Background

Jaz is 4 years, 10 months old and is attending preschool three mornings a week. She was first
identified by the Speech-Language Pathologist working at the Kindergarten screening for the
local school district. At the screening it was noted that Jaz' language was marked by multiple
word errors and possible low MLU. Her preschool teacher confirmed these observations about
Jaz's oral language production, but had no concerns about her receptive language, cognitive, or
motor functioning. The SLP initiated a formal referral to assess for possible oral language delay
or disorder. As part of the diagnostic assessment, a conversational sample was elicited by the
SLP following the protocol used for the Salt Conversation database.

Assessment Measure

The conversation with an adult partner was utilized. A conversational language sample was
collected from Jaz to assess whether there was an oral language delay or disorder. Jaz readily
participated in the collection of the language sample. The sample seems to be a valid
representation of her present level of abilities. The main topics discussed revolved around cats
and dogs, Jazs family members such as her grandma and siblings, and what her family and her
like to do. The examiner tried to get Jaz to engage in conversation by discussing topics of interest
for her, such as the dogs and cats. The SLP asked Jaz questions throughout the sample, Jaz would
give short answers when questions were asked. It almost seemed as though Jaz would not carry
on the conversation on her own without the SLP guiding it with questions. By the examiner
continually asking Jaz questions, the majority of Jazs responses were directly related to the
questions that the examiner asked.

