Vietnamese (Dinh & Nguyen, 1998; D. H.
Nguyen 2001) and English (Erickson, 2001; Harris, 1994). As with table 1, orthographic
letters that correspond to speech sounds are underlined in the words in parentheses.
Vietnamese and English share seven single vowels: /i/ as in see, // as in had, // as
in egg, // as in caught, // as in cot, // similar to could and /u/ as in blue.
Apart from these shared sounds, Vietnamese contains five additional single vowels, /e/ as
in l pear, // as in t private, // as in m dream, // as in m warm and // as
in nm year; and three true diphthongs (Dinh & Nguyen, 1998): /ie/ as in bin sea,
/uo/ as in cun roll and // as in t wet. In addition, there are 20 possible twovowel combinations in which the principal vowel is combined with either a medial vowel
/-u-/, or a syllable-final semi-vowel -y or -w and seven 3-vowel combinations that
include all three vowel slots: medial, principal, and final (Dinh & Nguyen, 1998; see
Table 2 for examples). These two- and three-vowel combinations are commonly taught in
spelling classes in the primary grades in Vietnam (e.g., nh vn mau, n. d.) It should be
noted that these two- and three-vowel combinations maintain the overall syllable
structure (Dinh & Nguyen, 1998) and are produced in one beat. The vowel sounds
specific to Standard American English include three single vowels: // in kid, // in
cut, and unstressed // in attack. In addition, English has two rhotacized (r-rounding)

Journal of Southeast Asian American Education & Advancement, 2

Tang Cross-linguistic Analysis of Vietnamese and English

Table 2
Comparison of Vietnamese and English vowels
Vietnamese only
Singletons
e (l), (t), (m)
(m), (nm)

Shared sounds
i (xin or see)
(lm or had),

(kid)

(cho or ought )

(thunder) (urgent)

(mt2 or cot1)

English only
(cut), (attack)

(t or wood)
u (tu or blue)
(cht2 or egg)
Diphthongs

ie (bin, ma, yn)

uo (cun)
(t, tra)

2-Vowel Combinations
(medial vowel -u- and
principal vowel)

ui (suy), oe (Hu)
o (th), o (lut)

2-Vowel Combinations
(principal vowel with
final semi-vowel)

j (chi), j (chi)
oj (ni), uj (li), aj (chai)
j (voi), j (cy), j (cay)

o (oh), a (how)
a (eye), (boy), e (bake)

e (khoe), a (hoa)

iw (xu), ew (ku)
w (leo), w (lu)
:w(o, rau), u (lu)
3+ vowel combinations
(medial vowel -u- and
principal vowel and
final semi-vowel)

iew (nhiu, yu)

a (Diana)

w (hu), aj (khoai)

ie, (pronounciation)

uj (nui), j (mi)
uia (khuya), uej (uy)

io (stereo), oe (oasis)

Note: Numerous vowel differences exist among regional Vietnamese dialects (see Dinh and Nguyen, 1998,
for details). This table presents Vietnamese vowels primarily from the northern dialect (Dinh & Nguyen,
1998; D. H. Nguyen, 2001). General American English vowel sounds are based on Erickson (2001) and
Harris (1994). Sounds are represented by IPA symbols. Letters that correspond to the sounds are underlined
in the example words in parentheses.
1
Regional dialects of American English may not exhibit a difference between // and /a/.
2
The phoneme /a/ may serve as an allophonic variation of // in certain Vietnamese dialects. The phoneme

// may serve as an allophonic variation of /e/ in certain Vietnamese dialects.

vowels // in bird and its unstressed counterpart // in thunder. There are five
English-specific diphthongs: /o/ as in oh, /a/ as in cow, /ai/ as in eye, /o/ as in

Journal of Southeast Asian American Education & Advancement, 2

Tang Cross-linguistic Analysis of Vietnamese and English

10

boy, and /e/ as in bake; as well as four vowel combinations: /a/ as in Diana, /ie/
as in pronunciation, /io/ as in stereo, and /oe/ as in oasis (Harris, 1994).

Syllable Structure
Given information about the phonemes or speech-sounds of each language, it is
also important to understand how these sounds combine together to form a syllable.
Syllable structures in Indo-European languages may be described as sequences of
consonants (C) and vowels (V). For instance, in English, there are numerous syllable
structures that are plausible such as CV, CVC, CCVC, CCCVC, (Erickson, 2001) as in
the words me, bat, stop, and scratch, respectively. In contrast, linguists in
Vietnam have posited that representing the Vietnamese syllable using consonant and
vowel sequences inaccurately portrays its structure since CV sequences would not
account for tones, a compulsory element that contributes to lexical meaning, nor the
adjustments in vowel length that contribute to the preservation of the syllable structure
and length (H. T. Nguyen, personal communication, November 15, 2005).
Table 3 displays the syllable structure of Vietnamese (Doan, 1999; see also Dinh
& Nguyen, 1998). Double lines delineate the three main syllable components: tone,
syllable-initial sound, and the rime. Tone is present throughout the syllable and carries
lexical meaning (see the lexical-semantic section for a discussion of tone as a lexical
unit). The onset or syllable-initial position consists solely of consonant sounds.
(According to Cao, 2004, written Vietnamese words that begin with a vowel actually are
produced with an initial glottal stop). The rime consists of a medial vowel, principal
vowel, and final sound, of which the principal vowel is the only required vowel in the
syllable (Dinh & Nguyen, 1998). Table 3 displays four word examples that illustrate
possible syllable structures: ton math, to court, tan to melt and ta we or I.
Note that the smallest possible syllable, ta, is produced with an initial consonant sound,
principal vowel, and a tone (level tones are not marked orthographically).
Table 3
Vietnamese Syllable Structure
Tone
SyllableRime
initial
Medial Principal Final
sound
/u/
vowel
sound
T
o

n
T

Journal of Southeast Asian American Education & Advancement, 2

Tang Cross-linguistic Analysis of Vietnamese and English

11

Compared to English, Vietnamese has a wider variety of single vowel and vowel
combinations with a total of five unshared singletons and 30 vowel combinations
compared to five unshared singletons and eight vowel combinations in Standard
American English (see Table 2). A complex vowel system may be related to the
Vietnamese syllable structure that allows three possible slots for vowel sounds and only
two possible slots for consonants (see syllable structure in Table 3). Correspondingly, the
relatively limited number of consonants may be related to their limited role in a syllable.
A relatively larger vowel inventory may counterbalance a more limited number of
consonants in Vietnamese.
Based on this comparison of Vietnamese and English phonology, we find that
while certain speech sounds are common to both languages, there are many differences to
be noted. First, tones in Vietnamese carry lexical meaning and are obligatory in the
syllable structure. Second, Vietnamese has a more complicated vowel system, while
English has a larger consonant inventory with greater distribution across syllable
positions. Lastly, in regards to complexity, Vietnamese contains multiple relatively
marked retroflex and velar consonant sounds, while English contains complex structures
such as affricates and consonant clusters.

Lexical Semantics
Lexical Tone
Moving from a comparison of the sound structure, we now compare Vietnamese and
English at the word level. A critical element of the Vietnamese word is lexical tone.
Traditionally, tones of tonal languages have been described as phonemes (see
phonological section above for details). However, tones may also be viewed as
contributing to the lexical-semantic meaning of words. D. H. Nguyen (1997) describes
how specific patterns of tone change are used as a lexical unit. One example is the use of
the dipping-rising (hi) tone with pronouns to indicate third person reference in the
southern (Si Gn) dialect (see discussion below on kinship terms used as pronouns). For
example, in the northern dialect a pronoun is followed by the word y to refer to the third
person such as anh, the pronoun that indicates a man who is slightly older than the
speaker, as in anh y he or that man. The southern dialect allows for the use of the
dipping-rising (hi) tone to indicate third person reference in spoken language (D. H.
Nguyen, 1997). For example, instead of anh y he or that man, the level (khng du)
tone is replaced by the dipping-rising (hi) tone to indicate third person reference, nh
he. This tone substitution is also found in select words such as trong in, changed to
trng in there and bn side, changed to bn that side (D. H. Nguyen, 1997). Unlike
Vietnamese, English is not a tonal language, thus tones are not used as lexical items.
Instead of a tone substitution, English would indicate this change in meaning with the
addition of another word such as this and that.

Lexical Function
Both English and Vietnamese words can be divided into content words and function
words. Content words carry lexical meaning, while function words relate lexical words to

Journal of Southeast Asian American Education & Advancement, 2

Tang Cross-linguistic Analysis of Vietnamese and English

12

each other (Stubbs, 2001). For both languages, content words may be further divided into
nouns, verbs, and adjectives. Nouns are words that represent entities; verbs represent
actions or states, and adjectives represent qualities or characteristics (Kreidler, 1998).
In Vietnamese as well as in English, words have the capability to change word
class, and thus change in meaning. Kreidler (1998) described the semantic meaning
underlying changes in word class. For instance, when verbs become nouns, an action
becomes a countable entity (e.g., to kick and a couple of kicks). When a noun
becomes a verb, it describes the process or completion of an action (e.g., a mine and
mining). The following examples of changes in word class are from K. L. Nguyen
(2004) for Vietnamese and Kreidler (1998) for English. Nouns can become verbs such as
a box and to box in English and mt b [one] bundle and b to bundle in
Vietnamese; and verbs can become nouns such as to kick and a kick in English and
ca to saw and ci ca a saw in Vietnamese. Adjectives can become nouns such as
warm to warmth in English and kh khn difficult and mt ci kh khn a
struggle in Vietnamese; Nouns can become adjectives such as child to childish in
English and ci l tng an ideal to [rt] l tng [quite] ideal in Vietnamese. In
addition, certain Vietnamese nouns can be used as pronouns. For example, bc s
doctor may be used as a second person reference pronoun in the sentence Bc s ngh
th no? [Doctor think what] What do you think? Kreidler (1998) did not report this
conversion between nouns and pronouns in English. However, in English, adjectives can
become verbs such as to bore and boring. K. L. Nguyen (2004) did not report
Vietnamese adjectives becoming verbs, perhaps because many linguists (e.g., D. H.
Nguyen, 1996) argue that Vietnamese adjectives should be classified as stative verbs.
In English, words may keep the same form (e.g., to kick and a kick) or have a
different form to indicate a change in word class (e.g., child and childish), whereas
Vietnamese words never change in form to indicate a change in word class. For both
languages, when there is no change in form, a change in word class is indicated in context
of surrounding words. For example, in English, the article a signals a noun as in a
kiss, while the word to indicates a verb as in to kiss (Nelson, 1995). Similarly in
Vietnamese, a numeral, quantifier, or classifier signals a noun as in mt b a bundle,
nhng b some bundles and ci b [classifier] bundle, respectively, while modifiers
indicate a verb as in b ri [completed-aspect-marker to-bundle already] to have
bundled already (K. L. Nguyen, 2004).

Classifiers
In addition to word classes of nouns, verbs, and adjectives, Vietnamese has another group
of words not found in Englishclassifiers. There is much controversy as to whether
classifiers are a distinct word class (Aikhenvald, 2000) or whether they are a subclass of
nouns (Alves, 1999; Cao, 1998) that have a classifying function. Although this debate is
beyond the scope of this paper, it is noted that the term classifier is used here to
describe this group of words and is not intended to favor either viewpoint.
Classifiers are used to categorize objects by a single attribute such as shape or
animacy, and may reflect how different cultures perceive or divide up the world around
them (Aikhenvald, 2000). In many Southeast Asian languages, the prototypical noun
phrase that requires a classifier is [Numeral + Classifier + Noun] (Adams, 1989) such as

Journal of Southeast Asian American Education & Advancement, 2

Tang Cross-linguistic Analysis of Vietnamese and English

13

hai con ch [two cl-animacy dog] two dogs. The exact number of Vietnamese
classifiers varies from over 200 (D. H. Nguyen, 1957) to 4 (Cao, 1998). (For detailed
information on the debate on classifiers, see Cao, 1988 as well as Loi t trong cc ngn
ng Vit Nam [Classifiers of the languages in Vietnam], 2000). The two most common
classifiers in Vietnamese indicate animacy (con as in con gu bear) and inanimacy (ci
as in ci gh chair). There are Vietnamese words that classify the shape and size of
objects such as cy (long and slender) in cy vng long piece of gold, cun (long and
cylindrical) in cun phim camera film, and mnh (small piece) in mnh vi small
piece of [torn] cloth. There are also words that indicate a set or group of objects such as
b, nhm, n in b chn set of dishes, nhm ngi group of people, and n b
herd of cows or n vt flock of geese (K. L. Nguyen, 2004).
English speakers may have difficulty understanding the role and function of
classifiers since English does not have an equivalent word type. Although quite limited in
scope, comparisons have been made between classifiers and English words such as
sheet in the phrase one sheet of paper. This type of word in English seems infrequent
and may ultimately be incomparable to Vietnamese classifiers in frequency and use
(Aikhenvald, 2000; Daley, 1998).

Pronouns
Another element related to lexical semantics is how Vietnamese and English speakers use
words to make reference to persons or items in the world around them. In most
languages, there are words of which their referent can only be determined in context such
as this, she, and you (Kreidler, 1998). An example of this type of word is the
pronoun.
Both Vietnamese and English have pronouns to substitute for nouns or noun
phrases. Although there are a few pronouns in Vietnamese that can be used in a general
sense such as ti I, most Vietnamese pronouns are kinship terms, and their use depends
on the social context and the relationship between the speaker and listener (Luong, 1990).
Vietnamese kinship terms are used to address family and non-family members. Within
the family, there are kinship terms to distinguish between sides of the family, such as ni
paternal and ngoi maternal. Kinship terms also indicate age, gender, and blood
relations versus in-law status. Examples of kinship terms that indicate age and gender
include ch older sister, anh older brother, em younger sibling, bc father or
mothers older sibling (in the northern dialect), d aunt or mothers younger sister, c
aunt or fathers younger sister, ch uncle or fathers younger brother and cu uncle
or mothers younger brother (Luong, 1990). Kinship terms that distinguish between
blood relations and in-law status include thm aunt or wife of fathers younger brother,
and m aunt or wife of mothers younger brother. In addition, kinship terms vary
among regional dialects. For instance the kinship term for uncle or mothers younger
sisters husband is ch in the northern dialect and dng in the southern dialect (K. L.
Nguyen, 2004).
In Vietnamese, the speaker and listener address each other and themselves
differently depending on the social context. Even though the listener is not a family
member or relative, kinship terms are used as pronouns to address and refer to friends and
unfamiliar interlocutors (Luong, 1990). For example, a person who is approximately the

Journal of Southeast Asian American Education & Advancement, 2

Tang Cross-linguistic Analysis of Vietnamese and English

14

age of ones uncle or aunt could be addressed as ch or c, respectively. In addition, the

way in which one addresses himself or herself depends on the listeners age and status.
For instance, when meeting someone approximately the age of ones aunt or uncle, it is
common to address oneself as chu niece/nephew in the northern dialect or con
son/daughter in southern dialect. When meeting someone approximately the age of
ones older sister, one may address himself or herself as em younger sibling and
address the speaker as ch older sister. It is common to address the listener with
pronouns that indicate an older age as a sign of respect (Luong, 1990); typically, the older
the age, the higher the status. English pronouns are not dependent on the social or
personal relationship between the speaker and listener, nor do they indicate age or status.
As summarized by Erickson (2001), English uses distinct pronouns to indicate
first person (e.g., I, me), second person (e.g., you), and third person (e.g., she, he, it).
English marks gender in the singular third person (e.g., she, he) and number in the first
person (e.g., I vs. we) and third person (e.g., she vs. they). In addition, there are
different pronouns that indicate subject vs. predicate position (e.g., she vs. her). In
contrast, Vietnamese pronouns remain the same and do not indicate number, subject or
predicate position, nor first, second, and third person. In order to indicate plurality in
Vietnamese, a quantifier is added before the pronoun. For example, cc some is added
before ch uncle to indicate more than one male who is approximately the age of ones
uncle: cc ch.

