test of problem solving 3 elementary

JavaScript seems to be disabled in your browser. For the best experience on our site, be sure to turn on Javascript in your browser.

• 844 378 4918
• Assess Online (OES)
• Access ProLearn

• Compare Products

(TOPS-3E:NU) Test of Problem Solving - Elementary, Third Edition Normative Update

About Qualification Levels

--> From $42.00

--> To $431.00

Sign In to download sample materials.

Don't have an account? Register Here.

Includes 25 Examiner Record Booklets; Picture Book; Picture Sequence Cards; Manual

* Required Fields

--> $42.00 -->

About This Product

The TOPS-3E: NU focuses on a student’s linguistic ability to think and reason. Language competence is the verbal indicator of how a student’s language skills affect his or her ability to think, reason, problem solve, infer, classify, associate, predict, determine causes, sequence, and understand directions. The test focuses on a broad range of language-based thinking skills, including clarifying, analyzing, generating solutions, evaluating, and showing affective thinking.

While other tests may assess students’ thinking skills by tapping mathematical, spatial, or nonverbal potential, the TOPS-3E: NU measures discreet skills that form the foundation of language-based thinking, reasoning, and problem-solving ability.

Although the skills tested by the TOPS-3E: NU are necessary for developing social competence, it is not primarily a test of pragmatic or social language skills. Rather, it should be part of a battery of tests and observations used to assess pragmatic competence.

New features:

• Characteristics of the normative sample were stratified by age relative to region, gender, ethnicity, and socioeconomic factors.
• The Total Score was renamed the Problem Solving Index and calculated as a standard score with a mean of 100 and a standard deviation of 15.
• Each item on the test was evaluated using both conventional item analysis to choose “good” items and differential item analysis to find and eliminate potentially biased items.
• The index score was thoroughly examined for floor and ceiling effects.
• The test was subjected to diagnostic accuracy analyses, particularly rigorous techniques involving the computation of the receiver operating characteristic/area under the curve (ROC/AUC) statistic.
• The Manual was reorganized and rewritten to provide more detailed information on the administration, interpretation, and statistical characteristics of the test.
• Privacy Policy
• Terms of Use
• Cookie Settings

TOPS-3E: NU

Test of problem solving–3 elementary: normative update, linda bowers, ma, slp, rosemary huisingh, ma, slp, and carolyn logiudice, ma, ccc-slp, browse products a-z, measure discreet skills that form the foundation of language-based thinking, reasoning, and problem-solving.

The TOPS-3E: NU assesses a school-age child’s ability to integrate semantic and linguistic knowledge with reasoning ability by way of picture stimuli and verbal responses.

The TOPS-3E: NU focuses on students’ linguistic ability to think and reason. Language competence is the verbal indicator of how a student’s language skills affect his ability to think, reason, problem solve, infer, classify, associate, predict, determine causes, sequence, and understand directions. The test focuses on a broad range of language-based thinking skills, including clarifying, analyzing, generating solutions, evaluating, and showing affective thinking.

While other tests may asses students’ thinking skills by tapping mathematical, spatial, or nonverbal potential, the TOPS-3E: NU measures discreet skills that form the foundation of language-based thinking, reasoning, and problem-solving ability.

Although the skills tested on the TOPS-3E: NU are necessary for developing social competence, it is not primarily a test of pragmatic or social language skills. Rather, it should be part of a battery of tests and observations used to assess pragmatic competence.

Features and benefits

• Characteristics of the normative sample were stratified by age relative to region, gender, ethnicity, and socioeconomic factors, and other critical variables are the same as those reported for the school-age population reported the ProQuest Statistical Abstract of the United States, 2016 (ProQuest, 2016).
• The Total Score was renamed the Problem Solving Index and calculated as a standard score with a mean of 100 and a standard deviation of 15.
• Each item on the test was evaluated using both conventional item analysis to choose “good” items and differential item analyses to find and eliminate potentially biased items.
• The index score was thoroughly examined for floor and ceiling effects.
• The test was subjected to diagnostic accuracy analyses, particularly rigorous techniques involving the computation of the receiver operating characteristic/area under the curve (ROC/AUC) statistic.
• The Examiner’s Manual was reorganized and rewritten to provide more detailed information on the administration, interpretation, and statistical characteristics of the test.
• The TOPS-3E: NU has three components: an Examiner’s Manual, Examiner Record Booklets, and a Picture Book. The Examiner’s Manual includes a comprehensive discussion of the test’s theoretical and research-based foundation, item development, standardization, administration and scoring procedures, norm tables, and guidelines for using and interpreting the test’s results. The Examiner Record Booklet provides space to record responses and transform the raw score to an age equivalent, percentile rank, and the Problem Solving Index. The test kit also includes a Picture Book, which includes the picture stimuli for the test items.

includes TOPS-3E: NU Examiner's Manual, TOPS-3E: NU Picture Book, Picture Sequence Cards, and 25 Examiner Record Booklets

Forms and booklets

Technical information.

