HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal My Folders Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Blanton, D. J. Articles by Dagenais, P. A. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Blanton, D. J. Articles by Dagenais, P. A. Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Comparison of Language Skills of Adjudicated and Nonadjudicated Adolescent Males and Females

Contact author: Paul A. Dagenais, Speech Pathology & Audiology, University of South Alabama, 2000 University Commons, Mobile, AL 36688-0002. E-mail: pdagenais{at}usouthal.edu.

Purpose: This study attempted to determine whether there were any differences or similarities in the basic cognitive and language skills of 4 groups of adolescents: adjudicated (a judge's decision to establish responsibility for a delinquent act) and nonadjudicated male and females.

Method: The 4 groups of adolescents were 18 adjudicated females, 18 nonadjudicated females, 14 adjudicated males, and 14 nonadjudicated males. They were evaluated using the Kaufman Brief Intelligence Test (K–BIT; A. S. Kaufman & N. L. Kaufman, 1990) as a screener for intelligence and the Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals—3 (CELF–3; E. Semel, E. Wiig, & W. Secord, 1995) as a screener for language skills.

Results: No gender differences were found between the groups for either the K–BIT or the CELF–3. All groups scored within normal limits on the K–BIT subtests, but lower on the vocabulary portion of the K–BIT compared to the matrices (nonverbal) portion. There were differences found between adjudicated and nonadjudicated groups on the CELF–3, with the adjudicated groups having lower scores.

Implications: As the majority of adjudicated adolescents had not been previously identified as having difficulties with language abilities, this population could benefit from early assessment. Also, children who are at risk for incarceration should be screened for possible language deficits that could contribute to the many difficulties experienced by adolescents.

KEY WORDS: adolescent language, language delay, intelligence, incarceration, adjudicated

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Facebook    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				J. L. Hagaman, A. L. Trout, C. DeSalvo, R. Gehringer, and M. H. Epstein The Academic and Functional Academic Skills of Youth Who Are at Risk for Language Impairment in Residential Care Lang Speech Hear Serv Sch, January 1, 2010; 41(1): 14 - 22. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]