Agreement of Assessment Profiles Used in Cognitive Referencing

Abstract

Eligibility for speech-language pathology services often is based on the relation between the child’s cognitive ability and language performance. If cognitive ability is developed to a greater degree than language ability, the child is considered to be an appropriate candidate for speech-language pathology services under a cognitive referencing model. If cognition and language are both delayed to a similar degree, the child may be considered an inappropriate candidate for specific language services. The purpose of this study was to examine the agreement of the measurement practices used in the cognitive referencing model of service triage. We administered a battery of cognitive and language measures to 26 preschool children with delayed language ability and examined the agreement of combinations of cognitive-language profiles in determining service eligibility. Substantial disagreement was found among profiles with different measures. Eligibility for service ranged from a high of 22 out of 26 children for the Columbia Mental Maturity Scale (Burgemeister, Blum, & Lorge, 1972)/ Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test-Revised (Dunn & Dunn, 1981) profile, to 3 of 26 children for the McCarthy Scales of Children’s Abilities General Cognitive Index (McCarthy, 1972)/ Test of Auditory Comprehension of Language-Elaborated Sentences (Carrow-Woolfolk, 1985) profile.