Longitudinal vocabulary development in Australian urban Aboriginal children: Protective and risk factors

Suitability of vocabulary assessments: Comparing child scores and parent perspectives on communicative inventories for Aboriginal families in Western Sydney

Purpose: Standardised testing tools within an Aboriginal Australian context have been found to produce inaccurate results due to language and cultural differences. The primary aim of the study is to compare Aboriginal children's scores in urban NSW across two language assessment tools: the Early Language Inventory (ERLI) and the Australian English Communicative Development Inventory, short form (OZI-SF). These tools are vocabulary checklists for children aged approximately 12-30 months. OZI-SF is an Australian tool for mainstream use and ERLI has been developed with and for Aboriginal families, but not in urban contexts, so its suitability there is unknown, given the great cultural and linguistic diversity among Aboriginal people across Australia. The second aim is to identify which tool is more culturally appropriate for urban Aboriginal families through parent perspectives.Method: Overall, 30 parents (of 31 children) participated in the study to complete the ERLI, and 14 parents from this sample completed both the ERLI and OZI-SF and interviews to explore child scores and parent perspectives, in a mixed methods approach.Result: Aboriginal children (N = 14) scored higher on the ERLI than the OZI-SF. Gender and age were significant contributors to the scores as scores were higher for older children and higher for girls than boys. In answer to the second aim, four themes emerged to explain parental perspectives and their preference for the ERLI, which supported connection to culture and language.Conclusion: Findings have implications for paediatric language assessments with urban Aboriginal families in clinical, educational and research settings.

Scoping review: Language assessment practices for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children in Australia and guidelines for clinical practice

INTRODUCTION

Speech pathologists play an important role in differentiating language difference from disorder in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children. However, speech pathologists report that they lack culturally appropriate resources and feel under-prepared, which suggests that culturally safe ways of working and available evidence often do not align.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this scoping review was to explore how the language abilities of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children are being assessed, the ways in which assessments are being adapted and the context in which results are being interpreted within the published literature. The studies were also evaluated for components of cultural safety using the Cultural Formulation model.

DESIGN

A comprehensive and systematic search of the literature was undertaken; hand searching was also conducted. To be eligible for inclusion, studies needed to have been conducted in Australia and include receptive and/or expressive language assessment of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children.

FINDINGS

Combined, the identified studies included 438 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children, though only 419 were independent samples. A total of 352 studies were initially identified, 10 of which were retained for this review. Data extraction included participant characteristics, assessment tools and procedures, reported outcomes and factors related to cultural safety according to the Cultural Formulation model.

CONCLUSION

Overall, studies showed that standardised language assessments do not accurately represent the language abilities of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children. If used, they should be used alongside other non-standardised tasks and/or scoring should be adapted. Considerations for increasing cultural safety when assessing the language abilities of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children are outlined.

Paths to language development in at risk children: a qualitative comparative analysis (QCA)

Background

Childhood language development is related to long term educational, employment, health and social outcomes. Previous research identifies a complex range of risk and protective factors which result in good and poor language outcomes for children, however children at risk are an underrepresented group in these studies. Our aim is to investigate the combinations of factors (paths) that result in good and poor language outcomes for a group of 5 year old children of mothers experiencing adversity.

Methods

This mixed methods study utilised longitudinal data from a randomised control trial of sustained home visiting (MECSH) to determine the language outcomes in at risk children. Mothers were randomly assigned to a comparison group at entry to the study (prior to child’s birth). Their children who were retained at entry to school completed language assessments (n = 41) and were participants in this study. Influence of 13 key factors derived from the extant literature that impact language development were explored. Regression was used to determine the six key factors of influence and these were used in the Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA). QCA was employed to examine the necessary and sufficient conditions and paths affecting language development linked to good and poor language outcomes. A post hoc analysis of the risk and protective paths to good and poor language outcomes was also conducted.

Results

Thirteen distinct pathways led to good language outcomes and four paths to poor language outcomes in five year old at risk children. A variety of condition combinations resulted in these outcomes, with maternal responsivity, toddler development and number of children in the home being key. High and low maternal education influenced both good and poor language development.

Conclusions

The paths to good and poor language outcomes were different and complex. Most paths to a good language outcome involved protective factors, though not always. In addition, paths to poor language more often involved risk factors. The varied patterns of risk and protective factors point to the need for interventions across the first five years of life in both health and education for families which can respond to these risk and protective patterns.

Trial registration

The original RCT was retrospectively registered in the ANCTR: ACTRN12608000473369.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12887-019-1449-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

FATORES DE RISCO E DE PROTEÇÃO PARA ATRASOS NO DESENVOLVIMENTO DA LINGUAGEM

O objetivo deste trabalho foi elencar fatores de risco e de proteção que, segundo a literatura nacional e internacional, estão associados com atrasos no desenvolvimento da linguagem oral de crianças. Foi desenvolvida uma revisão integrativa da literatura, nas bases de dados Lilacs, PsycINFO e Web of Science. A busca resultou em 12 artigos que atendiam aos critérios de seleção. A maioria dos trabalhos identificou fatores de risco estáticos, os quais são principalmente variáveis biológicas, ou da história de vida da criança. Um número menor de pesquisas investigou fatores de risco dinâmicos e fatores de proteção, dentre os quais foi ressaltado o suporte social oferecido à criança. Conhecer quais fatores estão relacionados a esses atrasos é imprescindível para a formulação de propostas que objetivem um desenvolvimento adequado da linguagem. São discutidas lacunas na literatura e a necessidade de novas pesquisas que atentem para o rigor metodológico, considerando a importância dessa discussão para eventuais intervenções.