Word Formation
We now turn to a comparison of how Vietnamese and English form new words. English
words are polysyllabic, with most words containing one to five syllables (Erickson,
2001). In earlier studies (e.g., Thompson, 1965), Vietnamese has been inaccurately
reported to be a monosyllabic language with each word equal to one syllable. Currently,
linguists agree that Vietnamese words may consist of one, two, three, or even four
syllables; D. H. Nguyen (1997) suggested that 80% of Vietnamese words actually consist
of two syllables. English and Vietnamese have two ways of forming new words:
affixation and compounding.
Affixation is the process of attaching small units (i.e., morphemes) to a word to
change its meaning. In English, content words can have attached inflections such as a
prefix at the beginning of a word (e.g., un- in unreal) or a suffix at the end of a word
(e.g., -ful in wonderful). According to D. H. Nguyen (1997), Vietnamese uses
prefixes and suffixes as well, but rather than attaching them to the word itself, prefixes
and suffixes appear as separate words, as in the examples below:
a. the prefix bn half, semi in front of cu sphere or ball forms the word
bn cu hemisphere;
b. the suffix ha -ize, -fy following a cu forms a cu ha to
globalize or globalization.
There are linguists who may disagree with this account and consider these examples as
compounding (e.g., Do, 1981).

Journal of Southeast Asian American Education & Advancement, 2

Tang Cross-linguistic Analysis of Vietnamese and English

15

Compounding is the process of combining two or more words together to create a

new word (American Heritage Dictionary, 2000). Both languages combine nouns, verbs,
and adjectives to create compound words. Most English compounds are composed of two
nouns and have an endocentric semantic function (Bauer, 1983). For instance, armchair
and beehive are endocentric because an armchair is a type of chair, and a beehive is a
type of hive. Vietnamese compounds may also have an endocentric function. For
instance, hi qun [the] navy is a type of qun army (hi ocean). In addition,
Vietnamese compounds may have a generalizing function. A generalizing compound
consists of two similar items that combine to indicate a larger concept. D. H. Nguyen
(1997) provided examples of generalizing compounds:
a. the words bn table and gh chair combine to mean bn gh
furniture;
b. the words con child and chu grandchild combine to mean con chu
offspring, descendents.
In English, generalizing compounds occur less frequently than the endocentric type
(Baur, 1983).
Another way a word can be compounded is through reduplication. Reduplication
rarely occurs in English and is primarily used in words that reflect sounds or noises such
as click clack (Thompson, 1965). Vietnamese frequently uses reduplication across
word classes of verbs, adjectives, and nouns. They may consist of the replication of an
entire syllable or of its individual components such as the rime, initial consonant sound,
or principal vowel (G. T. Nguyen, 2003; see Table 3 on syllable structure). For the
purposes of this discussion, only examples of reduplications involving the repetition of an
entire syllable are described in order to focus on the semantic meaning rather than the
syntactic form. For a detailed description of reduplications, see C. T. Nguyen (1999), D.
H. Nguyen (1997), G. T. Nguyen (2003), and K. L. Nguyen (2004).
Earlier studies on Vietnamese have suggested that reduplications, as in English,
primarily reflect sounds and noises (Thompson, 1965). Vietnamese reduplications have
been shown to have multiple semantic functions (C. T. Nguyen, 1999; G. T. Nguyen,
2003). In general, when a verb is repeated, this reduplication indicates movement. For
instance gt [u] to nod [ones head] can be reduplicated to indicate a repetitive
nodding motion: gt gt u. In the case of adjectives, reduplication can imply a lesser
degree of a quality. For example, one can imply that a girl is not as pretty as previously
thought: C ta xinh She is pretty versus C ta xinh xinh She is kind of (or less)
pretty. Color terms such as green, xanh, can have a lighter shade by reduplicating the
word, xanh xanh. Certain nouns can be reduplicated to indicate reoccurrence or multiple
instances such as ngy ngy day day, which implies many days or all days (C. T.
Nguyen, 1999; G. T. Nguyen, 2003).
In summary, there are multiple similarities and differences between Vietnamese
and English at the lexical-semantic level. Table 4 compares the presence or absence of
the previously discussed semantic features across languages. Both Vietnamese and
English divide words into two general groups: content (or lexical) and function words.
Content words are further divided into nouns, verbs, and adjectives and have the capacity
to change word class such as a noun to a verb (D. H. Nguyen, 1997; Kreidler, 1998).

Journal of Southeast Asian American Education & Advancement, 2

Tang Cross-linguistic Analysis of Vietnamese and English

16

Both languages have pronouns to address and refer to people, although pronouns of each
language exhibit different embedded meanings. English pronouns mark for gender,
number, person, and grammatical position (Erickson, 2001), while Vietnamese pronouns
mark for gender and status (Luong, 1990). Both languages use affixation and
compounding to form new words (Bauer, 1983; D. H. Nguyen, 1997; Kreidler, 1998;
Stubbs, 2001), while Vietnamese uses reduplication (C. T. Nguyen, 1999; G. T. Nguyen,
2003), a type of compounding, far more frequently and with more semantic complexity
than English.
Table 4
Comparison of select lexical-semantic features of Vietnamese and English words
Lexical Semantic element
Vietnamese
Lexical tone
x
Content and function words
x
Entities (nouns), actions and states (verbs), qualities (adjectives)
x
Classifiers
x
Reference marker (pronoun)
x
Indicates gender
xa
Indicates number
Indicates person
Indicates age/status
x
Indicates subject or predicate position
Affixation
x
Prefixes
x
Suffixes
x
Compounding
x
Endocentric meaning
x
Reduplication
xb

English

Note: Information on English gathered from Bauer (1983), Erickson (2001), Kreidler (1998), and Stubbs
(2001). Information on Vietnamese gathered from Luong (1990), C. T. Nguyen (1999), D. H. Nguyen
(1997), and G. T. Nguyen (2003).
a
Studies such as McDonald (2000) and Thompson (1965) suggested that gender is not marked in
Vietnamese pronouns. I argue that although gender and age/status cannot be separated in Vietnamese
pronoun use, they are both marked in most pronouns such as c (younger female).
b
Although found in English, reduplication seems to be restricted to reflect sounds and noises (D. H.
Nguyen, 1997).

Morpho-Syntax
Previous subsections compared Vietnamese and English across sound and word levels.
This subsection compares the morpho-syntactic or grammatical systems of the two
languages at phrase and sentence levels. Vietnamese and English differ greatly in regards
to grammatical structures. English is a moderately inflected language that uses
morphological morphemes (smallest units of meaning) to mark tense (e.g., -ed) and
number (e.g., plural -s) (see Quirk, Greenbaum, Leech, & Svartivik, 1989, for a detailed
description of English grammar). Vietnamese is an isolating language in that the
grammar primarily consists of word order and the use of function words rather than

Journal of Southeast Asian American Education & Advancement, 2

x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x

Tang Cross-linguistic Analysis of Vietnamese and English

17

bound morphemes (see D. H. Nguyen, 1997, D. L. Nguyen, 1970, and H. V. Nguyen,

2003 for overviews of Vietnamese grammar).
Table 5 summarizes certain grammatical characteristics of Vietnamese and
English. Apart from a general word order of subject-verb-object (SVO) and primary use
of active voice, the majority of grammatical characteristics are not shared between the
languages. In English, adjectives precede nouns; in Vietnamese adjectives follow the
nouns they describe. English content questions are formed with a question word at the
beginning of the sentence with a movement of the auxiliary verb (Erickson, 2001): the
declarative sentence, She is going to the store, can be restated as a question Is she
going to the store? in which the auxiliary verb is and the subject she have changed
places. This transposition does not occur in Vietnamese, in which content questions are
formed using the same SVO structure of a declarative sentence with the placement of a
question word in the slot that would contain the answer (D. H. Nguyen, 1997). For
instance, a WH question C y i u? [Miss-she go where] Where are you going?
may be answered with C y i ch. [Miss-she go store] She is going to the store, in
which the question word, u where, is replaced with the answer, ch store. In the
Who-question Ai mun n? [Who want eat] Who wants to eat? the question word, ai
who, is replaced by the answer Ti I: Ti mun n [I want eat] I want to eat. For a
detailed description of question types, see D. H. Nguyen (1997) and D. L. Nguyen
(1970).
In regards to negation, Vietnamese has two general forms, while English has three
general forms. In Vietnamese, negation may be indicated using khng no before the
verb as in Ti khng n [I no eat] I will not eat. When the copula, l, is used, the phrase
khng phi [no correct] must be used as in N khng phi l mo [It no correct to-be cat]
It is not a cat (D. H. Nguyen, 1997). According to Erickson (2001), negation in English
may be indicated using not in between the auxiliary verb and the verb phrase as in She
could not open the door. When the auxiliary verb is not present, the negative form of a
sentence includes a form of do before not: compare the affirmative sentence Bill
opened the door and the negated sentence Bill did not open the door. In addition,
spoken English often uses the contraction nt in place of not as in She couldnt open
the door.
Vietnamese also differs from English in that it does not morphologically mark
tense, aspect, or number. Tense is represented with words that precede the verb such as
, ang, s to indicate past, present, and future respectively. However, these tense
markers are not required for a sentence to be grammatically correct and are often inferred
in context (D. H. Nguyen, 1996). If there is ambiguity, , ang, s may be used to
clarify the context. English uses certain verb inflections to indicate tense and aspect. Past
tense is marked with the verb inflection ed; the present progressive aspect is marked
with ing (Erickson, 2001).
The feature of number (singular vs. plural) is indicated differently in English and
Vietnamese. English requires the use of the plural marker -s or -es (Erickson, 2001), such
as in boys and boxes. In contrast, Vietnamese nouns are not inflected or do not
change to a plural form; number is indicated through the addition of numerals such as
mt con g for one chicken and hai con g for two chickens, and quantifiers such as

Journal of Southeast Asian American Education & Advancement, 2

Tang Cross-linguistic Analysis of Vietnamese and English

18

Table 5
Comparison of Selected Vietnamese and English Grammatical Characteristics
Vietnamese
English
Word
SVO, OSV less common
SVO
order
N + Adj
Adj + N
Voice

Primarily Active

Primarily Active

Content
questions

Question word occupies answer-slot

C n ti u?
[Miss-you eat-dinner at- where]
Where will you eat dinner?
Answer: Ti n nh I will eat at home.
Ai mun n?
[Who want eat]
Who wants to eat?
Answer : C y mun n. She wants to eat.

Question word + auxV + S + V

Where will you eat dinner?
What would you like to eat?

Negation

1. khng + V : Ti khng n.
[I no eat]
I will not eat.
2. khng phi + l (copula):
Ti khng phi l sinh vin.
[I no-correct to-be student]
I am not a student.

1. S + auxV + not + V phrase

She could not open the door.
2. If auxV not present: do + not
Bill opened the door.
Jane did not open the door.
3. Contraction -nt
She couldnt open the door.

Tense &
Aspect

, ang, s + V for past, present, future;

optional- often inferred in context

ed, - ing, will + V

Number

N: numbers/quantifiers + N
V: do not indicate number

N: Plural -s, -es

V: Present 3rd person singular s

Possession

ca + N
or
nn ca m
[hat of mom]
Moms hat

Possessive marker: Ns as in Bobs

Phrase: of + N as in of Bob
Possessive pronouns: hers, his, ours

Compare

Adj, Adj + hn, Adj + nht

cao tall, cao hn taller, cao nht tallest

Adj, Adj+ -er, Adj+- est

tall, taller, tallest
More + Adj more basic
Irregularities good, better, best

Classifiers

Numeral + Classifier + Noun

hai
con
ch
[two
cl-animacy dog]
two dogs

Does not have classifiers

ca omitted
nn m
[hat mom]
Moms hat

Note: N = noun; Adj = Adjective; V = Verb; S = Subject; O = Object; Aux = auxilary. Information on
Vietnamese grammar gathered from D. L. Nguyen (1970), D. H. Nguyen (1997), and H. V. Nguyen (2003).
Information on English grammar gathered from D. L. Nguyen (1970) and Erickson (2001).

Journal of Southeast Asian American Education & Advancement, 2

Tang Cross-linguistic Analysis of Vietnamese and English

19

nhng con g for some chickens. Both Vietnamese and English have a rule for marking
possession with the word of between the possessed object and the possessor, such as
ci nn ca con gi the hat of the girl. In Vietnamese, there is the option of including
ca of or omitting it such as xe bn for car [of a] friend. English has additional ways
to mark possession. It commonly uses the morpheme s attached to nouns such as a
girls hat or possessive pronouns Its hers (Erickson, 2001). The feature of
comparatives are marked with additional words in Vietnamese (i.e., hn more and nht
most) compared with English noun inflections er, est, with some exceptions to the
rule (see Table 5 for examples). As mentioned in the lexical semantic subsection,
Vietnamese American children may have difficulty with classifiers in Vietnamese since
they are not present in English. An omission of a classifier may indicate a change in word
meaning (semantics, see previous subsection) as well as a change in grammar (morphosyntax). For instance an omission of a required classifier would make a noun phrase
(Numeral + Classifier + Noun) ungrammatical such as if the noun phrase hai con ch
two dogs were incorrectly produced as hai ch*.
This completes section two of this paper on a cross-linguistic comparison of
Vietnamese and English across the sound, word, and sentence levels. Section 3 focuses
on predictions of cross-linguistic interactions within a speaker. These potential
interactions are described across the language levels of phonology, lexical semantics, and
morpho-syntax.

Potential Vietnamese-English Interactions

Based on the cross-linguistic comparison of Vietnamese (L1) and English (L2) in Section
2, it is possible to predict and describe how these languages may interact. Within the
Vietnamese American population, there are at least two distinct speaker groups: the
Vietnamese adult L2 learner and the Vietnamese American child learning both languages
either simultaneously or sequentially (i.e., L1 at home with exposure to L2 shortly after).
These two speaker groups are often found within individual family structures. For
example, the parents in a family may belong to the first speaker group (the adult L2
learners), while the children may belong to the second speaker group. Other speaker
groups may include Vietnamese adolescents and children who have newly arrived to the
United States. Newly arrived Vietnamese adolescents may demonstrate similar
characteristics to the adult speaker group, while newly arrived young children may
experience shifts in relative language dominance. For the sake of simplicity, this paper
separates speakers into two general groups of adults and children. However, the example
of a new arrival group underscores the importance of assessing all speakers on an
individual basis, recognizing factors particular to each speaker such as previous language
experiences.
This section presents predictions about potential language interactions between
Vietnamese and English within individual speakers. Since little to no research has been
conducted on L1-L2 interactions in Vietnamese Americans, it may be helpful to analyze
the language characteristics of these two general groups to better understand how
Vietnamese may influence English (particularly in the adult speaker group) and how
English may influence Vietnamese (in the child speaker group).