SALT Analysis
1. Jaz is 4 year and 10 months old and in Pre-K. The database comparison used was six
months older and younger then Jazs age. Jazs age was -0.95 Standard Deviation which
is close to 1 SD below the mean.
2. For the PK (Pre-K) percentages given by the SALT support staff was 46% in the category
of responses to questions and Jazs percentage in the analysis I ran was about 54%. For
the PK by SALT support staff percentage under yes/no responses to questions was 21%
and after running the analysis Jazs percentage was about 26%. I modified the analysis set
to exclude responses to questions and yes/no responses because Jazs responses to both
areas were more than two percentage points above the PK provided by SALT support
staff.
3. Top Section of SMR: There were 36 samples matched by age to which Transcript Length
and Intelligibility were compared. Under the Transcript Length category, all measures are
within 1 SD (Standard Deviation) of the database mean and thus within the average
range. Under the Intelligibility category all measures again are within 1 SD and thus
within the average range.
4. Bottom Section of SMR: There were 32 samples equated by same number of total words
(cut at 200 NTW).
Syntax/Morphology: MLU in words equaled 5.13 which 0.45 SD above the mean,
which means this is within the average range when compared to the database and is
not an area of concern. SI Composite Score equaled 0.98 which is 1.62 SD below the
mean, which is below the average database mean and is an area of concern. MLU in
morphemes equaled 5.46 which is 0.65 SD below the mean, which is within the
database mean and not an area of concern.
o Syntax/Morphology- SI Composite Scores: This area of concern within
syntax/morphology was SI composite score -1.62 SD. To further investigate
the low SI composite scores I ran the Subordination Index report. Jaz
produced three utterances that were coded SI-0 which is 3.37 SD above the
database mean. [SI-2] was used two times which is 1.04 SD below the
database mean. The SI coding shows the types of sentences she is making. For
example, her SI-1 performance shows that Jaz is producing simple sentences.
Semantics: Number Total Words (NTW) are 200 which is 0.52 SD which means this
is within the average range when compared to the database mean. Number Different
Words (NDW) is 91 with a SD of 0.01, which means this is within the average range
when compared to the database and is not an area of concern. Type Token Ratio
(TTR) is 0.46 which is within 0.61 SD below the mean, which means this is within
the average range when compared to the database and is not an area of concern.
Moving-Average TTR, a measure of vocabulary diversity across the conversation, is
0.51 which is 1.16 SD below the mean, which is below the average range when
compared to the database and is an area of concern as it can indicate limited
vocabulary diversity.
o Semantics- Moving-Average Type Token Ratio: Review of the Word Lists
section of Word Lists, Bound Morphemes & Utterance Distribution analysis
shows that word type was within 1 SD for all categories, thus not providing
suggestions as to why moving TTR was low. Jaz actually produced more
personal pronoun types than the database mean. Jaz used ten personal pronoun
types which is 1.73 SD above the database mean. This information again
doesnt indicate why Moving-Average TTR might be low.
Discourse: Utterances with Overlapping Speech equaled 20 which is 3.55 SD above
the mean, which is above the average range compared to the database and is an area
of concern. Jazs SD was significantly higher than the mean of the database which is a
weakness since her utterances are overlapping the examiners which is not something
that is wanted. Interrupted Other Speaker equaled 5 which is 2.70 SD, which is above
the average range when compared to the database and is an area of concern. Jaz
shows strength in the %of responses to questions but she interrupts the examiner
more than the mean. She is struggling with discourse as utterances with overlapping
speech and interrupted other speaker categories are both significantly above the
database mean. Jazs SD was significantly higher than the mean of the database which
is a weakness since her utterances are overlapping the examiners which is not
 something that is wanted. Throughout the transcript Jaz would interrupt when she
would think of the word or words that she meant to say. Often times Jaz would give a
short answer to questions but during the examiners response Jaz would think of what
she meant or correcting what she had previously said.
Jaz's responses to examiner questions. Jaz responds to the majority of the questions
which the examiner asks her. The majority of Jazs responses are clearly related to the
question which is asked by the examiner. For example, when the examiner asks
whether the dog she mentioned is a big dog or little dog, which Jaz responds that it is
a little dog. However, there are responses in which she does not answer the examiners
question. For example, when the examiner asks Jaz if she has any brothers and sisters
other than Summer and Lauren, Jaz says no but when asked again says she has three
brothers. To me it appears that Jaz can answer simple questions with simple
responses, such as saying yes or no, or when given and option such as little or big.
Jazs ability to maintain a conversational topic. The examiner and Jaz start talking
about the dogs, which leads into them talking about family, which then leads them to
discuss the activities she and her family do. Throughout the transcript there are few
topic changes unless it is started by the examiner. When a new topic is introduced, the
examiner usually introduces it. For example, the examiner asks Jaz about her siblings,
their ages and names. When the examiner does this Jaz answers the questions and the
conversation is able to continue on that topic. However, she only continues the
conversation when the examiner continues to ask questions.
Verbal Facility: Words/Minute equaled 66.74 which is within 1 SD of the mean,
which means this is within the average range when compared to the database and is
not an area of concern. Pauses within Utterances equaled 1 which is within 1 SD of
the mean, which means this is within the average range when compared to the
database and is not an area of concern. Pauses between Utterances equaled 0 which is
within 1 SD of the mean, which means this is within the average range when
compared to the database and is not an area of concern. Abandoned Utterances
equaled 1 which is within 1 SD of the mean, which means this is within the average
range when compared to the database and is not an area of concern. Total Maze
Words for Jaz was 52 which is 2.24 SD above the mean, thus above the average range
when compared to the database and is an area of concern. Maze Words as % of Total
Words equaled 20.6% which is 2.11 SD above the mean, thus above the average
range when compared to the database and is an area of concern. Since the SD is
above the mean it is important that we run a Maze Summary so that we can look into
the type and number of mazes.
o The Database Menu: Maze Summary report provides the break-down of the
maze contents. Using this report, we learn that there was a significant number
of word-level and phrase-level revisions when comparing to the database.
Total Number of Mazes was 17 which is 1.08 SD above the database mean.
The Average Words per Maze was 3.06 which is 2.46 SD above the database
mean, thus making it an area of concern. There were 14 Utterances with
Mazes which is 1.54 SD above the database mean. There were four word-level
 revisions which is 1.89 SD above the database mean. There were eleven
phrase-level revisions which is 3.54 SD which is significantly above the
database mean. These results suggest that Jaz is having utterance formulation
issues. Over twenty percent of Jazs words were in mazes, this has a negative
impact on her oral communication.
Errors: % Utterances with Errors equaled 59% which is 6.14 SD, which means this is
above average range when compared to database and is an area of concern. Number
of Omissions equaled 12 which is 4.44 SD, which means this is significantly above
the average range when compared to the database and is an area of concern. Number
of Error Codes equaled 30 which is 7.10 SD, which means this too is significantly
above average range when compared to database and is an area of concern. Jaz
struggled in the Errors category which is seen by the errors she made throughout her
transcript. All the subcategories of errors were much higher than the mean and are
therefore weaknesses.
o To determine patterns in her errors, the Analyze: Omissions and Error Codes
summary was generated. This summary provides a list of all omitted words
and bound morphemes as well as all the words and utterances coded as an
error. This analysis also shows the specific utterances in which the omissions
or errors that occurred. Jaz had 3 total omitted words out of these 3, 2 were
is and was. Which were used as auxiliary verbs but should have been used
as forms of the main verb to be. There was a pattern in her Word-Level
Error Codes, in this area 7 out of the 24 errors were has/have. She struggled
with using the correct verb form of has/have, she used the auxiliary verb
form of has/have when she needed to use the main verb form. In the Word-
Level Error Codes there was another area of concern due to the number of
errors in the pronouns she used.

