Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 193

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 A B C D E

K H A n – L e w i s

P h o n o l o g i c a l
AN a l y s i s

SAMPLE,
NOT FOR
M A N U A L

M A N U A L
ADMINISTRATION
OR RESALE
Linda M. L. Khan and Nancy P. Lewis

800.627.7271
www.PearsonClinical.com Product Number 0158012879

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN_Cover.indd All Pages 8/31/15 5:31 PM


SAMPLE,
NOT FOR
MANUAL

ADMINISTRATION
Linda M. L. Khan and Nancy P. Lewis

OR RESALE

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 1 8/31/15 3:38 PM


SAMPLE,
NOT FOR
ADMINISTRATION
OR RESALE
Copyright © 2015 NCS Pearson, Inc. All rights reserved.

Portions of this work were previously published.

Warning: No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means,
electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, recording, or any information storage and retrieval system,
without the express written permission of the copyright owner.

Pearson, PSI design, PsychCorp, KLPA, Q-global, and Q-interactive are trademarks, in the U.S. and/or
other countries, of Pearson Education, Inc. or its affiliates.

Bluetooth is a trademark of Bluetooth SIG, Inc.

PsychCorp is an imprint of Pearson Clinical Assessment.

NCS Pearson, Inc.  5601 Green Valley Drive  Bloomington MN 55437


800.627.7271 www.PearsonClinical.com

Printed in the United States of America.

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 2 8/31/15 3:38 PM


Table of Contents

Acknowledgments��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������viii

1 Overview ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 1
Uses ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 1
Content and Organization ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 1
KLPA–3 Core Phonological Process Analysis������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 1
KLPA–3 Supplemental Phonological Process Analysis ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 2
KLPA–3 Consonant Analysis and Vowel Analysis������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 2
Scores ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 2

SAMPLE,
Analysis Completion Time ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 2
Test Components ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 2
Manual ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 2

NOT FOR
Analysis Form������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 3
Sound Change Booklet��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 3
Digital Options Available for the KLPA–3������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 3

ADMINISTRATION
Rationale for the KLPA–3�������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 3
Pairing with the GFTA ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 4
Goals for the Revision ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 4

OR RESALE
Examiner Qualifications������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 4
KLPA–3 User’s Responsibilities����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 4

2 The Phonological Processes ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 5


Categories of the Phonological Processes������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 5
The Phonological Process Abbreviations by Category and Type ������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 5
Definitions of the Phonological Processes������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 7
Core Phonological Process Definitions���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 7
Manner���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 7
Place ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 8
Reduction������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 9
Voicing �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 10
Supplemental Phonological Process Definitions ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 10
Manner�������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 10
Place ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 12

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Table of Contents iii

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 3 8/31/15 3:38 PM


Reduction���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 13
Voicing �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 14
Other Phonological Process Definitions for Consideration�������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 14
Vowel Phonological Process Definitions������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 19

3 Recording and Scoring Directions ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 23


General Guidelines ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 23
When to Complete a Phonological Analysis ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 23
Preparing to Use the KLPA–3 ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 23
Reviewing the Components������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 24
Calculating Chronological Age ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 26
Recording Responses����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 26
Identifying the phonological processes ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 26
Scoring Considerations������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 27
Examples of Scored Responses����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 27

SAMPLE,Identifying Vowel Alterations ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 29


Identifying Other Phonological Processes�������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 29

NOT FOR
Determining Processes per Word���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 29
Determining the Total Raw Score �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 29
Completing the Score Summary����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 30

ADMINISTRATION
Step 1. Convert Total Raw Score to Standard Score �������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 30
Step 2. Determine Confidence Intervals���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 31
Step 3. Determine Percentile Ranks���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 31

OR RESALE
Step 4. Determine Age Equivalents������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 31
Determining the Percent of Occurrence for Core Phonological Processes������������������������������������������������������ 32
Completing the Vowel Alterations Section ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 32
Completing the Dialectal Influence Section������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 32
Completing the Overall Intelligibility Section ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 32
Determining the Percent of Occurrence for Supplemental Phonological Processes and Vowel Alterations ��� 33
Calculating Processes per Word ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 33
Completing the Consonant Analysis����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 33
Phonetic Inventory for Consonants in Single Words �������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 33
Core Phonological Process Analysis Table ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 35
Summary of Consonant Analysis ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 35
Completing the Vowel Analysis ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 35
Phonetic Inventory for Vowels in Single Words ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 35
Vowel Phonological Process Usage Table�������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 36
Summary of Vowel Analysis ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 36

iv Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Table of Contents

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 4 8/31/15 3:38 PM


4 Test Interpretation ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 37
Using the KLPA–3 in the Clinical Evaluation Process ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 37
Description of KLPA–3 Scores ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 37
Norm-Referenced Standard Scores ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 37
Confidence Intervals ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 38
Percentile Ranks ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 39
Age Equivalents ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 39
Limitation 1 ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 40
Limitation 2 ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 40
Limitation 3 ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 40
Calculating Percent Delay From an Age Equivalent ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 40
Interpretation of KLPA–3 Results������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 41
Interpreting Percent of Occurrence Scores ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 41
Effect of Interfering Processes on Percent of Occurrence Scores�������������������������������������������������������������������� 42

SAMPLE,
Case Studies ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 42
Case Study A (Female, Age 2:10) ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 42
History and Referral ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 42

NOT FOR
Referral Questions �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 42
Score Results���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 43
Recommendations and Follow-up�������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 44

ADMINISTRATION
Case Study B (Male, Age 6:3) ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 45
History and Referral ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 45
Referral Questions �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 45

OR RESALE
Score Results���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 45
Recommendations and Follow-up�������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 47
Case Study C (Female, Age 7:9) ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 47
History and Referral ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 47
Referral Questions �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 48
Score Results���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 48
Recommendations and Follow-up�������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 50

5 Development and Standardization����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 51


Development of the KLPA–3 ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 51
Feedback From Test Users and Others ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 51
Literature Review ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 52
GFTA–3/KLPA–3 Pilot Research ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 52
Pilot Sample������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 52
Pilot Research Results�������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 52
Tryout Research ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 52

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Table of Contents v

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 5 8/31/15 3:38 PM


Tryout Sample���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 52
Statistical Analysis �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 53
Tryout Research Results ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 53
Standardization Research���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 53
Standardization Sample������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 53
Standardization Research Results�������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 55
Coding of Phonological Processes in the KLPA–3���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 55
Developing the KLPA–3 Scoring System ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 57
Scores Provided by the KLPA–3 ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 57
Standard Scores ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 57
Age Equivalents ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 57
Percent of Occurrence�������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 58
Suppression of Phonological Processes ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 58

6 Evidence of Reliability and Validity ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 59

SAMPLE,
Evidence of Reliability ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 59
Evidence of Internal Consistency ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 59

NOT FOR
Standard Error of Measurement and Confidence Intervals ������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 60
Evidence of Test-Retest Stability ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 61
Evidence of Inter-Scorer Agreement������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 62

ADMINISTRATION
Evidence of Validity ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 63
Evidence Based on Test Content����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 63
KLPA–3 Content and Scope ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 64

OR RESALE
Evidence Based on Response Processes ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 64
Evidence Based on Relationships With Other Variables������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 65
Correlation With the KLPA–2 ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 65
Evidence Based on Special Group Studies ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 66
Individuals Diagnosed With a Speech Sound Disorder ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 67
Diagnostic Accuracy ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 69
Summary of Reliability and Validity Evidence ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 71

Appendix A Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample
by Age and Sex������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 73
Appendix B Age Equivalents for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex��������������������������������������������������������� 163
Appendix C Suppression and Occurrence of the Phonological Processes in the Normative Sample
by Age��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 165
Appendix D List of Examiners for the Tryout and Standardization Research Phases����������������������������������� 169
Appendix E Phonetic Symbols and Diacritics for Transcription ��������������������������������������������������������������������������175
Appendix F Reproducible Pages ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������177
References ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 181

vi Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Table of Contents

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 6 8/31/15 3:38 PM


Tables
Table 4.1  Distance From the Mean of Selected Standard Scores�������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 38
Table 4.2  Guidelines for Describing the Severity of a Speech Sound Disorder ����������������������������������������������������������� 41
Table 5.1  KLPA–3 Content and Bias Review Panel Members �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 51
Table 5.2 Distribution of the GFTA–3/KLPA–3 Normative Sample by Parent Education Level, Race/Ethnicity,
and Geographic Region �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 54
Table 6.1 Reliability Coefficients and Standard Errors of Measurement for Female and Male Normative Samples ���� 61
Table 6.2  Test-Retest Stability �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 62
Table 6.3  Rater Agreement for Core Processes������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 63
Table 6.4  Correlations Between the KLPA–3 and KLPA–2 Scores ������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 66
Table 6.5 Demographic Characteristics of the Speech Sound Disorder Sample���������������������������������������������������������� 68
Table 6.6  Mean Performance of the Speech Sound Disorder Group and the Nonclinical Matched Sample��������������� 69
Table 6.7  Clinical Validity Statistics for Phonology Error Scores Based on Cut Score Base Rates ����������������������������� 71

Figures

SAMPLE,
Figure 3.1  Sample Page From the Sound Change Booklet������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 25
Figure 3.2  Calculating Chronological Age �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 26
Figure 3.3  KLPA–3 Examples of CS and SR Scored Responses ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 28

NOT FOR
Figure 3.4  KLPA–3 Examples of DIC and DMC Scored Responses ���������������������������������������������������������������������������� 28
Figure 3.5  KLPA–3 Examples of VOC and CS Scored Responses ������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 29

ADMINISTRATION
Figure 3.6  Calculating the KLPA–3 Total Raw Score ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 30
Figure 3.7  Locating the KLPA–3 Standard Score ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 31
Figure 3.8  Completed KLPA–3 Score Summary������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 32

OR RESALE
Figure 3.9  Calculating the Percent Of Occurrence for Phonological Processes���������������������������������������������������������� 32
Figure 3.10  Completed Consonant Analysis����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 34
Figure 3.11  Completed Vowel Analysis ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 36
Figure 4.1  The Normal Curve and Its Relationship to Standard Scores and Percentile Ranks on the KLPA–3 ����������� 37
Figure 4.2  Example of Score Ranges for 90% and 95% Confidence Intervals������������������������������������������������������������ 39
Figure 5.2  Sample Page From the Sound Change Booklet������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 56
Figure 6.1  Possible Outcomes of Positive Predictive Power (+) and Negative Predictive Power (–)���������������������������� 70

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Table of Contents vii

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 7 8/31/15 3:38 PM


Acknowledgments

T
he development of a robust assessment tool required the assistance and support of many professionals.
We would like to thank the many members of the Pearson family who, through their dedication and support,
guided the development of the Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis (3rd. ed.; KLPA–3) as a companion tool to the
Goldman-Fristoe Test of Articulation (3rd. ed.; GFTA–3). We are grateful to each and every one of them. Special thanks to
Ron Goldman and Macalyne Fristoe for the privilege of collaborating with them on these projects.
Senior research director Shannon Wang guided the project from beginning to end. Her team included research director
Marie Sepulveda and senior clinical assessment developer Elsa Tijerina. Nancy Castilleja, senior product line manager,
ensured that the project was on point and that the initial vision of the KLPA–3 was upheld throughout development and
maintained the same standards as KLPA and KLPA–2. Project manager Jill Tudyk’s organization and skill kept the project
on target.
The field research team, led by director Victoria Locke, was tasked with collecting all the samples throughout tryout and
standardization. The digital adaptation of the KLPA–3 for Q-interactive required the dedication and diligence of many
individuals in its creation and successful development. Kristen Getz, research director, managed the Q-interactive portion

SAMPLE,
of the project throughout the development of the test. Jennifer Japhet, research assistant, and Kami Buss, field research
coordinator, trained all Q-interactive field examiners. We are grateful to all the individuals who gave their time and effort to
the data collection.

NOT FOR
The psychometrics staff, led by Dr. Jianjun Zhu, director of Clinical Psychometrics, added their expertise throughout the
project. Special thanks goes to Dr. Ou Zhang, psychometrician, and Suping Jin, statistical analyst, who provided their
knowledge and skills during all phases of data analysis and final norms development.

ADMINISTRATION
It is imperative that all components are easy to understand and use. Jeffrey Miller, editor, deserves our gratitude for
ensuring that the manuals were well written and the Sound Change Booklet was accurate. Janet Smith, senior graphic
designer, provided an elegant and user-friendly design for the analysis form.
Field testing is a time-consuming process and would not have been successful without the efforts of the speech-

OR RESALE
language pathologists who participated as examiners. Without their tenacity and perseverance in locating and testing
individuals before and after school, on weekends, and even holidays, this analysis would not exist. We sincerely thank the
participants, especially the youngest of them, for their patience in responding to the many test items.
To the many clinicians who have expressed to us their appreciation of just how clinically useful the previous editions of
the KLPA have been, thank you. As speech-language clinicians ourselves, we developed this assessment tool with you
in mind.
Finally, we would like to extend our heartfelt gratitude to the thousands of amazing children, along with their amazing
families, who have taught us so much more than we could ever have imagined throughout our careers. The KLPA–3 is
dedicated to them.
Linda Khan and Nancy Lewis
September 2015

viii Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Acknowledgments

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 8 8/31/15 3:38 PM


1 Overview

T
he Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis, (3rd ed.; KLPA–3) is a revision of the Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis
(2nd ed.; KLPA–2; Khan & Lewis, 2002). The KLPA–3 is a norm-referenced, in-depth analysis of phonological
process usage for children, adolescents, and young adults ages 2:0–21:11. Designed as a companion tool to the
Goldman-Fristoe Test of Articulation (3rd ed.; GFTA–3; 2015), the KLPA–3 makes use of the target words elicited by the
GFTA–3 Sounds-in-Words test to provide further diagnostic information about an individual’s speech sound abilities.
The KLPA–3 is designed for a speech-language pathologist to analyze an individual’s production of target words for
any sound changes and to identify the phonological processes used to produce those sound changes. The KLPA–3
phonological processes are separated into two categories: Core Phonological Processes, which are frequently occurring
and considered to be developmental; and Supplemental Phonological Processes, which occur less frequently but are
evidenced by individuals with speech sound disorders. A third group of phonological processes is discussed in this

SAMPLE,
Manual, but they not are listed on the KLPA–3 Analysis Form. These other phonological processes occur infrequently and
are typically indicators of disordered speech. The KLPA–3 also includes eight phonological processes impacting vowel
sound changes that can be summarized on the Analysis Form.

Uses
NOT FOR
The KLPA–3 can help you:

ADMINISTRATION
■■ determine if an individual has a speech sound disorder in the area of phonology,
■■ determine eligibility for speech services in conjunction with other supporting evidence,
■■ identify which phonological processes an individual demonstrates most often,
identify which phonological processes may interfere with an individual’s intelligibility of speech,

OR RESALE
■■

■■ obtain an inventory of sounds used by an individual,


■■ determine if an individual produces vowel alterations, and
■■ determine a treatment plan based on the profile of phonological process usage.

Content and Organization


KLPA–3 Core Phonological Process Analysis
The KLPA–3 provides a systematic analysis for identifying the phonological processes used when target sounds from
the GFTA–3 Sounds-in-Words test are produced incorrectly. In the KLPA–3, 12 Core Phonological Processes are used to
derive the standard score. These phonological processes are categorized into four types of processes.
Manner Processes:
Deaffrication
Gliding of liquids
Stopping of fricatives and affricates
Stridency deletion
Vocalization

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Chapter 1 ■ Overview 1

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 1 8/31/15 3:38 PM


Place Processes:
Palatal fronting
Velar fronting
Reduction Processes:
Cluster simplification
Deletion of final consonant
Syllable reduction
Voicing Processes:
Final devoicing
Initial voicing

KLPA–3 Supplemental Phonological Process Analysis


In addition to the Core Phonological Processes, a supplemental set of phonological processes can be used to further
describe an individual’s speech sound production. These Supplemental Phonological Processes are not included in the
KLPA–3 scoring system due to the fact that some are nondevelopmental and/or occur infrequently. However, KLPA–3

SAMPLE,
data indicate that individuals with speech sound disorders use these phonological processes. They are, therefore,
included for qualitative analysis purposes and to help plan for intervention.

KLPA–3 Consonant Analysis and Vowel Analysis

NOT FOR
The KLPA–3 also provides space for further analysis of consonant and vowel sound productions. These analyses can
play an important role in treatment planning by contributing more information to an individual’s speech sound profile.

ADMINISTRATION
Scores
The KLPA–3 yields norm-referenced scores (standard scores, percentile ranks, age equivalents). The KLPA–3 standard
score is derived from the analysis of phonological processes corresponding to productions of the consonant and

OR RESALE
consonant cluster sounds in the the GFTA–3 Sounds-in-Words test.
Scores are reported for females and males in the following intervals:
Ages 2:0–6:11 2-month intervals
Ages 7:0–8:11 3-month intervals
Ages 9:0–10:11 6-month intervals
Ages 11:0–13:11 1-year intervals
Ages 14:0–21:11 2-year intervals

Analysis Completion Time


The typical time required to complete the KLPA–3 is between 10 and 30 minutes. The time varies depending on the
number and complexity of the individual’s speech sound errors.

Test Components
Manual
The Manual provides information on the rationale and development of the KLPA–3, the definitions and examples of
the phonological processes, the use of the Sound Change Booklet to complete the Analysis Form, the calculation and
interpretation of standard scores, the standardization and norms development procedures, the evidence of reliability and
validity, and six appendixes.

2 Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Chapter 1 ■ Overview

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 2 8/31/15 3:38 PM


Analysis Form
The KLPA–3 Analysis Form provides a place for recording any sound changes that occur when an individual’s production
differs from the target word. The front of the Analysis Form has a space for recording identifying information, scores, and
the percent of occurrence for the Core Phonological Processes. The interior pages list each consonant and consonant
cluster from the target words and provide space for transcribing responses, marking sound changes, and recording
phonological processes. Core Phonological Processes are on left-hand pages in purple, and Supplemental Phonological
Processes are on right-hand pages in green. The right-hand page also contains columns for recording vowel alterations,
other phonological processes, and processes per word (PPW). The last few pages of the Analysis Form display
definitions for each Core and Supplemental Phonological Process, a page for analyzing consonant productions, and a
page that provides definitions for vowel phonological processes as well as space for analyzing vowel productions.
The tables for consonants used in each position and for vowels used provide an inventory of phonemes that can be used
as visual summaries of the consonants and vowels produced by the individual. This information may be used in planning
intervention (Davis, 2005; Gierut, 2005).

Sound Change Booklet


The Sound Change Booklet is used to identify the phonological processes active in any sound change. Because the
content is presented in a sound-by-sound format for each of the target words, any sound change for a given word can be
located in this booklet and the corresponding phonological process(es) used can be recorded on the Analysis Form.

SAMPLE,
Digital Options Available for the KLPA–3
At the time of publication, digital options are available on two digital platforms: Q-global (a web-based administration
and scoring platform) and Q-interactive (an interactive digital platform using two digital tablets that work together with a

NOT FOR
Bluetooth® connection). Because digital products are updated frequently, refer to www.PearsonClinical.com for the most
current information.

ADMINISTRATION
Rationale for the KLPA–3
The KLPA–3, like its predecessors, attempts to combine the advantages of traditional methods, the distinctive-feature
approach, and phonological analysis for examining sound changes.

OR RESALE
Traditionally, speech-language pathologists examined individuals’ speech production for individual phoneme changes.
In these analyses, sound changes were described as substitutions, distortions, and omissions of target phonemes. They
were further described with regard to their position within a word (i.e., initial, medial, final). Thus, results from traditional
analyses provided speech-language pathologists with a list of individually misarticulated phonemes by type of sound
change and position. Although these results provided useful information, sound changes sometimes appeared to be
random or inconsistent, particularly for very young children or older individuals whose speech was unintelligible.
Speech sound assessments have also attempted to examine changes in distinctive-features (Fisher & Logemann, 1971).
A change in one distinctive feature, such as continuancy, may have explained a number of changes that had appeared
to be random or inconsistent across several phonemes. A review of the sound change patterns that arise assist in
intervention planning.
The KLPA was developed to identify the phonological processes that account for various types of sound changes,
including those related to context. Context, or environment, can be important in determining sound change patterns.
What appear to be random sound changes on an articulation test may be reasonably explained by examining context
and patterns. Both consonants and vowels can influence the production of a target consonant. For example, a child may
say frog as [fwɔg], green as [grin], and brother as [bwʌðɚ]. In examining the inconsistent use of /r/ in clusters, the context
appears to be the reason. The pattern may be that when /r/ is adjacent to a labial consonant (/f/ and /b/), it is produced as
a [w], which is also labial. The influence of the phonemic environment was referred to as “coarticulatory context” as early
as 1968 (Daniloff & Moll, 1968) and continues to be the focus of research in children and adults (Goffman, Smith, Heisler,
& Ho, 2008; Recasens, 2002).

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Chapter 1 ■ Overview 3

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 3 8/31/15 3:38 PM


Pairing with the GFTA
The KLPA authors sought to develop a companion analysis of phonological processes for the GFTA that would
preserve the information obtained through traditional measures while extending the assessment to include analysis for
phonological process usage (Lewis & Khan, 1982). They chose the GFTA as their foundation for several reasons. GFTA
provided an efficient method for eliciting and recording phoneme production. The easel containing the colorful pictures
offered interesting stimuli and a manageable system of administration. Most vocabulary words were within the lexicon of
even the youngest child, yet the test used a number of complex words for further examination. The GFTA–2 Response
Form layout was arranged to display an error matrix.
The KLPA–3 continues to be responsive to the needs of speech-language pathologists. The combination of the GFTA–3
with the KLPA–3 requires only the time to administer, score, and analyze a set of single-word speech sound productions
to provide a reliable measure of phonological process usage.

Goals for the Revision


In conceptualizing and developing the KLPA–3, the goals were to incorporate the best features of the KLPA–2, maintain
the diagnostic power of the analysis by selecting an item set that provided for coverage of developmental phonological
processes to assist you in making decisions about the presence or absence of a phonological disorder, and structure
and organize the Analysis Form to facilitate quick review of an individual’s phonological process usage. Revisions for
the KLPA–3:

SAMPLE,
reflect changes made in GFTA–3 (e.g., new target words),
■■

■■ provide an analysis of the Core Phonological Processes,


■■ incorporate Supplemental Phonological Processes, other phonological processes, and vowel alterations to

NOT FOR
provide a qualitative analysis of an individual’s responses,
■■ introduce a digital edition of the analysis, and
■■ provide a vowel analysis that includes a phonetic inventory of vowels and vowel phonological processes.

ADMINISTRATION
Examiner Qualifications
The KLPA–3 should be scored and interpreted by speech-language pathologists who have knowledge about speech

OR RESALE
sound disorders. Moreover, they must have in-depth knowledge of phonetics and transcription using the International
Phonetic Alphabet (IPA).
The KLPA–3 is used to determine if an individual has a speech sound disorder in the area of phonology and to provide
metrics to gauge the severity of the disorder. Score results may help you determine treatment goals. Therefore, while
individuals with various degrees of training and experience (e.g., speech scientists, linguists) can evaluate speech sound
production, only speech-language pathologists should make decisions concerning diagnosis, intervention, and prognosis.

KLPA–3 User’s Responsibilities


It is your responsibility as the assessment tool user to ensure that test materials, including record forms, remain secure
and are released only to professionals who will safeguard their proper use. Although review of assessment results
with parents/caregivers is appropriate, this review should not include disclosure or copying of items, record forms, or
other materials that would compromise the security, validity, or value of the KLPA–3 as a measurement tool. Under
no circumstance should assessment materials be resold or displayed in locations where unqualified individuals can
purchase or view partial or complete portions of the KLPA–3. This restriction includes personal Internet websites and
Internet auction sites. Because all items, normative data, and other assessment materials are copyrighted, the Legal
Affairs Department of Pearson must approve, in writing, the copying or reproduction of any materials. The only exception
to this requirement is the copying of a completed Analysis Form for the purpose of conveying an individual’s records to
another qualified professional. These user responsibilities, copyright restrictions, and assessment security issues are
consistent with the guidelines set forth in the Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing (American Educational
Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education [AERA,
APA, & NCME], 2014).

4 Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Chapter 1 ■ Overview

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 4 8/31/15 3:38 PM


2 The Phonological Processes

Categories of the Phonological Processes


Based on analysis of the normative data, three categories of phonological processes were determined. Twelve
phonological processes are considered Core Phonological Processes and are scored in the KLPA–3. These Core
Phonological Processes are generally developmental in nature and may be observed in the typical speech development
process. An additional twelve phonological processes are considered Supplemental Phonological Processes and are not
used to derive the KLPA-3 standard score. These Supplemental Phonological Processes may be more clinical in nature
as demonstrated in the speech production of individuals with speech sound disorders. Twenty-one other phonological
processes are also listed and may be included in the KLPA-3 summary of quantitative and qualitative data. These other
phonological processes occur infrequently and are usually indicative of disordered speech production. Additionally,
definitions for vowel alteration and eight vowel phonological processes are also listed and may help in assessing

SAMPLE,
individuals who have numerous vowel changes in their production of target words.