Journal of Southeast Asian American Education & Advancement, 2

Tang Cross-linguistic Analysis of Vietnamese and English

20

This section is divided into two parts. The first part describes language
characteristics of Vietnamese L2 learners of English who most likely are adolescents or
adults. This speaker group may include Vietnamese parents as well as newly-arrived
Vietnamese students in their teenage years. The influence of Vietnamese (L1) skills on
English (L2) performance is described. Information is based on previous studies of L2
acquisition (e.g., McDonald, 2000; Riney, 1988; Sato, 1988) and anecdotal evidence
from Vietnamese adult informants. Further investigation is needed to verify and expand
on the description of linguistic features of this population. The second part of this section
describes language characteristics that may occur in Vietnamese American children
acquiring both languages, either simultaneously or sequentially. Although not specifically
on Vietnamese-English speakers, the literature on sequential bilingualism of minority
languages in the United States suggests that children tend to shift in relative strength from
L1 to L2 (Anderson, 2004). Oftentimes L2 becomes the relatively dominant language
with a higher rate of development than L1 (Kan & Kohnert, 2005; Kohnert, 2002;
Kohnert & Bates, 2002; Kohnert, Bates, & Hernandez, 1999). English (L2) may be
attained with native-like proficiency, and the childs L1 performance may be influenced
by their relatively dominant L2 (Hernandez, Bates, & Avila, 1994; Su, 2001). Virtually
no research studies have been conducted on the language acquisition of VietnameseEnglish bilingual children or Vietnamese monolingual children (though see Tang &
Barlow, 2006). Therefore the following predictions are based on the cross-linguistic
comparison described in Section 2, anecdotal evidence based on the authors familiarity
with both languages, and consultation with Vietnamese language teachers. Empirical
evidence on the language skills of Vietnamese American children is necessary to support
or refute these predictions and to increase our overall understanding of how children
learn two languages.

Vietnamese Transfer to English

Adult L2 learners often transfer L1 skills onto their L2 (McDonald, 2000). Transfer from
L1 to L2 is often referred to as positive transfer. The following description is meant to
highlight salient linguistic features specific to English with which Vietnamese speakers
may have difficulty. Obviously not all Vietnamese adult L2 learners will demonstrate all
characteristics of Vietnamese-influenced English. Factors such as age of arrival, age of
English acquisition, years of formal instruction, language and dialect of the surrounding
community, and opportunities to practice with native English speakers play a large role in
the degree of transfer of L1 skills to L2 performance (e.g., Flege, Yeni-Komshian, & Liu,
1999; Genesee, Paradis, & Crago, 2004; McDonald, 2000).
Table 6 summarizes examples of potential interactions from Vietnamese to
English across phonology, lexical semantics, and morpho-syntax. In regards to
phonology, Vietnamese adult L2 learners often have difficulty pronouncing English
sounds not found in Vietnamese such as consonant clusters, affricates, vowels with rrounding /,/ , and lax vowel // (see Tables 1 and 2). Consonant clusters may be
simplified or deleted depending on the word position (D. L. Nguyen, 1970b; Riney,
1988). For instance, the initial consonant cluster /str-/ in string may be simplified and
produced without the /t/ as sring [si], with a tense high vowel [i] instead of the lax

Journal of Southeast Asian American Education & Advancement, 2

Tang Cross-linguistic Analysis of Vietnamese and English

21

vowel //, which is not present in Vietnamese. A consonant cluster in the word-final
position as in walked may be deleted and produced as walk.
In addition to omitting sounds, L2 learners may substitute English-specific sounds
with Vietnamese sounds or sounds shared between both languages (McDonald, 2000;
Riney, 1988). For instance the English hard th in the may be approximated with [d],
a shared sound, as in [d]. In the final position, a hard th may be produced as the shared
sound /t/ as in [smut] for /smu/ smooth. The English soft th may be approximated
with the Vietnamese dental aspirated t as in [tht] for /t/ thought. The English r
in run may be produced as the r-flap (an acceptable allophone for the Vietnamese r)
or as /z/ (from the northern Vietnamese dialect): un or zun. English final r may be
omitted as in [sta] for star. English final /l/ may be produced with the semivowel [w]
such as [snew] for /snel/ snail (D. L. Nguyen, 1970b). Since tones are obligatory in
every Vietnamese word, Vietnamese speakers may add tones into English, which would
affect intonation patterns.
Table 6
Potential Interactions of Vietnamese (L1) with English (L2)
Lang. level
Pattern
Example
Phonology Simplify initial consonant clusters
sring for string
(Sound
Delete or simplify final consonant clusters
bok for box
level)
Substitute with Vietnamese consonants
Dental aspirated t for soft th:
[tht] for thought
Substitute with Vietnamese vowels
cheek for chick
Intonation pattern influenced by tones
Rising and falling on individual
words
LexicalSemantic
(Word
level)

Difficulty using words that do not have

direct Vietnamese translations
Difficulty with endings that indicate a
change in word class

To do, to work, and to make

are all one word in Vietnamese, lm
so bore for so boring

Syntax
(Grammar)

Omit word endings for tense

Omit word endings for plurality
Omit word endings for verb agreement
Omit auxiliary verbs
Place adjectives after nouns
Difficulty with word order in questions

walk for walked

two dollar for two dollars
she walk for she walks
You hungry? for Are you hungry?
car big for big car
You want eat what? for What do
you want to eat?

Note: This table displays potential influences of Vietnamese (L1) on English (L2). These patterns more
likely occur in adolescent or adult learners of English as a second language. Individual speakers would not
necessarily exhibit all of these patterns depending on their age at exposure to English, manner in which
English was learned, individual learning style, etc.

Journal of Southeast Asian American Education & Advancement, 2

Tang Cross-linguistic Analysis of Vietnamese and English

22

A potential interaction at the word level may be related to multiple-to-one word

mappings, namely, when one language has multiple words that equate to only one word
in the other language. Based on my own familiarity of Vietnamese and English, the
following are a couple of anecdotal examples: the English verbs to do, to work and
to make are all expressed as one Vietnamese verb, lm; English words that describe
groups of animals such as herd [of cattle], flock [of geese] and school [of fish] are
all expressed using the plural classifier, n. It may be difficult for Vietnamese speakers
to use English vocabulary that consists of lexical-semantic distinctions not present in
Vietnamese.
Another potential interaction that involves both meaning and grammar is related to
word class conversion. As mentioned earlier, both English and Vietnamese words have
the capability of changing word class such as from a noun to a verb (see the lexicalsemantic subsection for details). In English, a change in word class oftentimes involves a
change in form (e.g., child to childish). In Vietnamese, word forms do not change,
but rather a noun becomes a verb based on the context of the sentence. From a
grammatical viewpoint, Vietnamese adult speakers may change the word class of English
words without changing the word form (e.g., The book is so bore for The book is so
boring.) From a lexical-semantic viewpoint, Vietnamese adult speakers may rely on
sentential context (rather than morpho-syntactic markers) to use or interpret, in this
example, a noun as an adjective.
At the grammatical level, Vietnamese speakers may have difficulty with English
noun and verb inflections since their L1 does not use morphological markers such as the
past tense verb marker ed, plural s, and third person singular s (McDonald, 2000). For
instance, Vietnamese speakers may use the present tense verb to indicate tenses of past or
future. The omission of certain morphological markers may also be related to phonology
since the final /s/ and consonant clusters (e.g., walked /wkt/) are specific to English.
Another potential interaction may be with differences in word order. For instance,
nouns come before adjectives in Vietnamese, while adjectives come before nouns in
English. Word order of content questions in English may also be influenced by
Vietnamese. Dominant Vietnamese speakers may have difficulty with inverting subjectverb word order or even including auxiliary verbs when asking questions in English
(McDonald, 2000). The auxiliary verb may be omitted altogether, and the question word
may be placed in sentence-final position to fill the answer slot (see Table 5) such as You
go where? for Where are you going? or You drink what? for What would you like
to drink?
In summary, dominant Vietnamese learners of English may have difficulty with
sound, word, and grammatical aspects of English not found in Vietnamese. For instance,
they may have difficulty producing consonant clusters, affricates, and syllable-final
consonant sounds as well as using English intonation patterns due to the influence of
lexical tone. They may have difficulty using English vocabulary that make lexicalsemantic distinctions not found in Vietnamese and they may depend on the sentence
context (rather than morphology) to express and/or interpret words as different word
classes. These learners may have difficulty producing English word inflections such as
the past tense -ed as well as using English subject-verb inversion and auxiliary verbs
when asking questions.

Journal of Southeast Asian American Education & Advancement, 2

Tang Cross-linguistic Analysis of Vietnamese and English

23

English Transfer to Vietnamese

It is well known that a persons L1 may influence their L2 performance in adult L2
learners (e.g., McDonald, 2000; Sato, 1988). Recent studies have also shown that L2
skills may influence L1 performance (Hernandez, Bates, & Avila, 1994; Su, 2001). Table
7 presents potential interaction of English with Vietnamese in Vietnamese American
students learning both languages.
Table 7
Potential interactions of English (L2) with Vietnamese (L1)
Lang. Level
Pattern
Example
Phonology
Simplify 2-3 vowel combinations
Says phng for phng
(Sound
Substitute with English consonants
English k for Vietnamese kh
level)
Substitute with English diphthongs
English o for Vietnamese o
Aspiration of /p, t, k/ in initial or final 1) mth for mt eye
positions
2) English t for Vietnamese
dental aspirated t as in th
rabbit
Tone errors
Says cu penis for c owl
Rising intonation added to questions
May affect tones and meaning
Lexical
semantics
(Word
meaning)

Difficulty using words that do not

have direct English translations
Overgeneralization of classifiers
Omission of classifiers1
Difficulty using kinship terms

mang, vc, khing, xch, bng

are translated as to carry in
English
ci vit for cy vit pen
hai ch* for hai con ch two
dogs
Refer to oneself as con child
when speaking to same-aged
peers

Difficulty understanding
reduplications
MorphoSyntax
(Grammar)

Overuse of function words

Difficulty with word order for
possession
Difficulty with word order in
questions
Omission of classifiers1
Place adjectives before nouns

Use , ang, s when not

needed
M xe for xe m
u i anh? for Anh i u?
See above
p bm for bm p

Omission of classifiers may indicate a change in meaning (semantic) as well as a change in grammar.
Therefore this potential interaction may be placed at the lexical-semantic level as well as the morphosyntactic level.

Journal of Southeast Asian American Education & Advancement, 2

Tang Cross-linguistic Analysis of Vietnamese and English

24

Potential interactions of English (L2) with Vietnamese (L1), also known as negative
transfer, often found in children whose L1 is a minority language and who may
experience a relative shift in dominance to L2. These are predictions of negative transfer
patterns based on a cross-linguistic analysis. Future empirical evidence is needed to
refute or support these patterns. At the phonological (sound) level, the tone production of
these students may be affected since tones do not have lexical meaning in English.
Vietnamese students in an English language environment may have difficulty perceiving
and/or producing tones correctly. Oftentimes, the older Vietnamese generation may be
amused by their childrens American accent and tease them for tonal errors that change
lexical meaning. For instance, a child may want to say con c an owl but may drop the
rising (sc) tone and say con cu penis. A related difficulty is the influence of English
intonation patterns. In English many questions are asked with a rising intonation at the
end of the sentence. Students who are acquiring both languages may have a rising
intonation in Vietnamese, which alters tones and may affect meaning or intelligibility.
In regards to sound-substitution, the Vietnamese aspirated dental t as in th
rabbit and the velar fricative kh as in khng no may be produced as an English t
and k, respectively. In addition, Vietnamese final consonant sounds, which are
typically unreleased (Dinh & Nguyen, 1998), may be produced with some aspiration (or
at least an audible release) since English final consonants can be released (Harris, 1994).
Vietnamese single vowels may become elongated or diphthongized, such as with the
vowel /o/ being produced as the English diphthong /o/. Vietnamese two- or three-vowel
combinations may be simplified due to the relatively few number of vowel combinations
in English (see Table 2).
Vietnamese American students acquiring both languages may also make errors at
the lexical-semantic (word) level. For instance, there are many Vietnamese words that
have multiple-to-one mappings into English; an English verb can have multiple
Vietnamese correlates that are attached to specific contexts. For example, the English
verb to carry corresponds to Vietnamese verbs mang to carry a general object, vc
to carry on ones back, khing to carry a heavy object, bng b to carry [a child] on
the side of ones hip, xch to carry an object with a handle, and bng to carry with
both hands and in front of ones body. The English verb to wear corresponds to
Vietnamese verbs mc to wear in general, mang to wear socks/shoes, eo to wear
glasses/jewelry/wristwatch, and i to wear an object on ones head. The English verb
to give corresponds to Vietnamese verbs a to give with one hand, cho to give to
someone of your status or younger, tng to give to someone who is slightly higher in
status, and biu to give to someone who is much higher in status or age / to give with
great respect. One influence of English on Vietnamese would be the overuse of the
general verbs or the incorrect use of specific context-based verbs.
Another area of potential English influence is the misuse or simplifications of
classifiers (see the lexical-semantic subsection for details on classifiers). Vietnamese
American students may tend to overuse the general classifier for inanimates, ci, with
nouns that require more specific classifiers (H. A. Nguyen, personal communication,
March 12, 2006). For instance, a student may say ci vit for a pen instead of cy vit;
cy indicates a long thin object, which is more specific than ci. Since there are no
classifiers in English, another potential interaction may be the omission of Vietnamese
classifiers in required contexts. For instance, a child may omit the animate classifier, con,

Journal of Southeast Asian American Education & Advancement, 2

Tang Cross-linguistic Analysis of Vietnamese and English

25

in hai con ch [two cl-animate dog] two dogs and incorrectly say hai ch [two dog].
This error pattern may indicate a change in meaning as well as a change in grammar.
Another lexical-semantic feature that occurs far more frequently in Vietnamese
than English is reduplication (see lexical-semantic subsection for details). Vietnamese
American students may not be exposed to many examples of reduplication and may not
comprehend their meaning or may not use this feature in spoken language. There has
been little to no research documenting the frequency and distribution of reduplications in
the language use of parents or in childrens literature. Therefore it is unclear how children
acquiring both languages would interpret and use this language feature.
The final lexical-semantic feature discussed in this section is related to the use of
pronouns. Vietnamese uses many kinship terms as pronouns (see lexical-semantic
subsection for details). As discussed in the lexical semantics section, kinship terms are
used in with everyone, not only direct family members. Vietnamese children in the
United States may not have extended relatives as they typically would in Vietnam and
therefore may have limited opportunity to use a variety of kinship terms such as ng
grandfather, b grandmother ch uncle or fathers younger brother, d aunt or
mothers younger sister, and bc aunt or mother or fathers older sister. Limited
exposure and practice with kinship terms may affect how children use Vietnamese
pronouns in social contexts with interlocutors of varying age and status (Luong, 1990). In
addition, Vietnamese American students may have difficulty adjusting personal reference
when referring to themselves. For instance, given a listener of a specific gender and age,
they may need to use a variety of kinship terms such as chu niece/nephew, con
son/daughter, em younger sibling, ch older sister, and bn friend. Children who
speak Vietnamese only to their parents may make the mistake of referring to themselves
as con son/daughter when meeting new same-aged peers.
In regards to the morpho-syntactic (grammatical) level, Vietnamese influences on
English (L2) may involve word order. Vietnamese American students may place
adjectives before nouns such as p bm [pretty butterfly] for bm p [butterfly
pretty] pretty butterfly. To indicate possession, they may place the possessor in front of
the possession such as m xe [mother car] for xe m [car mother] mothers car. They
may use English subject-verb inversion in constructing Vietnamese questions or may
have difficulty knowing where to place the question word (see Table 5 for examples). In
addition, they may omit classifiers that are required to complete a noun phrase (see
Tables 5 and 6 for examples).
In summary, English skills may influence Vietnamese performance in Vietnamese
American students across the sound, word, and grammatical levels. For instance, children
may have difficulty with consonant and vowel sounds not shared in English (see tables 1
and 2) as well as misuse or omit lexical tone. At the word level, children may have
difficulty using Vietnamese vocabulary that have lexical-semantic distinctions not found
in English as well as L1-specific word types such as classifiers, kinship terms, and
reduplications. At the grammatical level, children may use English word order when
producing adjectives, possessives, and questions in Vietnamese.
Another potential cross-linguistic interaction not previously discussed is related to
code-switching, operationally defined as the use of words, phrases, or sentences from
both languages in a conversation. Petito et al. (2001) found that parents who codeswitched had children who code-switched at similar rates. It should be noted that code-