Reliability and validity studies were conducted with individuals who have typical language ability and individuals who had been previously diagnosed with a language impairment or received other special education services. The average coefficient alpha is .82 for the Problem Solving Index. Studies were conducted to examine the ability of the test to differentiate students who receive special education services or have language impairments from those who do not. The results demonstrate that a Problem Solving Index cutoff score of 90 resulted in a sensitivity of .75, a specificity of .85, and a ROC/AUC of .74 for differentiating students who receive special education services; and a cutoff score of 92 resulted in a sensitivity of .69, a specificity of .89, and a ROC/AUC of .73 for differentiating students who have a language impairment. Validity of the test composites was demonstrated by correlations to the Universal Nonverbal Intelligence Test–Group Abilities Test (UNIT-GAT; Bracken & McCallum, in development). The coefficient for the Analogic Reasoning subtest was .73, and the coefficient for the Quantitative subtest was .89, both very large.

PRODUCT SEARCH

Browse by category, e-stimulus books, spanish language instruments, general mental health, school assessment, remote assessment, healthcare and clinical, assessment advisors, partalks webinars, par training, university partnership program, supplemental resources, data collection and research, content hub, qualification levels, frequently asked questions, software updates, be a duck: stories from customer support, work at par, meet our staff, community partners, legal and privacy.

' + value.name + '

' + value.desc + '

Test Of Problem Solving – Third Edition Elementary: Normative Update (TOPS-3E: NU)

• MORE INFORMATION
• SPECIFICATIONS
• Characteristics of the normative sample were stratified by age relative to region, gender, ethnicity, and socioeconomic factors, and other critical variables are the same as those reported for the school-age population reported the ProQuest Statistical Abstract of the United States, 2016 (ProQuest, 2016).
• The Total Score was renamed the Problem Solving Index and calculated as a standard score with a mean of 100 and a standard deviation of 15.
• Each item on the test was evaluated using both conventional item analysis to choose “good” items and differential item analyses to find and eliminate potentially biased items.
• The index score was thoroughly examined for floor and ceiling effects.
• The test was subjected to diagnostic accuracy analyses, particularly rigorous techniques involving the computation of the receiver operating characteristic/area under the curve (ROC/AUC) statistic.
• The Examiner’s Manual was reorganized and rewritten to provide more detailed information on the administration, interpretation, and statistical characteristics of the test.

MORE ITEMS FROM Cognition and Intelligence

Test Of Problem Solving–Third Edition Elementary: Normative Update (TOPS-3E: NU)

The Test of Problem Solving-3rd Edition: Normative Update (TOPS-3E: NU) assesses a school-age child s ability to integrate semantic and linguistic knowledge with reasoning ability by way of picture stimuli and verbal responses.

The TOPS-3E: NU focuses on students linguistic ability to think and reason. Language competence is the verbal indicator of how a student s language skills affect his ability to think, reason, problem solve, infer, classify, associate, predict, determine causes, sequence, and understand directions. The test focuses on a broad range of language-based thinking skills, including clarifying, analyzing, generating solutions, evaluating, and showing affective thinking.

While other tests may asses students thinking skills by tapping mathematical, spatial, or nonverbal potential, the TOPS-3E: NU measures discreet skills that form the foundation of language-based thinking, reasoning, and problem-solving ability.

Although the skills tested on the TOPS-3E: NU are necessary for developing social competence, it is not primarily a test of pragmatic or social language skills. Rather, it should be part of a battery of tests and observations used to assess pragmatic competence.

New Features

• Characteristics of the normative sample were stratified by age relative to region, gender, ethnicity, and socioeconomic factors, and other critical variables are the same as those reported for the school-age population reported the ProQuest Statistical Abstract of the United States, 2016 (ProQuest, 2016).
• The Total Score was renamed the Problem Solving Index and calculated as a standard score with a mean of 100 and a standard deviation of 15.
• Each item on the test was evaluated using both conventional item analysis to choose good items and differential item analyses to find and eliminate potentially biased items.
• The index score was thoroughly examined for floor and ceiling effects.
• The test was subjected to diagnostic accuracy analyses, particularly rigorous techniques involving the computation of the receiver operating characteristic/area under the curve (ROC/AUC) statistic.
• The Examiner s Manual was reorganized and rewritten to provide more detailed information on the administration, interpretation, and statistical characteristics of the test.

Description of the Test The TOPS-3E: NU has three components: an Examiner s Manual, Examiner Record Booklets, and a Picture Book. The Examiner s Manual includes a comprehensive discussion of the test s theoretical and research-based foundation, item development, standardization, administration and scoring procedures, norm tables, and guidelines for using and interpreting the test s results. The Examiner Record Booklet provides space to record responses and transform the raw score to an age equivalent, percentile rank, and the Problem Solving Index. The test kit also includes a Picture Book, which includes the picture stimuli for the test items.

