Identifying Children at Risk for Language Impairment or Dyslexia With Group-Administered Measures

Abstract

Purpose: The study aims to determine whether brief, group-administered screening measures can reliably identify second-grade children at risk for language impairment (LI) or dyslexia and to examine the degree to which parents of affected children were aware of their children's difficulties.

Method: Participants (N = 381) completed screening tasks and assessments of word reading, oral language, and nonverbal intelligence. Their parents completed questionnaires that inquired about reading and language development.

Results: Despite considerable overlap in the children meeting criteria for LI and dyslexia, many children exhibited problems in only one domain. The combined screening tasks reliably identified children at risk for either LI or dyslexia (area under the curve = 0.842), but they were more accurate at identifying risk for dyslexia than LI. Parents of children with LI and/or dyslexia were frequently unaware of their children's difficulties. Parents of children with LI but good word reading skills were the least likely of all impairment groups to report concerns or prior receipt of speech, language, or reading services.

Conclusions: Group-administered screens can identify children at risk of LI and/or dyslexia with good classification accuracy and in less time than individually administered measures. More research is needed to improve the identification of children with LI who display good word reading skills.

Figure 1.

Venn diagram illustrating the overlap between students meeting criteria for language impairment (LI) and/or dyslexia (DYS). Of the 135 children meeting the criteria for LI, 73 (54%) also met the criteria for DYS. Of the 103 children meeting the criteria for DYS, 73 (71%) also met the criteria for LI. LI-only = language impairment without dyslexia; DYS-only = dyslexia without language impairment; LI+DYS = combined language impairment and dyslexia.

Figure 2.

Distribution of scores on composite screen by subgroup. Dotted line indicates cut score associated with 80% sensitivity overall. TD = typical development; LI-only = language impairment without dyslexia; DYS-only = dyslexia without language impairment; LI+DYS = combined language impairment and dyslexia.

Figure 3.

Distribution of scores on Test of Silent Word Reading Fluency by subgroup. Dotted line indicates cut score associated with 80% sensitivity overall. TD = typical development; LI-only = language impairment without dyslexia; DYS-only = dyslexia without language impairment; LI+DYS = combined language impairment and dyslexia; TOSWRF SS = Test of Silent Word Reading Fluency standard score.