Journal of Southeast Asian American Education & Advancement, 2

Tang Cross-linguistic Analysis of Vietnamese and English

26

switching has been demonstrated in research to be a common and legitimate mode of

bilingual communication that follows syntactic structure and has specific functions in
conversation (Myers Scotton, 1988; Poplack, 1980). Poplack (1980) found the use of
code-switching in balanced bilinguals (i.e., fluent in both languages) as well as groups
who identified themselves as L1 dominant. Therefore, Vietnamese parents who have
arrived in the United States as adults and remain dominant in their L1 still may exhibit
English code-switches in their language use, which in turn may be reflected in the
language use of their children. The next generation of parents may differ from the current
generation in that most parents will have been educated in the United States and have
greater familiarity with English. There has been no research on the affects or influence of
the language input provided by Vietnamese parents who are fluent in both languages, or
perhaps English-dominant, on the language use of their children. Questions such as what
are code-switching behaviors in adult bilinguals? and how is that reflected in the
language output of children? may be important to investigate as it pertains to current and
future generations of Vietnamese Americans.

Conclusions and Implications for Future Research

Research studies on the three-generation model have found a rapid language shift in
relative dominance from L1 to English (L2) among immigrant populations (Fishman,
1972; Veltman, 1983). Numerous studies have indicated social and academic advantages
of bilingualism such as strong social connections within the family and ethnic community
(Kohnert & Derr, 2004; Wong-Fillmore, 1991), a strong social identification (Zhou &
Bankston, 1998), and the transmission of traditional values such as the importance of
education (Zhou & Bankston, 1994). The social issues surrounding the subject of
language maintenance impress on us the immediate need to find and promote methods of
L1 maintenance during the development of L2.
This paper has focused on L1 maintenance and language shift towards L2 among
Vietnamese Americans. Studies on across generation language shift in Vietnamese
American youth have suggested that this population is undergoing a rapid shift towards
English monolingualism as described by the three-generation model (Young & Tran,
1999). Although there have been studies regarding L1 influences on L2 performance in
Vietnamese adults (e.g., McDonald, 2000; Sato, 1988) as well as studies that examine
L1-L2 interactions in bilingual populations of other languages (e.g. Hernandez, Bates,
Avila, 1994; Kan & Kohnert, 2005; Kohnert, 2002; Kohnert & Bates, 2002; Kohnert,
Bates, & Hernandez, 1999; Su, 2001) there have been little to no studies on crosslinguistic interactions in Vietnamese American children. This paper is an initial step of
making predictions about language interactions between Vietnamese and English based
on a cross-linguistic comparison at phonological (sound), lexical-semantic (word
meaning), and morpho-syntactic (grammatical) levels. Empirical evidence is necessary to
support or refute the observations presented in this article.
The fields of child language acquisition and bilingualism may provide a
framework for future empirical investigation. In a recent workshop sponsored by the
United States Department of Education and the United States Department of Health and
Human Services (Childhood Bilingualism, 2005), the following questions were proposed
to shape the future direction of research: How does the first language influence the

Journal of Southeast Asian American Education & Advancement, 2

Tang Cross-linguistic Analysis of Vietnamese and English

27

second language? How does the second language affect continued development of the
first? How and when does (or should) the second language get reinforced?
Quantitative information regarding the frequency and distribution of speech
sounds and words of Vietnamese based on both oral language samples and written texts
are needed to establish how rare or common linguistic features are and therefore how
often they occur in daily language use. Language materials and experimental stimuli may
be created based on linguistic information presented in this article as well as frequency
and distributional information from large corpora in Vietnamese. Both cross-sectional
and longitudinal studies are needed to investigate the language development of
Vietnamese children in the United States who are exposed to English at an early age. This
line of research may provide useful information regarding cross-language transfer of
skills and within-language development, which may contribute to a better overall
understanding of how children learn two languages. A clear understanding of normal
variation in the language development of children exposed to two languages is the first
step in developing effective language teaching materials as well as assessment and
educational interventions for a variety of language learners. Research in this area may be
applied to language instruction materials and strategies to promote L1 maintenance along
with L2 development in the home and school environments.

References
Adams, K. L. (1989). Systems of numeral classification in the Mon-Khmer, Nicobarese
and Asian subfamilies of Austroasiatic. Canberra, Australia: Pacific Linguistics
Series B101.
Alba, R., Logan, J., Lutz, A., & Stults, B. (2002). Only English by the third generation?
Loss and preservation of the mother tongue among the grandchildren of
contemporary immigrants. Demography, 39(3), 467-484.
Aikhenvald, A. Y. (2000). Classifiers: A typology of noun categorization devices.
Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Alves, M. J. (1999). Whats so Chinese about Vietnamese? In G. Thurgood (Ed.), Papers
from the ninth annual meeting of the Southeast Asian Linguistics Society (pp. 221242). Berkeley, CA: University of California.
The American heritage dictionary (4th ed.). (2000). Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.
Anderson, R. (2004). First language loss in Spanish-speaking children: Patterns of loss
and implications for clinical practice. In B. A. Goldstein (Ed.), Bilingual language
development and disorders in Spanish-English speakers (pp. 187-211). Baltimore,
MD: Paul Brookes Publishing Co., Inc.
Bankston, C. L., III, & Zhou, M. (1995). Effects of minority-language literacy on the
academic achievement of Vietnamese youths in New Orleans. Sociology of
Education, 68(1), 1-17.
Bauer, L. (1983). English word-formation. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Cao, H. X. (1998). Ting Vit: My vn ng m, ng php, ng ngha [Vietnamese:
issues in phonetics, syntax, and semantics]. Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam: Nh
Xut Bn Gio Dc.

Journal of Southeast Asian American Education & Advancement, 2

Tang Cross-linguistic Analysis of Vietnamese and English

28

Cao, X. H. (2004). m v hc v tuyn tnh: Suy ngh v cc nh ca m v hc ng

i [Phonology and linearity: Critique of contemporary phonology postulations,
2nd ed.]. H Ni, Vietnam: Nh Xut Bn i Hc Quc Gia.
Chung, C. (2000). English language learners of Vietnamese background. In S. L. McKay
& S. C. Wong, (Eds.), New immigrants in the United States (pp. 216-231). New
York: Cambridge University Press.
Daley, K. A. (1998). Vietnamese classifiers in narrative texts. Dallas, TX: Summer
Institute of Linguistics, Inc.
nh vn mau [Spell quickly]. (n.d.). (author and publisher unknown).
Dinh, T. L. & Nguyen, H. V. (1998). C cu ng m ting Vit [Structure of Vietnamese
phonetics]. Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam: Nh Xut Bn Gio Dc.
Do, C. H. (1981). T vng ng ngha ting Vit [Vietnamese lexico-semantics]. Hanoi,
Vietnam: Nh Xut Bn Gio Dc.
Doan, T. T. (1999). Ng m ting Vit. [Vietnamese phonetics]. H Ni, Vietnam: Nh
Xut Bn i Hc Quc Gia H Ni.
Erickson, J. (2001). English. In J. Garry & C. Rubino (Eds.), Facts about the worlds
languages: An encyclopedia of the worlds major languages, past, and present
(pp. 199-203). New York: H. W. Wilson Company.
Feliciano, C. (2001). The benefits of biculturalism: Exposure to immigrant culture and
dropping out of school among Asian and Latino youths. Social Science Quarterly,
82, 865-879.
Fishman, J. (1972). The Sociology of Language. Rowley, MA: Newbury.
Flege, J. E., Yeni-Komshian, G. H., & Liu, S. (1999). Age constraints on secondlanguage acquisition. Journal of Memory and Language, 41, 78-104.
Genesee, F., Paradis, J., & Crago, M. (2004). Dual language development and disorders:
A handbook on bilingualism and second language learning. Baltimore, MD: Paul
H. Brooks Publishing Company.
Harris, I. (1994). English sound structure. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishers.
Hernandez, A., Bates, E. & Avila, L. (1994). On-line sentence interpretation in SpanishEnglish bilinguals: What does it mean to be in between? Applied
Psycholinguistics, 15, 417-446.
Jakobson, R. (1968). Child language, aphasia and phonological universals. The Hague,
Netherlands: Mouton.
Kan, P. F. and Kohnert, K. J. (2005). Preschoolers learning Hmong and English: Lexicalsemantic skills in L1 and L2. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing
Research, 48, 372-383.
Kohnert, K. (2002). Picture naming in early sequential bilinguals: A 1-year follow-up.
Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 45, 759-771.
Kohnert, K., & Bates, E. (2002). Balancing bilinguals II: Lexical comprehension and
cognitive processing in children learning Spanish and English. Journal of Speech,
Language, and Hearing Research, 45, 347-359.
Kohnert, K., Bates, E., & Hernandez, A. (1999). Balancing bilinguals: Lexical-semantic
production and cognitive processing in children learning Spanish and English.
Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 42, 1400-1413.
Kohnert, K. & Derr, A. (2004). Language intervention with bilingual children. In B.
Goldstein (Ed.), Bilingual language development and disorders in Spanish-

Journal of Southeast Asian American Education & Advancement, 2

Tang Cross-linguistic Analysis of Vietnamese and English

29

English speakers (pp. 311-338). Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brooks Publishing

Company.
Kreidler, C. W. (1998). Introducing English semantics. London: Routledge.
Luong, H. V. (1990). Discursive practices and linguistic meanings: The Vietnamese
system of person reference. Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins Publishing
Company.
McDonald, J. L. (2000). Grammaticality judgments in a second language: Influences of
age of acquisition and native language. Applied Psycholinguistics, 21, 395-423.
Myers Scotten, C. (1988). Code switching as indexical of social negotiations. In M.
Heller (Ed.), Codeswitching: Anthropological and sociolinguistic perspectives
(pp. 151-186). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Nelson, K. (1995). The dual category program in acquisition of action words. In M.
Tomasello, W. E. Merriman (Eds.), Beyond names for things: Young childrens
acquisition of verbs (pp. 223-250). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Nguyen, C. T. (1999). Ng php ting Vit, in ln th su [Vietnamese grammar, 6th
edition]. H Ni, Vietnam: Nh Xut Bn i Hc Quc Gia.
Nguyen, D. H. (1996). Vietnamese verbs. Mon-Khmer Studies 25, 141-159.
Nguyen, D. H. (1997). Vietnamese. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Nguyen, D. H. (2001). Vietnamese. In J. Garry & C. Rubino (Eds.), Facts about the
worlds languages: An encyclopedia of the worlds major languages, past, and
present (pp. 794-796). New York: The H. W. Wilson Company.
Nguyen, D. L. (1970a). A contrastive grammatical analysis of English and Vietnamese.
In D. L. Nguyen (Ed.), A contrastive analysis of English and Vietnamese: Vol. 3.
Sydney, Australia: Pacific Linguistics.
Nguyen, D. L. (1970b). A contrastive phonological analysis of English and Vietnamese.
In D. L. Nguyen (Ed.), A contrastive analysis of English and Vietnamese: Vol. 4.
Sydney, Australia: Pacific Linguistics.
Nguyen, G. T. (2003). T vng hc ting Vit, ti bn ln th t [Vietnamese
lexicography, 4th edition]. Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam: Nh Xut Bn Gio Dc.
Nguyen, H. V. (2003). T in Ng Php Ting Vit C Bn Dictionary of Basic
Vietnamese Grammar: Bilingual Vietnamese-English. Ho Chi Minh City,
Vietnam: Nh Xut Bn i Hc Quc Gia.
Nguyen, K. L. (2004). Gio trnh ting Vit II [Vietnamese textbook II]. Hu, Vietnam:
i Hc Hu Trung Tm To T Xa.
Nguyen, A., Shin, F., & Krashen, S. (2001). Development of the first language is not a
barrier to second-language acquisition: Evidence from Vietnamese immigrants to
the United States. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism,
4(3), 159-164.
Petito, P., Katerelos, M., Levy, B. G., Gauna, K., Ttreault, K., & Ferraro, V. (2001).
Bilingual signed and spoken language acquisition from birth: Implications for the
mechanisms underlying early bilingual language acquisition. Journal of Child
Language, 28, 453-496.
Pham, L. (1990). Functional patterns in infant bilingualism: A case study of the
simultaneous acquisition of two languages by a three-year-old VietnameseAmerican child. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Houston.