Reliability and validity studies were conducted with individuals who have typical language ability and individuals who had been previously diagnosed with a language impairment or received other special education services. The average coefficient alpha is .82 for the Problem Solving Index. Studies were conducted to examine the ability of the test to differentiate students who receive special education services or have language impairments from those who do not. The results demonstrate that a Problem Solving Index cutoff score of 90 resulted in a sensitivity of .75, a specificity of .85, and a ROC/AUC of .74 for differentiating students who receive special education services; and a cutoff score of 92 resulted in a sensitivity of .69, a specificity of .89, and a ROC/AUC of .73 for differentiating students who have a language impairment. Validity of the test composites was demonstrated by correlations to the Universal Nonverbal Intelligence Test Group Abilities Test (UNIT-GAT; Bracken & McCallum, in development). The coefficient for the Analogic Reasoning subtest was .73, and the coefficient for the Quantitative subtest was .89, both very large.

COMPLETE TEST INCLUDES: Examiner s Manual, Picture Book, Picture Sequence Cards, and 25 Examiner Record Booklets, all in a sturdy storage box (©2018).

User Qualifications:

To administer this test at least a master' s degree is required, with state licensure OR certification from a professional organization (ASHA, AOTA, APA, AERA, ACA, AMA, NASP, NAN, INS) that requires formal training and experience in ethics, psychometrics, statistics, and scoring and interpretation. Tests of perceptual, academic, and functional processes used in schools, clinics and rehabilitation settings are of this level. All test users, regardless of level and profession, are expected to abide by the standards set forth by the APA, AERA and NCME regarding the ethical use, protection and dissemination of all test materials. All orders for the products listed below, must be placed on official institutional purchase order forms or professional letterhead.

The purchase of this product requires a check of customer qualifications. CLICK HERE to download qualifications form.

Orders for items on this page cannot be completed online. Please attach completed qualifications form to your institutional purchase order or professional letterhead when ordering this product. For questions or help placing your order for these items call (800) 880-4433.

To create a requisition form

• Enter a Quantitiy for the item(s) desired
• Click Add to Cart
• Click Print a requisition list

• Movies & TV

Image Unavailable

• To view this video download Flash Player

Test of Problem Solving 3 Elementary

Purchase options and add-ons, buy it with.

Customers also viewed these products

Product information

Warranty & support, product description.

Description The TOPS 3 Elementary assesses the ability to integrate semantic and linguistic knowledge with reasoning ability, using picture stimuli and verbal responses. TOPS 3 Elementary focuses on language-based thinking skills, including clarifying, analyzing, generating solutions, evaluating, and affective thinking. It is intended for use by speech-language pathologists, psychologists, and other professionals trained in language disorders. The test measures discrete skills that form the foundation of language-based thinking, reasoning, and problem-solving abilities. It is composed of 18 situations that examine six thinking tasks relevant to most students and common across cultures and school or home settings. Although the skills assessed are necessary for developing social competence, the TOPS 3 is not primarily a test of pragmatic or social language. It can, however, be part of a battery of tests to assess pragmatic competence.

Looking for specific info?

Customer reviews.

Customer Reviews, including Product Star Ratings help customers to learn more about the product and decide whether it is the right product for them.

To calculate the overall star rating and percentage breakdown by star, we don’t use a simple average. Instead, our system considers things like how recent a review is and if the reviewer bought the item on Amazon. It also analyzed reviews to verify trustworthiness.

No customer reviews

• Amazon Newsletter
• About Amazon
• Accessibility
• Sustainability
• Press Center
• Investor Relations
• Amazon Devices
• Amazon Science
• Sell on Amazon
• Sell apps on Amazon
• Supply to Amazon
• Protect & Build Your Brand
• Become an Affiliate
• Become a Delivery Driver
• Start a Package Delivery Business
• Advertise Your Products
• Self-Publish with Us
• Become an Amazon Hub Partner
• › See More Ways to Make Money
• Amazon Visa
• Amazon Store Card
• Amazon Secured Card
• Amazon Business Card
• Shop with Points
• Credit Card Marketplace
• Reload Your Balance
• Amazon Currency Converter
• Your Account
• Your Orders
• Shipping Rates & Policies
• Amazon Prime
• Returns & Replacements
• Manage Your Content and Devices
• Recalls and Product Safety Alerts
• Conditions of Use
• Privacy Notice
• Consumer Health Data Privacy Disclosure
• Your Ads Privacy Choices

• PRO-ED Order Form
• Research & Testing
• Publish with ProEd
• Reprint Permission

TOPS-3E: NU: Test Of Problem Solving-Third Edition Elementary: Normative Update

Linda bowers • rosemary huisingh • carolyn loguidice.

• Product Number: 34280
• Test Level: B
• Format: KIT
• Weight 2 lbs.10 oz.

Description

This product requires a check of customer qualifications.

Ages: 6-0 through 12-11 Testing time: 35 minutes Administration: Individual

The TOPS-3E: NU assesses a school-age child's ability to integrate semantic and linguistic knowledge with reasoning ability by way of picture stimuli and verbal responses.

The TOPS-3E: NU focuses on students' linguistic ability to think and reason. Language competence is the verbal indicator of how a student's language skills affect his ability to think, reason, problem solve, infer, classify, associate, predict, determine causes, sequence, and understand directions. The test focuses on a broad range of language-based thinking skills, including clarifying, analyzing, generating solutions, evaluating, and showing affective thinking.

