GETCAP - Stephen F. Austin State University

advertisement

STEPHEN F. AUSTIN STATE UNIVERSITY

ELNITA STANLEY SPEECH AND HEARING CLINIC

SPEECH AND LANGUAGE EVALUATION

NAME: Client's Name

DATE OF BIRTH: January 1, 2009

AGE: 10 years 10 months

PARENT(S): John & Jane Smith

DATE OF EVALUATION: January 1, 2009

DIAGNOSIS: list diagnosis

GRADUATE CLINICIAN: Grad Clinician's Name

SUPERVISING SLP: Supervisor's Name

REASON FOR REFERRAL : Client was referred for a speech/language evaluation by

Refering Person's Name on January 1, 2009due to concerns with list concerns. This assessment was conducted on January 1, 2009 and aided in determining if a delay or disorder exists and whether the condition affected development to such a degree that there is a need for speech and language services.

HISTORY/HEALTH ASSESSMENT:

The following information was obtained from parent reports, interviews, and screenings:

Birth: Birth history

Developmental: developmental hisotry

Medical: medical history

Educational: eduational history

Social: social history

Family and Environmental: family & environmental history

Hearing Screening: On January 1, 2009, Client passed a pure tone screening indicating his/her hearing was within normal limits for the following decibel and

Hertz levels: record tested levels here

PREVIOUS EVALUATION AND THERAPY: include if applicable to client

COMMUNICATION AND LANGUAGE ASSESSMENT:

Clinician's name, graduate student clinician, administered the following assessments on

Jnauary 1, 2009. Client was 10 years 10 month at the time of this evaluation.

Oral-Facial Examination

An oral-facial examination was given in order to evaluate the structural and functional integrity of the oral mechanism.

Structure : Client's lips and tongue were of normal size, shape, and symmetry. The relationship of the mandible to the maxilla was normal/or describe. Examination of the hard and soft palates revelaed no abnormalities/or report any abnormalities.

Function: Client was able/not able to protrude, retract, elevate depress and lateralize his/her tongue. He/She was was/was not to protrude and retract both his/her lips and tongue in quick succession. Adequate velopharyngeal closure was evident/not evident on production of /a/. Diadochokinetic rate was judged to be adequate/inadequate.

Summary: All structures and functions of Client's oral mechanism was judged to be adequate/inadequate for the normal production of speech.

Speech and Language Sample

A speech and language sample was conducted in order to informally assess various aspects of Client's speech and language. Upon analysis of the sample,

Client's Mean Length of Utterance (MLU) was calculated to be . This score along with Client's syntactic abilities, when applied to Brown’s Stages of

Language Development, revealed components characteristic of Brown’s Stage

. Client's chronological age of implies that she should be functioning at a Stage level with an MLU of . A Type Token Ratio (TTR) was computed to determine the number of different words Client's uses. The total of different words is divided by the total number of words produced. Client's TTR was calculated to be , / , which indicates that describes. Include infromation on speech intelligibility in connected speech, voice, fluency, etc

Photo Articulation Test (PAT-3)

The PAT-3 was administered in order to assess Client's articulation skills at the single word level. Phonemes were elicited in the initial, medial, and final position of words through presentation of various photographs. Results are as follows:

Substitutions:

Initial Position:

Medial Position:

Final Position:

Omissions:

Initial position:

Medial Position:

Final Position:

Distortions:

Initial position:

Medial Position:

Final Position:

Raw Score:

Percentile:

Age Equivalent:

Standard Score:

Severity:

The mean standard score for the PAT-3 is 100 with average scores ranging between 85-115. Based on the results of the PAT-3, Client's standard score of

falls standard deviations below the mean indicating the presence of a note severity articulation disorder.

Preschool Language Scale (PLS-4)

The PLS-4 was given to assess Client's auditory comprehension and expressive communication skills. Results were as follows:

Auditory Comprehension: Raw score:

Standard Score:

Percentile Rank:

Age Equivalent: 10years, 10 months

In the area of Auditory Comprehension, Client achieved a raw score of , which converted to a standard score of .

His/Her standard score of was standard deviations below the mean when compared to the performance of other children of the same chronological age. These scores indicate a severity receptive language disorder. Receptively, Client did list deficits no higher than client's age level. Client did not list deicits no higher than client's age level.

Expressive Communication: Raw Score:

Standard Score:

Percentile Rank:

Age Equivalent: 10 years, 10 months

In the area of Expressive Communication, Client achieved a raw score of , which converted to a standard score of

. His/Her standard score of was standard deviations below the mean when compared to the performance of other children of the same chronological age. These scores

indicate a severity expressive language disorder. Expressively,

Client did list skills no higher than client's age level. Client's did not list deficits no higher than client's age level.

Total Language Score: Raw Score Total:

Standard Score:

Percentile Rank:

Age Equivalent: 10years, 10 months

BEHAVIOR : professional description here

EVALUATION SUMMARY:

Briefly describe evaluation results by severity here

Based on the results above, Client appears to demonstrate disordered/delayed communication in the areas of state deficit areas.

RECOMMENDATIONS AND GOALS:

Based on the results of this test battery it is recommended that Client attend speech and language therapy (2) times per week for (45)-minute sessions. The goals are as follows:

1.

2.

3.

__________________________________ _________________________________

Name of Supervisor Name of clinician

Supervising Speech-Language Pathologist Graduate Student Clinician

*This report was completed by the above named student clinician under the supervision of the supervisor whose name appears on this report.

Download