Journal of Southeast Asian American Education & Advancement, 2

Tang Cross-linguistic Analysis of Vietnamese and English

30

Poplack, S. (1980). Sometimes Ill start a sentence in Spanish y termino en espaol:

toward a typology of code-switching. Linguistics, 18, 581-618.
Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G., Svartvik, J. (1989). A comprehensive grammar of
the English language. London: Longman Inc.
Reeves, T. J. & Bennett, C. E. (Dec, 2004). We the people: Asians in the United States.
Census 2000 Special Reports. Washington, DC: United States Department of
Commerce Economics and Statistics Administration. (United States Census
Bureau Report No. ASI 2004 2326-31.16)
Riney, T. J. (1988). The interlanguage phonology of Vietnamese English. Unpublished
doctoral dissertation, Georgetown University.
Rumbaut, R. (1995). The new Californians: Comparative research findings on the
educational progress of immigrant children. In R. Rumbaut & W. A. Cornelius
(Eds.), Californias immigrant children: Theory, research, and implications for
educational policy (pp. 17-70). San Diego, CA: Center for United States Mexican
Studies.
Sato, C. J. (1988). Origins of complex syntax in interlanguage development. Studies in
Second Language Acquisition, 10, 371-395.
Schmid, C. L. (2001). Educational achievment, language-minority students, and the new
second generation. Sociology of Education (Extra Issue), 71-87.
Stanton-Salazar, R. D. & Dornbusch, S. M. (1995). Social capital and the reproduction of
inequality: Information networks among Mexican-origin high school students.
Sociology of Education, 68, 116-135.
Stubbs, M. (2001). Words and phrases: Corpus studies of lexical semantics. Oxford, UK:
Blackwell Publishers, Inc.
Su, I. (2001). Transfer of sentence processing strategies: A comparison of L2 learners of
Chinese and English. Applied Psycholinguistics, 22, 83-112.
Tang, G. & Barlow, J. (2006). Characteristics of sound systems of monolingual
Vietnamese-speaking children with phonological impairment. Clinical Linguistics
& Phonetics, 20(6), 423-445.
Thompson, L. (1965). A Vietnamese Grammar. Seattle, WA: University of Washington
Press.
Trung tm khoa hc x hi v nhn vn: Quc gia vin ngn ng hc [Center of Natural
and Social Sciences: National Institute of Linguistics]. (2000). Loi t trong cc
ngn ng Vit Nam [Classifiers of the languages in Vietnam]. H Ni, Vietnam:
Nh Xut Bn Khoa Hc X Hi.
United States Department of Education and United States Department of Health and
Human Services. (2005, Jan). Childhood bilingualism: Current status and future
directions. Retrieved April 5, 2006, from
http://www.nichd.nih.gov/about%5Ccrmc/cdb/p_lang.htm
Veltman, C. (1983). Language shift in the United States. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Wong-Fillmore, L. (1991). When learning a second language means losing the first.
Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 6, 323-346.
Young, R. & Tran, M. (1999). Language maintenance and shift among Vietnamese in
America. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 140, 77-82.
Zhou, M. & Bankston, C. L., III. (1994). Social capital and the adaptation of the second

Journal of Southeast Asian American Education & Advancement, 2

Tang Cross-linguistic Analysis of Vietnamese and English

31

generation: The case of Vietnamese youth in New Orleans. International

Migration Review, 28(4), 821-845.
Zhou, M. & Banskton, C. L., III. (1998). Growing up American. New York: Russell Sage
Foundation.
Zhou, M. & Bankston, C. L., III. (2000). Straddling two social worlds: The experience of
Vietnamese refugee children in the United States. Washington, DC: ERIC
Clearinghouse on Urban Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No.
ED-99-CO-0035)

Acknowledgements
Portions of this paper were presented at the joint conference of the National Association
for Asian and Pacific American Education and the National Association for the Education
and Advancement of Cambodian, Laotian, and Vietnamese Americans, co-sponsored by
the National Education Association. The Bryn Bryngelson Research Fund and the
College of Liberal Arts at the University of Minnesota provided funding for travel
expenses related to the conference presentation on which this paper is based. I would like
to thank Jessica Barlow and Kathryn Kohnert for reviewing earlier drafts of this paper as
well as Hai Anh Nguyen, Pui Fong Kan, Kelly Nett Cordero, Jy Xiong, and Brenna
Vaughn for helpful suggestions and comments.
Please address correspondence to Giang Tang in the Department of SpeechLanguage-Hearing Sciences, 115 Shevlin Hall, 164 Pillsbury Drive S.E., University of
Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55455 or via email at tangx098@umn.edu.

About the Author

Tng Ngc Thy Giang is currently a doctoral student in the Department of SpeechLanguage-Hearing Sciences at the University of Minnesota. She completed a BA in
Spanish and a BS in Speech, Language, and Hearing Sciences at the University of Illinois
and a MA in Speech-Language Pathology as well as a certificate of Bilingual SpeechLanguage Pathology from San Diego State University. Giang has worked as a bilingual
speech-language pathologist in preschool and elementary school settings with students
who speak Spanish as a home language. In addition to serving Latino populations, she
has volunteered in Vietnam on multiple occasions training special educators and families
of individuals with disabilities. Giang is a fluent speaker of English, Vietnamese, and
Spanish. As a doctoral student, she aims to investigate typical and atypical language
development in dual-language learners, particularly in Vietnamese-speaking populations.

Journal of Southeast Asian American Education & Advancement, 2

Tang Cross-linguistic Analysis of Vietnamese and English

32

Journal of Southeast Asian American

Education & Advancement
Volume 2

www.JSAAEA.org

Editor
Dr. Wayne E. Wright
University of Texas, San Antonio

Associate Editors
Dr. Chhany Sak-Humphry
University of Hawaii
Dr. KimOanh Nguyen-Lam
California State University, Long Beach

Book Review Editor

Dr. Leslie Turpin
School for International Training

Creative Works Editor

Phouang Hamilton
Washington Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction

Special Advisor
Anne Frank
University of California, Irvine, Southeast Asian Archives

Editorial Assistant
James Knaack
University of Texas, San Antonio
Comments and questions for the editorial staff may be directed to jsaaea@lists.sis.utsa.edu.

Editorial Review Board

Dr. Carl L. Bankston III
Tulane University

Dr. Changming Duan

University of Missouri, Kansas City

Dr. Pollie Bith-Melander

San Jose State University

Dr. Sophal Ear

Syracuse University

Dr. Phala Chea

Lowell Public Schools

Dr. Nancy H. Hornberger

University of Pennsylvania

Dr. George Chigas

University of Massachusetts, Lowell

Dr. Samlong Inthaly

Minneapolis Public Schools

Journal of Southeast Asian American Education & Advancement, 2

A peer-reviewed
scholarly journal
published by the
National Association
for the Education &
Advancement of
Cambodian, Laotian,
and Vietnamese
Americans (NAFEA)

Tang Cross-linguistic Analysis of Vietnamese and English

Dr. Peter Nien-Chu Kiang
University of Massachusetts, Boston

Dr. Karen Quintiliani

California State University, Long Beach

Dr. Kevin K. Kumashiro

University of Illinois, Chicago

Dr. Kalyani Rai

University of Wisconsin, Milwaukee

Dr. Stacey Lee

University of Wisconsin, Madison

Dr. Fay Shin

California State University, Long Beach

Dr. David Chanpannha Ley

Montgomery County Public Schools

Dr. Nancy J. Smith-Hefner

Boston University

Dr. Sue Needham

California State University, Dominguez Hills

Dr. Yer J. Thao

Portland State University

Dr. Bic Ngo

University of Wisconsin-Madison

Dr. Myluong Tran

San Diego State University

Dr. Max Niedzwiecki

Independent Scholar

Dr. Khatharya Um
University of California, Berkeley

Dr. Leakhena Nou

California State University, Long Beach

Dr. Linda Trinh Vo

University of California, Irvine

Dr. Clara Park

California State University, Northridge

Dr. Terrence G. Wiley

Arizona State University

Dr. Mark Pfeifer

Texas A&M University, Corpus Christi

Dr. Zha Blong Xiong

University of Minnesota

Dr. Loan T. Phan

University of New Hampshire

Dr. Kou Yang

California State University, Stanislaus

Dr. Bounlieng Phommasouvanh

Minnesota Department of Education

Doctoral Student
Editorial Review Board
Keo Chea
University of Pennsylvania

Giang Tang
University of Minnesota

Vichet Chhuon
University of California, Santa Barbara

Layheng Ting
State University of New York, Albany

Loan Dao
University of California, Berkeley

Loan Tran
University of California, Santa Barbara

Annie BichLoan Duong

San Joaquin County Office of Education

Phitsamay Sychitkokhong Uy
Harvard University

Ha Lam
Arizona State University

Yang Sao Xiong

University of California, Los Angeles

Vanna Som
Harvard University

Journal of Southeast Asian American Education & Advancement, 2

33

Appendix: 3QQQ Spanish Phoneme Development chart

Spanish Phoneme Development
Acevedo (1989)
(MexicanAmerican)

Jimenez (1987)
(MexicanAmerican)

Linares (1981)
(Mexican)

Terrero (1979)
(Venezuelan)

IPA
m
n
p
b

k
g

t
d
f
j
l

3;6
3;6
3;6
3;6
--3;6
3;6
--4;0
4;0
>5;6
3;6
4;6
4;6

3;7
3;7
3;3
3;3
--3;7
4;7
--3;3
4;7
--4;3
3;11
3;11

3
3
3
6
6
3
3
--3
4
4
4
3
3

5;0

4;7

t
s
r (tap)

5;0
<5;6
3;6

4;7
5;7
4;7

4
6
4

rr (trill)

>5;6
3;6
3;6
---

>5;7
4;11
3;7
---

6
3
5
3

3;1
4;1
3;1
3;9
--3;1
5;5
--3;1
4;9
>5;5
4;9
5;1
4;5 (M)*
>5;5 (F)*
4;1 (M)
>5;5 (F)
5;1
>5;5
>5;1 (M)
5;5 (F)
>5;5
4;9
-----

The ages (in years; months) indicate the point at which the subjects had mastered the
respective phonemes, with mastery being at the 90% level. < means younger than.
> refers to older than.
*M and F refer to medial and final positions, respectively. These differences were
reported if they spanned more than two age groups. Those ages not designated as
corresponding to word position indicate the age at which the phonemes are mastered in
all positions in which they occur.
Source: Paulson, D.M. (1991). Phonological Systems of Spanish-speaking Texas
Preschoolers (Masters thesis). Fort Worth, TX: Texas Christian University.
Talk with Me

Appendix: 3RRR Helping Young ELL Children Not Speaking At School

HelpingYoungELLChildrenwhoarenotspeakingatSchool
TipsandIdeas
ByJanellNorman
2009

There are many misconceptions about preschool children who have not begun speaking at school. One of
themisthattheyhaveadeep,darksecrettohide.Anotheristhattheyhavebeentraumatizedorabused.A
thirderrorisinbelievingthatthesechildrenbenefitfromthreatsortoughlove.Afinalfallacyisthatthese
childrenareselectivemutesandthattheconditionishopeless.

Thevastmajority90%ofchildrenwhodonotspeakthefirstdayofdailyschoolwillbeginspeakingbythe
endofthatyear.ThisisespeciallytrueforchildrenwhoareEnglishLanguageLearnersandneedextratimeto
adjusttothelanguageandschoolroutines.

Thesechildrenaregenerallyshyandpreferwatchinguntiltheroutinesarefirmlyestablished.Theydonot
havethesyndromeofselectivemutismuntiltheyhavebeeninschoolforatleastayear.Eventhen,four
months of nonspecial education interventions need to be conducted and documented to determine if
changescanbemadeintheiraffect,behavior,andsocializationwithoutaformalassessment.

We need to bide our time and provide extra TLC with ELL students who have not established speaking at
school.Thesearechildrenwhobenefitfromextratime,teachersupport,guidance,andmodeling.Theyneed
to feel part of the class without feeling that they are the center of attention. They require extensive
supervisionthroughouttheschooldaysotheyaresafeandsecure.Theymayneedadailynotebookthatgoes
homeforquestionsandinformation.Theyneedtoseesmilesandbereassured.

Bygentleencouragement,thevastmajorityofthesechildrenwillestablishafriendshipwithinafewmonths.
Theywillalsoshowinterestinpreferredactivitiesandroutines.Theseneedtobeexpandedupontoplayup
theirstrength.Theyusuallylikecomputers,art,ormusic.Doalittleinvestigatinganddeterminewhatthis
childenjoys.

Americanschoolsarepermeatedwithdemandstospeakupandmakeyourselfheard.Thesearechildren
whohavealittledifferenttemperamentandbenefitfromroutinesandpatternsthathelpthemfeelsecurein
thiscomplexsociety.

The true selective mute child will not show any social improvement in a year. That child will often look
scared,worried,orhaveadeerintheheadlightsappearance.Thosearethechildrenthatneedadditional
documentation to determine the appropriate course of treatment. About 50% of children showing no
improvementhaveanunderlyingspeech,hearing,orlanguageproblemintheirnativelanguagethatmakes
themfeellessconfidentinspeaking.

Gathersomeinformationfromhome. Hasthechildhadherhearingtested?Doesshe speakclearlyinfull

sentences?Interact with relativeswhocomeinto the home? Answerthe phone?Shynesstendstorun in
families.Doyouthinkthischildhasashyparent?Ifso,theparenthasalsostruggledtofitinwithschool
andothersocialdemands.

Dontcallachildaselectivemuteunlessamedicalprofessionalhasusedthisterminologywiththefamily.
Discussyourconcernsfromaneducationalpointofviewandasktheparentswhatyouthinkmighthelptheir
childfeelmorecomfortableatschool.

Allthesequestionswillhelpyoudetermineifthechildisjustslowtowarmup,apossibleselectivemute,or
one with pervasive delays 24/7. Children showing little improvement that first year of school tend to be
anxious.Manyofthemappearveryafraidwithafrozenappearance.Thesearethechildrenthatweshould
bemoreconcernedabout.

Some children have been referred who have ended up having an autism spectrum disorder or pervasive
developmentaldelay.Thesechildrenhavelimitedcommunicationinallenvironmentsandoftenhavestrange
idiosyncrasiesintheirsocialinteractions.

Butmostlittlekidsjustneedthatfriendlyencouragementtojointhecircle,openthebook,lineup,bringout
theshowandtelltoy,orcompletetheartproject.

TechniquesHelpfultoYoungChildrennotSpeakingatSchool

1.Providedailysupportandextratimeinanactivitythechilddoeswell:organizingtoys,takingattendance
totheoffice,music,sharing,art,computers,etc.Makehis/herstatusintheclassimportantandreal,butnot
threatening.

2.Findoutfromthefamilywhatthechildsinterestsathomeare.Bringinpictures,photos,orremnantsof
theseintereststosharewiththeclass.

3.Pairthechildwithayounger,shyer,needier,ornewclassmateinlearningactivities.

4.Callthechildathomeonthephonetogiveclassinformation.

5.Talkanddraw.

6.Playtherapy,musictherapy,arttherapy,waterplayandsandplay.

7. Have the child get involved in simple projects, seasonal activities, and enjoyable games that do not
demandspeaking.

8.Donotletotherclassmatestalkoranswerforthechild.Thiswilleventuallyturnhimintotheclassmascot
andhewillgiveupallcommunicativeefforts,becauseitisthepathofleastresistance.

9.Playwithpuppetsanddevelopthematicschemesofinterest(MallofAmerica,barbershop,birthdayparty,
etc.).

10.Actnormallyandsmilealot.Dowhateveryoucantomakethechildfeelsecureandhappy.Callonhim
duringcalendarandcircletimeandencouragehimtocommunicateinwhateverwayhecan.

11.PlayISpy.

12.Havethechildtakeawrittenmessagetosomeone.

13.Lookatfamilyphotosduringsharingtime.Includeyourownphotos.

14.Includeasiblingingamesandactivities.

15.Bringinapet.

16.Doesthechildcooperateandhavegoodeyecontact?Ifso,youwilleventuallyseehergravitatetowards
certainclassmatesforpotentialfriends.Encouragethis.

17.Ifthechildisresistantinbehavior,avoidseyecontact,standstherelikeastatueorishidinginthecoat
closetprovidelowkeyremindersastowhateveryoneelseisdoing.Provideascaffoldofsupportwhereitis
neededtoguidethechildtowardthemainstream.

18.Thesechildrenthriveonroutine.Theydonotlikealotofchangesintheirlivesandliketobetoldifthere
isaspecialsituationthatmightbescaryforthem,suchasatornadodrill.

19.Neverplaythefool.Dontaskquestionsyoualreadyknowtheanswerto(e.g.,IsJacobheretoday?
whenheissittingrightinfront ofyou).Givethechildextra timetorespond.Accept nodsand pointingas
validresponses.Provideavarietyofopportunitiesforthestudenttomakeherneedsknown.

20.Doyouthinkthischildhasaspeechorhearingproblem?Hasthisbeencheckedout?

21.Doesthechildappearstiffandscared?Ifsoyouwillneedtoprovideextrareassurancethattheschoolis
ahappyplacewhereshecanbesuccessful.