While other tests may asses students' thinking skills by tapping mathematical, spatial, or nonverbal potential, the TOPS-3E: NU measures discreet skills that form the foundation of language-based thinking, reasoning, and problem-solving ability.

Although the skills tested on the TOPS-3E: NU are necessary for developing social competence, it is not primarily a test of pragmatic or social language skills. Rather, it should be part of a battery of tests and observations used to assess pragmatic competence.

New Features

• Characteristics of the normative sample were stratified by age relative to region, gender, ethnicity, and socioeconomic factors, and other critical variables are the same as those reported for the school-age population reported the ProQuest Statistical Abstract of the United States, 2016 (ProQuest, 2016).
• The Total Score was renamed the Problem Solving Index and calculated as a standard score with a mean of 100 and a standard deviation of 15.
• Each item on the test was evaluated using both conventional item analysis to choose good items and differential item analyses to find and eliminate potentially biased items.
• The index score was thoroughly examined for floor and ceiling effects.
• The test was subjected to diagnostic accuracy analyses, particularly rigorous techniques involving the computation of the receiver operating characteristic/area under the curve (ROC/AUC) statistic.
• The Examiner's Manual was reorganized and rewritten to provide more detailed information on the administration, interpretation, and statistical characteristics of the test.

Description of the Test

The TOPS-3E: NU has three components: an Examiner's Manual, Examiner Record Booklets, and a Picture Book. The Examiner's Manual includes a comprehensive discussion of the test's theoretical and research-based foundation, item development, standardization, administration and scoring procedures, norm tables, and guidelines for using and interpreting the test's results. The Examiner Record Booklet provides space to record responses and transform the raw score to an age equivalent, percentile rank, and the Problem Solving Index. The test kit also includes a Picture Book, which includes the picture stimuli for the test items.

Reliability and validity studies were conducted with individuals who have typical language ability and individuals who had been previously diagnosed with a language impairment or received other special education services. The average coefficient alpha is .82 for the Problem Solving Index. Studies were conducted to examine the ability of the test to differentiate students who receive special education services or have language impairments from those who do not. The results demonstrate that a Problem Solving Index cutoff score of 90 resulted in a sensitivity of .75, a specificity of .85, and a ROC/AUC of .74 for differentiating students who receive special education services; and a cutoff score of 92 resulted in a sensitivity of .69, a specificity of .89, and a ROC/AUC of .73 for differentiating students who have a language impairment. Validity of the test composites was demonstrated by correlations to the Universal Nonverbal Intelligence Test- Group Abilities Test (UNIT-GAT; Bracken & McCallum, in development). The coefficient for the Analogic Reasoning subtest was .73, and the coefficient for the Quantitative subtest was .89, both very large.

COMPLETE TEST INCLUDES : Examiner's Manual, Picture Book , and 25 Examiner Record Booklets, all in a sturdy storage box (©2018). 

In Our World  Every Step Forward Is A Step In The Right Direction

• About esOPTS
• Lunch & Learn
• OnDemand Learning
• Upcoming Trainings and Workshops
• Special Education Resources
• Request A Training
• Pre-K Prepare
• Project Prepare Coach Training
• Project Prepare Resources
• Assistive Technology Resources
• Home Page & Resources
• iPad Applications
• Loan Agreement
• Communication
• Computer Access/Environmental Controls
• Curriculum/Books
• Evaluations
• Hearing Impairment
• iPads & Apps
• iPad Accessories
• Miscellaneous
• Seating/Positioning
• Toys & Sensory
• Writing/Reading
• School-Based Therapy
• Guides & Resources

Test Of Problem Solving – 3 Elementary (2005) L-34

This item is loaned by the Department of Elementary & Secondary Education (DESE). You will not be charged for shipping upon confirming your order; DESE ships the items to you for free. However, you will be responsible for the cost of returning the loan item(s) to DESE.

Description

**DISCLAIMER: Normative update is available – TOPS-3E:NU** The TOPS 3 Elementary assesses a school-aged child’s ability to integrate semantic and linguistic knowledge with reasoning ability by way of picture stimuli and verbal responses. TOPS 3 Elementary focuses on the student’s linguistic ability to think and reason. Language competence is the overall indicator of how a child’s language skills affect his ability to think, reason, problem solve, infer, classify, associate, predict, determine causes, sequence, and understand directions. The TOPS 3 Elementary test questions focus on a broad range of language-based thinking skills, including clarifying, analyzing, generating solutions, evaluating, and affective thinking. While other tests may assess students’ thinking skills by tapping mathematical, spatial, or nonverbal potential, the TOPS 3 Elementary measures discrete skills that form the foundation of language-based thinking, reasoning, and problem-solving abilities. The test is composed of 18 situations that examine six thinking tasks. Carefully selected items and situations are relevant to most students and common across cultures and in most schools or home settings. Although the skills tested on the TOPS 3 Elementary are necessary for developing social competence, it is not primarily a test of pragmatic or social language skills. Rather, it should be part of a battery of tests/observations used to assess pragmatic competence. 6-12 years Norm-Referenced Huisingh, Bowers & LoGiudice Pro-Ed (LinguiSys)

WPS Qualification Level: C

Related products

Assessment of Classroom Communication and Study Skills (1998) L-5

School Functioning Assessment

Executive Function Test – Elementary (2014) TBI-4

Expressive language test – second edition (2010) l-14.

