TELD 3

1
TELD 3

• Team
• Tom Breeyear
• Pamela Wyman
• Jessica Drinkwine
• Rebecca Kingsolver

2
Instrument Introduction

• Authors-
• Wayne P. Hresko
• D. Kim Reid
• Donald D. Hammill
• Publisher-
• Pro-Ed
• Cost-
• 264 for the kit and 74 for the manual (as of
  2001)

3
Description-Purpose of the Assessment

• To identify those children who are significantly
  below their peers in early language development
  and who may be candidates for early intervention
• To identify strengths and weaknesses of
  individual children
• To document children's progress as a consequence
  of early language intervention programs

4
Purposes (Cont)

• To serve as a measure in research, studying
  language development in young children
• To accompany other assessment techniques

5
Description-Target Behavior

• 2 years 0 months through 7 years 11 months
• Subtests
• Receptive language and expressive language

6
Description

• Intended Use-
• To measure the development of spoken language in
  young children
• Administration Time-
• 15-40 minutes depending on age and ability of
  child
• Below age 5 children may require a break every 10
  minutes

7
Description

• Administering the Test - Materials
• The record booklet
• The picture booklet
• The kit itself
• Shoe, toy car, ball, spoon, 5 coins, doll, and
  five blocks
• Two different forms of the test
• Form A and Form B

8
Description

• Administering Test - Procedure
• Examiner prepares booklet for Form A or Form B
  and props
• Test gives step by step instructions for examiner
• Examinee answers and/or responds
• Examiner records after each question

9
Description

• Scoring-
• Directions for scoring appear directly after each
  items instruction. The child earns 1 point for
  each item passed and incorrect is scored 0 or
  not passed.

10
Description

• Scoring Cont
• Yields 5 types of scoring
• Raw scores - number scored correct on each subset
• Percentiles
• Quotients for the subtests and composite
• Age equivalents

11
Description

• Information Derived from Scores-
• It is the best indicator of a childs overall
  oral language ability
• Best single predictor of future language ability
  and school abilities influenced by language
  ability

12
Description

• Information Derived from Scores
• Tests dont diagnose, people do
• Examiners often forget this and base their
  diagnosis exclusively on test results
• Test results are often observations, not
  diagnoses
• They focus on a performance level at a particular
  time in a given situation, but they do not tell
  why a person performed as they did
• Test is merely an aid to clinical judgment and
  not used for placement

13
Description

• Results-
• May contribute to the selection of long term
  educational goals
• Should not be used as the basis for planning day
  to day lessons
• TELD 3 is the first step in performing a
  comprehensive evaluation of a childs problem
• Should be followed up with extensive clinical
  teaching, criterion-reference testing, and
  informal assessment
• Evaluation should be the basis for designing an
  appropriate intervention

14
Development

• In 1981, TELD was developed to meet the need for
  a quick, easily administered, oral language
  screening test for young children. Items were
  selected that tested receptive and expressive
  aspects of language structure
• TELD 3 represents all of these language areas to
  some degree

15
Development

• Pilot Testing
• A 370 item experimental edition of the TELD was
  prepared and administered to 200 children.
• Results analyzed using conventional item analysis
  techniques
• As a result the number was reduced to 70 which
  were given to 100 children
• Second analysis - number reduced to 38
• Became final version

16
Technical

• Standardization-
• Normative sample
• 2,217 children residing in 35 states
• Characteristics of sample with regard to
  geographic region, gender, race, residence,
  ethnicity, family income, educational attainment
  of parents, and disabling condition were reported
  as percentages in relation to a nation as a whole

17
Technical

• Reliability-
• High degree of reliability across 3 types
• Time Sampling - examines the extent to which the
  childs test performance is constant over time
  and is generally measured using the test-retest
  technique
• Content Sampling - reflects the degree of
  homogeneity among items within a test
• Use coefficient alpha and alternative forms to
  investigate content sampling

18
Technical

• Reliability Cont
• Inter-scorer Differences- Understandably high
• TELD 3 has clear administration procedures,
  detailed guidelines governing scores, and
  opportunities to practice scoring

19
Technical

• Comments based on Reliability-
• Based on this tests reliability it is the best
  indicator of a childs overall oral language
  ability and it is the best single predictor of
  future language ability
• As future educators it is important to use tests
  with high reliability

20
Technical

• Validity - High degree
• Criterion-Prediction Validity-
• Indicates the effectiveness of a test in
  predicting an individuals performance in
  specified activities
• Content-Description Validity-
• Involves the systematic examination of the test
  content to determine whether it covers a
  representative sample of the behavior domain to
  be measured
• It is a matter of judgment

21
Technical

• Validity Cont
• Construct-Identification Validity- relates to the
  degree to which the underlying traits of the test
  can be identified and the extent to which these
  traits reflect the theoretical model on which the
  test is based

22
Technical

• Sample A sample of 30 young children in a
  private daycare center were used for the study.
  Responses of parents were compared and collected.
  The main focus was on accuracy of parental
  report, which is used as a means of gathering
  data related to early language

23
Technical

• Classification/Predictions
• The results of the test are used for predictions
  as to where the child is performing academically
  and is not used to classify them
• Based on the validity, it proves to take into
  account more than just the results of this test

24
Commentary

• Strengths-
• Appealing to younger children
• Materials in test are appropriate for age group
• Easy to administer
• Administer can tell what each question is
  testing, giving each question a purpose
• Way to detect language delays or difficulties
  which will get students early intervention

25
Commentary

• Weaknesses-
• Vocabulary is not always appropriate for age
  group
• Scoring is difficult to understand
• The test says it is simple
• Tables for scoring are not explained thoroughly,
  making them difficult to understand

26
Summary

• Overall the test was appropriate for detecting
  language deficiencies. The test results are not
  used to place a child in an alternative program
  instead they are used to indicate where a child
  is performing in relation to their age group
• Some recommendations
• The wording should be changed to fit all age
  groups and easily understood by all children
• The scoring should be explained more in depth
• We had difficulties matching our numbers to those
  in the booklet