22. Dont make the child the center of attention. This increases their anxiety and feelings of discomfort.
Theyalsodislikeeffusive,gushypraise.

23.Whydoesthefamilythinkthisbehaviorpatternhasemerged?Whathelpsthechildathome?

24. Schedule special bathroom breaks for these children as many of them wont use the bathroom
independentlyandholditallday.Despitebeingbright,manyofthemhaveaccidentsatschool.

25.Donteverthreatenanonspeakingchildatschoolanddontallowanyoneelsetodosoeither.Ifyousee
someone doing this, pull him aside and provide a better model for instruction. Threats and demands fuel
anxiety,andanxietyfuelsnotbeingcomfortableenoughtospeakorinteractwithothers.

26.Anonspeakingstudentneedsextrasupervisiontobesafearoundtheschoolandcommunity,astheyare
notabletovoicetheirneedsorproblems.

27.Strangebehaviors,suchasstaringinmirrors,handflapping,echolalia,androckingbackandfortharenot
characteristicofthenormal,shyELLchild.

27. Even though the child has not established speaking at school, try to make every day a happy, positive
experienceforhim/her.

Appendix: 3SSS Immersion Programs in Minnesota

Language Immersion Programs In Minnesota

Language Immersion Program Models and Definition:

Language immersion programs are defined as those that:

use a language other than English to teach subject matter content, i.e. math, reading, social
studies;
integrate language teaching with content teaching;
offer instruction through the immersion language for at least 50% of the school day during the
pre-school and elementary years; offer a minimum of two content areas taught through the
immersion language in middle and secondary continuation programs;
promote additive bi- or multilingualism, i.e., enriched instruction in the immersion language
sustained through the elementary years, including maintenance of the English language both
in and out of school;
are school-based programs that are held accountable for evaluating academic achievement
in the content areas;
employ teachers who are highly proficient in the language(s) they use for instruction; and
clearly separate teacher use of one language versus another for sustained periods of time.

One-Way (Foreign Language) Immersion Programs are designed to serve students whose native
language is English.
Two-Way Immersion Programs are designed to serve a combined population of native English
speakers and native Spanish speakers (all two-way programs in MN are Spanish/English).
Indigenous language immersion programs promote the revitalization of Native languages and
cultures and typically enroll Native American children whose first language is English.

For more information on immersion education:

Minnesota has a non-profit organization devoted to immersion programs: Minnesota Advocates for
Immersion Network (MAIN). Chair of the Executive Board is Corey Maslowski and Co-Chair is Tara
Fortune (see below).
Visit http://www.carla.umn.edu/immersion/index.html for more information and links to resources or
contact one of the following individuals with questions:
o
o
o

Tara Fortune, Immersion Projects Coordinator, Center for Advanced Research on Language
Acquisition, University of Minnesota fortu001@umn.edu
Corey Maslowski, Assistant Principal, St. Louis Park Jr. High maslowski.corey@slpschools.org
Diane Tedick, Assoc. Prof., Second Languages and Cultures Educ., Univ. of Minnesota
djtedick@umn.edu

Appendix: 3TTT ESR audit checklist

ELL ESR audit checklist for Early Childhood Special Ed
for Speech and Language Evaluations

Element of report

Yes

No Comments:

Background: Description of language history of

family, daycare providers, and child, addressing
the childs development and use of L1 and L2
(languages used, with whom, in what context,
when)
Background: Identification of the dialect of the
home language, including dialects of English
Interpreter: Name of interpreter used for
evaluation is listed
Testing: Description of tools used to evaluate
English and home language. Accommodations
listed
Test interpretation: Standard scores reported
only if student was part of the standardization
sample and administration was conducted in
the standard way (no interpreter used, no
repetitions of items, etc.)
Test interpretation: Informal
measures/observations support findings from
more formal measures
Test interpretation: Comparison of ELL child to
peers from culture, siblings or general
developmental expectations
Test interpretation: Data is interpreted in
relation to the childs exposure to both
languages, language transfer issues, and
community/cultural standards
Eligibility: Speech or language delay must be
present in all of the languages that the child
speaks to be eligible and must not be due solely
to lack of exposure to English
Eligibility: Conclusions consider skills in all
languages and eligibility criteria, indicating skills
that are significantly delayed (equivalent to -2.0
s.d.) when compared to cultural peers

Talk with Me

Harty/Mann/Derr 2008

Appendix: 3UUU Facilitating Meaningful Participation

(Please scroll to next page for appendix)

Facilitating the Meaningful

Participation of Culturally and
Linguistically Diverse Families in
the IFSP and IEP Process
Chun Zhang and Tess Bennett

This article briefly reviews literature regarding the involvement and participation of culturally and linguistically diverse (CLD) families in the special education process. Barriers
to family participation and strategies for facilitating family participation are summarized. Furthermore, we highlight important issues regarding raising the awareness of
professionals when they develop Individualized Family Service Plans (IFSPs) or Individualized Education Programs (IEPs) with families from CLD backgrounds. We discuss
implications for families, professionals, and programs to highlight the importance of
developing collaborative and effective IFSPs and IEPs with all families.

number of challenges have been

confronting special education
service providers and programs
in the process of providing quality services and supports to culturally and linguistically diverse (CLD) children with
disabilities and their families who are
from African American, Hispanic, Asian
and Pacific Islander, and Native American backgrounds. First, the demographics of the U.S. population are rapidly
changing. About one third of the young
children born in the United States are
from CLD backgrounds (Hanson, 1998).
Second, families are also becoming more
diverse in terms of language, SES, education, religion, ethnicity, family structure, occupation, geographical location,
belief systems, and values (Hanson,
Lynch, & Wayman, 1990; Lynch & Hanson, 1998). Third, many service providers who were primarily trained to provide child-focused services lack formal
training in working with families (Bailey,
Buysse, & Palsha, 1990). Furthermore,
bilingual and bicultural early interven-

tion and special education professionals

are in great shortage (Christensen, 1992).
Children with disabilities and their
families eligible for special education services need to develop Individualized
Family Service Plans (IFSPs) and Individualized Education Programs (IEPs).
An IFSP is a process and a written document developed by a multidisciplinary
and interagency team consisting of parents and other family members, a service
coordinator, and other professionals involved in the provision of early intervention services to infants and toddlers. The
components of the IFSP document include the following:
1. the childs current level of development in five domains;
2. the familys priorities, concerns, and
resources;
3. the major outcomes expected to be
achieved;
4. the specific early intervention services to be provided in the natural
environments;

5. the projected dates for the initiation

and duration of the services to be
provided;
6. the name of the service coordinator
who will be coordinating the services; and
7. the steps for supporting the transition to special education services
(Yell, 1998).
The IFSP must also include a justification of the extent, if any, to which early
intervention services will not be provided
in a natural environment (Special
Focus Issue, 1999, p. 15).
An IEP is a process in which a team develops an appropriate program and a
written document delineating the special
education and related services to be provided to an eligible student from ages 3
to 21 years (Yell, 1998). An IEP must include the students present level of performance and disability classification, the
recommended program placement, related services to be provided, a timeline
for the projected goals to be accomplished, annual goals and short-term instructional objectives, and evaluation
methods (Mervis & Leininger, 1992).
The IEP must provide a justification of
the extent to which the child will not
participate with children without disabilities in the general education class
(Special Focus Issue, 1999, p. 9).
Laws concerning special education
(e.g., the Education for All Handicapped

FOCUS ON AUTISM AND OTHER DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES

VOLUME 18, NUMBER 1, SPRING 2003
PAGES 5159

FOCUS ON AUTISM AND OTHER DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES

52

Children Act of 1975, the Education of

the Handicapped Act Amendments of
1986, the Individuals with Disabilities
Education Act of 1990) recognize family
involvement and familyprofessional collaboration as essential to developing
IFSPs and IEPs. These two documents
ensure the provision of early intervention
and special education services to children
with disabilities and their families. They
are at the heart of the intervention process, promoting collaboration between
family and service providers.
Numerous studies show that families
from CLD backgrounds underuse early
intervention services (Arcia & Gallagher,
1993; Sontag & Schacht, 1993, 1994).
Arcia, Keyes, Gallagher, and Herrick
(1993) reported that the three most important determinants for underuse of services for young children less than 5 years
of age are having a diverse ethnic or cul-

tural background, having a very low family income, and having a mother who is
unemployed. A child who is poor, living
in a rural area, disabled, and a member of
a diverse cultural and linguistic group
may have a much greater risk for underor nonuse of early intervention services.
On the other hand, school-age children
from CLD backgrounds are overrepresented with mild disabilities (e.g., learning disabilities, emotional disturbance) in
special education (Harry, 1992b). The
phenomena of underrepresentation and
overrepresentation are closely related to
the ways services are conceptualized and
delivered in early intervention and special
education.
Little research has been conducted on
the representation of children from CLD
backgrounds in moderate and severe disabilities (Harry, Grenot-Scheyer, et al.,
1995), and no research is available on

TABLE 1
Barriers to Family Participation
Barrier
Families
Limited English proficiency
Differences in language and dialects
Interpersonal communication style differences
Acculturation level
Attitudes toward disability
Family knowledge and comfort with the school infrastructure
A sense of alienation from school
Work, time conflicts, transportation problems, and childcare
needs
Logistic barriers related to income, material resources, transportation, time
Professionals
Special education professional knowledge and sensitivity to
cultural diversity
Insensitivity to religious beliefs and family traditions
Professional attitudes that stereotype or blame the parent and
deny parental expertise and knowledge about the child
Professionals withholding of information
Use of jargon
Programs
Lack of language-appropriate information materials concerning
resources, rights, and responsibilities for non-English-speaking
individuals
Shortage of trained bilingual and bicultural personnel
Inflexible scheduling of conferences
Lack of culturally responsive service models that systematically
address relevant cultural orientations and behaviors that
affect service use

References

Boone et al., 1999;

Greene & Nefsky,
1999; Harry, 1992b;
Lynch & Stein, 1987;

Boone et al., 1999;

Greene & Nefsky,
1999; Harry, 1992b

Chan, 1990; Lynch &

Stein, 1987

working with CLD families of children

with autism. This article briefly reviews
literature on the participation of CLD
families in the special education process.
We explain barriers to family participation and strategies for facilitating family
participation. Furthermore, we raise important issues for professionals to consider when they develop the IFSPs and
IEPs with CLD families, including those
of children with autism. Implications for
families, professionals, and programs are
discussed to highlight the importance of
working collaboratively to develop effective IFSPs and IEPs with all families.

Barriers to Family
Participation
Several studies have reported that CLD
families exhibit lower levels of participation than European American families in
the special education process (Harry,
1992a, 1992b; Lynch & Stein, 1987).
Many researchers have discussed barriers
to the participation of CLD families
(Blanche, 1996; Chan, 1990; Hanson
et al., 1990; Harry, 1992a; Sontag &
Schacht, 1993, 1994; see Table 1).
Knowledge of these barriers will help
professionals constructively develop
strategies to facilitate family understanding and participation.
Barriers such as the language and cultural differences of the family, a lack of
understanding of linguistic and cultural
diversity by professionals, and a lack of
support from the systems are key influences on the familys level of participation (Bennett, Zhang, & Hojnar, 1998).
McCubbin, Thompson, Thompson, McCubbin, and Kaston (1993) stated that
the ease with which professionals integrate cultural factors into the intervention planning is determined by the following factors:
1. the cultural background of the professional;
2. the sensitivity and competence of the
professional in dealing with cultural
factors;
3. the congruence between families
and professionals beliefs about intervention and services;

VOLUME 18, NUMBER 1, SPRING 2003

4. the influence of racism, poverty, and

political powerlessness on the familys perception of the servicedelivery system; and
5. the language and cultural identities
of the family.
Factors affecting the familys level of participation are complex and intertwined
and vary with each situation (e.g., view
of disability, knowledge about disability,
accessibility of services). Thus, it is important for professionals to individualize
and provide services depending on each
familys education, acculturation, socioeconomic status, geographical location,
beliefs about special education, and view
about the childs disability and the intactness of the family support systems
(Bennett et al., 1998; Harry et al., 1995;
Shu-Minutoli, 1995).

Preparation for the IFSP and

IEP Process
Initial Contacts with Families
When a child is suspected of having a disability or referred to an agency for a disability, an emotional period begins for
the family (Collins & Collins, 2001).
This period may be intensified because
the familys reactions have been brought
into the spotlight and exposed to a
stranger. It is very important for professionals to understand familys emotional
reactions to disability. These reactions
differ with each family. For some families,
this may mean that their worst fear has
been confirmed. For others, it may mean
that family shame has become public.
However, to still others it may mean that
they can get help and support from professionals. It is essential at this stage to
approach families with sensitivity and to
determine their readiness for information
and support. Bombarding families with
too much information may alienate them
from professionals and agencies and make
future contacts more challenging.
Taking time to understand the reactions, concerns, needs, priorities, and preferences of the family and developing a
trusting relationship with them can per-

sonalize the process, which will facilitate

the familys access to special education
and ease the process. Lynch and Lewis
(1982) described the special education
system about two decades ago:
Not only is the special education system
new to many families, it is also highly complex and requires the same kind of recordkeeping, efficiency, and monitoring that is
required in the business world. Each step
in the identification, assessment, and placement of a student into a special education
program or service is now a bureaucratic
procedure leaving professionals less time
and less flexibility for recognizing and attending to families needs. Often the
process itself is in direct conflict with the
familys cultural values and beliefs. (p. 98)

Special education remains a complex system. Rushing to complete the IFSP or

IEP process within 30 to 60 days only to
meet the mandates of the law may not be
in the best interests of the child and family. Establishing rapport (e.g., having
conversations, interpreting, sharing, accepting) with families and taking the
time to introduce them to the special education system and process is a recommended strategy (Bennett et al., 1998;
Chan, 1990, 1998; Harry, 1992b; Kalyanpur & Rao, 1991; Lynch & Hanson,
1998).
Initial contact is a critical period of
time for professionals to get to know the
child and family. In this critical period of
time, professionals can explain the terminology, explain the diagnosis and the intricacy of special education and related
services, share their expectations of each
other, and understand the familys hopes
and aspirations. See Table 2 for strategies
to facilitate the familys participation in
special education.

Preparing Families
An IFSP or IEP meeting is a mandated
procedure that must occur before special
education services are provided to children and families. Many families have reported that professionals do not spend
time explaining parent rights or giving
the needed information before the IFSP

53
or IEP meeting and that they felt their
presence at the IFSP or IEP meeting was
only for show (Kalyanpur & Rao, 1991).
As Lynch and Stein (1987) pointed out,
For newly arrived Hispanics, Central
Americans, and Asians, the entire educational system is different from that in
their own countries, and the special education programs, services, and legislation
have no parallel (p. 106).
Family characteristics (e.g., education,
acculturation, employment status, language, family resources) need to be considered when planning the IFSP and IEP
meetings. Some special efforts may be
needed if families are unfamiliar with the
special education process. Training sessions may be necessary in order for families to participate in a meaningful way
(Chan, 1990). Cloud (1992) suggested
that families role-play a meeting, sit in on
another meeting, or watch a videotape of
a meeting so that they can gain a better
understanding of an IFSP or IEP meeting. These efforts may lengthen the
process; however, they will make it more
meaningful, which will eventually pay off
for everyone. Many other strategies for
preparing families for the IFSP or IEP
process are included in Table 2.

