Comparing Spoken Versus iPad-Administered Versions of a Narrative Retell Assessment Tool in a Practice-Based Research Partnership.

IF 2.2 3区医学 Q1 AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY

Language Speech and Hearing Services in Schools Pub Date : 2024-07-01 Epub Date: 2024-02-23 DOI:10.1044/2024_LSHSS-23-00022

Caitlin Coughler, Taylor Bardell, Mary Ann Schouten, Kristen Smith, Lisa M D Archibald

{"title":"Comparing Spoken Versus iPad-Administered Versions of a Narrative Retell Assessment Tool in a Practice-Based Research Partnership.","authors":"Caitlin Coughler, Taylor Bardell, Mary Ann Schouten, Kristen Smith, Lisa M D Archibald","doi":"10.1044/2024_LSHSS-23-00022","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose: In the current age of greater digital delivery of services, it is important to examine the validity and differences between spoken and digital delivery of materials. The current study is a practice-based research partnership between school-based speech-language pathologists (SLPs) and researchers, evaluating presentation effects and validity of a narrative retell assessment tool created by SLPs.Method: Fifty-one children across kindergarten, Grade 1, and Grade 2 completed the narrative retell task, retelling One Frog Too Many and Frog Goes to Dinner in three in-person story presentation conditions administered 1 week apart: spoken, iPad with audio-recorded natural rate of speech, and iPad with slow rate of speech. This was followed by 10 comprehension questions related to story events. Children also completed the Story Retelling subtests from the Test of Integrated Language and Literacy Skills (TILLS).Results: Children recalled significantly fewer events in the spoken condition compared to audio-recorded iPad conditions. No significant effect of speaking rate was found. Presentation condition and rate did not affect performance on comprehension questions. Correlations among retell measures and corresponding subtests on a standardized language test ranged from weak to strong, providing some evidence of concurrent validity.Conclusions: This practice-based research partnership provided valuable insight into differences in delivery modality as well as the validity of a school-based SLP created narrative retell assessment tool. This study found that rate did not impact recall of events or performance on comprehension questions. Additionally, children performed better on narrative retell measures when stories were told using an iPad. This highlights the potential for iPad delivery as an option in narrative retell tasks. Finally, this study provided an initial examination of the Narrative Evaluation Tool's validity, finding the tool captures ability to recall narrative events; however, future studies are needed to examine the tool's validity as a measure of narrative comprehension.Supplemental material: https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.25260910.","PeriodicalId":54326,"journal":{"name":"Language Speech and Hearing Services in Schools","volume":" ","pages":"976-984"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Language Speech and Hearing Services in Schools","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1044/2024_LSHSS-23-00022","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/2/23 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: In the current age of greater digital delivery of services, it is important to examine the validity and differences between spoken and digital delivery of materials. The current study is a practice-based research partnership between school-based speech-language pathologists (SLPs) and researchers, evaluating presentation effects and validity of a narrative retell assessment tool created by SLPs.

Method: Fifty-one children across kindergarten, Grade 1, and Grade 2 completed the narrative retell task, retelling One Frog Too Many and Frog Goes to Dinner in three in-person story presentation conditions administered 1 week apart: spoken, iPad with audio-recorded natural rate of speech, and iPad with slow rate of speech. This was followed by 10 comprehension questions related to story events. Children also completed the Story Retelling subtests from the Test of Integrated Language and Literacy Skills (TILLS).

Results: Children recalled significantly fewer events in the spoken condition compared to audio-recorded iPad conditions. No significant effect of speaking rate was found. Presentation condition and rate did not affect performance on comprehension questions. Correlations among retell measures and corresponding subtests on a standardized language test ranged from weak to strong, providing some evidence of concurrent validity.

Conclusions: This practice-based research partnership provided valuable insight into differences in delivery modality as well as the validity of a school-based SLP created narrative retell assessment tool. This study found that rate did not impact recall of events or performance on comprehension questions. Additionally, children performed better on narrative retell measures when stories were told using an iPad. This highlights the potential for iPad delivery as an option in narrative retell tasks. Finally, this study provided an initial examination of the Narrative Evaluation Tool's validity, finding the tool captures ability to recall narrative events; however, future studies are needed to examine the tool's validity as a measure of narrative comprehension.

Supplemental material: https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.25260910.

查看原文本刊更多论文

在以实践为基础的研究合作中，比较叙述复述评估工具的口语版本和 iPad 管理版本。

目的：在当前数字化服务日益普及的时代，研究口语和数字化材料之间的有效性和差异非常重要。本研究是学校语言病理学家（SLPs）与研究人员合作开展的一项基于实践的研究，旨在评估由语言病理学家创建的叙事复述评估工具的演示效果和有效性：51名来自幼儿园、一年级和二年级的儿童完成了叙事复述任务，在三种当场故事演示条件下复述了《一只青蛙太多了》和《青蛙去吃晚饭》，三种演示条件相隔一周：有声故事、iPad录制的自然语速故事和iPad慢速故事。随后是 10 道与故事事件相关的理解题。儿童还完成了综合语言和读写能力测试（TILLS）中的故事复述子测试：结果：与 iPad 录音条件相比，儿童在口语条件下回忆的事件明显较少。说话速度没有明显影响。演示条件和速度对理解问题的表现没有影响。复述测量与标准化语言测试中相应分项测试之间的相关性由弱到强，为并发有效性提供了一些证据：这项以实践为基础的研究合作为了解教学模式的差异以及学校语言康复师创造的叙事复述评估工具的有效性提供了宝贵的见解。这项研究发现，费率不会影响事件的回忆或理解问题的表现。此外，使用 iPad 讲故事时，儿童在叙事复述测评中的表现更好。这凸显了将 iPad 作为叙述性复述任务的一种选择的潜力。最后，本研究对叙事评估工具的有效性进行了初步检验，发现该工具可以捕捉到回忆叙事事件的能力；但是，未来的研究还需要检验该工具作为叙事理解测量方法的有效性。补充材料：https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.25260910。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Language Speech and Hearing Services in Schools Social Sciences-Linguistics and Language

CiteScore

4.40

自引率

12.50%

发文量

165

期刊介绍： Mission: LSHSS publishes peer-reviewed research and other scholarly articles pertaining to the practice of audiology and speech-language pathology in the schools, focusing on children and adolescents. The journal is an international outlet for clinical research and is designed to promote development and analysis of approaches concerning the delivery of services to the school-aged population. LSHSS seeks to advance evidence-based practice by disseminating the results of new studies as well as providing a forum for critical reviews and meta-analyses of previously published work. Scope: The broad field of audiology and speech-language pathology as practiced in schools, including aural rehabilitation; augmentative and alternative communication; childhood apraxia of speech; classroom acoustics; cognitive impairment; craniofacial disorders; fluency disorders; hearing-assistive technology; language disorders; literacy disorders including reading, writing, and spelling; motor speech disorders; speech sound disorders; swallowing, dysphagia, and feeding disorders; voice disorders.