Interpretation

Jaz shows strength in the percentage of responses to questions but she interrupts the examiner
more than the mean. She is struggling with discourse as utterances with overlapping speech and
interrupted other speaker categories are both significantly above the database mean. However,
Jaz had several areas of concern. To me it appears that Jaz can answer simple questions with
simple responses, such as saying yes or no, or when given an option such as little or big. The
examiner and Jaz start talking about the dogs, which leads into them talking about family, which
then leads them to discuss the activities she and her family do. Throughout the transcript there
are few topic changes unless it is started by the examiner. When a new topic is introduced, the
examiner usually introduces it. Her ability to carry on a conversation was affected by her errors
using the main verb to be and main verb of has/have, and with not using pronouns in the
correct manner. The omitted words and errors made by Jaz in this transcript will affect her
performance and achievement in school. She will struggle to form sentences and maintain a topic
when needed for academic activities. So these issues need to be addressed for her to be
 successful academically. She overuses mazes which makes it an area of concern. Jaz mazes were
mainly revisions, these revisions show that she struggles with beginning and restarting her
utterances. The maze issues make Jaz conversational ability a challenge for her, since this shows
use that she struggles with finding the right words and formulating statements. Jaz does have
strength in her responding to someone asking a question which should help her academically
since often teachers will ask questions that usually only requiring short responses.

Plan

Based on the results of Jaz language sample, the Speech-Language Pathologist should continue
working with her and an intervention plan needs to be in place:
1. There needs to be instruction focused on the areas of semantics and syntax/morphology, with
further testing on her expressive language. There should be a specific focus on helping build her
vocabulary diversity. She needs to use vocabulary that she will hear or use every day. As seen in
her verbal facility she had many word-level and phrase-level revisions. To help her not have
those revisions she needs help in forming verbal sentences correctly.
2. There should be more focused instruction in the area of sentence structure to help Jaz understand
and learn how her sentences should be structured. There are four types of sentence structures:
simple, compound, complex, and compound-complex. For Jaz there should be a focus on helping
her get a better grasp on compound sentences. A compound sentence contains a subject, verb,
two independent clauses, and a coordinating conjunction. Activities that focus on building
sentences and vocabulary enrichment will really help Jaz.
3. Jaz really needs to work on her verb forms which she is struggling with. As seen in the area of
errors she struggles with the main verb forms of to be and has/have. These should be areas
of focus to help her understand how and when to use specific forms. Once she has a grasp on the
forms she struggles with then that knowledge needs to be built on for her to learn other verb
forms.
4. Jaz also needs to practice her pronoun use, learning how and when to correctly use pronouns. In
the beginning she should focus on the pronouns she struggles with then expand once she
understands the ones that she has learned so far and how to appropriately use them.
5. The Speech-Language Pathologist should engage her in conversation and help promote Jaz
beginning a conversation. So that they can set a goal of her carrying on a conversation without
the SLP guiding the conversation, then making a future goal of Jaz beginning outside
conversations with other people that she is able to help maintain.
6. Since she interrupted the SLP or had overlapping language with the SLP, there needs to be work
done in this area. By working with Jaz on waiting until a speaker is done before she begins to
speak she will learn how to take appropriate turns in a conversation. A good beginning step
would be to have Jaz wait until the speaker is done and count to one before responding so she
can get familiar to the natural pause between speakers. Turn taking within a conversation is
important and involves waiting until the other speaker pauses before speaking.
References
Miller, J. F., Andriacchi, K., & Nockerts, A. (2015). Assessing language production using SALT
software: A clinician's guide to language sample analysis. Middleton, WI: SALT Software, LLC.

Reflection

The most significant thing that I learned through this semester process of learning to use the
SALT software and interpreting provided results was how important this software is in helping
figure out how to help students and what their needs are. It was very informative to see how this
software can give data and that it shows a lot about the students needs for intervention. Going
through the steps to find out this information for Jaz was a very interesting process in which a lot
was learned on how to decipher the data and make an intervention for her. Having the steps laid
out both in the book and through the information provided on d2l helped in the process of
learning about the software and analysis. It was also very helpful to have the salt classes on the
website that broke it down and made it easier for me to go through the processes. For me
examples help me, so I would recommend that there be examples for part 5 and 6 of previous
students work to help show what you want exactly regarding information and content of the
assignments.