Communication
Professionals experience a range of languages and communication styles when
interacting with families from CLD backgrounds. Communication is the key to
mutual understanding, trust, and collaboration (Bennett et al., 1998). When
communication breaks down in an interaction, misunderstanding can occur.
Hanson et al. (1990) pointed out that
families with limited English proficiency
(or interventionists with limited otherlanguage proficiency) are seriously disadvantaged (p. 124). They also noted that
successful intervention takes time and
that when there is no or limited communication to collaboratively share, plan,
and implement services, some of the
goals of special education will be lost.
Communication is embedded with
many nuances. This is especially true for
cross-cultural communication. Professional jargon, body language, timing of

FOCUS ON AUTISM AND OTHER DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES

54

TABLE 2
Strategies for Facilitating Family Participation in Special Education Process
Strategy

References

Families
Promote increased knowledge and understanding with school
policy, practices, and procedures among families.
Develop new roles for families.
Professionals
Involve other influential family members or qualified community
members.
Develop increased knowledge and sensitivity about multiple
dimensions of cultural diversity.
Hold bilingual meetings and select convenient times for parents.
Conduct a home visit a few days prior to IEP meeting to discuss
with parents such issues as child care, transportation, and the
importance of parent attendance.
Use family-centered approaches and collaborative techniques
when interacting with families/youth with disabilities.
Understand culturally bound, nonverbal aspects of communication,
such as body language and eye contact.
Reduce the volume of written information.
Provide families with information that is not only factual, but also
open-ended and reciprocal to allow parents to express their
cultural views on disability, preferences, and opinions about
placement, teaching methods, and the extent and meaning of
their rights under the special education law.
Provide an overview of what will take place throughout each phase
of the IEP process.
Orient parents to location of the IEP meeting and introduce them
to other members of the team.
Encourage parents to have a family member or family advocate
accompany them.
Familiarize yourself with emotional reactions and attitudes to a
child with a disability.
Define goals which are consistent with the life experiences,
religious beliefs, and cultural values of the families served.
Use native language information and materials (e.g., reading
materials, radio, television, video, Web site).
Maintain ongoing communication regarding status of assessment
and service delivery procedures.
Programs
Provide transportation, advance notice of meetings, and childcare.
Hire persons who are familiar with the culture of the family in order
to promote accurate and unbiased interpretation.
Maintain the same interpreter throughout the process to avoid
disruption of parent/interpreter relationship.
Disseminate information and gain access to parents through traditional community supports such as churches or ethnic organizations, as opposed to impersonal efforts.

silence, pacing of speech, and pitch and

tone influence the communication and
interpretation process. Misunderstandings between professionals and families
have been documented in many examples (e.g., Blanche, 1996). For example,
professionals label children as mentally
retarded, emotionally disturbed, or

Greene & Nefsky,

1999

Florian, 1987;
Greene & Nefsky,
1999; Lynch &
Stein, 1987; Nelson, Smith, &
Dodd, 1992

Shu-Minutoli (1995) described the difference between two communication

styles. Low-context communication emphasizes exactly what is said during the
interaction. The communication is
straightforward, specific, and logical.
High-context communication is heavily
dependent on the subtle messages of the
interaction (body language, facial expression, timing of silence). In this context,
the verbal message does not really convey the genuine meaning. Professionals
unaware of these differences will feel
frustrated, puzzled, or confused because
of an interaction. If questioning a professionals authority is not valued in a
familys culture, they may refrain from
asking for clarification or expressing
opinions in order to show proper respect
(Anderson, 1989; Blanche, 1996). Professionals may misinterpret the familys
deferential attitude as lack of interest
(Shu-Minutoli, 1995).
Cooper and Rascon (1994) suggested
some strategies for enhancing family
professional communication. They include keeping the communication free of
specialized diagnostic or educational terminology and professional jargon and establishing a climate of trust. Involving a
cultural guide who is bilingual and bicultural will also reduce the degree of misunderstanding and mistrust.

Familys View of Disability

Rhodes, 1996

learning disabled, whereas families may

call their children stubborn, lazy,
and slow. In many languages there are
no equivalent terms to describe various
types of disabling conditions, such as
autism, mental retardation, and learning
disabilities (Chan, 1998; Harry, 1992a;
Smith & Ryan, 1987).

Shu-Minutoli (1995) cautioned that the

reaction to a child with a disability is very
personal, and cultural beliefs may be only
one factor. Factors such as SES, regional
differences, religious beliefs, degree of
acculturation, English proficiency, educational level, occupation, immigration
status, accessibility of services, familys
support system, and family stability could
all affect a familys view of disability,
which in turn affects the familys access
to and use of services.
Harry (1992a) stated that disabilities
are culturally defined. Every culture has
different parameters for typical and atypical development. Some cultures accept a
wider range of diversity in behavior and
development. For example, in cultures
where technology is not highly valued, if

VOLUME 18, NUMBER 1, SPRING 2003

the child can make a living, the child will

not be labeled as mentally retarded
(Harry & Kalyanpur, 1994). Another example is that if a child has a communication problem and that condition does
not prevent him or her from helping in
the family household or business, the
family may not think of the child as disabled. A familys view of disability will
impact their use of services. Sontag and
Schacht (1993) reported that there were
significant differences among ethnic
groups in the frequency of using medicalrelated services (e.g., physical and occupational therapy, surgery). Native American children were significantly less likely
to receive medical-related services than
European American children.
Conflict may occur when families and
professionals disagree on the view of disability and treatment. Families may
refuse surgery because of cultural taboos
against cutting someone open. If a
childs condition does not seem problematic to the family, they will not
respond favorably to the notion of treatment (McCubbin et al., 1993). The challenge for professionals is to recognize
that the framework of disability and services to disabled students are based on
cultural assumptions, rather than universal truths (Harry & Kalyanpur, 1994,
p. 145). Thus, when initially presenting
a diagnosis to CLD families, it is imperative that professionals take time to understand the familys reactions to the
childs condition. Professionals should
not use a label that does not make sense
to the family. They can enlist cultural
guides to properly explain what that condition is if language and cultural differences exist between the professional and
the family (Shu-Minutoli, 1995).

Understanding and Accepting

Family Structure
Families from many cultural groups may
rely on members of their extended family, with whom they have close emotional
ties, to share responsibilities and provide
support (Blanche, 1996; Hanson et al.,
1990). For example, many CLD families
may rely on extended family members for
babysitting and may even be reluctant to

use an outsider (Anderson, 1987). Often

parents may not be the primary caregivers. Parental consent is a Western value.
In order for professionals to meaningfully involve families, they may have to
obtain the consent of extended family
members who are close to the family
(e.g., grandparents, godparents, tribal
leaders; Hanson et al., 1990). Thus, the
decision-making process needs to include the primary caregiver and any important members of the family in order
for interventions to be implemented and
followed through (Shu-Minutoli, 1995).

Time Orientation
In many cultures, personal interaction is
more important than rushing to get the
work done, and thus time efficiency may
not be valued by families (Blanche,
1996). The 30- to 60-day deadline for
completing an IFSP or IEP meeting may
not be understood by many families
(Bennett et al., 1998). Some families may
not be able to project into the future and
come up with goals for their child. In
many cultures, taking time to consult
elders or community leaders in order to
make wise choices for the child is critical.
Rushing to complete the IEP or IFSP
may prevent the family from meaningfully participating in the process. Moreover, professionals may see themselves as
short-term providers who spend a period
of time with children. Parents see the
care of their child as an ongoing and lifelong commitment (Brotherson & Goldstein, 1992). Professionals need to acknowledge this significant difference in
time orientation and realize the importance of preparing families to be advocates so that families can maintain the
continuity and quality of care for their
children.

Families Understanding of
Family-Centered Philosophy
Many concepts and philosophies of early
intervention and special education may
be strange to families who are not familiar with the special education process and
systems in the United States. The Education of the Handicapped Act Amendments of 1986 and the Individuals with

55
Disabilities Education Act mandate family involvement and family decision making in the process to protect children
with disabilities from inequitable treatment. Concepts advocated in familycentered philosophies, such as families
being decision makers and advocates,
may conflict with the views of experts
and families. Many families may take
what is offered and feel reluctant to question the appropriateness of placement
and instruction provided to their children. Thus, the interpretation of familycentered practice needs to be extended
and contextualized when working with
families from CLD backgrounds. Providing information to familiarize families
with the special education process, their
legal rights, support systems (such as family advocates), and parent training will
prepare them to be more comfortable
with and confident at navigating the systems and becoming advocates for their
children.

Developing IFSP and

IEP Goals
The issues previously discussed affect
familyprofessional interaction and thus
are important for professionals to consider in order to develop meaningful
IFSP and IEP goals with families. Professionals may find that a familys hopes
and goals for their child are greatly influenced by that familys beliefs and other
important characteristics (SES, education, religion, acculturation; Blanche,
1996; Hanson et al., 1990; Robinson &
Rathbone, 1999). Professionals may emphasize independence, employability,
and self-sufficiency as important goals for
children. Shu-Minutoli (1995) stated
that families may feel confused if professionals develop goals to foster a childs
independence at an early age. This is because many parents from CLD backgrounds may feel that they are not good
parents if they do not take care of their
child (e.g., feeding and dressing their
child). Another example is that children
and adults with disabilities are treated
with protection, nurturing, sympathy,
and pity (Harry et al., 1995). These atti-

56

FOCUS ON AUTISM AND OTHER DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES

tudes may be in conflict with service

providers goals of independence and
self-sufficiency.

Identifying the Familys

Strengths, Needs,
and Resources
Correa (1989) suggested a multifaceted
ecological model to gather information
before goal development. She emphasized that a broad base of assessment
areas must be tapped before the professional has an accurate view of the needs
of the individual child and family. The assessment should include resources and
support systems available to the family;
an understanding of the familys structure and the roles within the family; and
knowledge of the extended family, each
members responsibilities within the family unit, and the decision-making process.

Involving Bilingual and

Bicultural Guides
Misidentification and misplacement of
children from CLD backgrounds are often due to a lack of understanding or a
miscommunication. Only involving translators or interpreters simplifies the complexities of cross-cultural communication
(Barrera, 1994). Barrera suggested the
use of a culture-language mediator,
sometimes referred to as cultural guide,
or bilingual and bicultural guide, who is
proficient in the language families speak
but also has the professional knowledge
and skills (p. 11). This person can assist
the professionals in understanding the
values, behaviors, language, and rules
held by the family. He or she can also
help the family and child become familiar with the values, beliefs, language, and
rules and procedures for the assessment
and intervention implemented by the
professionals. Thus, this person becomes
key to mediating the conflicts and bridging the differences of those involved.

Developing Goals to Match

the Childs Strengths
and Needs
Cloud (1992) stated that an IEP is a
plan that accounts for all elements that

make up the teaching and learning context (p. 149). It should have information about the childs characteristics
(e.g., strengths, learning and interaction
styles, language proficiency, needs). Cloud
(1992) suggested that goals and objectives should be developed in all areas, including language development, academic
or vocational skills, social skills, and objectives for inclusion. If the child has a
disability and has limited English proficiency, the IEP needs to have a languageuse plan that specifies the extent of instruction in academic areas that needs
to done in the native language and in
English.

Developing Goals That

Consider the Familys
Language and Culture
Harry, Rueda, and Kalyanpur (1999) indicated that professionals working with
families from different backgrounds need
to consider the extent to which they influence families goals. They stated that
in order to develop socially valued and
acceptable goals, professionals need to
consider the context of the child and
family (e.g., the language used at home,
the community where the child functions
daily). Through honest and open dialogue with families, professionals can
compare their differing beliefs and develop goals by building on family characteristics, beliefs, and strengths rather
than setting goals derived from values
that may be strange to the families served.

Implications
Families
A deficit view of families has been detrimental when professionals intend to fix
a childs or a familys problem (Harry
& Kalyanpur, 1994; Kalyanpur & Rao,
1991). Family-centered support principles emphasize that professionals recognize the unique strengths of each individual family and understand the
importance of assisting families in identifying available resources to meet their
perceived needs rather than trying to fit
families into the rigid existing program

models and services. Professionals need

to build a partnership with family members based on mutual respect, open communication, shared responsibility, and
collaboration (Greene & Nefsky, 1999).
Chan (1990) found that families desired objective information about their
childs specific disabling condition, particularly with respect to etiology, associated characteristics, the corresponding
needs, and information about available
services. Parents were interested in learning skills to promote their childs development. Parents also expressed the needs
to get emotional support for coping with
a child with a disability and to reduce
family stress (Collins & Collins, 2001).
Families need understandable information regarding the eligibility, assessment,
services, and educational programming
for their children with disabilities. As primary advocates of their children, they
need information regarding their rights
in the decision-making process (Chan,
1990; Greene & Nefsky, 1999).
Families need to be encouraged to become active participants in the servicedelivery process. Families should be
included and respected as equal team
members. Support groups such as parent
advisory committees and advocacy groups
can play a critical role in bridging the gap
between special education personnel and
families from CLD backgrounds. These
support groups may not be familiar to
many cultural groups; however, families
can be exposed to these experiences so
that they can choose the variety of roles
they are comfortable with. These support
groups can also help families understand
the legal aspects of the special education
process, teach them how to be effective
advocates for their children, and offer
cultural and linguistic diversity training
to professionals working with their children (Greene & Nefsky, 1999).

Professionals
Harry (1992b) mentioned that many
minority parents tend to place their trust
in the school and do not expect to play
an influential role (p. 102). For this reason, parents sometimes maintain a passive stance in dealing with issues related

VOLUME 18, NUMBER 1, SPRING 2003

to their children. Further, the nature of

special education and related services
provided to school-age children with disabilities is mainly determined by professionals (Harry, 1992b). Professionals,
thus, face the responsibility for making
legitimate decisions in the best interests
of children and families.
When working with families whose
backgrounds differ, professionals cultural
values are often unrecognized until they
are challenged by exposure to different
values. Professionals and families may expect reactions that range from suspicion
to surprise, from disbelief to delight, and
from acceptance to appreciation (Hanson et al., 1990, p. 117). Harry et al.
(1995) cautioned professionals against
developing a false sense of cultural competence based on a general, superficial
body of information (e.g., foods, holidays, heroes) about particular cultural
groups.
Shu-Minutoli (1995) indicated that
professionals expectations for family participation must be realistic, sensible, and
sensitive to the families needs and priorities. Professionals also need to be aware
of their own beliefs that may have an impact on the delivery of services to families of children with disabilities. Becoming culturally competent requires that
professionals identify, clarify, and reflect
on their own values, assumptions, and
practices. By gathering and analyzing information regarding the cultural context
families are in, professionals can determine the degree of family acculturation
and examine each familys beliefs related
to childrearing practices and goals for
their child (Hanson et al., 1990). It is
critical that professionals be prepared to
deliver services in a nontraditional and
flexible manner and in a fashion that is
most comfortable for families (ShuMinutoli, 1995).
Professionals need to adapt their roles
when they work with families in planning
and implementing interventions. Hanson et al. (1990) stated that professionals need to
[acknowledge] different cultural perspectives and [learn] how to work effectively
within the boundaries that are comfortable

for the family, while sharing the views of

the larger culture to increase the familys
understanding and improve their ability to
negotiate the new culture. (p. 117)

Self-reflection, flexibility, the ability to

understand the relativity of their own and
the familys perspectives, and observational and interaction skills will enable
service professionals to gather, in a respectful manner, the necessary information regarding developing realistic and
socially acceptable goals (Harry et al.,
1999). Both professionals and families
need to acknowledge the importance of
an individualized, ongoing, and flexible
IFSP or IEP process. This ongoing process will allow professionals to respond
appropriately to the familys changing
needs. It will help professionals monitor
the degree to which suggested interventions fit into the familys schedule and
routines. Professionals must acknowledge
that the IFSP or IEP is not merely a document but a continuous intervention
process for preparing families to be advocates of their children (Harry et al.,
1999).
Thus, as Harry et al. (1999) stated,
the challenge is
not for professionals to give up their own
beliefs, but to cultivate a habit of learning
to understand and respect others. . . . If
service providers can learn to respect the
value systems of others regardless of
whether they agree with them, a process of
cultural reciprocal negotiation can begin.
(p. 133)

Kalyanpur and Rao (1991) suggested

that empowerment is not the mere provision of services to underserved population. Empowerment signifies changing
the role of a service provider from that of
an expert to that of an ally or friend who
enables families to articulate what they
need (Kalyanpur & Rao, 1991, p. 531).