TOPS-3 Elementary:Normative Update

Tops-3e: nu: test of problem solving–third edition elementary: normative update,   linda bowers • rosemary huisingh • carolyn loguidice, tops 2 adolescent complete kit, test of narrative language - 2nd edition: tnl-2, test of pragmatic language - topl-2 complete kit, social language development test - elementary: nu complete kit - sldt-e:nu, tops-3e:nu test forms, tops-3 elementary: nu examiner's manual, tops-3 elementary:nu picture book, information, customer service.

Shopping Cart

Professional resources, assessments, and educational books.

• Special Education
• Occupational Therapy
• Speech & Language

Tasks of Problem Solving: Elementary

Tops-3 companion.

• Grades 1 - 6
• Format 8.5" x 11"
• Product Code 31171 ( MR #065856 )

This is a resource for Test of Problem Solving–Elementary: Normative Update (TOPS-3E: NU)

*** DISCONTINUED (NO LONGER AVAILABLE) ***

• General Information—Identify the salient information in a statement to answer questions.
• Identifying Problems—Observe surroundings and identify/express what is or is not a problem.
• Determining Causes—Think through situations and figure out how or why something happened.
• Sequencing—Organize objects and ideas quickly and logically.
• Negative Questions—Students notice and consider the negative marker in questions.
• Predicting—Make a logical guess about what will happen next in predictable and diverse situations.
• Making Inferences—Students think about what they know from past experiences and personal knowledge to form an inference.
• Problem Solving—Students work their way through logical steps to solving problems. Specific skills include sequencing the problem, determining the cause of the problem, brainstorming solutions, choosing the best solution, and evaluation the outcome.
• Justifying Opinions—Express opinions and explain or justify them to others.
• Generalizing Skills—Answer a variety of thinking questions about photographs.
• Additional Information
• Copyright 2005

• Skip to Content
• Skip to Main Navigation
• Skip to Catalog Search

Indiana University Indiana University IU

• Online Only

Search Results

• Export to Refworks
• Export to EndNote
• Librarian View

Assessing Social Pragmatic Abilities in Children with Language Difficulties

You’ve received a referral to assess the language abilities of a school aged child with suspected language difficulties. The child has not been assessed before so you know you’ll need a comprehensive language test to look at the child’s ability to recall sentences, follow directions, name words, as well as perform a number of other tasks showcasing the child’s abilities in the areas of content and form (Bloom & Lahey, 1978).

But how about the area of language use? Will you be assessing the child’s pragmatic and social cognitive abilities as well during your language assessment? After all most comprehensive standardized assessments, “typically focus on semantics, syntax, morphology, and phonology, as these are the performance areas in which specific skill development can be most objectively measured” (Hill & Coufal, 2005, p 35).

This means that popular comprehensive language such as  Comprehensive Assessment of Spoken Language-2 or the Test of Language Development-4 will not contain subtests assessing pragmatics and social competence. The  Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals-5 (CELF-5) which contains a Pragmatics Profile , does NOT really taps into the child’s social language competence since it does NOT directly test the child’s social language skills but rather assesses them via a parental/teachers questionnaire. Even the Test of Integrated Language and Literacy , which contains the Social Communication (SC) subtest can be passed by a number of students quite easily despite presenting with notable and easily evidenced social communication deficits.

Thus, many children can attain average scores on comprehensive language tests yet still present with pervasive social language deficits . That is why it’s very important to thoroughly assess social communication separately and not merely document your observations regarding the child’s behavior in the ‘background information’ section of the report.

But why should we? Can this one area really make such a difference? Well, turns out that it can! Numerous researchers have found a strong connection between language impairment (LI) and social deficits.  Paul, Looney, & Dahm (1991) found that late talkers as young as 18 months of age evidence peer socialization difficulties.  Early social difficulty such as difficulty with initiating and participating in play with peers may place toddlers at risk for later social rejection. As these children enter preschool they run the risk of being less socially accepted (Gertner, Rice, & Hadley, 1994) then typically developing peers. By the time children with language difficulties enter early elementary grades, the gap widens as they begin to manifest greater and greater difficulties in the area of social functioning (Fujiki, Brinton, Isaacson, & Summers, 2001).

So how can we administer balanced comprehensive evaluations which encompass assessment of the child’s social pragmatic skills? For starters, we need to do some prep work and establish prior to testing that this area is indeed affected and requires looking into.  I personally dislike wasting time, which is why prior to my assessments, I ask both the parent and the teacher to fill out checklists, which I’ve developed, specifically for this purpose.  On these multiple page checklists (separate for preschool and school aged children), I have 5 areas related to social pragmatic functioning:

• Narrative/Storytelling   
• Problem Solving
• Pragmatic Language
• Social Emotional Development
• Executive Functions

After a specific checklist is returned to me, I make decisions regarding whether part of my testing will be devoted to assessment of the child’s social pragmatic language skills and if so, what type of testing will be appropriate in such case? If social pragmatic assessment is needed, the latter becomes fairly apparent after I observe the child (e.g., in the classroom, during free period) as well as during the administration of the comprehensive language testing.

So what are some useful standardized and non standardized assessments of Social Pragmatic Language?

There are quite a few, but for the purposes of this post, I’ll just mention some of the ones that I use on daily basis for children whose ages range from toddlerhood through adolescence.

For toddlers 18 -47 months of age, I highly recommend the Language Use Inventory (LUI)  (O’Neil, 2009) which is administered in the form of a parental questionnaire.   —Aimed at identifying children with delay/impairment in pragmatic language development it contains —180 questions and divided into 3 parts and 14 subscales including:

• —Communication w/t gestures
• —Communication w/t words
• —Longer sentences

For preschoolers ages 4 and up, the Children’s Communication Checklist-2 U.S. Edition (CCC-2) is quite useful. This 70 item norm referenced instrument (given to the parent to rate) is divided into 10 scales, 4 of which ( E, F, G & H) address pragmatic aspects of communication, while another two ( I & J) assess behaviors commonly impaired in children with Autism Spectrum Disorders (Bishop, 2006; 2000).

For school aged children 6-12 years of age, the following standardized instruments tend to be fairly effective in teasing out social pragmatic language deficits:

• Test of Problem Solving-3 Elementary (TOPS-3)
• Test of Pragmatic Language-2 (TOPL-2) Available for children 6-18 years of age*
• Social Emotional Evaluation (SEE)**
• Social Language Development Test -Elementary (SLDT-E)                                                                   

*It is important to note that the TOPL-2 is best suited for children who either have impaired cognitive abilities (<70 IQ) or who have severely impaired perspective taking abilities, since this test is primarily composed of questions dealing with rules of polite conduct and involves very limited perspective taking.  Children with average IQ but significant word-retrieval deficits may also fair poorly on this test, if they are unable to coherently verbalize their answers to presented questions.

**Similarly the Social Emotional Evaluation (SEE) is best suited for children with impaired cognition and moderately impaired perspective taking abilities, since much of the test involves recall of facial expressions, as well as identification and recognition of common emotions and emotional reactions. The subtest “Understanding Conflicting Messages” may be limitedly useful for administration with higher functioning children.

For students 7-18 years of age the Clinical Assessment of Pragmatics ( CAPs ) is another good instrument sensitive to the assessment of social rules, irony, sarcasm, figurative language as well as comprehension and elicitation of nonverbal body language.

For school aged children 12-18 years of age I typically use the following standardized instruments (unless they are significantly impaired in the area of pragmatics, in which case I’ll use the TOPL-2 ):

• Test of Problem Solving-2 Adolescent (TOPS-2)
• Social Language Development Test -Adolescent (SLDT-A)
• Listening Comprehension Test Adolescent (LCT-A)

Some of you may wonder why I included the test of Listening Comprehension on this list. Well for those of you who are unfamiliar with this test, it has paragraph based questions, which require synthesis of presented information to identify main ideas. In other words the test assesses the student’s ability to engage in Gestalt Processing, or recognizing the “big picture” in messages, stories, or announcements. I also use it because it assesses problem solving and inferencing abilities, empathy and decision making in older children, so it’s a very useful instrument to have in your tool kit if you are working with language impaired adolescents.

When it comes to informal assessment of social language competence I often use materials from the following sources with children of various ages:

• Sally-Anne: First Order False Belief Task (Baron-Cohen, Leslie, & Frith 1985) Ages 4-5
• John Thinks that Mary Thinks Task (Perner & Wimmer, 1985) Ages 6+
• John Thinks that Mary Feels Task (Parker, MacDonald, & Miller, 2007) Ages 5-8
• Strange Stories (Happe, 1994) Ages 6+
• Social Dynamic Assessment Protocol (Winner, 2007) Ages 8+
• Informal Narrative Assessments (Hedberg & Westby, 1993) Ages: Pre-K -Adolescent

These are aimed at assessing the client’s perspective taking abilities, Theory of Mind, comprehension of non-literal language, positive and negative emotions, ability to produce coherent and cohesive narratives, as well as other abilities related to social competence. Of course I always exercise caution when using the above materials and instruments when assessing social pragmatic abilities of bilingual and multicultural children, since oftentimes extreme caution will be needed when reporting data and interpreting performance outcomes in order to avoid bias.

Also, when evaluating social pragmatic abilities, I typically attempt to use multiple assessment tasks to create a balanced assessment. I try to ensure that my assessments are functional, meaning that during my assessment I determine the child’s strengths and not just weaknesses. That is because I am looking for diagnostic information needed to formulate treatment goals, and if I just uncover weaknesses across the board, it’s quite difficult to find the starting point to initiate therapy. I also make sure that I add a descriptive portion to the report in addition to documenting standard scores, in order to objectively describe the child’s deficit areas.

Social pragmatic assessments are an integral part of language evaluations. After all so much of our students’ success depends not on their standardized tests scores but on their social skills (Lleras, 2008).

• — Social Pragmatic Assessment and Treatment Bundle
• Social Pragmatic Deficits Checklist for School Aged Children
• The Checklists Bundle
• — Narrative Assessment Bundle
• —Psychiatric Disorders Bundle
• — Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorders Assessment and Treatment Bundle
• Assessing Social Pragmatic Skills of School Aged Children
• Treatment of Social Pragmatic Deficits in School Aged Children
• Social Pragmatic Language Activity Pack
• Behavior Management Strategies for Speech Language Pathologists
• Executive Function Impairments in At-Risk Pediatric Populations

References :

• —  Baron-Cohen, S., Leslie, A.M., & Frith, U.  (1985) Does the autistic child have a ‘theory of mind’?  Cognition , 21, 37-46
• —  Bishop, D. V. M. (2006), CCC-2; Children’s Communication Checklist-2, United States Edition, Manual. San Antonio, TX: Pearson
• —  Bishop, D. V. M. (2000). Pragmatic language impairment: A correlate of SLI, a distinct subgroup, or part of the autistic continuum? In D. V. M. Bishop & L. B. Leonard (Eds.), Speech and language impairments in children: Causes, characteristics, intervention & outcome (pp.99-113). Hove, UK: Psychology Press
• —  Bloom, L & Lahey, M. (1978) Language development and language disorders. New York, Wiley.
• —  Fujiki, M., Brinton, B., Isaacson, T., & Summers, C. (2001). Social behaviors of children with language impairment on the playground: a pilot study.  Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools , 32 (2), 101-113.
• —  Gertner, B.L., Rice, M.L., & Hadley, P.A. (1994). Influence of communicative competence on peer preferences in a preschool classroom.  Journal of Speech and Hearing Research , 37, 913-923.
• —  Happé, F. G. E. (1994). An Advanced Test of Theory of Mind: Understanding of Story Characters’ Thoughts and Feelings by Able Autistic, Mentally Handicapped and Normal Children and Adults. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 24, 129-154.
• —  Hedberg, N. & Westby, C. (1993). Analyzing story-telling skills: Theory to practice. Tucson, AZ: Communication Skill Builders.
• —  Hill, J. W., & Coufal, K. L. (2005). Emotional/behavioral disorders: A retrospective examination of social skills, linguistics, and student outcomes.  Communication Disorders Quarterly ,  27 (1), 33–46.
• —  Lleras, Christy. (2008). “ Do Skills and Behaviors in High School Matter? The Contribution of Noncognitive Factors in Explaining Differences in Educational Attainment and Earnings. ” Social Science Research, 37: 888-902.
• —  O’Neill, D. (2009). The Language Use Inventory (LUI)
• Parker JR, MacDonald CA, & Miller SA, (2007) “John thinks that Mary feels. . .” False belief in children across affective and physical domains . Journal of Genetic Psychology , 168(1):43-61.
• —  Paul, R., Looney, S., & Dahm, P. (1991). Communication and socialization skills at ages 2 and 3 in “late-talking” young children. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research , 34, 858-865.
• —  Perner, J., & Wimmer, H. (1985) John Thinks That Mary Thinks That – Attribution of 2 nd order Beliefs By 5-Year-Old To 10-Year-Old Children. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology , 39, 437–471.
• —  Winner, M.G., (2007).  Thinking About You Thinking About Me.  Think Social Publications, San Jose, CA

15 thoughts on “ Assessing Social Pragmatic Abilities in Children with Language Difficulties ”

[…] General language tests such do NOT directly test children’s narrative abilities or social language skills. Thus, many children can attain average scores on these tests yet still present with pervasive higher order language deficits, so more sensitive testing IS NEEDED.  […]

Thank you for this article. I was looking for an assessment that targets pragmatic language in younger children on my caseload (age 4 and younger), and there are very few options at this age level. I am excited to use the Language Use Inventory in my private practice. Thank you, Rachel Sakofs, M.S. CCC-SLP BrainWorks Therapy, LLC http://www.brainworksslp.com

Hello Tatyana, I have a question. The LUI seems promising since it’s the only one you could do on younger children. However, it is normed on Canadian children. Therefore, we wouldn’t be able to use the norms. How do you use it? What information does it provide? Is there an alternative?

Because it is a parental questionnaire dealing with basic pragmatic milestones for kids 18 mos-47 mos of age, it is perfectly acceptable to use the norms with US children as these milestones are not different for US kids.

I noticed that the Theory of Mind Inventory was not mentioned, but it is listed on your assessment checklist as a good option. Can you comment on when you might use this and maybe what other assessments might complement it?

I’m planning to buy the SLDT-E soon, but after reading this post I’m wondering if another assessment would be a better option.

Thank you, Marianne

I believe that was because this post was originally published before I became aware of TOM-2 Inventory. I did review the TOM-2 inventory in this post “Early Intervention Evaluations PART IV:Assessing Social Pragmatic Abilities of Children Under 3” https://www.smartspeechtherapy.com/early-intervention-evaluations-part-ivassessing-social-pragmatic-abilities-of-children-under-3/

Great information and I love that theory of mind cartoon!

[…] deficits are overt (e.g., reduced vocabulary and grammar), many subtle language difficulties (e.g., social communication, writing, etc.) may not be readily recognized without these in-depth […]

[…] subtle or overt social communication difficulties that require assessment and intervention.  More assessment tools were developed to assess social communication abilities of school-age children.  A number of […]

[…] Let’s begin by answering a few simple questions. Was a thorough language evaluation with an emphasis on the child’s social pragmatic language abilities been completed? And by thorough, I am not referring to general language tests but to a variety of formal and informal social pragmatic language testing (read more HERE). […]

Is there a reason LinguiSystems no longer carries the Executive Functions Test?

Not quite sure. Perhaps it’s because Super Duper now sells it? https://www.superduperinc.com/products/view.aspx?pid=TM891#.Wr4Gcsv3ahA

[…] and easily evidenced social communication deficits. Consequently, I prefer the administration of comprehensive social communication testing when working with children in my hospital based program or in my private practice, where I perform […]

[…] and expression of language but may display significant social pragmatic language weaknesses, which will not be apparent on general language testing (e.g., administration of Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals -5). Thus, the administration […]

[…] versus externalizing manifestations) many social communication deficits will be missed without the administration of appropriate social pragmatic language assessments.  It is also important to note that presently social pragmatic assessments ARE NOT routinely […]

You must be logged in to post a comment.

• Adolescents (28)
• Ankyloglossia (1)
• APD Validity (7)
• App Review (18)
• Articulation (17)
• Assessment (118)
• Autism (19)
• behavior strategies (14)
• Bell Curve Charting (3)
• Bilingual (17)
• Blogging About Research (25)
• Book Companion (10)
• CEUs/CMHs (4)
• Checklist (23)
• Childhood Apraxia of Speech (6)
• Clinical Assessment (19)
• Clinical Fellows (1)
• CMH Quiz (1)
• Context Clues (3)
• Contextual Intervention (8)
• Controversial Practices in Health Care (7)
• Critical Thinking (22)
• Cues and Prompts (4)
• Development milestones (16)
• Developmental Disabilities (12)
• Differential Diagnosis (20)
• Down Syndrome (6)
• Dysgraphia (7)
• Dyslexia (35)
• Dyslexia Assessment (12)
• Dyslexia/Reading Disability (30)
• Early Intervention (18)
• Elementary (32)
• emotional and behavioral disturbances (34)
• Emotional Intelligence (5)
• Evidence-Based Practice (EBP) (50)
• Executive Function (15)
• Facebook (7)
• Fairy Tales (1)
• feeding (3)
• Following Directions (2)
• Fragile X Syndrome (3)
• Freebie (13)
• genetic syndromes (14)
• Giveaway (71)
• Independent Educational Evaluations (IEEs) (13)
• Insight (15)
• insurance coverage (2)
• Intake forms (6)
• internationally adopted children (28)
• Kindergarten (11)
• language delay (74)
• Language Disorder (68)
• language stimulation (30)
• Learned Helplessness (1)
• Learning Disability (55)
• Life Skills (3)
• listening comprehension (29)
• Literacy (42)
• Metacognition (4)
• Metalinguistics (12)
• Middle School (24)
• Morphological Awareness (8)
• Motor Speech Disorders (5)
• multicultural (24)
• Multisensory Stimulation (9)
• Narratives (10)
• News Release (44)
• NJAC 6A:14-3.6 (1)
• Nonfiction Text (2)
• orofacial assessment (4)
• Parent Consultation (4)
• Parent Tips (2)
• Phonemic Awareness (24)
• Phonics (9)
• Phonological Awareness (16)
• Picture Books (11)
• preschoolers (52)
• Problem Solving and Verbal Reasoning (34)
• Processing Disorders (25)
• Professional Consultation (2)
• Professional Development (3)
• Psychiatric Impairments (3)
• Reading Comprehension (19)
• Reading Fluency (17)
• Report Writing Tips (12)
• resource websites (33)
• Review (37)
• Rewards (1)
• Russian (6)
• Science of Reading Literacy Certificate for SLPs (1)
• Screening (1)
• Search Tips (2)
• Sequencing (2)
• Severe Disabilities (12)
• SLP Efficiency Bundles (3)
• Smart Speech Therapy Article (77)
• Social Communication (25)
• social pragmatic language (70)
• Social Thinking® Products (2)
• Special Education Disputes (14)
• speech language pathology (208)
• Speech-Language Report Tutorials (12)
• SPELL-Links/Learning By Design (3)
• Spelling (12)
• stuttering (5)
• Summer Learning Loss (1)
• Test Review (16)
• Thematic Intervention (13)
• Toddlers (12)
• Tongue Tie (1)
• Translanguaging (5)
• Treatment Suggestions (112)
• Trivia Night (5)
• Video Modeling (1)
• Vocabulary (42)
• Wh- Questions (2)
• word-finding (12)
• Writing (16)