In today’s evaluation, a series of formal and informal assessments were used according to the client’s chronological age and developmental age. Alexander was a happy, cooperative, sociable, attentive young man throughout the evaluation.
First an oral mechanism examination was used to evaluate Alexander’s oral structures to see if the patient had a communication disorder or dysphagia. The client’s oral structures appeared to be functional enough to support speech.
A hearing screening was then tested to see if there were any signs that lead to affecting the client’s communicative abilities. Clinician found no signs and the client passed the hearing screening.
Following the hearing screening, the clinician then gave a numerous amount of formal …show more content…
The TACL-4 consisted of 3 subtests; for the vocabulary subtest the client received a percentile rank of 7, for the grammatical morpheme the client received a percentile rank of 2, and for the elaborated phrases and sentences the client received a percentile rank of 1. With the patient’s total language quotient, the TACL-4 indicated that the child is not developing at the same rate as a typically developing child of his age. In addition to the TACL-4 and the PLS-5, the Comprehensive Receptive and Expressive Vocabulary Test- 2nd edition (CREVT-2) was administered and evaluated both the receptive and expressive vocabulary of the child. The patient’s receptive vocabulary score was higher than the expressive vocabulary score. For the receptive vocabulary score the patient is at the 4th percentile rank and in the expressive vocabulary the patient is at the 1st percentile rank. According to the CREVT-2, Alexander is not developing at the same rate as a typically developing child of his …show more content…
The patient presented auditory comprehension weaknesses where the graduate student created goals such as understanding pronouns, making inferences, identifying colors, and understanding picture analogies. Alexander also presented with expressive communication weaknesses and the clinician created goals such as combining three or four words in spontaneous speech, answering what and where questions, naming objects in pictures, and telling how an object is used.
After formally measuring the client, the clinician then got a language sample from the patient where she measured a variety of things such as articulation, voice, fluency, and language. There were no indications of an articulation, voice, and fluency disorder, except for the language section. The clinician discovered that the child was below average in both his expressive and receptive language abilities.
Behavior was also observed from the clinician throughout the evaluation. The clinician collected data based on how well Alexander was able to cope with his frustration. The patient showed signs of frustration throughout the evaluation when the patient wasn’t able to express something. So then, the clinician came up with a clinical impression of the young Alexander having a mild behavior problem and created some goals based on his behavior for
First an oral mechanism examination was used to evaluate Alexander’s oral structures to see if the patient had a communication disorder or dysphagia. The client’s oral structures appeared to be functional enough to support speech.
A hearing screening was then tested to see if there were any signs that lead to affecting the client’s communicative abilities. Clinician found no signs and the client passed the hearing screening.
Following the hearing screening, the clinician then gave a numerous amount of formal …show more content…
The TACL-4 consisted of 3 subtests; for the vocabulary subtest the client received a percentile rank of 7, for the grammatical morpheme the client received a percentile rank of 2, and for the elaborated phrases and sentences the client received a percentile rank of 1. With the patient’s total language quotient, the TACL-4 indicated that the child is not developing at the same rate as a typically developing child of his age. In addition to the TACL-4 and the PLS-5, the Comprehensive Receptive and Expressive Vocabulary Test- 2nd edition (CREVT-2) was administered and evaluated both the receptive and expressive vocabulary of the child. The patient’s receptive vocabulary score was higher than the expressive vocabulary score. For the receptive vocabulary score the patient is at the 4th percentile rank and in the expressive vocabulary the patient is at the 1st percentile rank. According to the CREVT-2, Alexander is not developing at the same rate as a typically developing child of his …show more content…
The patient presented auditory comprehension weaknesses where the graduate student created goals such as understanding pronouns, making inferences, identifying colors, and understanding picture analogies. Alexander also presented with expressive communication weaknesses and the clinician created goals such as combining three or four words in spontaneous speech, answering what and where questions, naming objects in pictures, and telling how an object is used.
After formally measuring the client, the clinician then got a language sample from the patient where she measured a variety of things such as articulation, voice, fluency, and language. There were no indications of an articulation, voice, and fluency disorder, except for the language section. The clinician discovered that the child was below average in both his expressive and receptive language abilities.
Behavior was also observed from the clinician throughout the evaluation. The clinician collected data based on how well Alexander was able to cope with his frustration. The patient showed signs of frustration throughout the evaluation when the patient wasn’t able to express something. So then, the clinician came up with a clinical impression of the young Alexander having a mild behavior problem and created some goals based on his behavior for