Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Audiology and Speech Language Pathology, Kasturba Medical College Mangalore, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Mangalore, Karnataka, 576104, India.
Published: October 2024
AI Article Synopsis
Article Abstract
Background: Pragmatic language assessment in children is performed in line with standard protocols, guidelines, and best practices. The absence of these aspects in the Indian context has resulted in the quest to explore the approaches used by speech-language pathologists (SLPs) to assess pragmatic language impairments. This survey explored the current practices of SLPs towards the assessment of pragmatic language among preschool children in India. It also aimed to identify the barriers, facilitators and identify the level of knowledge, skill and overall practice of SLPs towards their practices using self-appraisal.
Methods: A total of 100 SLPs(94 females and 6 males) working with preschool aged children (three-to-six-year-olds) from across different Indian states participated in the survey. Participants were enquired about the aspects of pragmatic language assessed, methods used for assessment, awareness and use of Indian tools, the settings, members, and language used for the assessment. Additionally, they were asked to mention the specific tools used, informal methods used, barriers and facilitators, and self-appraise their knowledge, skill and overall practice.
Results: Majority of participants assessed multiple aspects of pragmatic language. All used a combination of different assessment methods, with the participants commonly using informal compared to formal approaches. Preschoolers were assessed at multiple settings, along with different communication partners. Lack of awareness on assessment tools developed in India was the major barrier, while the use of informal tasks or activities were the major facilitators influencing pragmatic language assessment to a greater extent. The knowledge and skills for the assessment of pragmatic language obtained poorer scores compared to practices.
Conclusions: The assessment practices of the SLPs were largely influenced by the unavailability of developed or adapted tools for Indian preschoolers, leading to the need to develop indigenous assessment tools. Certain considerations for further assessment practices have been identified and discussed.