Programs
Harry (1992b) pointed out that schools
tend to focus on compliance with mandates rather than on developing effective
communication and interaction with parents. Providing culturally sensitive and

57
appropriate services requires overcoming
significant barriers (Hanson et al., 1990).
A fundamental barrier is the simple fact
that most early intervention and special
education programs and their policies, as
well as professionals, may represent only
European American values. The effectiveness of programs often depends on
the development of policies that are sensitive to and respectful of cultural diversity, cultural competence, and behavioral
changes of the professionals (Hanson
et al., 1990). The effectiveness of the
programs that serve CLD populations
rests heavily upon the sensitivity, understanding, and respect paid to the specific
cultural, familial, and individual diversity
involved (Anderson & Schrag Fenichel,
1989, p. 18).
Harry et al. (1995) recommended that
personnel preparation on cultural diversity issues should be intensive and explicit, with an emphasis that inculcates
the understanding that cultures are fluid
and are greatly influenced by acculturation, generational status, gender, social
class, education, occupational status, and
numerous other variables (p. 106). A
more important objective of cultural diversity training for professionals is to
teach them how to use family-centered
approaches that enable special educators
to gain an understanding of and respect
for a familys perspective on their child
with disabilities and hopes and plans for
the childs future (Greene & Nefsky,
1999).
ABOUT THE AUTHORS

Chun Zhang, PhD, is currently an assistant

professor of early childhood special education at
Fordham University. Her research interests include familyprofessional collaboration, multicultural perspectives of disabilities, and facilitating the participation of culturally and
linguistically diverse families in the development of Individualized Family Service Plans
and the Individualized Education Programs
and teacher preparation. Tess Bennett, PhD, is
a faculty member of early childhood at Eastern
Illinois University. She has extensive experience
working with families of children with special
needs, Head Start, research and evaluation
activities, and teacher preparation. Address:
Chun Zhang, Fordham University, Room

58

FOCUS ON AUTISM AND OTHER DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES

1102, Division of Curriculum & Teaching,

113 West 60th St., New York, NY 10023.
REFERENCES

Anderson, P. P. (1989). Issues in serving culturally diverse families of young children

with disabilities. Early Child Development
and Care, 50, 167188.
Anderson, P. P., & Schrag Fenichel, E.
(1989). Serving culturally diverse families
of infants and toddlers with disabilities.
Washington, DC: National Center for Clinical Infant Programs.
Arcia, E., & Gallagher, J. J. (1993). Who are
underserved by early interventionists? Can
we tell? Infant-Toddler Intervention, 3, 93
100.
Arcia, E., Keyes, L., Gallagher, J. J., & Herrick, H. (1993). National portrait of sociodemographic factors associated with underutilization of services: Relevance to early
intervention. Journal of Early Intervention,
17, 283297.
Bailey, D. B., Buysse, V., & Palsha, S. A.
(1990). Self-ratings of professional knowledge and skills in early intervention. The
Journal of Special Education, 23, 423 435.
Barrera, I. (1994, June/July). Thoughts on
the assessment of young children whose sociocultural background is unfamiliar to the
assessor. Zero to Three, 913.
Bennett, T., Zhang, C., & Hojnar, L. (1998).
Facilitating the full participation of culturally diverse families in the IFSP/IEP process. Infant-Toddler Intervention, 8, 227
249.
Blanche, E. I. (1996). Alma: Coping with culture, poverty, and disability. The American
Journal of Occupational Therapy, 50, 265
276.
Brotherson, M. J., & Goldstein, B. L. (1992).
Time as a resource and constraint for parents of young children with disabilities: Implications for early intervention services.
Topics in Early Childhood Special Education,
12, 508527.
Chan, S. (1990). Early intervention with culturally diverse families of infants and toddlers with disabilities. Young Children, 3(2),
7887.
Chan, S. (1998). Families with Asian roots. In
E. W. Lynch & M. J. Hanson (Eds.), Developing cross-cultural competence: A guide
for working with young children and their
families (pp. 210251). Baltimore: Brookes.
Christensen, C. M. (1992). Multicultural
competencies in early intervention: Train-

ing professionals for a pluralistic society. Infants and Young Children, 4(3), 4963.
Cloud, N. (1992). Development of the Individualized Educational Program for limited
English proficient students. In L. Mervis
& R. Leininger (Eds.), Recommended practices in the identification, assessment, and
provision of special education for culturally
and linguistically diverse students (pp. 143
154). Springfield: Illinois Board of Education.
Collins, A. W., & Collins, S. J. (2001). Journey into autism. Focus on Autism and Other
Developmental Disabilities, 16, 2026.
Cooper, K. L., & Rascon, L. (1994, March).
Building positive relationships on the border
with parents of special students: Effective
practices for the IEP. Paper presented at the
annual national conference of the American Council on Rural Special Education,
Austin, TX.
Correa, V. I. (1989). Involving culturally diverse families in the education of their limited English proficient handicapped and at
risk children. In S. Fradd & M. J. Weistmantel (Eds.), Bilingual and bilingual special education: An administrators handbook (pp. 130144). San Diego, CA:
College-Hill.
Education for All Handicapped Children Act
of 1975, 20 U.S.C. 1400 et seq.
Education of the Handicapped Act Amendments of 1986, 20 U.S.C. 1400 et seq.
Florian, V. (1987). Cultural and ethnic aspects of family support services for parents
of a child with a disability. In D. K. Lipsky
(Ed.), Family support for families with a disabled member (pp. 3752). New York:
World Rehabilitation Fund.
Greene, G., & Nefsky, P. (1999). Transition
for culturally and linguistically diverse
youth with disabilities: Closing the gaps.
Mutiple Voices for Ethnically Diverse Exceptional Learners, 3(1), 1524.
Hanson, M. J. (1998). Ethnic, cultural, and
language diversity in intervention settings.
In E. W. Lynch & M. J. Hanson (Eds.), Developing cross-cultural competence: A guide
for working with young children and their
families (pp. 322). Baltimore: Brookes.
Hanson, M. J., Lynch, E. W., & Wayman,
K. I. (1990). Honoring the cultural diversity of families when gathering data. Topics
in Early Childhood Special Education, 10,
112131.
Harry, B. (1992a). Making sense of disability:
Low-income, Puerto Rican parents theories of the problem. Exceptional Children,
59, 27 40.

Harry, B. (1992b). Restructuring the participation of African-American parents in

special education. Exceptional Children, 59,
123131.
Harry, B., Grenot-Scheyer, M., Smith-Lewis,
M., Park, H., Xin, F., & Schwartz, H.
(1995). Developing culturally inclusive services for individuals with severe disabilities.
Journal of the Association for Persons with
Severe Handicaps, 20(2), 99109.
Harry, B., & Kalyanpur, M. (1994). Cultural
underpinnings of special education: Implications for professional interactions with
culturally diverse families. Disability & Society, 9, 145165.
Harry, B., Rueda, R., & Kalyanpur, M.
(1999). Cultural reciprocity in sociocultural
perspectives: Adapting the normalization
principle for family collaboration. Exceptional Children, 66, 123136.
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act
Amendments of 1997, 20 U.S.C. 1401
(26).
Kalyanpur, M., & Rao, S. S. (1991). Empowering low-income black families of handicapped children. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 61, 523532.
Lynch, E. W., & Hanson, M. J. (1998). Steps
in the right direction: Implications for interventionists. In E. W. Lynch & M. J.
Hanson (Eds.), Developing cross-cultural
competence: A guide for working with young
children and their families (pp. 491512).
Baltimore: Brookes.
Lynch, E. W., & Lewis, R. B. (1982). Multicultural considerations in assessment and
treatment of learning disabilities. Learning
Disabilities, 1, 93103.
Lynch, E. W., & Stein, R. C. (1987). Parent
participation by ethnicity: A comparison of
Hispanic, Black, and Anglo families. Exceptional Children, 54, 105111.
McCubbin, H. I., Thompson, E. A., Thompson, A. I., McCubbin, M. A., & Kaston,
A. J. (1993). Culture, ethnicity, and the
family: Critical factors in childhood chronic
illnesses and disabilities. Pediatrics, 91,
10631069.
Merns, L., & Leininger, R. (1992). Recommended practices in the identification, assessment, and provision of special education for
culturally and linguistically diverse students.
Springfield: Illlinois State Board of Education.
Nelson, R. J., Smith, D. J., & Dodd, J. M.
(1992). Understanding the cultural characteristics of American Indian families: Effective partnerships under the Individualized

VOLUME 18, NUMBER 1, SPRING 2003

Family Service Plan (IFSP). Rural Special

Education Quarterly, 11(2), 3336.
Rhodes, R. L. (1996). Beyond our borders:
Spanish-dominant migrant parent and the
IEP process. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 15(2), 1922.
Robinson, E. G., & Rathbone, G. N. (1999).
Impact of race, poverty, and ethnicity on
services for persons with mental disabilities:
Call for cultural competence. Mental Retardation, 37, 333338.

59

Shu-Minutoli, K. (1995). Family support: Diversity, disability, and delivery. Yearbook in

Early Childhood Education, 6, 125140.
Smith, M. J., & Ryan, A. S. (1987). ChineseAmerican families of children with developmental disabilities: An exploratory study of
reactions to service providers. Mental Retardation, 25, 345350.
Sontag, J. C., & Schacht, R. (1993). Family
diversity and patterns of service utilization
in early intervention. Journal of Early Intervention, 17, 431 444.

Sontag, J. C., & Schacht, R. (1994). An ethnic comparison of parent participation and
information needs in early intervention.
Exceptional Children, 60, 422 433.
Special focus issue: A primer on IDEA 1997
and its regulations. (1999, April/May).
CEC Today, 3.
Yell, M. L. (1998). The law and special education. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice
Hall.

Focus on Autism and Other

Developmental Disabilities
. . . is available online to subscribers!
Benefits include:

Set up access now at:

e-journal access 24 hours a day, 7 days a week,

365 days a year
Document-to-document linking via references
for fast, reliable access to the wider literature
Fully searchable across full text, abstracts, titles,
tables of contents, and figures
Links to and from major abstract and indexing
resources to aid research
Full-text searching across multiple journals
TOC alerting service

http://www.catchword.com/titles/10883576.htm

. . . and follow the online instructions.

Need help? Free technical support:
support@ingenta.com

Not a subscriber?
Contact http://www.proedinc.com today!

PRO-ED, Inc. 8700 Shoal Creek Blvd. Austin, Texas 78757-6897

ph 800/897-3202 or 512/451-3246 fax 800/FXPROED
www.proedinc.com

Appendix: 3VVV IFSP English Family Thoughts

(Please scroll to next page for appendix)

Childs Name:

FAMILY THOUGHTS

Family Considerations and Concerns for the Individualized Family Service Plan
1. Please describe how you see your child. Tell what you most like, any concerns or needs. (Please use the back or additional paper if desired.)

2. Which of the following do you or other family members feel are important concerns or areas about which you would like more information?

for your child:

Getting around
Communicating
Learning
Eating, nutrition
Toilet learning
Having fun with other children
Challenging behaviors/emotions
Equipment or supplies
Health or dental care
Pain or discomfort
Vision
Hearing
Other

for your family:

Information about available services

Information about specific special needs
Learning about different services and how they work
Explaining professional terms/roles
Help with transportation (to school, appointments, or vehicle
adaptation)
Meeting other families whose child has similar needs
Finding a support group
Information/ideas for brothers, sisters, friends, relatives, others
Finding or working with doctors/other specialists
Coordinating childs medical care
Coordinating or making appointments, dealing with agencies
Finding child care
People who help in your home/care for your child so you can have a
break
Planning/expectations for future
Assistance with housing, clothing, jobs, food, telephone
Assistance in obtaining funds for extra cost of childs special needs

3. What type of help would you want for your child and family in the months or year ahead?

4. What else do you think would be helpful for others to know about your child? about your family?

Help with insurance

Information about recreational
opportunities
Interpreter (language)
Other
Notes:

Appendix: 3WWW IFSP Consideraciones y Preocupaciones de la Familia

(Please scroll to next page for appendix)

IDEAS DE LA FAMILIA

Nombre de Nia(o):

Consideraciones y Preocupaciones de la Familia por el Plan de Servicios Individualizados de la Familia (IFSP)

1. Por favor, cuente cmo usted describira a su nia(o). Diga que es lo que ms le gusta de su nia(o) , algunas preocupaciones o necesidades.
(Por favor use el espacio atrs de la hoja o aada otra si usted lo desea).

2. Cules de los siguientes puntos cree usted que son, para usted o para otro miembro de la familia, importantes preocupaciones o reas sobre lo
que le gustara obtener ms informacin?

Para su nia(o):

Movilizarse
Comunicarse
Aprender
Comer, nutricin
Aprender ir al bao
Divertirse con otros nios
Dificultades en lo emocional o
con el comportamiento
Equipo o accesorios
Salud o cuidado dental
Dolor o incomodidad
Visin
Odos (audicin)
Otros

Para su familia:

Informacin sobre recursos disponibles

Informacin sobre necesidades especiales especficas
Aprender acerca de los diferentes servicios y como funcionan
Explicar trminos profesionales / el papel de los profesionales
Ayuda con transporte (a la escuela, citas, o adaptaciones al vehculo)
Conocer a otras familias con necesidades similares a las suyas
Encontrar un grupo de apoyo
Informacin / ideas para hermanos, amigos, parientes, etc.
Encontrar o trabajar con mdicos u otros especialistas
Coordinar el cuidado mdico de la nia(o)
Coordinar / hacer citas, tratar con otras agencias
Encontrar cuidado infantil
Gente que ayuda en la casa / cuidado infantil para que usted descanse
Planear/expectativas para el futuro
Conseguir alojamiento, ropa, trabajos, comida, telfono
Asistencia en obtener fondos para el gasto extra de las necesidades de
su nia(o)

3. Qu tipo de ayuda necesita para su nia(o) y su familia en los prximos meses o ao?

4. Qu cree usted que sea importante que otros sepan acerca de su nia(o)? De su familia?

Ayuda con seguro mdico

Informacin sobre oportunidades
recreacionales
Intrprete (idioma)
Otros
Notas: