ABSTRACT

In language assessment, the task is only made more difficult by the existence of communication disorders. According to Michael Kane (2011), “finding that an examinee had a disability that had not been adequately accommodated could undermine a standard interpretive argument” (also see Abedi, this volume). How should we interpret scores, ratings, or any language assessment for persons with communication disorders? Is it possible to do so based on the expected ranges and milestones associated with persons who do not have any known disorder or disability? For instance, can a “non-verbal” person with severe “infantile autism” be judged with assessment procedures that are designed for application to normally developing individuals of comparable physical and chronological maturity? Is a differently calibrated scale required for the person with autism? If a newly discovered problem could overturn a standard interpretation of a score, rating, or assessment procedure, just how many distinct language assessment procedures should there be and how are they to be determined? To address these questions and others that flow from them, it is useful to begin with a definition

of what communication disorders are.