The Phonological Process Abbreviations by Category and Type

NOT FOR
Core Phonological Processes
Manner
DF Deaffrication

ADMINISTRATION
GL Gliding of liquids
ST Stopping of fricatives and affricates
STR Stridency deletion
VOC Vocalization

OR RESALE
Place
PF
VF
Reduction
Palatal fronting
Velar fronting

CS Cluster simplification
DFC Deletion of final consonant
SR Syllable reduction
Voicing
FDV Final devoicing
IV Initial voicing

Supplemental Phonological Processes


Manner
AFF Affrication
FRC Frication
GL(Oth) Gliding of consonants other than liquids
GR Glottal replacement
LIQ Liquidization
ST(Oth) Stopping of consonants other than fricatives and affricates

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Chapter 2 ■ The Phonological Processes 5

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 5 8/31/15 3:38 PM


Place
BK Backing to velars or /h/
Reduction
DIC Deletion of initial consonant
DMC Deletion of medial consonant
Voicing
IDV Initial devoicing
MDV Medial devoicing
MV Medial voicing

Other Phonological Processes


ADD Addition of consonants and syllables
ALV Alveolarization
COAL Coalescence
CH Consonant harmony
DEN Denasalization

SAMPLE,
FV Final voicing
NDEN Interdentalization
LAB Labialization

NOT FOR
METAT Metathesis
(+)NAS Nasalization
PAL Palatalization

ADMINISTRATION
(+)STR Stridency addition
Dentalized productions
Lateralized productions
Vowel nasalization

OR RESALE



Idiosyncratic processes
Interacting processes
Interfering processes
Processes applied selectively
Reduplication
Sound preference

Vowel Phonological Processes


Vowel alteration
Backing
Fronting
Centralization
Decentralization
Raising
Lowering
Diphthongization
Monophthongization

6 Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Chapter 2 ■ The Phonological Processes

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 6 8/31/15 3:38 PM


Definitions of the Phonological Processes
The definitions that follow are based on the previous editions of the KLPA (Khan & Lewis, 1986; 2002), as well as
Chomsky and Halle (1968), Edwards and Shriberg (1983), Lowe (1994), Bernthal and Bankson (1998), and Bernthal,
Bankson, and Flipsen (2013). The Core Phonological Processes are presented first in the same order as they appear on
the Analysis Form. They are not presented in developmental order; instead, to facilitate the lookup of each phonological
process, they are presented in alphabetical order based on the type of process: manner, place, reduction, and voicing.
Supplemental Phonological Processes follow and are also presented in alphabetical order based on the type of process,
as they appear on the Analysis Form. Other phonological processes, presented here in the manual, are also listed in
alphabetical order. Bold type headings are used to designate scored phonological processes and italic type headings
are used to designate unscored phonological processes. Examples of each phonological process are provided in a table
format. The examples present word productions that may include multiple sound changes; however, only the relevant
sound change is listed in the Sound Change column.

Core Phonological Process Definitions


Manner
DF Deaffrication
The individual deletes the stop feature of affricates /ʧ/ and /ʤ/ with retention of the continuant, or fricative, feature.

SAMPLE,
It results in fricatives /f/, /v/, /ɵ/, /ð/, /s/, /z/, /ʃ/, /ʒ/, and /h/.

Examples of deaffrication (DF)

Target Word Word Change Sound Change

NOT FOR
chair /ʧɘr/ ž [sɘr] /ʧ/ ž [s]
watch /wɑʧ/ ž [wɑʃ] /ʧ/ ž [ʃ]
vegetable /vɘʤtəbəl/ ž [bɘðtəbəl] /ʤ/ ž [ð]

GL
ADMINISTRATION
Gliding of liquids
The individual produces the liquids /l/ and /r/ as glides /w/ and /j/.

OR RESALE
Examples of gliding of liquids (GL)

Target Word Word Change Sound Change


giraffe /ʤəræf/ ž [ʤəwæf] /r/ ž [w]
frog /frɔg/ ž [fwɔg] /r/ ž [w]
blue /blu/ ž [bju] /l/ ž [j]

ST Stopping of fricatives and affricates


The individual “stops” fricatives /f/, /v/, /ɵ/, /ð/, /s/, /z/, /ʃ/, /ʒ/, /h/ and affricates /ʧ/ and /ʤ/. Stopping of fricatives may result
in the production of affricate consonants /ʧ/ and /ʤ/ or stop consonants /p/, /b/, /t/, /d/, /k/, /g/ or a glottal stop.

Examples of stopping of fricatives and affricates (ST)

Target Word Word Change Sound Change


pajamas /pəʤɑməz/ ž [pədɑmɑs] /ʤ/ ž [d]
brushing /brʌʃɪŋ/ ž [brʌʧɪŋ] /ʃ/ ž [ʧ]
shovel /ʃʌvəl/ ž [ʧʌbo] /ʃ/ ž [ʧ], /v/ ž [b]

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Chapter 2 ■ The Phonological Processes 7

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 7 8/31/15 3:38 PM


STR Stridency deletion
The individual deletes stridency from the strident consonants /f/, /v/, /s/, /z/, /ʃ/, /ʒ/, /ʧ/, and /ʤ/ either through consonant
deletion or replacement with a nonstrident consonant or a glottal stop.

Examples of stridency deletion (STR)

Target Word Word Change Sound Change


chair /ʧɘr / ž [tɘr] /ʧ/ ž [t]
fish /fɪʃ/ ž [pɪʃ] /f/ ž [p]
shoe /ʃu / ž [tu] /ʃ/ ž [t]

VOC Vocalization
The individual replaces word-final liquid /r/ or word-final syllabic liquids—/əl/ and /ɚ/—with a vowel.
Note. The syllabic liquids in all KLPA–3 target words are word-final. For scoring consistency of VOC, the word-final
syllabic liquid becomes a vowel without the /l/ or /r/.

Examples of vocalization (VOC)

Target Word Word Change Sound Change

SAMPLE,
door /dɔr/ ž [dɔo] /r/ ž [o]
teacher /tiʧɚ/ ž [tiʃə] /ɚ/ ž [ə]
apple /æpəl/ ž [æpo] /əl/ ž [o]

NOT FOR
Place
PF Palatal fronting
The individual fronts the palatal fricatives /ʃ/ or /ʒ/ or affricates /ʧ/ or /ʤ/. Typically, they are fronted to the alveolar ridge

ADMINISTRATION
resulting in the alveolars /t/, /d/, /n/, /s/, /z/, and /l/, and sometimes /ts/ and /dz/. /ts/ and /dz/ occur infrequently and are
included in the Additional Sound Changes column in the Sound Change Booklet.

Examples of palatal fronting (PF)

OR RESALE
Target Word Word Change Sound Change
shoe /ʃu/ ž [su] /ʃ/ ž [s]
watch /wɑʧ/ ž [wɑts] /ʧ/ ž [ts]
juice /ʤus/ ž [dus] /ʤ/ ž [d]

VF Velar fronting
The individual fronts velars /k/, /g/, and /ŋ/ to alveolars /t/, /d/, /n/, /s/, /z/, and /l/.

Examples of velar fronting (VF)

Target Word Word Change Sound Change


finger /fɪŋgɚ/ ž [fɪndə] /ŋ/ ž [n], /g/ ž [d]
monkey /mʌŋki/ ž [mʌnti] /ŋ/ ž [n], /k/ ž [t]
go /go/ ž [do] /g/ ž [d]

8 Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Chapter 2 ■ The Phonological Processes

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 8 8/31/15 3:38 PM


Reduction
CS Cluster simplification
A cluster consists of two or more adjacent consonants with no intervening vowels. CS occurs when part of the cluster is
deleted, thus reducing the number of remaining consonants in the cluster.
CS may also occur by adding a schwa sound between the consonants of the cluster to create an extra syllable, a process
also known as epenthesis. For example, the word blue /blu/ may be produced as [bəlu].
Note. Some words include adjacent consonants in medial position that are separated by a syllable boundary
(e.g., /prɪnsɘs/, /vɘʤtəbəl/). No data suggest whether the individual perceives the first consonant of the medial cluster
as the final consonant of the first syllable or as the initial consonant of the second syllable. In the KLPA–3, all consonant
sequences—regardless of location within a word or syllable boundary—are considered consonant clusters and can be
simplified. Considerations for scoring CS are further discussed in Chapter 3.

Examples of cluster simplification (CS)

Target Word Word Change Sound Change


drum /drʌm/ ž [dʌm] /dr/ ž [d]
elephant /ɘləfənt/ ž [ɘfən] /nt/ ž [n]
frog /frɔg/ ž [fəwɔb] /fr/ ž [fəw]

SAMPLE,
princess /prɪnsɘs/ ž [pwɪnɘs] /ns/ ž [n]

Examples that are not cluster simplification (CS)

drum
elephant
NOT FOR
Target Word Word Change
/drʌm/ ž [dwʌm]
/ɘləfənt/ ž [ɘʔə]
Sound Change
/dr/ ž [dw]
/nt/ ž [Ø]
frog

ADMINISTRATION
princess
/frɔg/ ž [gwɔg]
/prɪnsɘs/ ž [pwɪntɘs]
/fr/ ž [gw]
/ns/ ž [nt]

DFC

OR RESALE
Deletion of final consonant
The individual deletes the final consonant of a word (i.e., the production has no final consonant sound).

Examples of deletion of final consonant (DFC)

Target Word Word Change Sound Change Syllable Shape Change


cup /kʌp/ ž [kʌ] /p/ ž [Ø] CVC ž CV
frog /frɔg/ ž [fwɔ] /g/ ž [Ø] CCVC ž CCV
elephant /ɘləfənt/ ž [ɘfə] /nt/ ž [Ø] VCVCVCC ž VCV

The examples below are not considered to be examples of DFC because the simplified productions still contain a final
consonant. Note that if the final consonant of a word is part of a consonant cluster, all consonants of the cluster must be
deleted to qualify as a deletion. If one or more consonants of the word-final cluster remain, CS applies.

Examples that are not deletion of final consonant (DFC)

Target Word Word Change Sound Change Syllable Shape Change


cup /kʌp/ ž [kʌk] /p/ ž [k] CVC ž CVC
frog /frɔg/ ž [frɔd] /g/ ž [d] CCVC ž CCVC
elephant /ɘləfənt/ ž [ələfən] /nt/ ž [n] VCVCVCC ž VCVCVC

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Chapter 2 ■ The Phonological Processes 9

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 9 8/31/15 3:38 PM


SR Syllable reduction
The individual’s production contains fewer syllables than the target word. Considerations for scoring SR are further
discussed in Chapter 3.

Examples of syllable reduction (SR)

Target Word Word Change Sound Change Syllable Shape Change


guitar /gətɑr/ ž [tɑr] /gə/ ž [Ø] CVCVC ž CVC
hammer /hæmɚ/ ž [mʌ] /hæ/ ž [ Ø] CVCVC ž CV
vacuum /vækjum/ ž [bæ] /kjum/ ž [Ø] CVCCVC ž CV

Voicing
FDV Final devoicing
The individual deletes the voicing in word-final voiced consonants /b/, /d/, /g/, /m/, /n/, /ŋ/, /v/, /ð/, /z/, /ʒ/, /ʤ/, /l/, and /r/,
producing them as voiceless consonants /p/, /t/, /k/, /f/, /ɵ/, /s/, /ʃ/, and /ʧ/ or a glottal stop.

Examples of final devoicing (FDV)

Target Word Word Change Sound Change


pig /pɪg/ ž [pɪk] /g/ ž [k]
five
cheese
SAMPLE, /faɪv/ ž [faɪf]
/ʧiz/ ž [ʃis]
/v/ ž [f]
/z/ ž [s]

IV

NOT FOR
Initial voicing
The individual adds voicing to initial consonants /p/, /t/, /k/, /f/, /ɵ/, /s/, /ʃ/, /ʧ/, and /h/, resulting in one of the following
voiced consonants /b/, /d/, /g/, /m/, /n/, /ŋ/, /v/, /ð/, /z/, /ʒ/, /ʤ/, /l/, /r/, /w/, and /j/.

ADMINISTRATION
Examples of initial voicing (IV)

Target Word Word Change Sound Change


pig /pɪg/ ž [bɪg] /p/ ž [b]

OR RESALE /fɪʃ/ ž [bɪs] /f/ ž [b]


fish
star /stɑr/ ž [dɑr] /st/ ž [d]

Supplemental Phonological Process Definitions


Sound changes that are not among the Core Phonological Processes in the KLPA–3 scoring system can also be noted on
the KLPA–3 Analysis Form. To provide a more comprehensive profile of an individual’s phonological patterns, you should
consider Supplemental Phonological Processes and any other processes described in the following sections.

Manner
AFF Affrication
The individual adds a stop feature to the continuant feature of fricatives /f/, /v/, /ɵ/, /ð/, /s/, /z/, /ʃ/, /ʒ/, and /h/, resulting in
an affricate.

Examples of affrication (AFF)

Target Word Word Change Sound Change


brushing /brʌʃɪŋ/ ž [brʌʧɪŋ] /ʃ/ ž [ʧ]
shovel /ʃʌvəl/ ž [tsʌbo] /ʃ/ ž [ts]
zoo /zu/ ž [ʤu] /z/ ž [ʤ]

10 Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Chapter 2 ■ The Phonological Processes

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 10 8/31/15 3:38 PM


FRC Frication
The individual changes any nonfricative, nonaffricate consonant to a fricative /f/, /v/, /ɵ/, /ð/, /s/, /z/, /ʃ/, /ʒ/, or /h/.

Examples of frication (FRC)

Target Word Word Change Sound Change


quack /kwæk/ ž [kvæk] /w/ ž [v]
drum /drʌm/ ž [zrʌm] /d/ ž [z]
seven /sɘvən/ ž [sɘvəɵ] /n/ ž [ɵ]

GL(Oth) Gliding of consonants other than liquids


Gliding of fricatives and affricates occurs when the individual changes fricatives /f/, /v/, /ɵ/, /ð/, /s/, /z/, /ʃ/, /ʒ/, /h/ and
affricates /ʧ/ and /ʤ/ to glides /w/ and /j/. This sound change does not apply in final position because glides cannot occur
in final word position.

Examples of gliding of fricatives and affricates

Target Word Word Change Sound Change


shoe /ʃu/ ž [ju] /ʃ/ ž [j]
house /haʊs/ ž [waʊs] /h/ ž [w]
thumb

SAMPLE, /ɵʌm/ ž [wʌm] /ɵ/ ž [w]

Gliding of nasals occurs when the individual changes nasals /m/, /n/, and /ŋ/ to glides /w/ and /j/. This sound change does

NOT FOR
not apply in final position because glides cannot occur in word-final position..

Examples of gliding of nasals

Target Word Word Change Sound Change

ADMINISTRATION
monkey /mʌŋki/ ž [jʌŋki] /m/ ž [j]
finger /fɪŋgɚ/ ž [fɪjgɚ] /ŋ/ ž [j]
knife /naɪf/ ž [waɪf] /n/ ž [w]

OR RESALE
Gliding of stops occurs when the individual changes stop consonants /p/, /b/, /t/, /d/, /k/, and /g/ to glides /w/ and /j/. This
sound change does not apply in final position because glides cannot occur in word-final position.

Examples of gliding of stops

Target Word Word Change Sound Change


duck /dʌk/ ž [jʌk] /d/ ž [j]
cup /kʌp/ ž [wʌk] /k/ ž [w]
guitar /gətɑr/ ž [jətɑr] /g/ ž [j]

GR Glottal replacement
The individual uses a glottal stop /ʔ/ to replace any consonant. Glottal stops are not regarded as deletions. Glottal stops
are most perceptible when used intervocalically, as when spider is produced as [spʔɚ].

Examples of glottal replacement (GR)

Target Word Word Change Sound Change


vacuum /vækjum/ ž [vaʔum] /kj/ ž [ʔ]
tiger /tgɚ/ ž [tʔɚ] /g/ ž [ʔ]
yellow /jɘlo/ ž [jɘʔo] /l/ ž [ʔ]

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Chapter 2 ■ The Phonological Processes 11

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 11 8/31/15 3:38 PM


LIQ Liquidization
The individual changes any nonliquid consonant to liquid consonants /l/ and /r/.

Examples of liquidization (LIQ)

Target Word Word Change Sound Change


pig /pɪg/ ž [lɪg] /p/ ž [l]
five /fv/ ž [lv] /f/ ž [l]
pajamas /pəʤɑməz/ ž [pərɑməz] /ʤ/ ž [r]

ST(Oth) Stopping of consonants other than fricatives and affricates


Stopping of glides occurs when the individual changes glides /w/ and /j/ to stop consonants /p/, /b/, /t/, /d/, /k/, and /g/ or a
glottal stop.

Examples of stopping of glides

Target Word Word Change Sound Change


web /wɘb/ ž [dɘb] /w/ ž [d]
yellow /jɘlo/ ž [dɘdo] /j/ ž [d]

SAMPLE,
watch /wɑʧ/ ž [pɑʧ] /w/ ž [p]

Stopping of liquids occurs when the individual changes liquids /l/ and /r/ to stop consonants /p/, /b/, /t/, /d/, /k/, and /g/ or a
glottal stop.

NOT FOR
Examples of stopping of liquids

Target Word Word Change Sound Change


yellow /jɘlo/ ž [jɘdo] /l/ ž [d]

ADMINISTRATION
ring /rɪŋ/ ž [pɪŋ] /r/ ž [p]
leaf /lif/ ž [dif] /l/ ž [d]

OR RESALE
Stopping of nasals occurs when the individual changes nasals /m/, /n/, and /ŋ/ to stop consonants /p/, /b/, /t/, /d/, /k/, and
/g/ or a glottal stop.

Examples of stopping of nasals

Target Word Word Change Sound Change


hammer /hæmɚ/ ž [hæbo] /m/ ž [b]
monkey /mʌŋki/ ž [pʌŋki] /m/ ž [p]
knife /nf/ ž [df] /n/ ž [d]

Place
BK Backing to velars or /h/
The individual alters the place of articulation of any nonvelar consonant to velars /k/, /g/, /ŋ/, and /h/.

Examples of backing to velars or /h/ (BK)

Target Word Word Change Sound Change


drum /drʌm/ ž [gʌm] /dr/ ž [g]
green /grin/ ž [gwiŋ] /n/ ž [ŋ]
yellow /jɘlo/ ž [hɘho] /j/ ž [h], /l/ ž [h]

12 Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Chapter 2 ■ The Phonological Processes

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 12 8/31/15 3:38 PM


Reduction
DIC Deletion of initial consonant
The individual deletes the initial consonant. If the initial consonant of a word is part of a consonant cluster, all consonants
of the cluster must be deleted to be considered a deletion.

Examples of deletion of initial consonant (DIC)

Target Word Word Change Sound Change Syllable Shape Change


house /haʊs/ ž [aʊs] /h/ ž [Ø] CVC ž VC
slide /slaɪd/ ž [aɪd] /sl/ ž [Ø] CCVC ž VC
plate /plet/ ž [et] /pl/ ž [Ø] CCVC ž VC

If one or more consonants of the word-initial cluster remain, it is scored CS, not DIC. Similarly, if the production contains
an initial consonant, DIC does not apply. The following are not examples of DIC:

Examples that are not deletion of initial consonant (DIC)

Target Word Word Change Sound Change Syllable Shape Change


slide /slaɪd/ ž [saɪd] /sl/ ž [s] CCVC ž CVC
crown /kraʊn/ ž [taʊn] /kr/ ž [t] CCVC ž CVC
guitar

SAMPLE,
DMC Deletion of medial consonant
/gətɑr/ ž [tətɑr] /g/ ž [t] CVCVC ž CVCVC

NOT FOR
The individual deletes a consonant or consonant cluster occurring between two vowels. If the medial consonant of a
word is part of a consonant cluster, all consonants of the cluster must be deleted to be considered a deletion.

Examples of deletion of medial consonant (DMC)

yellow
zebra
ADMINISTRATION
Target Word Word Change
/jɘlo/ ž [jɘo]
/zibrə/ ž [ziə]
Sound Change
/l/ ž [Ø]
/br/ ž [Ø]
Syllable Shape Change
CVCV ž CVV
CVCCV ž CVV

OR RESALE
vegetable /vɘʤtəbəl/ ž [vɘtəo] /b/ ž [Ø] CVCCVCVC ž CVCVV

If one or more consonants of the word-medial cluster remain, it is scored CS, not DMC. Similarly, if the production
contains a medial consonant, DMC does not apply. The following are not examples of DMC.

Examples that are not deletion of medial consonant (DMC)

Target Word Word Change Sound Change Syllable Shape Change


yellow /jɘlo/ ž [jɘjo] /l/ ž [j] CVCV ž CVCV
zebra /zibrə/ ž [zibə] /br/ ž [b] CVCCV ž CVCV
vegetable /vɘʤtəbəl/ ž [vɘtəo] /ʤt/ ž [t] CVCCVCVC ž CVCVV

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Chapter 2 ■ The Phonological Processes 13

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 13 8/31/15 3:38 PM


Voicing
IDV Initial devoicing
The individual deletes the voicing in word-initial voiced consonants /b/, /d/, /g/, /m/, /n/, /v/, /ð/, /z/, /ʤ/, /l/, /r/, /j/, and /w/,
producing them as voiceless consonants /p/, /t/, /k/, /f/, /ɵ/, /s/, /ʃ/, /ʧ/, and /h/ or a glottal stop.

Examples of initial devoicing (IDV)

Target Word Word Change Sound Change


zebra /zibrə/ ž [sibrə] /z/ ž [s]
door /dɔr/ ž [tɔr] /d/ ž [t]
guitar /gətɑr/ ž [tətɑr] /g/ ž [t]

MDV Medial devoicing


The individual deletes the voicing in word-medial voiced consonants /b/, /d/, /g/, /m/, /n/, /ŋ/, /v/, /ð/, /z/, /ʒ/, /ʤ/, /l/, /r/, /w/,
and /j/, producing them as voiceless consonants /p/, /t/, /k/, /f/, /ɵ/, /s/, /ʃ/, /ʧ/, and /h/ or a glottal stop.

Examples of medial devoicing (MDV)

Target Word Word Change Sound Change

SAMPLE,
hammer /hæmɚ/ ž [hæpɚ] /m/ ž [p]
table /tebəl/ ž [tepəl] /b/ ž [p]
spider /spdɚ/ ž [sptɚ] /d/ ž [t]

MV
NOT FOR
Medial voicing
The individual adds voicing to medial voiceless consonants /p/, /t/, /k/, /f/, /ɵ/, /s/, /ʃ/, /ʧ/, and /h/ producing them as /b/, /d/,
/g/, /m/, /n/, /ŋ/, /v/, /ð/, /z/, /ʒ/, /ʤ/, /l/, /r/, /w/, and /j/.

ADMINISTRATION
Examples of medial voicing (MV)

Target Word Word Change Sound Change

OR RESALE
guitar /gətɑr/ ž [gədɑr] /t/ ž [d]
elephant /ɘləfənt/ ž [ɘləvənt] /f/ ž [v]
cookie /kʊki/ ž [kʊgi] /k/ ž [g]

Other Phonological Process Definitions for Consideration


ADD Addition of consonants and syllables
The individual adds consonants or syllables that are not part of the target production of the word. This includes adding a
schwa to the final consonant of a word.

Examples of addition of consonants and syllables (ADD)

Target Word Word Change Sound Change


giraffe /ʤəræf/ ž [ʤəʤræf] /r/ ž [ʤr]
hammer /hæmɚ/ ž [hæmnɚ] /m/ ž [mn]
glasses /glæsɪz/ ž [glæsɪzɪz] Addition of [ɪz]
cup /kʌp/ ž [kʌpə] Addition of [ə]

14 Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Chapter 2 ■ The Phonological Processes

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 14 8/31/15 3:38 PM


ALV Alveolarization
The individual changes nonalveolar or nonvelar consonants to alveolar consonants /t/, /d/, /n/, and /l/.

Examples of alveolarization (ALV)

Target Word Word Change Sound Change


five /fv/ ž [lv] /f/ ž [l]
boy /bɔɪ/ ž [dɔɪ] /b/ ž /d/
zebra /zibrə/ ž [zidə] /br/ ž [d]

COAL Coalescence
The individual combines part of the beginning of a word with part of the end of the word. The word is “collapsed” across
syllables. SR also applies.

Examples of coalescence

Target Word Word Change Sound Change


seven /sɘvən/ ž [sɘn] /və/ ž [Ø]
yellow /jɘlo/ ž [jo] /ɘl/ ž [Ø]

SAMPLE,
shovel /ʃʌvəl/ ž [ʃʌl] /və/ ž [Ø]

CH Consonant harmony
In consonant harmony, production of one consonant is affected by another consonant within the word. One consonant

NOT FOR
influences another so that both are produced at a similar place, in a similar manner, or with identical voicing. You
need to review the entire corpus of words and use your clinical judgment to determine if CH should be applied to the
sound change.

ADMINISTRATION
The following groups of phonemes by articulatory features are used for considering the application of CH:
MANNER
Stops: /p/, /b/, /t/, /d/, /k/, /g/, /ʔ/

OR RESALE
Nasals: /m/, /n/, /ŋ/
Fricatives: /f/, /v/, /ɵ/, /ð/, /s/, /z/, /ʃ/, /ʒ/, /h/
Affricates: /ʧ/, /ʤ/
Liquids: /l/, /r/
Glides: /w/, /j/
PLACE
Alveolars: /t/, /d/, /n/, /s/, /z/, /l/
Interdentals: /ɵ/, /ð/
Labials: /p/, /b/, /m/, /f/, /v/, /w/
Palatals: /ʃ/, /ʒ/, /ʧ/, /ʤ/, /r/, /j/
Velars & Back: /k/, /g/, /ŋ/, /h/
VOICING
Voiceless: /p/, /t/, /k/, /f/, /ɵ/, /s/, /ʃ/, /ʧ/, /h/, /ʔ/
Voiced: /b/, /d/, /g/, /v/, /ð/, /z/, /ʒ/, /ʤ/, /m/, /n/, /ŋ/, /l/, /r/, /w/, /j/

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Chapter 2 ■ The Phonological Processes 15

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 15 8/31/15 3:38 PM


Examples of consonant harmony (CH)

Target Word Word Change Sound Change Type of Harmony


knife /naɪf/ ž [saɪf] /n/ ž [s] MANNER: /n/ becomes a fricative, like the /f/
cup /kʌp/ ž [pʌp] /k/ ž [p] PLACE: /k/ becomes labial, like the /p/
duck /dʌk/ ž [dʌg] /k/ ž [g] VOICING: /k/ becomes voiced, like the /d/

DEN Denasalization
The individual changes nasal sounds to homorganic stops (place of articulation is similar to target sound).

Examples of denasalization (DEN)

Target Word Word Change Sound Change


monkey /mʌŋki/ ž [bʌki] /m/ ž [b]
ring /rɪŋ/ ž [wɪg] /ŋ/ ž [g]
princess /prɪnsɘs/ ž [prɪdsɘs] /n/ ž [d]

FV Final voicing

SAMPLE,
The individual adds voicing to final consonants /p/, /t/, /k/, /f/, /ɵ/, /s/, /ʃ/, and /ʧ/, resulting in /b/, /d/, /g/, /m/, /n/, /ŋ/, /v/, /ð/,
/z/, /ʒ/, /ʤ/, /l/, and /r/.

Examples of final voicing (FV)

NOT FOR
Target Word Word Change Sound Change
duck /dʌk/ ž [dʌg] /k/ ž [g]
knife /naɪf/ ž [naɪv] /f/ ž [v]

ADMINISTRATION
house /haʊs/ ž [aʊz] /s/ ž [z]

NDEN Interdentalization

OR RESALE
The individual changes nondental consonants to interdental consonants /ɵ/ and /ð/.

Examples of interdentalization (NDEN)

Target Word Word Change Sound Change


go /go/ ž [ðo] /g/ ž [ð]
lion /laɪən/ ž [ðaɪən] /l/ ž [ð]
guitar /gətɑr/ ž [gəɵɑr] /t/ ž [ɵ]

LAB Labialization
The individual produces a nonlabial consonant as a labial consonant /p/, /b/, /m/, /f/, /v/, and /w/.

Examples of labialization (LAB)

Target Word Word Change Sound Change


go /go/ ž [bo] /g/ ž [b]
zoo /zu/ ž [fu] /z/ ž [f]
slide /slaɪd/ ž [slaɪb] /d/ ž [b]

16 Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Chapter 2 ■ The Phonological Processes

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 16 8/31/15 3:38 PM


METAT Metathesis
The individual transposes the order of phonemes in a word or syllable.

Examples of metathesis

Target Word Word Change Sound Change


elephant /ɘləfənt / ž [ɘfələnt] /l/ ž [f] and /f/ ž [l]
slide /slaɪd/ ž [laɪds] /s/ is transposed to the end of the word
spider /spaɪdɚ/ ž [paɪdɚs] /s/ is transposed to the end of the word

(+)NAS Nasalization
The individual produces nonnasal consonants as nasal consonants /m/, /n/, and /ŋ/.

Examples of nasalization ([+]NAS)

Target Word Word Change Sound Change


pig /pɪg/ ž [mɪg] /p/ ž [m]
frog /frɔg/ ž [fwɔŋ] /g/ ž [ŋ]
puzzle /pʌzəl/ ž [pʌnəl] /z/ ž [n]

SAMPLE,
PAL Palatalization
The individual produces nonpalatal consonants as palatal consonants /ʃ/, /ʒ/, /ʧ/, /ʤ/, /j/, and /r/.

NOT FOR
Examples of palatalization (PAL)

Target Word Word Change Sound Change


soap /sop/ ž [ʃop] /s/ ž [ʃ]

ADMINISTRATION
pajamas /pəʤɑməz/ ž [pəʤɑʤəz] /m/ ž [ʤ]
leaf /lif/ ž [liʃ] /f/ ž [ʃ]

OR RESALE
(+)STR Stridency addition
The individual replaces nonstrident consonants with strident consonants /f/, /v/, /s/, /z/, /ʃ/, /ʒ/, /ʧ/, and /ʤ/.

Examples of stridency addition ([+]STR)

Target Word Word Change Sound Change


door /dɔr/ ž [fɔr] /d/ ž [f]
truck /trʌk/ ž [ʃrʌk] /t/ ž [ʃ]
guitar /gətɑr/ ž [sətɑr] /g/ ž [s]

Dentalized productions
The individual distorts consonants (particularly alveolar fricatives) by altering the place of articulation dentally. Dentalized
productions include [s] and [z].
͆ ͆
Lateralized productions
The individual distorts consonants (particularly alveolar fricatives) by altering the place of articulation laterally. Lateralized
productions include [s] and [z].
ᵔ ᵔ
Vowel nasalization
The individual produces a nasal vowel that is not adjacent to a nasal consonant. Vowels that are adjacent to nasal
consonants normally contain nasality. For example, in the word man, the /æ/ is produced with nasality, whereas the /æ/ in
tap is produced with no perceived nasality.

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Chapter 2 ■ The Phonological Processes 17

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 17 8/31/15 3:38 PM


There are two types of nasalization. One type is the production of nasalized vowels adjacent to nasal consonants that
have been deleted, as in /hænd/ ž [hæ ~ ]. Retention of the nasalized vowel indicates an attempt to produce some nasality.

Another type of vowel nasalization is the addition of nasality to vowels that are not adjacent to nasal consonants, as in
~ ]. In these words, nasality is added where it does not usually appear—in the context of nonnasal consonants.
/tæp/ ž [tæ

Idiosyncratic processes
Any sound change not commonly found in descriptions of normal or disordered phonology should be examined for a
rule-driven pattern.

Interacting processes
Sound changes can result from the application of a single phonological process or from the application of two or
more phonological processes. When more than one phonological process contributes to a single sound change, the
phonological processes are referred to as interacting processes.

Examples of interacting process

Target Word Word Change Sound Change Interacting Processes


cup /kʌp/ ž [dʌp] /k/ ž [d] VF, IV
chair /ʧɘr/ ž [dɘr] /ʧ/ ž [d] ST, PF, IV, STR
slide /sld/ ž [gwd] /sl/ ž [gw] ST, GL, IV, STR, BK, LAB

SAMPLE,
Interfering processes
The application of some phonological processes may temporarily block or interfere with the application of other
phonological processes. When this occurs, the phonological process that blocks is referred to as the interfering process.

NOT FOR
When a syllable is deleted, it may interfere with the application of other phonological processes. For example, when
guitar /gətɑr/ becomes [gət], the absent word-final consonant, /r/, is not an example of DFC but of SR of word-final
/ɑr/. When deletion and reduction processes are suppressed and no longer acting as interfering processes, the blocked

ADMINISTRATION
phonological processes may emerge.

Examples of interfering processes

Target Word Word Change Interfering Processes Blocked Processes

OR RESALE
frog /frɔg/ ž [frɔ] DFC VF, FDV

guitar /gətɑr/ ž [tɑ] SR DIC


finger /fɪŋgɚ/ ž [ɪŋgɚ] DIC ST, IV, STR

Processes applied selectively


When a process is applied only in certain contexts, it is said to be applied selectively. For example, ST is applied
selectively when it occurs only in word-initial fricatives. To determine whether a process has been applied selectively
in this example, locate the stopping of fricatives and affricates column in the Analysis Form, note any X's marked, and
observe if the X's are specifically associated with word-initial fricatives (e.g., house, hammer, fish, shoe). Additionally, if
most of the sound changes related to a phonological process affected a class of consonants (such as stops, glides, or
nonstridents), then the process might have been applied selectively to that class of consonants.

Reduplication
Reduplication occurs when the individual attempts to produce a multisyllabic word by repeating one of its consonant-
vowel (CV) syllables, usually the stressed syllable. While the target word may have two or more dissimilar syllables, the
individual’s production will contain two identical or very similar syllables. The consonant must be repeated; the vowel may
be repeated or altered. Additionally, both the consonant and the vowel may be the target sounds or the result of sound
changes. Multiple processes contribute to reduplication, so it is not scored separately on the KLPA–3.

18 Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Chapter 2 ■ The Phonological Processes

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 18 8/31/15 3:38 PM


Examples of reduplication

Target Word Word Change Sound Change


monkey /mʌŋki/ ž [mʌmi] /ŋki/ ž [mi]
monkey /mʌŋki/ ž [kiki] /mʌ/ ž [ki], /ŋki/ ž [ki]
shovel /ʃʌvəl/ ž [ʃʌʃə] /vəl/ ž [ʃə]
shovel /ʃʌvəl/ ž [dʌdə] /ʃʌ/ ž [dʌ], /vəl/ ž [də]

Sound preference
The individual tends to use one sound or type of sound significantly more often than others. A pattern would be present
from the individual’s Phonetic Inventory for Consonants in Single Words in the Analysis Form. Sound preferences are very
individual and should be included in any summary of an individual’s phonology. For example, if the individual replaces all
consonants that are not word-final with a preferred phoneme like [s], the following pattern would be evident:

Examples of sound preference

Target Word Word Change Sound Change


table /tebəl/ ž [sesəl] /t/, /b/ ž [s]

SAMPLE,
pig /pɪg/ ž [sɪg] /p/ ž [s]
lion /laɪən/ ž [saɪən] /l/ ž [s]

Vowel Phonological Process Definitions

NOT FOR
Vowel alteration
The individual alters a target vowel so that it becomes a different vowel.

ADMINISTRATION
Examples of vowel alteration

Target Word Word Change Sound Change


web /wɘb/ ž [wib] /ɘ/ ž [i]

OR RESALE
shoe /ʃu/ ž [ʃæ] /u/ ž [æ]

Note. When a syllable in final position consisting of /ɚ/ or /əl/ becomes a different vowel, the phonological process of
Vocalization (VOC) is applied.

Examples

Target Word Word Change Sound Change


table /tebəl/ ž [tebo] /əl/ ž [o]
finger /fɪŋgɚ/ ž [fɪŋgʊ] /ɚ/ ž [ʊ]

While vowel alteration is a broad category, specific vowel phonological processes have been described in the literature
(Bauman-Waengler, 2011; Bernthal, Bankson, & Flipsen, 2013; Donegan, 2013; McGowan, McGowan, Denny, & Nittrouer,
2014). Because the vocal tract is open during vowel production, and no airflow obstruction occurs as in consonant
production, the choice of vowel phonological process can be somewhat subjective, relying on comparisons between the
target vowels and the individual’s productions.
Drawing on the current literature regarding vowel alterations, eight vowel phonological processes are included in the
KLPA–3. The vowel phonological process definitions are listed here and on the back of the Analysis Form. These
phonological processes should be used in conjunction with the KLPA–3 Vowel Analysis located on the back of the
Analysis Form for a more in-depth vowel analysis.

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Chapter 2 ■ The Phonological Processes 19

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 19 8/31/15 3:38 PM


Backing
The individual produces a front vowel as a back vowel.

Examples of vowel alteration: backing

Target Word Word Change Sound Change


monkey /mʌŋki/ ž [mʌŋku] /i/ ž [u]
quack /kwæk/ ž [kwɑk] /æ/ ž [ɑ]

Fronting
The individual produces a back vowel as a front vowel

Examples of vowel alteration: fronting

Target Word Word Change Sound Change


frog /frɔg/ ž [freg] /ɔ/ ž [e]
shoe /ʃu/ ž [ʃi] /u/ ž [i]

Centralization
The individual produces a front or back vowel as a central vowel.

SAMPLE,
Examples of vowel alteration: centralization

Target Word Word Change Sound Change


web /wɘb/ ž [wʌb] /ɘ/ ž [ʌ]

NOT FOR
cookie /kʊki/ ž [kukə] /i/ ž [ə]

Decentralization
The individual produces a central vowel as either a front or back vowel.

cup
ADMINISTRATION
Examples of vowel alteration: decentralization

Target Word Word Change


/kʌp/ ž [kop]
Sound Change
/ʌ/ ž [o]
vegetable

Raising OR RESALE /vɘʤtəbəl/ ž [vɘʤtibəl]

The individual alters the vowel production by raising the vowel height.
/ə/ ž [i]

Examples of vowel alteration: raising

Target Word Word Change Sound Change


giraffe /ʤəræf/ ž [ʤərɪf] /æ/ ž [ɪ]
watch /wɑʧ/ ž [wʊʧ] /ɑ/ ž [ʊ]

Lowering
The individual alters the vowel production by lowering the vowel height.

Examples of vowel alteration: lowering

Target Word Word Change Sound Change


blue /blu/ ž [blɑ] /u/ ž [ɑ]
green /grin/ ž [grɘn] /i/ ž [ɘ]

20 Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Chapter 2 ■ The Phonological Processes

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 20 8/31/15 3:38 PM


Diphthongization
The individual produces a monophthong as a diphthong //, //, or //.

Examples of vowel alteration: diphthongization

Target Word Word Change Sound Change


go /go/ ž [gɔɪ] /o/ ž [ɔɪ]
fish /fɪʃ/ ž [fʃ] /ɪ/ ž []

Monophthongization
The individual produces a diphthong //, //, or // as a monophthong.

Examples of vowel alteration: monophthongization

Target Word Word Change Sound Change


boy /bɔɪ/ ž [bɔ] /ɔɪ/ ž [ɔ]
house /hs/ ž [hɑs] // ž [ɑ]

SAMPLE,
NOT FOR
ADMINISTRATION
OR RESALE

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Chapter 2 ■ The Phonological Processes 21

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 21 8/31/15 3:38 PM


SAMPLE,
NOT FOR
ADMINISTRATION
OR RESALE

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 22 8/31/15 3:38 PM


3 Recording and Scoring Directions

General Guidelines
When to Complete a Phonological Analysis
The greater the degree of unintelligibility in an individual’s speech production, the more appropriate the decision to
complete a phonological analysis. The following guidelines have been established for determining when a phonological
analysis should be completed (Khan & Bird, 1983; Khan & Lewis, 2002).
1. When the individual’s speech is reasonably intelligible and has only a few misarticulated phonemes, a
standardized articulation test, such as the GFTA–3, is an appropriate choice. Completion of a phonological

SAMPLE,
process analysis is not needed.
2. When an individual’s speech is reasonably intelligible but contains many misarticulated phonemes, a standardized
articulation test and a phonological process analysis should be completed.

NOT FOR
3. When an individual is very young or has moderately to severely unintelligible speech (i.e., multiple speech sound
errors resulting in unintelligibility), a standardized articulation test and a phonological process analysis should
be completed.
Because the KLPA–3 is a companion tool to the GFTA–3, the KLPA–3 and GFTA–3 work in tandem to provide a

ADMINISTRATION
comprehensive profile of an individual’s speech production. Through the administration of the GFTA–3, the individual’s
responses are elicited to the 60 target words in the Sounds-in-Words test. The KLPA-3 provides for a phonological
process analysis of any sound changes in the individual’s responses.

OR RESALE
The GFTA–3 provides two ways of recording speech sound productions: by presence of sound change (i.e., marking
through a phoneme that was misarticulated) and type of sound change (i.e., marking the phoneme that was
misarticulated and noting the misproduction by using phonetic transcription). For the KLPA–3, a complete phonetic
transcription of each sound change is required. For example, a complete phonetic transcription of an individual’s
response to the target word duck might be [tʌk] or [dʌd]. Space for these transcriptions is provided on both the GFTA–3
Record Form and the KLPA–3 Analysis Form. Tables containing the IPA symbols for the consonants and vowels
represented in Standard American English and common diacritical marks are located in Appendix E.

Preparing to Use the KLPA–3


You should have experience or training in administering, scoring, and interpreting results of standardized assessments
and in-depth knowledge of phonetics, phonology, and speech sound disorders before attempting to score and interpret
the KLPA–3. You should also have experience and/or training in analyzing the speech of individuals whose ages, linguistic
and cultural backgrounds, and clinical history are similar to the speech of individuals you plan to analyze using the KLPA–3.
Refer to ASHA’s Cultural Competence in Professional Service Delivery position statement for more information (ASHA, n.d.).
Before you use the KLPA–3, review:
■■ basic information about the individual’s speech and language skills (e.g., referral data, teachers’ observations,
parents’/caregivers’ report),
■■ the Sound Change Booklet so that you can identify the phonological processes involved in the sound changes
that are recorded, and
■■ the scoring directions in this chapter thoroughly.

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Chapter 3 ■ Recording and Scoring Directions 23

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 23 8/31/15 3:38 PM


Follow all instructions precisely to enable you to make appropriate comparisons and interpretations based on the
normative sample. Failure to follow standardized scoring procedures will invalidate the analysis results.
Support assessment results with additional information about the individual’s use of speech sounds in social and
academic contexts. This can be accomplished by collecting a speech sample; interviewing parents/caregivers and
teachers; and observing the individual in the classroom, on the playground, and in other interactive situations.

Reviewing the Components


Read this Manual before using the KLPA–3. It is important that you are familiar with transcribing an individual’s responses
using the International Phonetic Alphabet (IPA). Careful adherence to the rules used to develop the KLPA–3 age-based
normative scores is a prerequisite for accurate and interpretable results.
Familiarize yourself with the Sound Change Booklet. It is a look-up table used for mapping sound changes to applicable
phonological processes. Because each target word is presented in a sound-by-sound format, any sound change for a
given word can be located in this booklet and recorded on the Analysis Form. See Figure 3.1 for a sample page from the
Sound Change Booklet. Referring to the sample page, item numbers and target words appear in the first two columns
and each word’s single consonant phonemes are presented in the next column. The top row of the sample page shows
columns for syllable, consonant cluster, or single consonant deletions; the IPA symbols for the phonemes represented
in Standard American English; vowel; and additional sound changes. The cell at the intersection of the row of the target
sound and the column of the IPA symbol for the sound that was produced contains all applicable phonological process

SAMPLE,
abbreviations. The abbreviations for Core Phonological Processes are in bold font; abbreviations for supplemental or
other phonological processes are presented in regular font. Additionally each consonant phoneme row is color coded by
its word position, matching color usage in the GFTA–3: purple for initial, green for medial, and blue for final.

NOT FOR
ADMINISTRATION
OR RESALE

24 Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Chapter 3 ■ Recording and Scoring Directions

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 24 8/31/15 3:38 PM


Single Additional
Target Target Syllable Cluster Consonant Sound
Item Word Sound Del Del Del p b t d k g ʔ m n ŋ f v ɵ ð s z ʃ ʒ ʧ ʤ l r w j h Vowel Changes
    DIC IDV LAB IDV \ BK BK IDV LAB (+)NAS BK IDV FRC IDV FRC IDV FRC IDV FRC IDV PAL LIQ LIQ GL(Oth) GL(Oth) BK    
LAB IDV GR (+)NAS (+)NAS FRC LAB FRC NDEN FRC (+)STR FRC PAL PAL (+)STR PAL LAB PAL IDV
d
LAB (+)STR NDEN (+)STR PAL (+)STR (+)STR AFF FRC
(+)STR (+)STR AFF
8 duck ʌ                                                            
    DFC LAB FV VF VF \ FV GR FV VF FV FRC FV FRC FV VF VF FRC FV (+)STR FV VF FV          
Single LAB FV LAB FV (+)NAS LAB FRC NDEN FRC FRC FV (+)STR FRC PAL (+)STR FV LIQ Additional
Target k
Target Syllable Cluster Consonant Sound
(+)NAS (+)NAS (+)STR LAB NDEN (+)STR FRC PAL (+)STR AFF PAL LIQ PAL
Item Word Sound Del Del Del p b t d k g ʔ m n ŋ f v
(+)STR ɵ ð s z
(+)STR ʃ ʒ
PAL ʧ ʤAFF l r w j h Vowel Changes
    CS
DIC LAB
IDV IV
LAB VF
IDV VF
\ \
BK IV
BK GR
IDV IV
LAB VF
(+)NAS IV
BK FRC
IDV IV
FRC FRC
IDV IV
FRC VF
IDV VF
FRC FRC
IDV IV
FRC (+)STR
IDV IV
PAL VF
LIQ IV
LIQ IV
GL(Oth) IV
GL(Oth) FRC
BK    
LAB LAB IV IDV GR LAB
(+)NAS IV (+)NAS LAB
FRC FRC
LAB NDEN
FRC FRC
NDEN FRC IV
(+)STR (+)STR
FRC FRC
PAL PAL (+)STR IV LIQ
PAL GL(Oth)
LAB GL(Oth)
PAL IDV
kd
(+)NAS (+)NAS (+)STR
LAB LAB
(+)STR NDEN NDEN (+)STR FRC PAL AFF
(+)STR (+)STR PAL
AFF LIQ PAL LAB PAL FRC

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 25
(+)STR (+)STR (+)STR (+)STR PAL AFF AFF
8 duck ʌ   DIC
  CS
  IDV
  ST(Oth)
  IDV
  ST(Oth)
  IDV
  BK
  IDV
  (+)NAS
  (+)NAS
  BK
  IDV
  FRC  IDV
  FRC
  IDV
  FRC  IDV
  FRC  ST(Oth)
  ST(Oth)
  LIQ
  LIQ
   \ PAL
  IDV
     
    DFC ST(Oth)
LAB FV ST(Oth)
VF ALV
VF BK
\ ST(Oth)
FV GR
GR FV ALV
VF (+)NAS
FV FRC
FRC (+)STR
FV FRC
FRC NDEN
FV FRC
VF (+)STR
VF FRC
FRC (+)STR
FV IDV
(+)STR (+)STR
FV ALV
VF PAL
FV     BK
     
w LAB ALV FV ST(Oth) ST(Oth) LAB FV (+)STR
(+)NAS LAB FRC NDEN
NDEN FRC (+)STR
FRC ALV
FV (+)STR
(+)STR PAL
FRC (+)STR
PAL PAL
(+)STR FV LIQ FRC
9 quack k ALV PAL PAL AFF
(+)NAS (+)NAS (+)STR LAB NDEN (+)STR FRC PAL (+)STR AFF PAL LIQ PAL
(+)STR (+)STR PAL AFF AFF
æ       
CS  
LAB  
IV  
VF  
VF  \  
IV  
GR  IV VF   
IV  
FRC  
IV  
FRC  
IV  
VF VF   
FRC  
IV  
(+)STR  
IV VF   
IV  
IV  
IV  
FRC      
    DFC LAB FV
LAB VF VF
IV \ FV GR FV
LAB VF
IV FV
(+)NAS FRC
LAB FV
FRC FRC
NDEN FV
FRC VF
FRC VF
IV FRC
(+)STR FV
FRC (+)STR
PAL FV
(+)STR VF
IV FV
LIQ  
GL(Oth)  
GL(Oth)      
k LAB FV LAB FV (+)NAS LAB FRC NDEN FRC FRC FV (+)STR FRC PAL (+)STR FV LIQ
k (+)NAS (+)NAS (+)STR LAB NDEN (+)STR FRC PAL (+)STR AFF PAL LIQ PAL LAB PAL
(+)NAS (+)NAS LAB
(+)STR (+)STR NDEN FRC
(+)STR (+)STR PAL (+)STR
PAL AFF PAL
AFF LIQ PAL
  DIC CS IDV ST(Oth) IDV ST(Oth) IDV BK IDV (+)NAS (+)NAS BK IDV (+)STR
FRC IDV FRC IDV (+)STR
FRC IDV PAL AFF
FRC ST(Oth) ST(Oth) LIQ LIQ \ PAL IDV    
  DIC LAB
ST(Oth) IV \
ST(Oth) IV
ALV BK IV
ST(Oth) GR IV IV
ALV IV
(+)NAS FRC IV
(+)STR FRC IV
NDEN FRC IV
(+)STR FRC IV
(+)STR PAL
IDV IV
(+)STR IV
ALV IV
PAL IV IV BK    
w LAB ALV ST(Oth) BK ST(Oth) LAB (+)NAS BK LAB
(+)STR FRC NDEN FRC (+)STR FRC
ALV PAL
(+)STR FRC
PAL (+)STR PAL LIQ LIQ GL(Oth) GL(Oth) FRC
9 quack t
(+)NAS (+)NAS (+)STR LAB NDEN ALV (+)STR (+)STR
PAL PAL AFF
PAL (+)STR
AFF PAL LAB PAL
(+)STR (+)STR AFF AFF
SR
e
æ                                                            
    DMC
DFC MDV
LAB \
FV MDV
VF ALV
VF BK
\ BK
FV GR (+)NAS
FV (+)NAS
VF BK
FV FRC FRC
FV FRC FRC
FV FRC
VF FRC
VF FRC FRC
FV MDV (+)STR
(+)STR FV LIQ
VF LIQ
FV GL(Oth)
  GL(Oth)
  BK
     
te LAB ALV FV MDV MDV LAB ALV
FV (+)NAS MDV
LAB (+)STR
FRC MDV
NDEN NDEN
FRC MDV
FRC (+)STR
FV MDV (+)STR
(+)STR FRC (+)STR
PAL AFF
(+)STR ALV
FV PAL
LIQ PAL FRC
10 table bk
teb (+)NAS (+)NAS (+)STR LAB NDEN NDEN (+)STR ALV
FRC (+)STR
PAL PAL
(+)STR AFF PAL LIQ PAL MDV
bəl (+)STR ALV (+)STR PAL PAL PAL AFF
ə    
DIC  
LAB  
IV  \  
IV  
BK  
IV  
GR IV   
IV  
IV  
FRC  
IV  
FRC  
IV  
FRC  
IV  
FRC  
IV  
PAL  
IV  
IV  
IV  
IV  
IV  
BK    
əl
    LAB
FDV ST(Oth) FDV ST(Oth) FDV BK FDV (+)NAS
LAB (+)NAS BK LAB
FDV FRC NDEN
FDV FRC (+)STR
FDV FRC PAL
FDV FRC (+)STR
FDV PAL LIQ
\ LIQ
PAL GL(Oth)
  GL(Oth)
  FRC
  VOC  
t
ST(Oth) LAB ST(Oth) BK ST(Oth) GR (+)NAS
LAB (+)NAS (+)STR
FRC LAB
(+)STR FRC NDEN FRC (+)STR (+)STR
FRC PAL AFF
PAL (+)STR PAL LAB PAL
l
LAB ST(Oth) ST(Oth) (+)STR (+)STR
LAB NDEN (+)STR PAL (+)STR (+)STR AFF
SR LAB (+)STR AFF
e                                                          
  DIC
DMC DEN
MDV DEN
\ IDV
MDV ST(Oth)
ALV BK BK IDV
GR \ ALV
(+)NAS (+)NAS BK IDV
FRC FRC IDV
FRC FRC IDV
FRC FRC IDV
FRC FRC IDV
MDV (+)STR LIQ LIQ GL(Oth) GL(Oth) BK    
te IDV ST(Oth)
ALV ALV MDV
IDV ST(Oth) MDV GR FRC
ALV (+)NAS MDV (+)STR FRC
MDV NDEN FRC
MDV (+)STR FRC
MDV (+)STR (+)STR PAL
AFF ALV PAL PAL IDV
FRC
10 table m
b
teb ALV ST(Oth) ST(Oth) (+)STR NDEN (+)STR ALV (+)STR PAL PAL
AFF AFF
PAL FRC
MDV
SR ALV PAL AFF
PAL
bəl

Figure 3.1  Sample Page From the Sound Change Booklet


ʌə                                                          
əl
mʌŋ   CS
  MDV
FDV ST(Oth) FDV VF VF
ST(Oth) FDV  DEN
BK FDV
DEN (+)NAS VF
LAB (+)NAS \
BK FRC
FDV FRC FRC
FDV FRC VF
FDV VF
FRC FRC
FDV FRC MDV
FDV (+)STR
PAL VF
\ LIQ
PAL GL(Oth)
  GL(Oth)
  FRC
   
VOC  
MDV ST(Oth)
ST(Oth) LAB ST(Oth) BK ST(Oth) GR LAB MDV
(+)NAS FRC (+)STR MDV
FRC NDEN FRC FRC
(+)STR MDV
FRC (+)STR
PAL (+)STR
PAL AFF
(+)STR LIQ PAL PAL MDV
11 monkey ŋl mʌŋk
LAB ST(Oth) ST(Oth) MDV
ST(Oth) (+)STR LAB NDEN MDV
(+)STR (+)STR (+)STR
PAL PAL
(+)STR AFF
(+)STR PAL
AFF
ki DMC LAB (+)STR PAL
(+)STR PAL
AFF

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Chapter 3 ■ Recording and Scoring Directions


i   CS
DIC LAB
DEN LAB
DEN VF VF
IDV ST(Oth) \
BK MV
BK GR
IDV LAB
\ VF
ALV MV
BK FRC
IDV FRC FRC
IDV FRC VF
IDV VF
FRC FRC
IDV FRC (+)STR
IDV MV
(+)STR VF
LIQ LIQ GL(Oth) GL(Oth) FRC
BK    
ŋki IDV MV MV
ST(Oth) ALV IDV ST(Oth) GR MV MV (+)NAS LAB
FRC LAB
(+)STR NDEN
FRC MV
NDEN FRC FRC
(+)STR (+)STR
FRC MV
(+)STR PAL
(+)STR (+)STR
PAL LIQ
ALV MV
PAL LAB MV
PAL IDV
k
m
ALV ST(Oth) ST(Oth) (+)NAS (+)NAS (+)STR MV NDEN NDEN (+)STR MV
ALV PAL
(+)STR (+)STR
PAL AFF
PAL PAL
AFF MV PAL MV PAL FRC
SR (+)STR ALV (+)STR PAL PAL AFF AFF
ʌi                                                          
mʌŋ   DIC
CS ST
MDV ST
ST(Oth) ST
VF ST
VF ST
  ST
DEN ST
DEN IV
LAB IV
VF IV
\ LAB
FRC IV
FRC NDEN
FRC IV
FRC (+)STR
VF IV
VF (+)STR
FRC IV
FRC ST
MDV ST
(+)STR IV
VF IV
LIQ IV
GL(Oth) IV
GL(Oth) \
FRC    
LAB
ST(Oth) IV
LAB MDV IV
ALV ST(Oth) IV GR LAB (+)NAS (+)NAS (+)STR LAB
MDV (+)STR MDV NDEN ALV
FRC (+)STR
FRC AFF
MDV (+)STR (+)STR IV
AFF LIQ GL(Oth)
PAL GL(Oth) GL(Oth)
PAL MDV
11 monkey ŋ
h mʌŋk ALV (+)STR AFF ALV LIQ LAB PAL
LAB LAB ST(Oth) ALV MDV (+)NAS ALV (+)STR (+)STR
LAB NDEN MDV (+)STR (+)STR PAL AFF PAL
ki DMC LAB (+)STR PAL PAL (+)STR PAL
SR PAL
i CS LAB LAB VF VF \ MV GR LAB VF MV FRC FRC FRC FRC VF VF FRC FRC (+)STR MV VF LIQ GL(Oth) GL(Oth) FRC    
æ ŋki       MV     
MV       MV  MV   
(+)NAS  
LAB LAB   
NDEN MV   
FRC  
FRC  
(+)STR MV   
PAL  
(+)STR  
LIQ MV   
LAB MV       
k hæm
hammer   DMC DEN DEN MDV ST(Oth) BK BK GR (+)NAS
\ (+)NAS
ALV BK (+)STR
FRC MV
FRC FRC NDEN
FRC (+)STR
FRC MV
FRC PAL
FRC (+)STR
FRC MDV PAL
AFF (+)STR MV
LIQ PAL
LIQ GL(Oth) PAL
MV GL(Oth) BK    
12 hæ MDV ST(Oth) ALV MDV ST(Oth) MDV MDV (+)STR MDV NDEN MDV (+)STR PAL
MDV (+)STR (+)STR AFF
PAL ALV PAL PAL FRC
m
i mɚ         ALV
    ST(Oth)
    ST(Oth)
        (+)STR
    NDEN
    (+)STR
  ALV  (+)STR
  PAL  PAL
  AFF
          MDV
     
  DIC ST ST ST ST ST ST ST IV IV IV LAB IV NDEN IV ALV
(+)STR IV PAL
(+)STR IV AFF
ST ST IV IV IV IV \    
ɚ
    FDV
LAB ST(Oth)
IV FDV
ALV ST(Oth)
IV FDV BK
IV FDV
GR (+)NAS BK
LAB (+)NAS (+)NAS FDV
(+)STR FRC
LAB FDV FRC
NDEN FDV
ALV FRC
(+)STR FRC
FDV (+)STR FDV
AFF (+)STR
IV ALV
LIQ \
GL(Oth)  
GL(Oth)  
GL(Oth)   VOC  
SAMPLE,
NOT FOR
h ST(Oth) LAB ST(Oth) ALV BK ST(Oth) GR LAB
(+)NAS ALV (+)NAS FRC (+)STR FRC NDEN FRC (+)STR
ALV FRC (+)STR (+)STR AFF ALV LIQ LAB PAL
ɚ
LAB ALV ST(Oth) ST(Oth) (+)STR LAB NDEN (+)STR ALV (+)STR AFF
PAL (+)STR PAL
SR LAB ALV PAL
æ                                                          
hæm   DMC DEN DEN MDV ST(Oth) BK BK GR \ ALV BK FRC FRC FRC FRC FRC FRC FRC FRC MDV (+)STR LIQ LIQ GL(Oth) GL(Oth) BK    
12 hammer
m

ɚ
0158012887_KLPA3_SC.indd 4


ɚ
   
MDV ST(Oth) ALV
ALV

FDV ST(Oth) FDV ST(Oth) FDV


ST(Oth) LAB ST(Oth) ALV
LAB ALV
BK
ST(Oth)
OR RESALE
MDV ST(Oth) MDV
ST(Oth)

BK
ST(Oth)
ST(Oth)

FDV (+)NAS (+)NAS


GR
ST(Oth)
LAB
BK FDV
ALV (+)NAS FRC
(+)STR
FRC
(+)STR
LAB
MDV
4 (+)STR
(+)STR
MDV
NDEN

FDV
FRC
NDEN
NDEN

FRC
NDEN
MDV (+)STR
(+)STR
ALV
FDV
FRC
(+)STR
ALV

FRC
(+)STR
ALV
MDV (+)STR (+)STR
(+)STR
PAL
FDV
FRC
(+)STR
PAL

FRC
PAL
AFF
PAL
AFF

FDV (+)STR
(+)STR (+)STR
AFF
AFF
ALV

ALV
PAL

\  
PAL

 
FRC
MDV

  VOC  

8/6/15 12:26 PM
LAB ALV

25
ADMINISTRATION

0158012887_KLPA3_SC.indd 4 8/6/15 12:26 PM

8/31/15 3:38 PM
Review the KLPA–3 Analysis Form. It provides a place for recording all sound changes that occur when an individual’s
production of a stimulus word differs from the target word. Space is provided to transcribe the individual’s responses,
mark sound changes, and record associated phonological processes for each consonant or consonant cluster sound
change. In addition, space is provided to record vowel alterations by word. Left-hand pages (in purple) are used to
record Core Phonological Processes, and the right-hand pages (in green) are used to record Supplemental Phonological
Processes, vowel alterations, other phonological processes, and the number of processes per word (PPW). Cells for
phonological processes that are not applicable to the sound are shaded.

Calculating Chronological Age


Record the individual’s information, including his or her chronological age, on the front of the Analysis Form. To calculate
the individual’s chronological age, subtract the individual’s birth date from the test date (i.e., the date that GFTA–3 was
administered), using the following rules:
1. When borrowing days of the month, always borrow 30 days, regardless of the month.
2. When borrowing months, always borrow 12 months.
3. Do notAround
N the
A individual’s
L Y S Iage S to the
F next
O R year.M
For example, the chronological age of an individual tested on May 4, 2016 and born on November 9, 2009 is 6 years 5
months 25 days (see Figure 3.2). The individual’s age is not rounded up to 6 years 6 months, so you would compare this
individual to age-level peers by using the norms tables for individuals ages 6:4–6:5.

SAMPLE,
ancy Lewis
Age Calculation

Year Month Day

NOT FOR
____________________________________ u Female u Male

chool/Agency: _________________________________________
Test Date 2016 5 16
5 4 34
4
e: _________________________________________________
__ Birth Date 2009 11 9

ADMINISTRATION
____________________________________________________

____________________________________________________ Age 6 5 25
____________________________________________________ Reminder: Do not round up to next month or year.

OR RESALE
Figure 3.2  Calculating Chronological Age

KLPA–3 Score Summary


Recording Responses
Confidence Interval
Standard Score Identifying90% 95%
the phonological Percentile
processes Rank Age Equivalent

Begin the KLPA–3–analysis by reviewing an individual’s responses to the GFTA–3 Sounds-in-Words test. Transcribe
the individual’s response in the Individual’s Response column on the KLPA–3 Analysis Form. In the Sound Change
column, record any substitutions (e.g., t/s, w/r), omissions (e.g., -/d, -/m), or distortions (e.g., ph/p) for the corresponding
rences of scored phonological processes.

target sound.
Occurrence for Core Phonological Processes Vowel Alterations
Next, identify the applicable phonological processes evident in each sound change for each target word. To identify the
Number of Total
phonological Possible related
processes Percent
to of Notes: change, use the Sound Change Booklet by following these steps:
a specific sound
Occurrences Occurrences Occurrences
1. Referof to8 the
= column labeled%Target Sound to locate the sound in the stimulus word that the individual
produced incorrectly.
of 20 = %
2. Read across the table to the appropriate column that represents the individual’s sound change.
nd affricates (ST) 3. Theofcell48where
= the Target Sound
% Dialectal
and the individual’s Influence
sound change intersect lists the applicable
phonological process(es).
R) of 42 = % Yes No
After you identify the phonological process(es) in the Sound Change Booklet, record them in the Analysis Form. To do
of cell
15 that
= intersects the Notes:
% row of the
this, locate the target sound with the column of the phonological process. Place an X
in the cell. For some sound changes, more than one phonological process is indicated. Repeat the steps listed above to
of 12 = %
record all applicable phonological processes in the Analysis Form for all sound changes.
of 23 = %
26 Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Chapter 3 ■ Recording and Scoring Directions

CS) of 23 = % Overall Intelligibility

nant (DFC) of 36 = % Good Fair Poor

of
0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 26 25 = % Notes: 8/31/15 3:38 PM
Note. You can also use Q-global scoring to quickly and accurately assign applicable phonological processes by entering
all the individual’s sound changes for the GFTA–3 Sounds-in-Words items.

Scoring Considerations
Scoring interfering processes, such as syllable reduction (SR) and cluster simplification (CS), require special considerations.
■■ In the Sound Change Booklet, the columns Syllable Del and Cluster Del identify phonological processes that
involve combinations of sounds (i.e., syllables, consonant clusters). Examine the combination of sounds as one
entity to determine if a phonological process applies.
■■ The phonological process of SR Is identified as an interfering process that may temporarily block or interfere
with the application of other phonological processes. If you code a sound change as SR, do not record the
blocked processes.
Scoring vocalization (VOC) also requires special consideration. All the syllabic liquids in the KLPA–3 target words are word-
final. For scoring consistency of VOC, the vowel is recorded as deleted and the word-final syllabic liquid becomes a vowel.
These process do not coincide with and should not be confused with the deletion of consonant and consonant cluster
sounds in specific word positions (i.e., DIC, DMC, DFC).

Examples of Scored Responses


Figures 3.3–3.5 present recording examples for specific phonological processes. For each response, an X appears in

SAMPLE,
each applicable phonological process column.
Target Word: quack
/kwæk/  ž  [kæk]: The sound /w/ is deleted from the initial sound combination /kw/. Because one sound still

NOT FOR
remains from the sound combination, the phonological process is CS. On the Analysis Form (see Figure 3.3),
locate the Cluster simplification column. Place an X in the cell that intersects with the /w/.
Do not also mark DIC (deletion of initial consonant) for the sound combination /kw/.

ADMINISTRATION
Target Word: table
[te]: The sound combination /bəl/ is deleted. The phonological process is SR. On the Analysis Form
/tebəl/  ž 

(see Figure 3.3), locate the Syllable reduction column. Place an X In the cell that intersects with /t/, /b/, and /əl/.

OR RESALE
Do not also mark DMC (deletion of medial consonant) for /b/.
Target Word: monkey
[ki]: The sound combination /mʌŋ/ is deleted. The phonological process is SR. On the Analysis Form
/mʌŋki/  ž 

(see Figure 3.3), locate the Syllable reduction column. Place an X in the cell that intersects with the /m/, /ŋ/,
and /k/.
Do not also mark DIC (deletion of initial consonant) for /m/ or DMC (deletion of medial consonant) for /ŋ/.
Target Word: hammer
/hæmɚ/  ž   [hæm]: The sound /ɚ/ is deleted. The phonological process is SR. On the Analysis Form (see
Figure 3.3), locate the Syllable reduction column. Place an X in the cell that intersects /h/, /m/, and /ɚ/.

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Chapter 3 ■ Recording and Scoring Directions 27

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 27 8/31/15 3:38 PM


Target IPA Individual’s Target Sound

and

Stri

Del
Clu

Init
Sto

Pal

Vel

Syl

Fin
De
ITEM

Gli
Word Transcription Response Sound Change

Vo

co
h
1 house hs
s
d
2 door dɔr
r
p
3 pig pɪg
g
k
4 cup kʌp
p
Manner Place Reduction Voicing
5 CORE
boy b b

Cluster simplification
Stopping of fricatives
Phonological Processes p

Stridency deletion

Syllable reduction
Gliding of liquids
6 apple æpəl

Deletion of final
Palatal fronting

Final devoicing
əl

Velar fronting

Initial voicing
and affricates
Deaffrication

Vocalization

consonant
7 go go g
Target IPA Individual’s Target
d Sound
ITEM
8 Word
duck Transcription
dʌk Response Sound Change
k
h

kæk
1 house hs k
s
9 quack kwæk w
d —
2 door dɔr k
r

te
t
p
103 pig
table pɪg
tebəl b
g —
əl —

k

ki
4 cup kʌp m

p
11 monkey mʌŋki ŋ
5 boy b b
k

hæm
h
p
6 apple æpəl
12 hammer hæmɚ m
əl
7 go go ɚ
g —
f
13 fish fɪʃ d
8 duck dʌk Examples of CS and SR ʃ
Figure 3.3  KLPA–3 k Scored Responses
w
14 watch wɑʧ k
Target Word: quack ʧ

SAMPLE,
9 quack kwæk w
/kwæk/  ž   [æk]: The sound combination s /kw/ is deleted. The phonological process is DIC. On the Analysis Form (see
k
p
Manner Place MannerReduction VoicingReduction
15CORE Figure
spider 3.4),
spdɚ locate the Deletion of initial
t consonant column. Place Place
an X in theVoicing
cell that intersects with the /k/ and /w/.
d SUPPLEMENTAL
Cluster simplification
Stopping of fricatives

Phonological Processes

Processes per word


Glottal replacement

Other phonological
Stridency deletion

Syllable reduction

10 table tebəl b

medial consonant
Gliding of liquids

to velars

Vowel alterations
Medial devoicing
Phonological Processes

initial consonant
Deletion of final

Do not also mark CS (Consonant simplification) for the /k/ and /w/, individually.
Stopping (other)
Palatal fronting

Initial devoicing
Final devoicing

Medial voicing
Velar fronting
Gliding (other)

Initial voicing
and affricates
Deaffrication

Liquidization
Vocalization

əl
consonant

of

Deletion of
Affrication

processes
w

NOT FOR
Frication

Deletion
Backing

16 Target web
Word Target
wɘb
Transcription Word: monkey m

(PPW)
IPA Individual’s Target Sound
or /h/

Target Target
ITEM Response Sound Change b Sound Word ITEM
11 monkey mʌŋki h ŋ
1 house /mʌŋki/  
hs ž   [mʌi]: Thes sound combination d /ŋk/ is deleted. The phonological process is DMC. On the Analysis h
houseForm 1
k s
217 doordrum(see dɔr Figure drʌm3.4), locate d
r
the Deletionh
r of medial consonant column. Place an X in the cell that intersects d /ŋ/ and /k/.
door 2
r
p m
312 hammer
pig Dopɪgnot hæmɚ also mark CS m
g for the /ŋ / and /k/, individually.
p
pig 3

ADMINISTRATION
p g
k ɚ k
4
18 cup plate kʌp plet l Manner Place Reduction Voicing cup 4
p p
f SUPPLEMENTAL
513 boy fish b fɪʃ t

Processes per word


b
Glottal replacement

b boy 5

Other phonological
ʃ
medial consonant
Backing to velars

Vowel alterations
Medial devoicing

Phonological Processes
initial consonant
Stopping (other)

Initial devoicing

p
Medial voicing

p
n
Gliding (other)

6 apple æpəl
Liquidization

apple 6
19 knife nf əl w
Deletion of

Deletion of

əl
Affrication

processes
14 go watchgo wɑʧ
Frication

g ʧf g go

(PPW)
7 7
or /h/

OR RESALE
Target Target
Sound Word ITEM
820 duckshoedʌk ʃu d ʃ
s
d
h duck 8
k k house 1
k ps — k
s

21
915 spider
quack
slide
kwæk
æk
spdɚ
sld
w
k dl — w
k
d
r
quack
door 9
2

p
t ɚ
d t
g
pig 3
10 table tebəl b b table 10
əlw k
əl cup 4
16 web wɘb Subtotal 1 p
m b m

11 monkey mʌŋki
mʌi —
ŋ
k d
ŋb
kp
boy
monkey 5
11

apple 6
h h
17
12 hammer
drumhæmɚ
drʌm m
r əl
mg hammer
go 12
7
2 KLPA–3 j Analysis Form ɚ m ɚ
d
f f duck 8
13 fish fɪʃ
ʃ
p ʃ
k fish 13

Figure 3.4 wɑʧKLPA–3
k
18 watchplate
14
plet Examples of DIC and lDMC Scored Responses
w w
w watch
quack 14
9
ʧ ʧ
s
t s
k
Target
0158012844_KLPA3_AF.indd 2 Word: table p n p 8/11/15 12:27 PM
t
spider
19 spiderknife
15 spdɚ nf d
b table 15
10
/tebəl/  ž  [tebo]: Theɚd sound combination
f /əl/ is changed. Assume that the vowel is deleted and the consonant
əl
ɚ
m
20
16 web shoewɘb/l/ is changed
ʃu to vowel
w
b
/o/. The phonological
ʃ process is VOC. On the Analysis Form (see Figure 3.5), wbŋlocate
webthe 16
monkey 11
k
Vocalization column.d Place an X in the cell that intersects /əl/.
s d
h
17 drum drʌm r r drum 17
m hammer 12
21 slide sld m l m
Target Word: monkey ɚ
p
p d f
l plate
18 plate
/mʌŋki/  
plet
ž  [mʌki]:
  The
l
t
single consonant /ŋ/ is deleted from the sound combination /ŋk/. Because oneʃsound still
t
fish 18
13

w
19 knife remains
nf from the sound
n Subtotal
combination, the1 phonological process is CS. On the Analysis Form (see Figure n
ʧ 3.5),
watch
knife
14
19
f f
s
20 shoe locate
ʃu the Cluster simplification
ʃ column. Place an X in the cell that intersects /ŋ/. ʃ
p shoe 20
spider 15
s sd
21
2
slide Do not also mark DMC
sld
KLPA–3 j Analysis Form l for the sound combination /ŋk/. ɚl slide 21
d d
w
web 16
b
Target Word: hammer Subtotal 1 Subtotal 1
d

/hæmɚ/  ž  [hæmo]: The sound /ɚ/ is changed to vowel /o/. The phonological process is VOC. On the Analysis Form
  m
r drum 17

KLPA–3 j Analysis Form


KLPA–3
(see
0158012844_KLPA3_AF.indd
2 2 Figure 3.5), locate the Vocalization column. Place an X in the cell that intersects /ɚ/.
Analysis Form
j p 8/11/15 12:27 PM 3
l plate 18
t
28 0158012844_KLPA3_AF.indd 3
Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Chapter 3 ■ Recording and Scoring
n Directions
knife 19
8/11/15 12:27 PM
0158012844_KLPA3_AF.indd 2 8/11/15 12:27 PM f
ʃ shoe 20
s
l slide 21
d

Subtotal 1

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 28 8/31/15 3:39 PM


KLPA–3 j Analysis Form
Target IPA Individual’s Target Sound

Clu

Init
Sto

Pal

Vel

Syl

Fin
Str
De

De
ITEM

Gli
Word Transcription Response Sound Change

Vo

co
an
h
1 house hs
s
d
2 door dɔr
r
p
3 pig pɪg
g
k
4 cup kʌp
p
Manner Place Reduction Voicing
5 CORE
boy b b

Cluster simplification
Stopping of fricatives
Phonological Processes p

Stridency deletion

Syllable reduction
Gliding of liquids
6 apple æpəl

Deletion of final
Palatal fronting

Final devoicing
əl

Velar fronting

Initial voicing
and affricates
Deaffrication

Vocalization

consonant
7 go go g
Target IPA Individual’s Target
d Sound
8
ITEM duck
Word dʌk
Transcription Response Sound Change
k
h
1 house hs k
s
9 quack kwæk w
d
2 door dɔr k
r

tebo
t
p
10
3 table
pig tebəl
pɪg b
g
əl
k
o
mʌki
4 cup kʌp m
11 monkey mʌŋki
p
ŋ —
5 boy b b
k

hæmo
h
p
6
12 apple
hammer æpəl
hæmɚ m
o
əl
ɚ
7 go go g
f
13 fish fɪʃ d
8 duck dʌk ʃ
Figure 3.5  KLPA–3 Examples of VOC andwk CS Scored Responses
14 watch wɑʧ k
ʧ

SAMPLE,
Identifying
9 quack Vowel
kwæk Alterations w
s
k
p
The15 KLPA–3
spider provides
spdɚ a column in the Analysis
dt
Form to note deviations from the target word in vowel production.
Recording and analyzing
10 table tebəl vowel alterations ɚ
provides
b valuable information contributing to the qualitative aspect of the
diagnostic process. əl
w

NOT FOR
16 web wɘb m
b
To11complete
monkey the mʌŋki
Vowel alterations column, ŋnote any changes to vowels of each target word. For example, when the /ɪ/ in
d
/pig/
17
is drum
changed to drʌm/i/, note this change withkr i/ɪ and consider this one change.
h
m
12 hammer hæmɚ m
Identifying Other Phonological Processes

ADMINISTRATION
p
ɚ
18 plate plet l
A group of other processes is discussed in fChapter 2 of this Manual. These phonological processes occur infrequently
13 fish fɪʃ t
from only a few individuals in the normativeʃnsample. However, it is important to include these other phonological
19
processes knife nf w
14 watchbecause wɑʧthey may provide informationf contributing to an individual’s speech sound profile.
ʧ

OR RESALE
20 shoe ʃu
A column labeled Other phonological processes ʃ is provided in the Analysis Form. For each sound change, list any of the
s
other
15
phonological
spider spdɚ
processes that may apply
s in this column.
p
21 slide sld dl
d
Determining Processes per Word ɚ
w
16 web wɘb Subtotal 1
The KLPA–3 provides a column in the Analysis b Form to compute the average number of processes per word (PPW) that
an individual uses. The PPW is a measure of d severity, represented by a ratio calculated by dividing the total number of
17 drum processes
phonological drʌm used by the number r of words produced. The more phonological processes that are presented
2 KLPA–3 j Analysis Form m
(i.e., the greater the PPW value), the more severe a phonological disorder is considered to be. For example an individual
p
may18
produce
plate
the plet
target word house /hs/ las [haʊ], which results from the application of two phonological processes
(i.e. deletion of final consonant, stridency deletion).
t In comparison, the individual may produce /haʊs/ as [haʊg], which
0158012844_KLPA3_AF.indd 2
results from the application of four phonological n processes (i.e., stopping of fricatives and affricates, stridency8/11/15 12:27 PM
deletion,
19 knife nf
backing to velars or /h/, final voicing). f
20 shoe ʃu ʃ
To calculate the PPW, count the total number of phonological processes across the row for each target sound. Then sum
s
the values in the rows that represent the entire target word. Record the sum in the column labeled Processes per word
21 slide sld l
(PPW) in the Analysis Form. d

Determining the Total Raw Score


Subtotal 1

Space is provided at the bottom of each page of the Core Phonological Processes to subtotal each phonological process
usage.
2 Transfer
KLPA–3 the subtotals
j Analysis Form for each of the phonological processes to the last page of item analysis in the Analysis
Form, and then sum the subtotals to calculate the raw score for each Core Phonological Process. To calculate the total
raw score, add the raw scores from each of the Core Phonological Processes in the Sums of Subtotals box and put the
total in the Total Raw Score box. See Figure 3.6.
0158012844_KLPA3_AF.indd 2 8/11/15 12:27 PM

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Chapter 3 ■ Recording and Scoring Directions 29

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 29 8/31/15 3:39 PM


nkr
17
48 drum
cookie drʌm
kʊki
mkt
v
ʧ
49 cheese ʧiz p
kz
18
34 plate
vacuum plet
vækjum l
ptj
ʤm
50 pajamas pəʤɑməz n
19 knife nf ʃ
m f
35 shovel ʃʌvəl zv
20 shoe ʃu ʃ
əlt
51 teeth tiɵ st
ɵ
21
36 slide
teacher sld
tiʧɚ pl
ʧ
dr
ɚ Manner Place Reduction Voicing
52
CORE
princess prɪnsɘs z
n 3 1

Cluster simplification
Subtotal 1

Stopping of fricatives
37 zebra zibrə b
s

Stridency deletion

Syllable reduction
Phonological Processes

Gliding of liquids

Deletion of final
Palatal fronting
sr

Final devoicing
Velar fronting

Initial voicing
and affricates
Deaffrication

Vocalization
ʤk

consonant
238 KLPA–3 j Analysis Form
53 giraffe
crown ʤəræf
krn r
Target IPA Individual’s Target Sound
ITEM Word Transcription Response nf
Sound Change

56 juice ʤus
ʤ t
Subtotal 2 1 1 1 4 3
54 truck trʌk sr
0158012844_KLPA3_AF.indd 2 8/11/15 12:27 PM
57 zoo zu kz
455 KLPA–3
red
j Analysis Form
rɘd sr
58 star stɑr dt
r
Subtotal 3 2 1 1 1
f
59 five
0158012844_KLPA3_AF.indd 4
fv 8/11/15 12:27 PM
v
6 KLPA–3 j Analysis Form s
60 seven sɘvən v
n
1 1 1

SAMPLE,
0158012844_KLPA3_AF.indd 6 Subtotal 4 8/11/15 12:27 PM

Subtotal 1 3 1
1 1 1 4 3

NOT FOR
Subtotal 2
Subtotal 3 2 1 1 1
+ Subtotal 4 1 1 1

ADMINISTRATION SUMS OF SUBTOTALS 1 4 2 9 2 4

22
OR RESALE
TOTAL RAW SCORE

Figure 3.6  Calculating the KLPA–3 Total Raw Score

Completing the Score Summary


The front of the Analysis Form is used to report score results for the KLPA–3. Use the following steps to complete
the score summary for the converted norm-referenced standard score, confidence interval, percentile rank, and age
equivalent. Alternatively, you can also use KLPA–3 scoring on Q-global to quickly and accurately derive the same norm-
referenced scores.

Step 1. Convert Total Raw Score to Standard Score


Transfer the total raw score for the Core Phonological Processes to the Total Raw Score box on the front of the Analysis
Form. Use the appropriate table based on the individual’s age in Appendix A of this Manual to convert the total raw score
from the analysis to a norm-referenced standard score. Normative information for females is presented in the first set
of columns. Information for males is presented in the second set of columns. Standard scores are reported by year and
month. Figure 3.7 shows how to use the test norms tables in Appendix A. To use the table,
1. Choose the set of columns for the sex of the individual tested.
2. Locate the individual’s total raw score in the appropriate column. Read across to the number in the Standard
score column.
3. Enter this standard score in the Standard Score box in the Score Summary on the Analysis Form (see Figure 3.8).

30 Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Chapter 3 ■ Recording and Scoring Directions

8 KLPA–3 j Analysis Form

0158012844_KLPA3_AF.indd 8 8/11/15 12:27 PM


0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 30 8/31/15 3:39 PM
tab_9_klpa3_normgrp27

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex (continued)
Ages 6:4–6:5
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
0 113 108–117 107–118 81 115 109–119 108–120 84 0
1 97 92–102 91–103 42 106 100–111 99–112 66 1
2 94 90–99 89–100 34 101 96–106 95–107 53 2
3 90 86–95 85–96 25 97 92–102 91–103 42 3
4 88 84–93 83–94 21 95 90–100 89–101 37 4
5 86 82–91 81–92 18 93 88–99 87–100 32 5
6 85 81–90 80–91 16 92 87–98 86–99 30 6
7 83 79–88 78–89 13 91 86–97 85–98 27 7
8 82 78–87 77–88 12 90 85–96 84–97 25 8
9 81 77–86 76–87 10 89 84–95 83–96 23 9
10 79 75–85 74–85 8 88 83–94 82–95 21 10
11 78 74–84 73–85 7 87 82–93 81–94 19 11
12 77 73–83 72–84 6 86 81–92 80–93 18 12
13 76 72–82 71–83 5 85 81–91 80–92 16 13
14 75 71–81 70–82 5 84 80–90 79–91 14 14
15 74 70–80 69–81 4 83 79–89 78–90 13 15

SAMPLE,
16 73 69–79 68–80 4 82 78–88 77–89 12 16
17 72 68–78 67–79 3 81 77–87 76–88 10 17
18 71 67–77 67–78 3 80 76–86 75–87 9 18
19 70 66–76 66–77 2 79 75–85 74–86 8 19
20 70 66–76 66–77 2 78 74–84 73–85 7 20

NOT FOR
21 69 66–75 65–76 2 77 73–83 72–84 6 21
22 68 65–74 64–75 2 76 72–82 71–83 5 22
23 68 65–74 64–75 2 75 71–81 70–82 5 23
24 67 64–73 63–74 1 74 70–81 69–82 4 24

ADMINISTRATION
25 66 63–72 62–73 1 73 69–80 68–81 4 25
26 66 63–72 62–73 1 72 68–79 67–80 3 26
Figure273.7  Locating
65 62–71 Standard
the KLPA–3 61–72Score 1 71 67–78 66–79 3 27
28 64 61–70 60–71 1 70 66–77 65–78 2 28
Step29 2. Determine 63 Confidence60–69 59–70
Intervals 1 69 65–76 64–77 2 29

OR RESALE
30 63 60–69 59–70 1 69 65–76 64–77 2 30
Follow31these instructions
62 to 59–68
report a confidence
58–69 interval.
1 68 64–75 63–76 2 31
32 62 59–68 58–69 1 67 63–74 62–75 1 32
1. Select the level of confidence that is appropriate for the purpose of the assessment or is required by your agency
33 61 58–67 57–68 0.5 66 62–73 61–74 1 33
or district. Confidence intervals are listed at the 90% and 95% levels. On the Analysis Form, indicate the level at
34 59 56–65 55–66 0.3 65 62–72 61–73 1 34
35
which you 59
are reporting.
56–65 55–66 0.3 64 61–71 60–72 1 35
36 Using the58same table
2. 55–64
from Step54–65 0.3 read across
1 (see Figure 3.7), 63 the individual’s
60–70 raw59–71 1
score and standard 36
score
37 to the column
57 54–63
for the 90% or 95% 53–64
confidence0.2 interval. Be 62
sure that you59–69
are in the58–70
correct column 37of
1 for the sex
38 the individual.
56 53–62 52–63 0.2 61 58–68 57–69 0.5 38
39 55 52–62 51–62 0.1 59 56–66 55–67 0.3 39
3.
40 Enter the53 two numbers 50–60that represent
49–61 the lower 0.1and upper57 54–64 in the Confidence
limits of scores 53–65 Interval
0.2 box in40 the
41 Score Summary
52 on 49–59
the Analysis48–60
Form (see figure
0.1 3.8). 56 53–63 52–64 0.2 41
42 51 48–58 47–59 0.1 55 52–62 51–63 0.1 42
Step43 3. Determine 49 Percentile46–56 Ranks 45–57 <0.1 54 51–62 50–63 0.1 43
44 47 44–54 43–55 <0.1 53 50–61 49–62 0.1 44
To report percentile rank, convert the standard score to a percentile rank by using the same table in Appendix A that
45 45 42–52 42–53 <0.1 51 48–59 47–60 0.1 45
was used to derive the standard score and its confidence interval (see Figure 3.7). Locate the standard score in the
46 44 42–51 41–52 <0.1 49 46–57 45–58 <0.1 46
appropriate
47
column42
and read40–49
across to the right to the<0.1
39–50
Percentile Rank
47
column. Record the
44–55
percentile <0.1
43–56
rank for the score
47
in the48
appropriate40 box in the38–47
Score Summary37–48 on the Analysis
<0.1 Form46(see Figure 3.8).
43–54 42–55 <0.1 48
49 40 38–47 37–48 <0.1 45 43–53 42–54 <0.1 49
Step50 4. Determine 40 Age Equivalents
38–47 37–48 <0.1 44 42–52 41–53 <0.1 50
51
Age equivalents 40the KLPA–3
for 38–47 37–48in Appendix
are reported <0.1 B. To determine
42 the40–50 39–51corresponding
age equivalent <0.1 to the51
total
52
raw score, find the40total raw 38–47
score in the37–48 <0.1 and read
left-hand column 41across to39–49
the right to38–50 52 the
<0.1column for
the appropriate
53–160 40 38–47 37–48 <0.1 40 38–48 37–49 <0.1 53–160
individual’s sex. Record the age equivalent in the appropriate box in the Score Summary on the Analysis Form. Figure 3.8
shows a completed Score Summary from the front of the Analysis Form for an individual age 6:5.

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Chapter 3 ■ Recording and Scoring Directions 31

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 31 8/31/15 3:39 PM


Test Date
Grade/Ed. Level: __________ School/Agency: _________________________________________
Language(s) Spoken in the Home: _________________________________________________
__ Birth Date
Examiner: ____________________________________________________________________

Reason for Testing: _____________________________________________________________ Age

____________________________________________________________________________ Reminder: Do not round up to next month or year.

KLPA–3 Score Summary


Confidence Interval
*Total Raw Score Standard Score 90% 95% Percentile Rank Age Equivalent

22 68 65 – 74 2 3:4 – 3:5
* Raw score equals total number of occurrences of scored phonological processes.
Figure 3.8  Completed KLPA–3 Score
A N ASummary
L Y S I S F O R M

Percent of Occurrence for Core Phonological Processes Vowel Alterations


Determining the Percent of Occurrence
Linda Khan and Nancy Lewis Number of for Possible
Total Core Phonological
Percent of Processes
Notes:
Phonological Process Occurrences Occurrences
To obtain the KLPA–3 percent of occurrence for each Age of the 12 Core Occurrences
Calculation Phonological Processes, refer to Table C.2. If you
prefer to calculate the percentages manually, transfer the sum=
Deaffrication (DF)
Name: ______________________________________________________ u Female u Male of
Year 8 Month Day
of subtotals for% the phonological processes to the front
Test Date
Grade/Ed. Level: __________ School/Agency: _________________________________________
of the Analysis Form in the area labeled Percent of Occurrence for Core Phonological Processes. The sum of subtotal
Gliding
Language(s) Spoken in the of liquids
Home: (GL)
___________________________________________________ Birth Date of 20 = %
numbers should be written in the Number of Occurrences column next to each phonological process. Then divide the
Manner

Examiner: ____________________________________________________________________ Manner Place Reduction Voicing


number
Reason in
Stopping
for Testing: theofNumber
fricatives ofandOccurrences
affricates (ST) box by
___________________________________________________________ __ the number Age of 48 in the
= Total Possible % Occurrences Dialectal
box and multiply by 100 to
SUPPLEMENTAL
Influence

Processes per word


Glottal replacement

Other phonological
medial consonant
Backing to velars

Vowel alterations
Medial devoicing
Phonological Processes

initial consonant
get the percent of occurrences.

Stopping (other)

Initial devoicing
___________________________________________________________________________ _

Medial voicing
Gliding (other)
Reminder: Do not round up to next month or year.

Liquidization

Deletion of

Deletion of
Stridency deletion (STR) of 42 = %
Affrication

processes
For example, if the sum of subtotal on the last page of item analysis for SR was 4, then 4 should beYes No

Frication
recorded in the

(PPW)
or /h/
KLPA–3 Score Summary Target Target
Sound Word ITEM
Confidence Interval
Number Raw of ScoreOccurrences
*Total Vocalization (VOC) Standard Scorecolumn for 90% Syllable95% reduction
Percentile Rank (SR).
of 15 To
= calculate
Age Equivalent the%percent of occurrences, the number juice
Notes: ʤ of 56
s
occurrences (4) is divided by the total –
possible occurrences (25), which equals 0.16. The quotient is multipliedz by 100 zoo and57

the value Palatal (16) fronting


is recorded(PF) in the Percent of Occurrences ofbox
12 (see
= Figure 3.9).% s
Place

t star 58

SAMPLE,
* Raw score equals total number of occurrences of scored phonological processes.
r
Velar fronting
Percent (VF) for Core Phonological Processes
of Occurrence of 23Alterations
Manner
Vowel = Place Reduction % Voicing f
five 59
Number of Total Possible Percent of
v
SUPPLEMENTAL

Processes per word


Notes:
Glottal replacement

Other phonological
s

medial consonant
Phonological Process Occurrences Occurrences Occurrences

Backing to velars

Vowel alterations
Medial devoicing
Phonological Processes

initial consonant
Cluster simplification (CS) of 23 = Stopping (other) % Overall Intelligibility

Initial devoicing
v seven 60

Medial voicing
Gliding (other)

0 0
Liquidization

Deaffrication (DF) of 8 = %
Reduction

Deletion of

Deletion of
Affrication

processes
Frication

Deletion of final consonant1(DFC) 5

(PPW)
Gliding of liquids (GL) of 20 = % or /h/

NOT FOR
Target 4 Target
of 36 = % Good Fair
Subtotal
Sound
Poor Word ITEM
Manner

Stopping of fricatives and affricates (ST) 4 of 48 = 8.3 % Dialectal Influence h


house 1

Syllable reduction (SR) 2 of 25 2 1 % Notes: 0 s


4.8 Yes = No
Stridency deletion (STR) of 42 = % Subtotal 1
d
1 6 Subtotal
r 2
door 2
Vocalization (VOC) 9 of 15 = 60 % Notes:
1 6 p
Final devoicing (FDV) of 35 = % Subtotal 3 pig 3
Voicing

Palatal fronting (PF) 0 of 12 = 0 %


1 5 g

ADMINISTRATION
Place

+ Subtotal
k 4
cup 4
Velar fronting (VF)
Initial voicing (IV) 0 of 23 = 0 %
of 33 = 1 0 0 1 0 2 0 0
%
p

0 0 0 2 0 26 b boy 5
Cluster simplification (CS) 0 of 23 = 0 % Overall Intelligibility
p
Reduction

of 151 = of 111 = of 81 = of 159 = of 124 = of 59 = of 134 = of 58 = of 27 = of 41 = of 22 = of 11 = of 82 = of 60 =


apple 6
Deletion of final consonant (DFC) 0 of 36 = 0 % Good Fair Poor
əl
1.3
.81 1.7
4.9 .4 g go 7
Syllable reduction (SR) 4 of 25 = 16 % Notes:
____% ____% ____% ____% ____% ____% ____% ____% ____% ____% ____% ____% ____%
d

OR RESALE
duck 8
Final devoicing (FDV) 0 of 35 = 0 % k
Voicing

k
Initial voicing (IV) 0 of 33 = 0 % w quack 9
k
Copyright © 2015 NCS Pearson, Inc. All rights reserved. t
Figure 3.9  Calculating the Percent Of Occurrence for Phonological Processes b
əl
table 10

m
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 A B C D E Product Number 0158012844
Completing the Vowel Alterations Section
Copyright © 2015 NCS Pearson, Inc. All rights reserved. ŋ monkey 11
k
h
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 A B C D E Product Number 0158012844
The individual’s speech productions may contain vowel alterations. An in-depth vowel analysis summary is provided hammer 12 m
ɚ
on the last page of the Analysis Form. However, if you would like to place a general note about the individual’s vowel
fish 13
f
0158012844_KLPA3_AF.indd 1
0158012844_KLPA3_AF.indd 1 8/11/15 8/11/15 12:27 PM ʃ 12:27 PM
changes, space is included on the front of the Analysis Form. watch 14
w
ʧ
s

Completing the Dialectal Influence Section p


d
spider 15

ɚ
The individual’s speech productions may reflect regional speech patterns that reflect dialectal differences from Standardweb 16
w
b
American English (SAE). Indicate if the individual exhibits any variations of SAE in the Dialectal Influence section on the d

front of the Analysis Form. Space is provided to report any additional information pertaining to the individual’s dialectal
drum 17
m
r

variations. The phonological processes should not be recorded for variations of SAE due to dialect because dialectalAnalysis Form

plate 18
9 KLPA–3
p j
l
variations are not scored as incorrect. t
n
0158012844_KLPA3_AF.indd 9 knife 19
8/11/15 12:27 PM
f

Completing the Overall Intelligibility Section ʃ


s
shoe 20

l slide 21
Rate the individual’s overall intelligibility by marking the appropriate rating for the individual’s speech in the Overall
d

Intelligibility section on the front of the Analysis Form. Intelligibility is based on the descriptive categories of Good,
Subtotal 1 Fair,
and Poor, and represents the clinical judgment of the examiner in combination with the analysis results. Additional space
is provided to report any other information pertaining to the individual’s intelligibility. KLPA–3 Analysis Form 3
j

0158012844_KLPA3_AF.indd 3 8/11/15 12:27 PM

32 Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Chapter 3 ■ Recording and Scoring Directions

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 32 8/31/15 3:39 PM


Determining the Percent of Occurrence for Supplemental Phonological Processes and
Vowel Alterations
The individual’s percent of occurrence for each of the Supplemental Phonological Processes and vowel alterations
can also be calculated. Follow the same procedure for “Determining the Percent of Occurrence for Core Phonological
Processes,” using the space provided on the last page of item analysis in the Analysis Form (see Figure 3.9). These
calculations are found in the pages in the interior of the analysis form.

Calculating Processes per Word


To calculate the processes per word (PPW), count the total number of Core and Supplemental Phonological Processes
as well as other phonological processes across the row for each target sound. Then sum the values in the rows that
represent the entire target word. Record the sum in the column labeled Processes per word (PPW) in the Analysis Form.
Space is provided at the bottom of each Supplemental Phonological Processes page to subtotal the PPW. Transfer the
subtotals to the last page of item analysis in the Analysis Form and then sum the subtotals to calculate the total number
of processes used. Divide the total number of processes used by 60 (i.e., total number of target words) to determine the
average processes per word.
Note. For individuals who did not provide responses to all 60 target words during the administration of the GFTA–3, use the
actual number of responses produced as the divisor. For example, if an individual responded to 40 of the 60 target words,
you would divide the number of phonological processes recorded by 40 to obtain the average processes per word.

SAMPLE,
Completing the Consonant Analysis
The Consonant Analysis on the second to last page of the KLPA–3 Analysis Form is an important component in planning

NOT FOR
treatment. It includes a phonetic inventory analysis and a Core Phonological Process analysis.

Phonetic Inventory for Consonants in Single Words


The Phonetic Inventory for Consonants in Single Words is a phonetic inventory analysis that allows you to see at a glance

ADMINISTRATION
whether the individual’s phonetic repertoire is limited in some way. A phonetic inventory displays the consonants that
the individual produced in the initial, medial, and final positions as well as the consonants that the individual does not
produce (Eisenberg & Hitchcock, 2010). Each of the three tables represent the position of the sound within the target
word. Each table of the Phonetic Inventory is arranged horizontally by manner of production, and vertically by place

OR RESALE
of production. Within place of production, voiceless sounds precede voiced sounds. The organization of the Phonetic
Inventory by place, manner, and voicing enables you to observe additional phonological patterns, such as overuse of
labial consonants. See Figure 3.10 for an example of how to complete the Phonetic Inventory for Consonants in Single
Words. To complete the Phonetic Inventory for Consonants in Single Words, follow the directions below.
Single Consonants Produced Correctly
Examine each consonant production. On the KLPA–3 Phonetic Inventory for Consonants in Single Words, circle
any correctly produced phoneme in the appropriate position. For example, when house /haʊs/ becomes [haʊ],
the initial /h/ is circled because it was produced correctly.
Single Consonants Produced as Substitutions
For consonants produced as substitutions for other phonemes, place a mark in the upper left-hand corner of
the cell for the phoneme that was produced. For example, if elephant /ɘləfənt/ becomes [ɘwəfənt], the /w/ was
produced medially but as a substitution for another phoneme, so the cell for word-medial /w/ should be marked in
the upper left-hand corner with /l/. Similarly, if knife /naɪf/ becomes [daɪf], mark the corner of the cell containing
initial /d/, because /d/ was a substitution for /n/.
Consonant Clusters
Any consonant clusters produced by the individual are recorded in the area labeled Consonant Clusters. For
example, if blue /blu/ becomes [bwu], the cluster /bw/ is recorded in the space provided beneath Word-Initial
Consonants Produced. Similarly, if quack /kwæk/ becomes [gwæk], the cluster /gw/ is recorded. However, if
/kwæk/ becomes [gæk], the cell containing initial /g/ is marked.

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Chapter 3 ■ Recording and Scoring Directions 33

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 33 8/31/15 3:39 PM


Consonant Analysis
Phonetic Inventory for Consonants in Single Words

Word-Initial Consonants Produced Word-Medial Consonants Produced Word-Final Consonants Produced

m n ŋ m n ŋ m n ŋ

p b t d ʧ ʤ k g p b t d ʧ ʤ k g p b t d ʧ ʤ k g

ɵ ð ɵ ð ɵ ð
f v ʃ f v ʃ ʒ f v ʃ ʒ
s z s z s z

w
r
j h
l w
r
j h
r ɚ

l l l əl

Consonant Clusters: Consonant Clusters: Consonant Clusters:


bw/bl, gw/kw
________________________________ ________________________________ nt
________________________________
________________________________ ________________________________ ________________________________
________________________________ ________________________________ ________________________________

Core Phonological Process Analysis

SAMPLE, Age

2:0–2:5
Female

FDV, IV
Phonological Process
Male

DF, FDV, IV

NOT FOR
2:6–2:11 SR SR

3:0–3:5 DFC, ST, VF DFC, VF

3:6–3:11 DF

ADMINISTRATION
4:0–4:5 STR CS, ST, STR

4:6–4:11 CS, VOC, PF PF

5:0–5:11

OR RESALE
6:0–6:11 GL

7:0–7:11 GL

8:0–8:11 VOC

Summary of Consonant Analysis


Final / r / is deleted and/or substituted with a vowel; mastery
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
• Phonetic Inventory
of / w / in which / w / replaces / l / and / r /
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
• IV, DFC are not appropriate for child’s age
Core Phonological Processes ______________________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
• L IQ specifically using / l / not / r /
Supplemental Phonological Processes _____________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
DEN
• Other Phonological Process _______________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Ratio of .4
• Processes Per Word (PPW) ________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Figure 3.10  Completed Consonant Analysis KLPA–3 j Analysis Form 11

34 Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Chapter 3 ■ Recording and Scoring Directions

0158012844_KLPA3_AF.indd 11 8/11/15 12:27 PM

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 34 8/31/15 3:39 PM


Core Phonological Process Analysis Table
The Core Phonological Process Analysis table reveals the developmental trends of phonological process suppression
as determined by the data from the KLPA–3 normative sample. This data is also reported in Appendix C. The table
reveals the ages by which 90% of the normative sample were able to suppress each of the Core Phonological Processes.
Suppression of a phonological process is defined as a phonological process occurring 15% or less in an individual’s
speech productions. The age ranges provide these developmental trends for females and males.
Complete the Core Phonological Process Analysis table by referring to the Percent of Occurrence for Core Phonological
Processes table on the front page of the Analysis Form. Note any phonological process that occurred more than
15% of the time. Find those phonological processes on the Core Phonological Process Analysis table in the column
appropriate for the individual’s sex, and circle it. This allows you to note which phonological processes an individual
has not suppressed. These results can be compared to the developmental trends of the KLPA–3 normative sample, and
can help you plan treatment by focusing on unsuppressed phonological processes that are typically suppressed at the
youngest age.

Summary of Consonant Analysis


Space is provided for you to summarize your findings. In addition to recording information about Core and Supplemental
Phonological Processes, you may want to note other phonological process usage, and processes per word (PPW) for
guidance in planning intervention.

SAMPLE,
■■ Phonetic Inventory: Using the Phonetic Inventory for Consonants in Single Words, note any consonant or
consonant cluster sound change patterns. For example, it may be noted that an individual deletes all affricates in
word-final position and changes word-initial glides to [w]. These observations can assist in intervention planning.
■■ Core Phonological Processes: Any circled phonological process on the Core Phonological Processes Analysis

NOT FOR
table should be considered when developing therapy goals and objectives. For example, you may want to begin
working with an individual on suppressing the phonological processes that have been circled in the 2:0–2:5 and
2:6–2:11 age ranges because developmentally those are the phonological processes to be suppressed first.

ADMINISTRATION
■■ Supplemental Phonological Processes: Supplemental Phonological Processes should be considered along with
Core Phonological Processes when developing therapy goals and objectives. These phonological processes
frequently impact an individual’s overall intelligibility of speech.
■■ Other Phonological Processes: If an individual uses phonological processes other than the Core and

OR RESALE
Supplemental Phonological Processes, they should be noted. These phonological processes may be selected as
therapy goals because they may impact an individual’s overall intelligibility.
■■ Processes per Word (PPW): You can expect the PPW to decrease over time, with therapy. The PPW can be
tracked over time, and progress as indicated by the decrease in PPW can be included in progress reports.

Completing the Vowel Analysis


The Vowel Analysis is presented on the back page of the KLPA–3 Analysis Form. Like the Consonant Analysis, it
facilitates planning treatment because it allows you to quickly assess whether the individual’s vowel repertoire is limited.
The Vowel Analysis includes the Phonetic Inventory for Vowels in Single Words, which has a table for noting which vowels
were produced and a table for identifying the vowel phonological processes that were used.

Phonetic Inventory for Vowels in Single Words


The organization of the Phonetic Inventory for Vowels in Single Words is by tongue position, front to back and high to low.
For example, /æ/ is a low, front vowel while /u/ is a high, back vowel. This vowel inventory is arranged horizontally by front,
central, and back and vertically by high, mid, and low. See Figure 3.11 for an example of a completed vowel inventory. To
complete this vowel inventory, follow the directions below.
Vowels Produced Correctly
Examine each vowel production. On the KLPA–3 Phonetic Inventory for Vowels in Single Words, circle any
correctly produced vowel. For example, when house /haʊs/ is produced correctly, the diphthong /aʊ/ is circled.

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Chapter 3 ■ Recording and Scoring Directions 35

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 35 8/31/15 3:39 PM


Fronting: producing a back vowel as a front vowel Lowering: altering vowel production by lowering vowel height
frog ž [freg] /ɔ/ ž [e] blue ž [blɑ] /u/ ž [ɑ]

Centralization: producing a front or back vowel as a Diphthongization: producing a monophthong as a diphthong


central vowel go ž [gɔɪ] /o/ ž [ɔɪ]
cookie ž [kukə] /i/ ž [ə]
Monophthongization: producing a diphthong as monophthong
Decentralization: producing aas
Vowels Produced central vowel as a front or
Substitutions boy ž [bɔ] // ž [ɔ]
back vowel
For vowels produced as substitutions for other vowels, place a mark in the upper-left hand corner of the cell for
cup ž [kop] /ʌ/ ž [o]
the vowel that was produced. For example, if elephant /ɘləfənt/ becomes [ɘlefənt], the /ə/ was produced as /e/;
you would mark the corner of the /ə/ with /e/ to note it as a vowel substitution.

Vowel Analysis
Phonetic Inventory for Vowels in Single Words

Vowels Produced Vowel Phonological Processes Individual’s Vowel Usage

Front Central Back Backing

i u Fronting əže
leaf zoo
High Centralization
ɪ ʊ
pig cookie
e
Decentralization
e ə o
plate zebra soap Raising
Mid
ɘ ʌ ɔ Lowering
web cup frog
æ ɑ Diphthongization
Low hammer watch
Monophthongization


SAMPLE,
house
Diphthongs

knife

boy

NOT FOR a◊; e


Summary of Vowel Analysis
• Vowels Produced _________________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

ADMINISTRATION Fronting
• Vowel Phonological Processes Used ________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

OR RESALE
Figure 3.11  Completed Vowel Analysis

Vowel Phonological Process Usage Table


Copyright © 2015 NCS Pearson, Inc. All rights reserved. Portions of this work were previously published.
The Vowel Phonological Process Usage table presents eight common phonological processes impacting vowels.
Warning: No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy,
To complete
recording, or anythis table, refer
information to and
storage theretrieval
definitions forwithout
system, vowelthe
phonological
express writtenprocesses presented
permission of onowner.
the copyright the last page of the
Analysis
Pearson, PSI Form or inPsychCorp,
Design, Chapter 2KLPA,
of this Manual.
Q-global, Note
and which ofare
Q-interactive thetrademarks,
vowel phonological processes
in the U.S. and/or apply oftoPearson
other countries, the individual’s
Education, Inc.
or its affiliates.
productions as evidenced on the Phonetic Inventory for Vowels in Single Words and/or the Vowel Alteration column
PsychCorp is an imprint of Pearson Clinical Assessment.
(located in the item analysis pages of the Analysis Form).
NCS Pearson, Inc., 5601 Green Valley Drive, Bloomington MN 55437
800.627.7271 www.PearsonClinical.com
Summary of Vowel Analysis
Printed in the United States of America.
Space is provided for you to summarize your findings after completing the vowel analysis. Record any vowel alterations
noted from reviewing the Phonetic Inventory for Vowels in Single Words. At times, an individual with speech sound
disorder may produce an alteration of the target vowel resulting in a sound that is not clearly another vowel sound. These
0158012844_KLPA3_AF.indd 12 8/11/15 12:27 PM
alterations are important to note and may contribute to the individual’s overall diagnostic profile.
■■ Vowels Produced: The organization of the Phonetic Inventory for Vowels in Single Words enables you to observe
vowel phonological patterns, such as productions restricted to mid front vowels. If you observe that an individual’s
vowel repertoire is limited, you may plan a therapy objective to try to expand production of more vowels.
■■ Vowel Phonological Processes Used: If an individual’s vowel repertoire is adequate, but the target vowels are
produced as other vowels, review the phonological processes being applied for vowels. You may want to consider
working with the individual to suppress vowel phonological processes as a therapy objective.

36 Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Chapter 3 ■ Recording and Scoring Directions

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 36 8/31/15 3:39 PM


4 Test Interpretation

Using the KLPA–3 in the Clinical Evaluation Process


Interpretation of KLPA–3 results is based on the assumption that the goal for an individual’s speech sound production
should be improved speech intelligibility. The KLPA–3 was developed to provide norm-referenced information. A raw
score has little interpretive value in isolation. It cannot be compared from one individual to the next. Because assessment
tools contain different types and numbers of items, raw scores may have similar but unique growth curves, and produce
varying score distributions. Even within a particular assessment, raw scores are not comparable, because the same raw
score may be high or low depending on the individual’s age. Raw scores, therefore, need to be converted to some form of
normative or derived scores that will have uniform meaning from age to age and assessment to assessment.

SAMPLE,
Normative scores derived from the Core Phonological Processes support the clinical utility of the KLPA–3 in
several ways:
■■ Scores are useful for diagnostic interpretation.
■■ Speech-language pathologists are often required by regulatory standards to report standardized scores reflecting

NOT FOR
an individual’s speech sound performance in order to determine eligibility for speech-language services.
■■ Scores can be quantified and operationalized for special purposes such as research.

Description of KLPA–3 Scores

ADMINISTRATION
KLPA–3 analysis provides norm-referenced information (i.e., standard scores, percentile ranks, and age equivalents)
that can be utilized with other diagnostic material to determine the nature and severity of an individual’s speech
sound disorder.

OR RESALE
Norm-Referenced Standard Scores
Norm-referenced standard scores are available to compare an individual’s performance to the performance of other
individuals the same age and sex in the normative sample. The scores are on a normalized standard score scale that has
a mean of 100 and a standard deviation (SD) of 15. This scale is commonly used in speech and language, psychological,
and educational batteries. Figure 4.1 shows the distribution of standard scores on the KLPA–3 and Table 4.1 shows
distances from the mean of selected standard scores.

Percent of cases
under portions of
the normal curve

Percentile rank

Standard Score
(Mean of 100 and
an SD of 15)

Figure 4.1  The Normal Curve and Its Relationship to Standard Scores and Percentile Ranks on the KLPA–3

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Chapter 4 ■ Test Interpretation 37

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 37 8/31/15 3:39 PM


Table 4.1  Distance From the Mean of Selected Standard Scores

Standard Score Distance From Mean Percentile Rank


145 +3 SD 99.9
130 +2 SD 98
115 +1 SD 84
100 Mean 50
85 –1 SD 16
70 –2 SD 2
55 –3 SD 0.1

A standard score of 100 on this scale represents the performance of the typical individual of a given age. Standard
scores between 85 and 115 correspond to one standard deviation below and above the mean, respectively; scores within
this range are considered to be within normal limits. Individuals with typical speech sound development would obtain
KLPA–3 scores in this range.
Criteria for identifying an individual as having a speech sound disorder vary among school districts and treatment
programs. For some agencies, 1 standard deviation below the mean is used as the criterion to qualify an individual for
enrollment in their programs, while others may use 1.5 or 2 standard deviations below the mean as the criterion. For

SAMPLE,
example, an individual age 5:6 obtains a standard score of 79 on the KLPA–3. If the criterion for enrollment in the school
district’s speech-language therapy program is a standard score of 77 or below (1.5 standard deviations below the mean),
a speech-language pathologist could not use a KLPA–3 standard score of 79 as evidence of a speech sound disorder
to qualify the individual for therapy in that school district. Even if the individual had scored 77 or below, it would still be

NOT FOR
inappropriate to refer him or her for services based solely on the obtained KLPA–3 results. Instead, the speech-language
pathologist should refer to the confidence intervals around the obtained score and further evaluate the individual using
other assessment protocols.

ADMINISTRATION
Confidence Intervals
Some degree of error is reflected in the score an individual obtains on any assessment tool. If an assessment tool were
perfectly reliable (and without any measurement error), an individual would always obtain the same score if given the

OR RESALE
measure repeatedly, and if no improvements to speech sound abilities have occurred. This score is a hypothetical true
score. Because no measure is perfectly reliable, the true score is expected to lie within a range of scores that reflects the
expected amount of measurement error.
One of the strengths of a norm-referenced assessment tool is that it specifies the size of the estimated measurement
error. The standard error of measurement (SEM) is the amount of error (in standard score units) you should consider
when you interpret an individual’s scores. The smaller the SEM, the more confidence you can have in the accuracy of the
score. The SEM is used to calculate the confidence intervals for the standard score an individual has obtained on the
KLPA–3. The confidence intervals for the standard score were derived by a method using the individual’s estimated true
score and the standard error of estimation, which centers the confidence interval around the estimated true score rather
than the observed score. Using confidence intervals, rather than a specific single score, enables you to state the degree
of confidence you have in a classification, eligibility, or placement decision based on KLPA–3 results. Therefore, reporting
a confidence interval around an individual’s score is particularly important in cases for which the score will be used to
make those types of decisions.
Each standard score is subject to a greater or lesser degree of measurement error, depending on the precision of the
particular standard score for a given age and sex. Because the SEM may be different for each standard score at a given
age and sex, the confidence interval (or range) will also be different at that age and sex. Standard score confidence
intervals required for 90% and 95% levels of confidence for the KLPA–3 standard score have been computed for you and
are presented in Appendix A in this Manual.
Figure 4.2 shows an example of score ranges for 90% and 95% confidence intervals. The 90% confidence interval for a
standard score of 78 on the KLPA–3 for a girl 6 years 1 month is 74 to 84. This means that you can be 90% confident that

38 Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Chapter 4 ■ Test Interpretation

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 38 8/31/15 3:39 PM


the girl’s true score is between 74 and 84. With a 95% confidence interval, the score range is 73 to 85; thus, you can be
95% confident that the girl’s true score is between 73 and 85.
tab_9_klpa3_normgrp25

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex (continued)
Ages 6:0–6:1
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
0 114 109–118 108–119 82 116 110–120 109–121 86 0
1 98 93–103 92–104 45 108 102–113 101–114 70 1
2 94 90–99 89–100 34 103 98–108 97–109 58 2
3 91 87–96 86–97 27 99 94–104 93–105 47 3
4 89 85–94 84–95 23 98 93–103 92–104 45 4
5 87 83–92 82–93 19 97 92–102 91–103 42 5
6 86 82–91 81–92 18 96 91–101 90–102 39 6
7 85 81–90 80–91 16 95 90–100 89–101 37 7
8 83 79–88 78–89 13 94 89–100 88–101 34 8
9 82 78–87 77–88 12 93 88–99 87–100 32 9
10 81 77–86 76–87 10 92 87–98 86–99 30 10
11 80 76–86 75–86 9 91 86–97 85–98 27 11
12 79 75–85 74–85 8 90 85–96 84–97 25 12

SAMPLE,
13 78 74–84 73–85 7 89 84–95 83–96 23 13
14 77 73–83 72–84 6 88 83–94 82–95 21 14
15 76 72–82 71–83 5 87 82–93 81–94 19 15
16 76 72–82 71–83 5 86 81–92 80–93 18 16

NOT FOR
Figure17 4.2  Example
75 71–81
of Score Ranges for70–82
90% and 95% 5 Confidence 85 Intervals 81–91 80–92 16 17
18 74 70–80 69–81 4 84 80–90 79–91 14 18
19 73 69–79 68–80 4 83 79–89 78–90 13 19
Percentile Ranks
20 73 69–79 68–80 4 82 78–88 77–89 12 20

ADMINISTRATION
21 72 68–78 67–79 3 81 77–87 76–88 10 21
The KLPA–3 provides age-based percentile ranks for the standard score. Percentile ranks should not be confused with
22 71 67–77 67–78 3 80 76–86 75–87 9 22
the percentage
23 of71
correct answers.
67–77 Figure 4.1 shows percentile
67–78 3 ranks
79 in the normal
75–85 distribution.
74–86 Percentile8 ranks indicate
23
an individual’s
24 standing
70 in relation
66–76 to others
66–77of the same 2 age and sex 78 in the normative
74–84 sample.
73–85 They reflect
7 points on 24a
score25scale at or below
69 a given score, based
66–75 65–76on the normative
2 sample.
77 The mean 73–83standard score of 1006 is at the 50th
72–84 25

OR RESALE
26
percentile rank for68all ages. KLPA–3
65–74 64–75 ranks range
percentile 2 from < 76 72–82
0.1 to > 99.9, with 50 as71–83
the median. 5An individual 26who
27 a percentile
achieves 67 rank of64–73
25 performs 63–74
as well as or1better than 75 25% of other 71–81 70–82
individuals of the same5age and sex 27in
28 66 63–72 62–73 1 74 70–81 69–82 4 28
the normative sample. The percentile rank also indicates that 75% of the individuals in the normative sample obtained
29 66 63–72 62–73 1 73 69–80 68–81 4 29
better30scores. 65 62–71 61–72 1 72 68–79 67–80 3 30
Unlike31standard scores,
65 62–71 ranks61–72
percentile do not have equal1 71 and they
intervals, 67–78
cluster near66–79 3
the 50th percentile (i.e., 31
the
32 64 61–70 60–71 1 71 67–78 66–79 3 32
median). Consequently, for an individual who scores within the average range, a change of 1 or 2 total raw score points
33 63 60–69 59–70 1 70 66–77 65–78 2 33
may produce
34 a large
62 change59–68in his or her58–69
percentile rank.1 Conversely, 69 for an individual
65–76 who scores very 2low or very 34
64–77
high on
35 the KLPA–3,61 a change of 1 or 2 raw
58–67 57–68score points 0.5is not likely
68 to produce a large change
64–75 63–76 in his or2her percentile 35
rank. 36
Table 4.1 shows
61 percentile58–67ranks that correspond0.5
57–68 to selected67standard 63–74
scores and their
62–75distances1from the mean, 36
37
expressed 60
in standard 57–66units. 56–67
deviation 0.4 66 62–73 61–74 1 37
38 60 57–66 56–67 0.4 65 62–72 61–73 1 38
39 59 56–65 55–66 0.3 65 62–72 61–73 1 39
Age Equivalents
40 58 55–64 54–65 0.3 64 61–71 60–72 1 40
41 57 54–63 53–64 0.2 63 60–70 59–71 1 41
The KLPA–3 provides age equivalents that indicate the age at which a given score is equal to the median performance.
42 56 53–62 52–63 0.2 62 59–69 58–70 1 42
In order
43
to derive 55
age equivalents,
52–62
the total raw score that
51–62 0.1
corresponded
61
to a58–68
standard score
57–69
of 100 was0.5identified in43
each 44
of the 49 normative
54 age groups and50–61
51–61 assigned to the 0.1 midpoint60 of that group’s
57–67 age range (e.g., 4:5 for
56–68 0.44:0–4:11). 44If
the same
45 total raw53score was identified in
50–60 two successive
49–61 0.1 age groups59 (e.g., 3:6–3:7
56–66 and 3:8–3:9),
55–67 it was 0.3 assigned to45 the
46 age group
younger 53(e.g., 3:6–3:7).
50–60 If the same
49–61 total raw 0.1 58
score was identified in55–65 54–66 age groups
three successive 46
0.3 (e.g., 3:6–3:7,
47 and 3:10–3:11),
3:8–3:9, 52 49–59
it was assigned 48–60
to the middle age 0.1 group (e.g.,
57 3:8–3:9). 54–64
If the same range of total0.2raw scores47
53–65
48 51 48–58 47–59 0.1 55 52–62 51–63 0.1 48
corresponded to a standard score of 100 in adjacent age groups (e.g., total raw scores of 18 and 19 both correspond
49 50 47–57 46–58 <0.1 54 51–62 50–63 0.1 49
50 48 45–55 44–56 <0.1 53 50–61 49–62 0.1 50
51 47 44–54 43–55 <0.1 52 49–60 48–61 0.1 51
52 46 43–53 43–54 <0.1 51 48–59 47–60 0.1 52
Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Chapter 4 ■ Test Interpretation 39
53 44 42–51 41–52 <0.1 50 47–58 46–59 <0.1 53
54 42 40–49 39–50 <0.1 49 46–57 45–58 <0.1 54

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 39 8/31/15 3:39 PM


to a standard score of 100 in adjacent age groups), the values in the range were evenly divided among the adjacent age
groups. Age equivalents for the KLPA–3 are provided in Appendix B.
Although age equivalents have been widely used and appear to be useful for describing an individual’s speech sound
skills in comparison to speech sound functioning for individuals of various ages, they are easily misinterpreted and have a
number of psychometric limitations.

Limitation 1
Age equivalents do not reflect an individual’s relative rank or standing among same age, same sex peers, and therefore
lack the precise information that within-group norms provide about rank within an age range. You can make judgments
about an individual’s relative standing only by using standard scores or percentile ranks (Lawrence, 1992; McCauley,
2001; McCauley & Swisher, 1984; Wiig, Secord, & Semel, 2004).
Because it does not give information about the range of scores for individuals in a specific age group, an age equivalent
does not give you the information you need to determine if an individual has a speech sound disorder.

Limitation 2
Small raw score changes may result in large changes in age equivalents. Large differences between age equivalents
and an individual’s chronological age may be obtained, but interpreting the individual’s speech sound skills as being
far below or far above average for his or her age may be unwarranted because the range of average scores overlaps at

SAMPLE,
adjacent age groups. For example, Child A, a female age 5:4 obtains a KLPA–3 raw score of 10 that corresponds to an
age equivalent of 4:6–4:7. Child B, a female also age 5:4, obtains a KLPA–3 raw score of 14 that corresponds to an age
equivalent of 4:2–4:3. Examining age equivalents alone might lead to the conclusion that Child A’s skills are 4 months
more advanced than Child B’s. In fact, Child A’s and Child B’s standard scores are 90 and 86 respectively, both in the

NOT FOR
average range compared with their same age, same sex peers.

Limitation 3

ADMINISTRATION
An extreme age equivalent (much lower or much higher than chronological age) does not signify that the individual’s
speech sound functioning resembles that of the extreme age group in every way. In addition, age equivalents at the most
extreme ends of the age range are particularly difficult to interpret because they may only be reported as being less than
2:0 or up to 7:0–7:2.

OR RESALE
Because of these limitations, it is not recommended that you use age equivalents as the primary scores for diagnosis.
Standard scores or percentile ranks must be used to compare an individual’s performance to others of the same age
and sex. Diagnostic decisions should be made from a review of the individual’s standard scores in conjunction with
background and qualitative information such as speech samples, primary caregiver/teacher interviews, and observations
of the individual in different communication contexts. Placement decisions or diagnoses should never be based on age
equivalents only or on any one type of score.

Calculating Percent Delay From an Age Equivalent


Some states and agencies that require quantitative criteria for placing preschool children in special services provide
speech-language pathologists with the option of expressing delay as a percentage of chronological age (Bleile, 2004).
Calculating percent delay is most often done by dividing the age at which an obtained raw score is the median (the age
equivalent) by the child’s chronological age, multiplying by 100, and then subtracting the percentage from 100. Thus, a
child who is 4:5, with an age equivalent of 3:10–3:11 would either be performing at 89% ability or be considered to have
a 11% delay. If the child’s school district required a 25% delay as the criterion for receiving special services, a child with
a 11% delay would not be recommended for services on the basis of the calculated percent delay. Due to the problems
inherent in using age equivalents, it is recommended that you avoid using percent delay to qualify children for services,
and instead use standard scores or percentile ranks.

40 Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Chapter 4 ■ Test Interpretation

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 40 8/31/15 3:39 PM


Interpretation of KLPA–3 Results
One method for interpreting the severity of a speech sound disorder is by referring to the deviation of an individual’s scores
from the mean of 100. Table 4.2 presents descriptions of the severity of speech sound disorders based on KLPA–3 results.

Table 4.2  Guidelines for Describing the Severity of a Speech Sound Disorder
Test Score Classification Relationship to Mean
115 and above Above Average +1 SD and above
86 to 114 Average Within +1 to –1 SD
78 to 85 Borderline/Marginal/At-Risk Within –1 to –1.5 SD
71 to 77 Low/Moderate Within –1.5 to –2 SD
70 and below Very Low/Severe –2 SD and below

Scores within 1 SD of the mean (between 86 and 114) are considered average. Scores below –1 SD indicate that the
individual is demonstrating below average to very low speech sound production skills relative to other individuals of
the same age and sex in the normative sample, which may or may not significantly impact intelligibility of speech and
participation in academic and/or social activities.
In addition to providing normative scores, the KLPA–3 provides a means for comparing an individual’s sound change

SAMPLE,
production against the standard of correct production. By comparing the phonetic transcriptions of these two
productions and the individual’s use of Core Phonological Processes, you can determine:
■■ which sound changes are used by the individual and under what conditions, or in which contexts,

NOT FOR
■■ the degree of consistency of an individual’s overall pattern of phonological process usage as well as his or her use
of individual processes,
■■ in what word position the individual has the most occurrences of phonological processes (i.e., initial, medial, final),
what types of phonological processes are observed most frequently for the individual (i.e., manner, place,

ADMINISTRATION
■■

reduction, voicing),
■■ if the individual uses phonological processes that affect a particular subset of sounds whether the sounds occur
frequently or infrequently

OR RESALE
■■ if the individual’s sound changes occur only on sounds that typically appear later in speech sound development
as opposed to sounds at many different developmental levels,
■■ if the individual’s “inconsistent” sound changes occur because of the influence of other consonants in the word or
adjacent vowels,
■■ if vowels are altered and whether there are patterns to these alterations, and
■■ whether the individual is using a relatively high average number of processes per word (PPW).

Interpreting Percent of Occurrence Scores


Percent of occurrence scores indicate an individual’s standing not in relation to his or her peers, but in relation to the
total number of items on the assessment tool. The percent of occurrence indicates the percentage of actual phonological
process occurrences out of the total possible occurrences on the KLPA–3. Percent of occurrence scores are given for
five reasons:
■■ They are a conventional index in phonological process analyses.
■■ They can be obtained for both Core and Supplemental Phonological Processes and vowel alterations.
■■ They can be used for individuals outside the KLPA–3 age range because they are based on raw scores.
■■ They permit performance on the KLPA–3 to be compared with results from other phonological assessments.
■■ They are usually used to state short-term phonological objectives (e.g., individual education program).

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Chapter 4 ■ Test Interpretation 41

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 41 8/31/15 3:39 PM


Because there are no norms regarding percent of occurrence scores, these scores alone should not be used for making
diagnostic decisions about developmental phonological processes. Interpretation of these scores depends on the
judgment of the speech-language pathologist.

Effect of Interfering Processes on Percent of Occurrence Scores


If used excessively, some deletion processes (e.g., cluster simplification [CS], deletion of final consonant [DFC], and
syllable reduction [SR]) may interfere with the occurrence of one or more nondeletion processes.
Sometimes, when one phonological process is used frequently, a second phonological process has no opportunity to be
applied. For example, when DFC occurs frequently, there are few (or no) opportunities for FDV to be applied. Processes
that can block other processes include CS, DFC, DIC, DMC, and SR. When a particular phonological process is blocked,
the percent of occurrence score for the blocked process may be inappropriately low.
When an interfering process is suppressed, the percent of occurrence scores of some of the previously blocked
processes may increase because they have more opportunities to occur.

Case Studies
Case Study A (Female, Age 2:10)
History and Referral

SAMPLE,
A is a female age 2:10 who currently attends a private preschool/day care center. Her parents have been worried
because she is very unintelligible to friends and family. She had six middle-ear infections before she turned two years
old, which were treated with antibiotics followed by insertion of bilateral myringotomy tubes. She is no longer having the
ear infections, but is difficult to understand when she talks. Her teacher agrees and has also noticed that she doesn’t

NOT FOR
always understand or follow simple directions and seems “lost” at times. She states that A plays reasonably well with her
peers and is generally cooperative with others. She failed a recent speech screening at her preschool program and was
subsequently referred for a speech/language evaluation through the public schools.

ADMINISTRATION
Referral Questions
1. Does a full assessment confirm the recent screening results?
2. Does A have a speech/language disorder? If so, what are her strengths and weaknesses?

OR RESALE
3. What initial goals in therapy can be derived from A’s profile?

42 Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Chapter 4 ■ Test Interpretation

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 42 8/31/15 3:39 PM


Score Results
A’s hearing was screened and was found to be normal. Following the administration of GFTA–3 Sounds-in-Words, a
KLPA–3 analysis was completed. A’s GFTA–3 and KLPA–3 standard scores are presented below, along with her profile as
indicated by the KLPA–3 Consonant Analysis.

R E C O R D F O R M

Ronald Goldman and Macalyne Fristoe

A
Name: ___________________________________________________________________________
X N/A
Female
Male Grade/Ed. Level: ____________________________________ Age Calculation

___________________________________________________________
School/Agency: Small Daycare Year Month Day

English
Language Spoken in the Home: ___________________________________________
Test Date 2015 12 13
Dialect (if applicable): ______________________________________________________ Birth Date 2013 2 05

SAMPLE,
Mr. Speech-Path
Examiner: _______________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
Reason for Testing: speech sound difficulties Age 2 10 8
___________________________________________________________________________ Reminder: Do not round up to next month or year.

NOT FOR
Total
Raw Score*
Standard
Score
GFTA–3 Sounds-in-Words Score Summary
Confidence Interval
90% 95%
Percentile
Rank
Test-Age
Equivalent
Growth
Scale Value


ADMINISTRATION
114 62 59 – 66 1 < 2:0 453

OR RESALE
GFTA–3 Sounds-in-Sentences Score Summary
Confidence Interval
Total Standard Percentile Test-Age Growth
Raw Score* Score 90% A
95% N A LRank
Y S I S FEquivalent
O R M Scale Value


* Total raw score equals total number of articulation errors. See Chapter 2.
Linda Khan and Nancy Lewis
Comments: Age Calculation

A X Female u Male
Name: ______________________________________________________ u Year Month Day

Small Daycare
Grade/Ed. Level: __________ School/Agency: _________________________________________
Test Date 2015 12 13
Language(s) Spoken English
in the Home: _________________________________________________
__ Birth Date 2013 2 05
Mr. Speech-Path
Examiner: ________________________________________________________________ ____
speech sound difficulties
Reason for Testing: _____________________________________________________________ Age 2 10 8
____________________________________________________________________________ Reminder: Do not round up to next month or year.

PsychCorp is an imprint ofKLPA–3


PearsonScore
ClinicalSummary
Assessment.
Pearson Executive Office 5601 Green Valley Drive Bloomington, MN 55437
Confidence Interval
800.627.7271 www.PearsonClinical.com
*Total Raw Score Standard
Copyright Score
© 2015 90%
NCS Pearson, Inc. All 95%
rights reserved. Percentile Rank Age Equivalent

92 68 65 72 2
Warning: No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any

means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, recording, or any information storage and
retrieval system, without permission in writing from the copyright owner.
< 2:0
Pearson,
* Raw score equals total number of occurrences of scoredthe PSI logo,
phonological PsychCorp, and GFTA are trademarks in the U.S. and/or other countries
processes.
of Pearson Education, Inc., or its affiliate(s).
Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Chapter 4 ■ Test Interpretation 43
Printed in the United States of America.
Percent of Occurrence for Core Phonological Processes Vowel Alterations
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 A B C D E Product Number 0158012836
Number of Total Possible Percent of Notes:
Phonological Process Occurrences Occurrences Occurrences
Deaffrication (DF) of 8 = %
0158012836_GFTA3_RF.indd 1 7/24/15 3:04 PM
0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 43 liquids
Gliding of (GL) of 20 = % 8/31/15 3:39 PM
Consonant Analysis
Phonetic Inventory for Consonants in Single Words

Word-Initial Consonants Produced Word-Medial Consonants Produced Word-Final Consonants Produced

bm d n ŋ m
ʧt
n ŋ m n
pb ʧ t td
ŋ
kg
p b t d ʧ ʤ k g p b d ʧ ʤ k g p ʧ ʤ k

tf v ɵ ð bv ɵ ð tʃ bv ɵ ð
ts z ʃ f
ts z
ʒ f
ts z
ʃ ʒ

r w r
j th w
r
j h
r ɚ
l l l əl

Consonant Clusters: Consonant Clusters: Consonant Clusters:


p/sp, p/pl
________________________________ k/ŋk
________________________________ ________________________________
t/dr
________________________________ ________________________________ ________________________________
________________________________ ________________________________ ________________________________

Core Phonological Process Analysis

SAMPLE,
Phonological Process
Age Female Male

2:0–2:5 FDV, IV DF, FDV, IV

NOT FOR
2:6–2:11 SR SR

3:0–3:5 DFC, ST, VF DFC, VF

3:6–3:11 DF

ADMINISTRATION
4:0–4:5 STR CS, ST, STR

4:6–4:11 CS, VOC, PF PF

5:0–5:11

OR RESALE
6:0–6:11 GL

7:0–7:11 GL

8:0–8:11 VOC

A’s GFTA–3 Sounds-in-Words standard score of 62 (confidence interval of 59–66 at the 90% level) is in the very low/
severe range. A’s KLPA–3 standard score of 68 Summary of Consonant
(confidence Analysis
interval of 65–72 at the 90% level) is also in the very low/
severe range. The results, along with her history, support the assumption that A has a speech sound disorder.
• Phonetic Inventory _______________________________________________________________________________________________

A scored below the 1st percentile on the GFTA–3 (multiple sound changes, including early and late developing phonemes
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
in all• Core
positions) and theProcesses
Phonological 2nd percentile on the KLPA–3 (excessive usage of Core Phonological Processes). A used
______________________________________________________________________________________
phonological processes that are expected for a child her age, such as deletion of final consonant and stopping of
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
fricatives and affricates. A also used phonological processes that are expected to be suppressed for a child her age,
• Supplemental Phonological Processes _____________________________________________________________________________
including final devoicing and initial voicing. Her phonetic inventory was limited to some initial stops and glides, some
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
medial stops, and some final stops and nasals.
• Other Phonological Process _______________________________________________________________________________________
Recommendations and Follow-up
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
The concerns of A’s parents and teacher were confirmed by the results of the GFTA–3 and KLPA–3. A presents with a
• Processes Per Word (PPW) ________________________________________________________________________________________
speech sound disorder and would benefit from intervention. Initial goals and objectives should target (a) expansion of
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
A’s consonant inventory to include other categories of sounds (e.g., nasals, fricatives, clusters), (b) suppression of final
devoicing and initial voicing, and (c) suppression of syllable reduction in two- and three-syllable words.
It is recommended that A’s speech sound skills be reevaluated in 6 months to document progress and jrefine
KLPA–3 goals
Analysis Form and 11
objectives, if appropriate.

44 Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Chapter 4 ■ Test Interpretation


0158012844_KLPA3_AF.indd 11 8/11/15 12:27 PM

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 44 8/31/15 3:39 PM


Case Study B (Male, Age 6:3)
History and Referral
B is a male age 6:3 who is referred for a speech sound evaluation by his first grade teacher because he is difficult
to understand in single word production as well as conversational speech. He is also having difficulty with reading
instruction (sound decoding) and his teacher reports that he is falling behind his class in literacy. His daily writing journal
contains mostly drawings and little or no text. He has been an eager learner but recently seems reluctant to raise his
hand and participate. B often plays alone and shies away from peer interactions because he knows the other children
have difficulty understanding him. His kindergarten teacher reported no academic issues. B was referred to the child
study team for both speech and literacy concerns.

Referral Questions
1. Does B have a speech sound disorder in the area of phonology?
2. If a speech sound disorder in the area of phonology is present, what is B’s profile of strengths and weaknesses?
3. What intervention recommendations can be derived from B’s profile?

Score Results
Hearing screening showed normal hearing, and there is no history of middle ear problems. Following the administration of

SAMPLE,
GFTA–3 Sounds-in-Words, a KLPA–3 analysis was completed. B’s GFTA–3 and KLPA–3 standard scores are presented,
along with the percent of occurrences for the Supplemental Phonological Processes.

NOT FOR
ADMINISTRATION
R E C O R D F O R M

Ronald Goldman and Macalyne Fristoe

B
OR RESALE
Name: ___________________________________________________________________________
Female X 1
Male Grade/Ed. Level: ____________________________________ Age Calculation

This Elementary
School/Agency: ___________________________________________________________
Year Month Day

English
Language Spoken in the Home: ___________________________________________
Test Date 2015 11 10
Dialect (if applicable): ______________________________________________________ Birth Date 2009 8 6
Ms. Assess
Examiner: _______________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
Reason for Testing: Difficulty understanding his speech Age 6 3 4
at school
___________________________________________________________________________ Reminder: Do not round up to next month or year.

GFTA–3 Sounds-in-Words Score Summary


Confidence Interval
Total Standard Percentile Test-Age Growth
Raw Score* Score 90% 95% Rank Equivalent Scale Value

22 77 73 – 83 6 3:10 – 3:11 555

GFTA–3 Sounds-in-Sentences Score Summary


Confidence Interval
Total Standard Percentile Test-Age Growth
Raw Score* Score 90% 95% Rank Equivalent Scale Value


Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Chapter 4 ■ Test Interpretation 45
* Total raw score equals total number of articulation errors. See Chapter 2.

Comments:

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 45 8/31/15 3:39 PM


A N A L Y S I S F O R M

Linda Khan and Nancy Lewis


Age Calculation

B X Male
Name: ______________________________________________________ u Female u Year Month Day

1 This Elementary
Grade/Ed. Level: __________ School/Agency: _________________________________________
Test Date 2015 11 10
Language(s) Spoken English
in the Home: _________________________________________________
__ Birth Date 2009 8 6
Ms. Assess
Examiner: ________________________________________________________________ ____

Reason for Testing: Difficulty understanding his speech__


___________________________________________________________ Age 6 3 4
at school
___________________________________________________________________________ _ Reminder: Do not round up to next month or year.

KLPA–3 Score Summary

SAMPLE,
Confidence Interval
*Total Raw Score Standard Score 90% 95% Percentile Rank Age Equivalent

23 77 73 – 83 6 3:6 – 3:7

NOT FOR
* Raw score equals total number of occurrences of scored phonological processes.

Percent of Occurrence for Core Phonological Processes Vowel Alterations


Number of Total Possible Percent of Notes: None produced

ADMINISTRATION
Phonological Process Occurrences Occurrences Occurrences
Deaffrication (DF) of 8 = %

Gliding of liquids (GL) 6 of 20 = 3.0 %


Manner

OR RESALE
Stopping of fricatives and affricates (ST) 1 of 48 = 2.1 % Dialectal Influence

Stridency deletion (STR) 1 of 42 = 2.3 % Yes X No


Vocalization (VOC) 1 of 15 = 6.6 % Notes:

Palatal fronting (PF) of 12 = %


Place

Velar fronting (VF) 4 of 23 = 17.4 %


Cluster simplification (CS) 7 of 23 = 30.4 % Overall Intelligibility
Reduction

Deletion of final consonant (DFC) 3 of 36 = 8.3 % Good X Fair Poor

Syllable reduction (SR) of 25 = % Notes:

Final devoicing (FDV) of 35 = %


Voicing

Initial voicing (IV) of 33 = %

Copyright © 2015 NCS Pearson, Inc. All rights reserved.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 A B C D E Product Number 0158012844

46 Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Chapter 4 ■ Test Interpretation

0158012844_KLPA3_AF.indd 1 8/11/15 12:27 PM

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 46 8/31/15 3:39 PM


Manner Place Reduction Voicing
SUPPLEMENTAL

Processes per word


Glottal replacement

Other phonological
medial consonant
Backing to velars

Vowel alterations
Medial devoicing
Phonological Processes

initial consonant
Stopping (other)

Initial devoicing

Medial voicing
Gliding (other)

Liquidization

Deletion of

Deletion of
Affrication

processes
Frication

(PPW)
or /h/
Target Target
Sound Word ITEM
ʤ
juice 56
s
z zoo 57
s
t star 58
r
f
five 59
v
s
v seven 60
n

Subtotal 4

1 7
SAMPLE,
Subtotal 1
1 1 1 12 Subtotal 2
14 Subtotal 3

NOT FOR
+ Subtotal 4

1 1 1 1 33

ADMINISTRATION
of 151 = of 111 = of 81 = of 159 = of 124 = of 59 = of 134 = of 58 = of 27 = of 41 = of 22 = of 11 = of 82 = of 60 =

0.9 2.4 4.5 9.0


____% ____% ____% ____% ____% ____% ____% ____% ____% ____% ____% ____% ____%
.55

OR RESALE
Administration of the GFTA–3 yielded some sound changes on early developing sounds (e.g., /k/, /g/) but mostly on later
developing sounds (e.g., /r/, /l/, clusters). The KLPA–3 analysis showed moderate usage of Core Phonological Processes
(no longer appropriate for his age), as well as several Supplemental Phonological Processes that are less commonly
observed. The Core Phonological Processes with the highest percent of occurrence were: cluster simplification, deletion
of final consonant, and velar fronting. The Supplemental Phonological Processes with the highest percent of occurrence
were initial devoicing and deletion of medial consonant. B’s Phonetic Inventory for Consonants in Single Words showed
a lack of consonants in word-final position, liquids changing to glides in consonant clusters in initial position, and few
liquids or velars produced.

Recommendations and Follow-up


The concerns of B’s teacher were confirmed by the GFTA–3 and KLPA–3 results. B presents with a speech sound
disorder in the area of phonology. He would benefit from intervention comprised of the following goals: (a) suppression
of deletion of final consonant, (b) expansion of consonant cluster usage, even if inaccurate, and (c) suppression of velar
fronting, and (d) suppression of initial devoicing. B should be referred for a comprehensive academic evaluation due to his
difficulties in reading and writing instruction.

Case Study C (Female, Age 7:9)


History and Referral
C is a female age 7:9 who has received speech-language services and other special education services since the age of
three. As a young child, C’s speech production was highly unintelligible characterized by excessive use of phonological
processes, especially those involving deletion of sounds along with vowel alterations. She has a history of feeding
KLPA–3 j Analysis Form 9
Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Chapter 4 ■ Test Interpretation 47

0158012844_KLPA3_AF.indd 9 8/11/15 12:27 PM

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 47 8/31/15 3:39 PM


difficulty in infancy and drooling as a toddler. C has always performed within the average range on receptive language
measures, yet her expressive language has lagged behind. By the time C entered kindergarten, she had been diagnosed
with Childhood Apraxia of Speech (CAS). In the spring of C’s second grade school year, she was scheduled for her
three-year comprehensive re-evaluation to determine her eligibility for continued services along with strengths and needs
regarding her speech and language development.

Referral Questions
1. Does C continue to demonstrate a speech-language disorder characterized by CAS?
2. What is C’s current speech/phonological process profile with regard to the sounds in her phonetic inventory and
the phonological processes that she currently uses with frequency?
3. What recommendations can be derived for C following the assessment?

Score Results
Following the administration of GFTA–3 Sounds-in-Words, a KLPA–3 analysis was completed. The Clinical Evaluation of
Language Fundamentals (5th ed.; CELF–5; Wiig, Secord, & Semel, 2014) was also administered. C’s GFTA–3 and KLPA–3
standard scores are presented, along with the percent of occurrences for the Supplemental Phonological Processes.

SAMPLE,
NOT FOR
R E C O R D F O R M

Ronald Goldman and Macalyne Fristoe

C
ADMINISTRATION
Name: ___________________________________________________________________________
X Female 2
Male Grade/Ed. Level: ____________________________________ Age Calculation

Hometown Elementary
School/Agency: ___________________________________________________________
Year Month Day

English 2015 10 15

OR RESALE
Test Date
Language Spoken in the Home: ___________________________________________

Dialect (if applicable): ______________________________________________________ Birth Date 2008 1 2


S-L Therapist
Examiner: _______________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
Reason for Testing: difficult speech sound production Age 7 9 13
___________________________________________________________________________ Reminder: Do not round up to next month or year.

GFTA–3 Sounds-in-Words Score Summary


Confidence Interval
Total Standard Percentile Test-Age Growth
Raw Score* Score 90% 95% Rank Equivalent Scale Value

80 40 38 – 50 < 0.1 < 2:0 491

GFTA–3 Sounds-in-Sentences Score Summary


Confidence Interval
Total Standard Percentile Test-Age Growth
Raw Score* Score 90% 95% Rank Equivalent Scale Value


* Total raw score equals total number of articulation errors. See Chapter 2.

Comments:
48 Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Chapter 4 ■ Test Interpretation

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 48 8/31/15 3:39 PM


A N A L Y S I S F O R M

Linda Khan and Nancy Lewis


Age Calculation

C X Female u Male
Name: ______________________________________________________ u Year Month Day

2 Hometown Elementary
Grade/Ed. Level: __________ School/Agency: _________________________________________
Test Date 2015 10 15
Language(s) Spoken English
in the Home: _________________________________________________
__ Birth Date 2008 1 2
S-L Therapist
Examiner: ________________________________________________________________ ____

Reason for Testing: difficult speech sound production __


___________________________________________________________ Age 7 9 13
____________________________________________________________________________ Reminder: Do not round up to next month or year.

KLPA–3 Score Summary

SAMPLE,
Confidence Interval
*Total Raw Score Standard Score 90% 95% Percentile Rank Age Equivalent

59 40 38 – 50 < 0.1 < 2.0

NOT FOR
* Raw score equals total number of occurrences of scored phonological processes.

Percent of Occurrence for Core Phonological Processes Vowel Alterations


Number of Total Possible Percent of Notes: 45.1% occurrence

ADMINISTRATION
Phonological Process Occurrences Occurrences Occurrences
Deaffrication (DF) of 8 = %

Gliding of liquids (GL) 8 of 20 = 40 %


Manner

OR RESALE
Stopping of fricatives and affricates (ST) 10 of 48 = 20.8 % Dialectal Influence

Stridency deletion (STR) 6 of 42 = 14.3 % Yes X No


Vocalization (VOC) of 15 = % Notes:

Palatal fronting (PF) 1 of 12 = 8.3 %


Place

Velar fronting (VF) of 23 = %

Cluster simplification (CS) 11 of 23 = 47.8 % Overall Intelligibility


Reduction

Deletion of final consonant (DFC) of 36 = % Good Fair X Poor

Syllable reduction (SR) 22 of 25 = 88 % Notes:

Final devoicing (FDV) of 35 = %


Voicing

Initial voicing (IV) 1 of 33 = 3.0 %

Copyright © 2015 NCS Pearson, Inc. All rights reserved.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 A B C D E Product Number 0158012844

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Chapter 4 ■ Test Interpretation 49

0158012844_KLPA3_AF.indd 1 8/11/15 12:27 PM

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 49 8/31/15 3:39 PM


Manner Place Reduction Voicing
SUPPLEMENTAL

Processes per word


Glottal replacement

Other phonological
medial consonant
Backing to velars

Vowel alterations
Medial devoicing
Phonological Processes

initial consonant
Stopping (other)

Initial devoicing

Medial voicing
Gliding (other)

Liquidization

Deletion of

Deletion of
Affrication

processes
Frication

(PPW)
or /h/
Target Target
Sound Word ITEM
ʤ
1 1 s
juice 56

z zoo 57
s
t star 58
r

1 1 f
v
five 59

s
v seven 60
n

Subtotal 4

9 20
SAMPLE,
Subtotal 1
1 1 13 27 Subtotal 2
13 24 Subtotal 3
2 2
NOT FOR
+ Subtotal 4


1 1 37 73

ADMINISTRATION
of 151 = of 111 = of 81 = of 159 = of 124 = of 59 = of 134 = of 58 = of 27 = of 41 = of 22 = of 11 = of 82 = of 60 =


0.7 0.7 45.1
____% ____% ____% ____% ____% ____% ____% ____% ____% ____% ____% ____% ____%
71.7

OR RESALE
C’s receptive language skills were in the average range. Though C had incorporated gestures to facilitate her expressive
communication, her expressive language skills remained below average as measured by the CELF–5. Her speech
production continued to be difficult to understand, especially to unfamiliar listeners.
The GFTA–3 revealed multiple sound changes. On the KLPA–3 analysis, C’s phonological profile was characterized by
the frequent use of syllable reduction, cluster simplification, stopping of fricatives and affricates, and gliding of liquids.
C’s speech production contained altered vowel production 45% of the time during the KLPA–3. C demonstrated the use
of consonant harmony as her productions were influenced by the sound environment.

Recommendations and Follow-up


Based upon assessment information, C continues to demonstrate a speech sound and expressive language disorder and
would benefit from ongoing intervention. Goals and objectives should be targeted toward (a) reducing the use of syllable
reduction, (b) reducing the use of cluster simplification, and (c) expanding her consonant phonetic inventory to include
fricatives, affricates, and liquids.

KLPA–3 Analysis Form 9


j

50 Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Chapter 4 ■ Test Interpretation

0158012844_KLPA3_AF.indd 9 8/11/15 12:27 PM

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 50 8/31/15 3:39 PM


5 Development and Standardization

Development of the KLPA–3


The KLPA–3 is the third revision of the Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis, originally published in 1986. For this edition,
Pearson test developers planned the scope and development goals concurrently with those of the GFTA–3. Initial steps
included reviewing current literature pertaining to the changes in professional practice and consulting with speech-
language pathologists (SLP) who were familiar with the KLPA–2. Based on the SLPs’ feedback, the test developers, in
collaboration with the authors, clarified definitions for some of the phonological processes and redesigned the Sound
Change Booklet and Analysis Form for added usability. After each research phase, administration, recording, and scoring
directions were refined, and the item set was reduced to only those words that provided the most clinical utility.

SAMPLE,
Feedback From Test Users and Others
Pearson test developers recognized the importance of obtaining feedback from test users in order to create a version
of the KLPA–3 that would best serve their needs. Prior to beginning item development, the test developers asked SLPs

NOT FOR
from across the country who were current GFTA–2 and KLPA–2 users to provide input about the assessment. They
were invited to complete questionnaires that asked about the GFTA–2 content, with regard to target words. Following
the questionnaire, items were developed, and members from Pearson’s speech-language advisory board completed a
content review prior to the start of the pilot research. In addition, a panel of SLPs with expertise in assessment of diverse

ADMINISTRATION
populations reviewed the items for potential bias. See Table 5.1 for a list of review panel members. During the research
phases, examiners who participated in the GFTA–3/KLPA–3 data collection also were offered the opportunity to provide
specific feedback about item content, formats, and directions. The feedback provided by these SLPs shaped the design

OR RESALE
and content of the KLPA–3.

Table 5.1  KLPA–3 Content and Bias Review Panel Members

Dolores Battle, Ph.D., CCC-SLP Greta T. Tan, M.A., CCC-SLP


Professor Emeritus, SUNY Buffalo State Cupertino Union School District
Buffalo, New York Cupertino, California

Billie M. Higheagle, M.A., CCC-SLP Albert Villanueva-Reyes, Ed.D., M.Sc., CCC-SLP


First Nations Therapy Services Speech-Language Pathology Program
Skokomish Nation, Washington University of Puerto Rico
San Juan, Puerto Rico
Deborah A. Hwa-Froelich, Ph.D., CCC-SLP
Department of Communication Sciences and Disorders Carol Westby, Ph.D., CCC-SLP
Saint Louis University Bilingual Multicultural Services
St. Louis, Missouri Albuquerque, New Mexico

Janna Oetting, Ph.D., CCC-SLP Rosalyna (Lynita) Yarbrough, M.S., CCC-SLP


Department of Communication Sciences and Disorders; Davis School of Communication Sciences and Disorders
Interdepartmental Program in Linguistics Texas Christian University
Louisiana State University Fort Worth, Texas
Baton Rouge, Louisiana

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Chapter 5 ■ Development and Standardization 51

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 51 8/31/15 3:39 PM


Literature Review
The KLPA–3 development was driven by the results of a literature review on the professional roles, responsibilities, and
activities of SLPs. The research is summarized in ASHA’s Scope of Practice in Speech-Language Pathology (ASHA,
2007). In addition, a review of current research pertaining to skills and abilities that distinguish individuals with speech
sound disorders from typically developing individuals was conducted to ensure the KLPA–3 includes phonological
processes that provide clinical utility in explaining errors in speech sound production.

GFTA–3/KLPA–3 Pilot Research


The GFTA–3/KLPA–3 pilot research phase was conducted to evaluate new target items for all age ranges. An initial list of
126 target words was developed.
The GFTA–3/KLPA–3 pilot objectives were to:
■■ ensure the set of target words provided the appropriate content coverage of the speech sounds in all applicable
word positions,
■■ ensure the set of target words provided multiple opportunities to use phonological processes,
■■ ensure the target words would be familiar to a diverse population of individuals, and
■■ determine the target words to be included for the tryout research phase.

SAMPLE,
Pilot Sample
Pilot data collection was conducted from February 2013 through March 2013. A sample of 31 individuals from San
Antonio, Texas participated in the pilot study. The sample included individuals from two age groups (2:0–5:11 and

NOT FOR
7:0–17:11) and included 18 females and 13 males. The sample consisted of 6% African American individuals, 6% Asian
individuals, 27% Hispanic individuals, 45% White individuals, and 16% individuals from other racial/ethnic groups. The
sample represented four parent/caregiver education levels: 16% completed 0–12 years of school, no diploma; 39% had
a high school diploma or equivalent; 19% had some college or technical school or an associate’s degree; and 26% had a

ADMINISTRATION
bachelor’s degree or more.

Pilot Research Results


Upon review of the pilot data, test developers pared down the item set to 108 target words to be used for the tryout

OR RESALE
research phase.

Tryout Research
The GFTA–3/KLPA–3 tryout objectives were primarily focused on the sound targets for each word. Specifically, the goals
were to:
■■ evaluate how individuals who speak dialects of Standard American English (SAE) produce the target words, and
■■ determine the target words to be included for the standardization research phase.
Seventy-three ASHA certified and/or licensed SLPs in 14 states participated in the tryout data collection. Each examiner
submitted a practice test before being approved for tryout testing. Practice tests were reviewed for accuracy of
administration, recording of responses, and scoring. If there were errors on the practice test, a second practice test was
assigned and carefully reviewed when returned to Pearson.
Throughout testing, examiners received detailed written and telephone support. Newsletters featuring information about
potential testing problems and progress of the tryout research were also sent to examiners periodically during the tryout
phase. After testing, examiners completed a questionnaire about the appropriateness of content revisions and additions;
clarity of illustrations, administration directions, and scoring instructions; and ease of administration.

Tryout Sample
Tryout data collection took place from June 2013 through January 2014. A sample of 316 children ages 2:0–8:11 from
across the country participated in the tryout study. All individuals spoke English well or very well. Individuals may have

52 Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Chapter 5 ■ Development and Standardization

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 52 8/31/15 3:39 PM


spoken a second language; however, English was their most frequently spoken language and the language of instruction
in their classrooms.
The Tryout sample included 159 females and 157 males. The sample consisted of 18.7% African American individuals,
2.8% Asian individuals, 26.9% Hispanic individuals, 35.1% White individuals, and 16.5% individuals from other racial/
ethnic groups. The sample represented four parent/caregiver education levels: 19.6% had 0–12 years of school, no
diploma; 23.1% had a high school diploma or equivalent; 29.4% had some college or technical school or an associate’s
degree; and 27.8% had a bachelor’s degree or more. Distribution of the sample by geographic region was 11.1% from the
Midwest, 29.7% from the Northeast, 42.1% from the South, and 17.1% from the West. Individuals who had a history of
speech sound disorders or hearing difficulties were not included in the sample.

Statistical Analysis
During analysis of the tryout data, all target words in the Sounds-in-Words test were submitted to statistical procedures
such as CTT and IRT analyses. The percentage of individuals who passed each item (p values), as well as the item-total
correlations, were calculated for each age group.

Tryout Research Results


Target words were revised or deleted if they were difficult to elicit or confusing to score. The test developers consulted
with the KLPA–3 authors to ensure that the remaining target words continued to provide the appropriate content

SAMPLE,
coverage of the speech sounds in all applicable word positions and provided opportunities for common phonological
processes to occur. Based on the results of the tryout research phase and authors’ input, test developers pared down the
item set to 74 target words to be used for standardization.

NOT FOR
Standardization Research
The purpose of the KLPA–3 standardization research phase was to collect data from a sample representative of the U.S.
population to determine:

ADMINISTRATION
■■ the appropriateness of including the KLPA–2 phonological processes in the KLPA–3,
■■ the most appropriate set of phonological processes for calculating standard scores, and
■■ normative scores with a sample that reflects the current diversity in the U.S. population.

OR RESALE
In this research phase, examiners collected the data digitally. Once Pearson received the data, phonological processes
were applied to the captured responses via a pre-programmed automated scoring system.
Standardization data collection began in November 2014 and continued through May 2015. One hundred ninety-eight
ASHA and/or licensed SLPs in 39 states participated in the standardization data collection. They met the same
qualifications as described for the tryout. In addition, the examiners participated in a training on how to administer the
GFTA–3 Sounds-in-Words test using a digital platform.
Throughout testing, examiners received detailed written and telephone support. Newsletters featuring information
about potential testing problems and progress of the standardization research were also sent to examiners periodically
during the standardization phase. At the conclusion of standardization, the examiners were asked to complete a
questionnaire about the appropriateness of content; clarity of administration, recording, and scoring directions; and ease
of administration.

Standardization Sample
Standardization data collection included a normative sample of 1,500 individuals. Additional samples were collected for
reliability and validity studies. For the youngest age bands (2:0–4:11), the normative sample included 100 individuals for
each 6-month age group. For the age bands 5:0–5:11 and 6:0–6:11, the normative sample included 200 individuals for
each 12-month age group. For the age bands 7:0–7:11 and 8:0–8:11, the normative sample included 100 individuals for
each 12-month age group. For the age bands 9:0–10:11 and 11:0–12:11, the normative sample included 100 individuals.
For the oldest age band (13:0–21:11), the normative sample included 100 individuals. In addition to the age requirement,
it was required that the data be collected based on sex with half the sample female and half the sample male to allow for
norms development based on sex. The sample was stratified by age, sex, race/ethnicity, geographic region, and parent/

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Chapter 5 ■ Development and Standardization 53

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 53 8/31/15 3:39 PM


caregiver education level. The sample was matched to a population in the United States as described in the U.S. Census
Bureau’s American Community Survey 2013 1-year period estimates (Ruggles et al., 2010 [reported census data are
from 2013]).
Table 5.2 reports the demographic characteristics of the sample, along with the US census figures. For sampling
purposes, the ethnic categories of American Indian, Eskimo, Aleut, and Pacific Islander were collapsed and combined
into the Other category. Each individual in the normative sample was identified by his or her parents/caregivers
designation (or himself or herself in the case of individuals age 18 years or older) as belonging to one of the listed racial/
ethnic groups.
tab_1_demo

Table 5.2 Distributionofofthe
4.2 Distribution theGFTA–3/KLPA–3
GFTA–3/KLPA–3Normative
NormativeSample
SamplebybyParent
ParentEducation
Education
Level, Level, Race/Ethnicity,
Race/Ethnicity, and Geographic
and Geographic Region Region
Normative sample US population
(%) (%)
Parent Education Level
0–12 years of school, no diploma 6.5 11.3
High school diploma or equivalent 18.7 22.4
Some college or technical school, associate's degree 38.5 34.8
Bachelor's degree or more 36.4 31.6

SAMPLE,
Race/Ethnicity
African American 11.4 14.7
Asian 2.1 3.7

NOT FOR
Hispanic 22.3 20.1
Other 7.1 5.8
White 57.1 55.6

ADMINISTRATION
Region
Midwest 23.6 22.3
Northeast 13.1 16.1
South 40.5 38.5
West

OR RESALE 22.9 23.1

The GFTA–3/KLPA–3 normative sample was stratified according to the following four parent/caregiver education
level categories:
■■ 0–12 years of school, no diploma
■■ High school diploma or equivalent
■■ Some college or technical school, associate’s degree
■■ Bachelor’s degree or more
To determine parent/caregiver educational level, the highest grade completed by the individual’s primary parent/caregiver
was used as the stratification variable. Parent/caregiver education level was also used for individuals age 18 or older.

54 Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Chapter 5 ■ Development and Standardization

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 54 8/31/15 3:39 PM


To be included in the normative sample, individuals had to meet the following requirements.
■■ The individual was able to take the test in the standard manner without modifications.
■■ The individual was typically developing in the area of speech sound ability.
■■ English was the individual’s most frequently used language. The individual spoke and understood English well or
very well.
■■ Bilingual speakers who had learned English and another language simultaneously were included in the sample if
both languages were learned in the United States.
Approximately 13.2% of the sample was reported to be bilingual either by the parents/caregivers or by the individuals
(ages 18–21). Of the group identified as bilingual, the following languages were reported: Filipino/Tagalog, French,
German, Greek, Hebrew, Hmong, Hungarian, Kanda, Mandarin and other Chinese languages, Portuguese, Potawatomi
and Cherokee, Russian, Spanish, Tamil, Telugu, and Vietnamese.
Six percent of the normative sample were reported with an educational placement as gifted or talented. In addition,
20% were reported with the following diagnoses: approximately 8% speech and/or language disorder; 4% attention
deficit disorders (inattentive, hyperactive, and combined); 3% learning disability; 2% intellectual disability, pervasive
developmental disorder, down syndrome, or developmental delay; and less than 1% each emotional disturbance,
cerebral palsy, central auditory processing disorder, visual impairment, autistic spectrum disorder, or other diagnoses
not specified.

SAMPLE,
Standardization Research Results
During analysis of the standardization data, all target items were submitted to statistical procedures such as CTT, IRT,
and logistic regression analysis. Items were analyzed for difficulty, discrimination, and reliability of scoring. In addition,

NOT FOR
items were omitted if examiners reported that they were difficult to elicit and/or score. Specific to the KLPA–3, items were
reviewed for the possible phonological processes that could occur with each sound change in the target word. Based on
statistical analyses and examiners’ feedback, a final item set of 60 words was determined.

ADMINISTRATION
Coding of Phonological Processes in the KLPA–3
The KLPA–3 is based on systematically coding the sound changes that occur when a target word is misarticulated.
The coding process began with the authors identifying the phonological processes to be included in the KLPA–3. Each

OR RESALE
phonological process was mapped to the possible sound changes that could occur with each consonant or consonant
cluster in the target words for the final item set. The resulting sound change map (i.e., Sound Change Booklet) was used
to code all responses collected from the normative sample with applicable phonological processes (see Figure 5.2).

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Chapter 5 ■ Development and Standardization 55

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 55 8/31/15 3:39 PM


Single Additional
Target Target Syllable Cluster Consonant Sound
Item Word Sound Del Del Del p b t d k g ʔ m n ŋ f v ɵ ð s z ʃ ʒ ʧ ʤ l r w j h Vowel Changes
    DIC IDV LAB IDV \ BK BK IDV LAB (+)NAS BK IDV FRC IDV FRC IDV FRC IDV FRC IDV PAL LIQ LIQ GL(Oth) GL(Oth) BK    
LAB IDV GR (+)NAS (+)NAS FRC LAB FRC NDEN FRC (+)STR FRC PAL PAL (+)STR PAL LAB PAL IDV
d
LAB (+)STR NDEN (+)STR PAL (+)STR (+)STR AFF FRC
(+)STR (+)STR AFF
8 duck ʌ                                                            

56
    DFC LAB FV VF VF \ FV GR FV VF FV FRC FV FRC FV VF VF FRC FV (+)STR FV VF FV          
Single LAB FV LAB FV (+)NAS LAB FRC NDEN FRC FRC FV (+)STR FRC PAL (+)STR FV LIQ Additional
Target k
Target Syllable Cluster Consonant Sound
(+)NAS (+)NAS (+)STR LAB NDEN (+)STR FRC PAL (+)STR AFF PAL LIQ PAL
Item Word Sound Del Del Del p b t d k g ʔ m n ŋ f v
(+)STR ɵ ð s z
(+)STR ʃ ʒ
PAL ʧ ʤAFF l r w j h Vowel Changes
    CS
DIC LAB
IDV IV
LAB VF
IDV VF
\ \
BK IV
BK GR
IDV IV
LAB VF
(+)NAS IV
BK FRC
IDV IV
FRC FRC
IDV IV
FRC VF
IDV VF
FRC FRC
IDV IV
FRC (+)STR
IDV IV
PAL VF
LIQ IV
LIQ IV
GL(Oth) IV
GL(Oth) FRC
BK    
LAB LAB IV IDV GR LAB
(+)NAS IV LAB
(+)NAS FRC FRC
LAB NDEN
FRC FRC
NDEN IV
FRC (+)STR (+)STR
FRC FRC
PAL PAL (+)STR IV LIQ
PAL GL(Oth)
LAB GL(Oth)
PAL IDV
dk (+)NAS (+)NAS (+)STR LAB NDEN FRC AFF PAL LIQ PAL LAB PAL
LAB (+)STR NDEN (+)STR PAL (+)STR (+)STR AFF FRC

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 56
(+)STR (+)STR (+)STR (+)STR PAL AFF AFF
8 duck ʌ   DIC
  CS
  IDV
  ST(Oth)
  IDV
  ST(Oth)
  IDV
  BK
  IDV
  (+)NAS
  (+)NAS
  BK
  IDV
  FRC
  IDV
  FRC
  IDV
  FRC
  IDV
  FRC
  ST(Oth)
  ST(Oth)
  LIQ
  LIQ
   \ PAL
  IDV
     
    DFC ST(Oth)
LAB FV ST(Oth)
VF ALV
VF BK
\ ST(Oth)
FV GR
GR FV ALV
VF (+)NAS
FV FRC
FRC (+)STR
FV FRC
FRC NDEN
FV FRC
VF (+)STR
VF FRC
FRC (+)STR
FV IDV
(+)STR (+)STR
FV ALV
VF PAL
FV     BK
     
w LAB ALV FV ST(Oth) ST(Oth) LAB FV (+)NAS (+)STR
LAB FRC NDEN
NDEN FRC (+)STR
FRC ALV
FV (+)STR PAL
(+)STR FRC (+)STR
PAL PAL
(+)STR FV LIQ FRC
9 quack k ALV PAL AFF
(+)NAS (+)NAS (+)STR LAB NDEN (+)STR FRC PAL
PAL (+)STR AFF PAL LIQ PAL
(+)STR (+)STR PAL AFF AFF
æ       
CS  
LAB  
IV  
VF  
VF \   
IV  
GR  
IV VF   
IV FRC   
IV  
FRC  
IV  
VF VF  FRC   
IV  
(+)STR  
IV  
VF  
IV  
IV  
IV  
FRC      
    DFC LAB FV
LAB VF VF
IV \ FV GR FV
LAB VF
IV FV
(+)NAS FRC
LAB FV
FRC FRC
NDEN FV
FRC VF
FRC VF
IV FRC
(+)STR FV
FRC (+)STR
PAL FV
(+)STR VF
IV FV
LIQ  
GL(Oth)  
GL(Oth)      
k LAB FV LAB FV LAB FRC NDEN FRC FRC FV (+)STR FRC PAL (+)STR FV LIQ
k (+)NAS (+)NAS (+)NAS (+)STR LAB NDEN (+)STR FRC PAL (+)STR AFF PAL LIQ PAL LAB PAL
(+)NAS (+)NAS LAB
(+)STR (+)STR NDEN FRC
(+)STR (+)STR PAL (+)STR
PAL AFF PAL
AFF LIQ PAL
  DIC CS IDV ST(Oth) IDV ST(Oth) IDV BK IDV (+)NAS (+)NAS BK IDV (+)STR
FRC IDV FRC IDV (+)STR
FRC IDV FRC AFF
PAL ST(Oth) ST(Oth) LIQ LIQ \ PAL IDV    
  DIC LAB
ST(Oth) IV \
ST(Oth) IV
ALV BK IV
ST(Oth) GR IV IV
ALV IV
(+)NAS FRC IV
(+)STR FRC IV
NDEN FRC IV
(+)STR FRC IV
(+)STR IDV IV
PAL (+)STR IV
ALV IV
PAL IV IV BK    
wt LAB ALV ST(Oth) BK ST(Oth) LAB (+)NAS BK LAB
(+)STR FRC NDEN FRC (+)STR FRC
ALV PAL
(+)STR PAL
FRC (+)STR PAL LIQ LIQ GL(Oth) GL(Oth) FRC
9 quack (+)NAS (+)NAS (+)STR LAB NDEN ALV (+)STR (+)STR
PAL PAL AFF
PAL (+)STR
AFF PAL LAB PAL
(+)STR (+)STR AFF AFF
SR
e
æ                                                            
    DMC
DFC MDV
LAB \
FV MDV
VF ALV
VF BK
\ BK
FV GR (+)NAS
FV (+)NAS
VF BK
FV FRC FRC
FV FRC FRC
FV FRC
VF FRC
VF FRC FRC
FV MDV (+)STR
(+)STR FV LIQ
VF LIQ
FV GL(Oth)
  GL(Oth)
  BK
     
te LAB ALV FV MDV MDV LAB ALV
FV (+)NAS MDV
LAB (+)STR
FRC MDV
NDEN NDEN
FRC MDV
FRC (+)STR
FV MDV
(+)STR (+)STR
FRC (+)STR
PAL AFF
(+)STR ALV
FV PAL
LIQ PAL FRC
10 table kb
teb (+)NAS (+)NAS (+)STR LAB NDEN NDEN (+)STR ALV
FRC (+)STR
PAL PAL
(+)STR AFF PAL LIQ PAL MDV
bəl (+)STR ALV (+)STR PAL PAL PAL AFF
ə    
DIC  
LAB  
IV \   
IV BK   
IV GR   
IV  
IV  
IV FRC   
IV  
FRC  
IV FRC   
IV FRC   
IV  
PAL  
IV  
IV  
IV  
IV  
IV  
BK    
əl
    LAB
FDV ST(Oth) FDV ST(Oth) FDV BK LAB
FDV (+)NAS (+)NAS BK LAB
FDV FRC NDEN
FDV FRC (+)STR
FDV FRC PAL
FDV FRC (+)STR
FDV PAL LIQ
\ LIQ
PAL GL(Oth)
  GL(Oth)
  FRC
  VOC  
t
ST(Oth) LAB ST(Oth) BK ST(Oth) GR (+)NAS
LAB (+)NAS (+)STR
FRC LAB
(+)STR FRC NDEN FRC (+)STR (+)STR
FRC PAL AFF
PAL (+)STR PAL LAB PAL
l
LAB ST(Oth) ST(Oth) (+)STR (+)STR
LAB NDEN (+)STR PAL (+)STR (+)STR AFF
SR LAB (+)STR AFF
e                                                          
  DIC
DMC DEN
MDV DEN
\ IDV ST(Oth)
MDV ALV BK BK IDV
GR \
(+)NAS ALV
(+)NAS BK IDV
FRC FRC IDV
FRC FRC IDV
FRC FRC IDV
FRC FRC IDV
MDV (+)STR LIQ LIQ GL(Oth) GL(Oth) BK    
te IDV ST(Oth)
ALV ALV MDV
IDV ST(Oth) MDV GR ALV (+)NAS MDVFRC (+)STR FRC
MDV NDEN FRC
MDV (+)STR MDV
FRC (+)STR (+)STR PAL
AFF ALV PAL PAL IDV
FRC
10 table m
b
teb ALV ST(Oth) ST(Oth) (+)STR NDEN (+)STR ALV (+)STR PAL PAL
AFF AFF
PAL FRC
MDV

Figure 5.2  Sample Page From the Sound Change Booklet


SR ALV PAL AFF
PAL
bəl
əʌ                                                          
əl
mʌŋ   CS
  FDV
MDV ST(Oth) FDV VF
VF ST(Oth) FDV  DEN
BK FDV
DEN (+)NAS VF
LAB (+)NAS \
BK FRC
FDV FRC FRC
FDV FRC VF
FDV VF
FRC FRC
FDV FRC MDV (+)STR
FDV PAL VF
\ LIQ
PAL GL(Oth)
  GL(Oth)
  FRC
   
VOC  
MDV ST(Oth)
ST(Oth) LAB ST(Oth) BK ST(Oth) GR LAB (+)NAS MDV
FRC (+)STR MDV
FRC NDEN FRC FRC
(+)STR MDV
FRC (+)STR
PAL (+)STR
PAL AFF
(+)STR LIQ PAL PAL MDV
11 monkey ŋl mʌŋk
LAB ST(Oth) ST(Oth) MDV
ST(Oth) (+)STR LAB NDEN MDV
(+)STR (+)STR (+)STR
PAL (+)STR AFF
PAL (+)STR PAL
AFF
ki DMC LAB (+)STR PAL
(+)STR PAL
AFF
i   CS
DIC LAB
DEN LAB
DEN VF VF
IDV ST(Oth) BK\ MV
BK GR
IDV LAB
\ VF
ALV MV
BK FRC
IDV FRC FRC
IDV FRC VF
IDV VF
FRC FRC
IDV FRC (+)STR
IDV MV
(+)STR VF
LIQ LIQ
LIQ GL(Oth) GL(Oth) FRC
BK    
ŋki IDV MV ST(Oth) ALVMV IDV ST(Oth) GR MV MV (+)NAS FRC LAB
LAB (+)STR NDEN
FRC MV
NDEN FRC FRC
(+)STR (+)STR
FRC MV
(+)STR PAL
(+)STR (+)STR
PAL LIQ
ALV MV
PAL LAB MV
PAL IDV
k
m
ALV ST(Oth) ST(Oth) (+)NAS (+)NAS (+)STR MV NDEN NDEN (+)STR MV
ALV PAL
(+)STR (+)STR
PAL AFF
PAL PAL
AFF MV PAL MV PAL FRC
SR (+)STR ALV (+)STR PAL PAL AFF AFF
ʌi                                                          
mʌŋ   DIC
CS MDV ST
ST ST(Oth) ST
VF ST
VF ST
  ST
DEN ST
DEN IV
LAB IV
VF IV
\ LAB
FRC IV
FRC NDEN
FRC IV
FRC (+)STR
VF IV
VF (+)STR
FRC IV
FRC ST
MDV ST
(+)STR IV
VF IV
LIQ IV
GL(Oth) IV
GL(Oth) \
FRC    
LAB IV
ST(Oth) LAB ALV IV
MDV ST(Oth) IV GR LAB (+)NAS (+)NAS (+)STR LAB
MDV (+)STR MDV NDEN ALV
FRC (+)STR
FRC MDV (+)STR AFF
(+)STR IV
AFF LIQ GL(Oth)
PAL GL(Oth) GL(Oth)
PAL MDV
11 monkey ŋh mʌŋk ALV (+)STR AFF ALV LIQ LAB PAL
LAB LAB ST(Oth) ALV MDV (+)NAS ALV (+)STR (+)STR
LAB NDEN MDV (+)STR (+)STR PAL AFF PAL
ki DMC LAB (+)STR PAL PAL (+)STR PAL
SR PAL
i CS LAB LAB VF VF \ MV GR LAB VF MV FRC FRC FRC FRC VF VF FRC FRC (+)STR MV VF LIQ GL(Oth) GL(Oth) FRC    
æ ŋki       MV    MV        MV  MV   
(+)NAS LAB  LAB   
NDEN MV  FRC  FRC   
(+)STR MV   
PAL  
(+)STR  
LIQ MV   
LAB MV       
k hæm
hammer   DMC DEN DEN MDV ST(Oth) BK BK GR (+)NAS
\ (+)NAS
ALV BK (+)STR
FRC MV
FRC FRC NDEN
FRC (+)STR
FRC MV
FRC PAL
FRC (+)STR
FRC AFF
MDV PAL
(+)STR MV
LIQ PAL
LIQ GL(Oth) PAL
MV GL(Oth) BK    
12 hæ MDV ST(Oth) ALV MDV ST(Oth) MDV MDV (+)STR MDV NDEN MDV (+)STR PAL
MDV (+)STR (+)STR AFFPAL ALV PAL PAL FRC
m
i mɚ         ALV
    ST(Oth)
    ST(Oth)
        (+)STR
    NDEN
    (+)STR
  ALV
  (+)STR
  PAL
  PAL
  AFF
          MDV
     
SAMPLE,

ALV PAL AFF


NOT FOR
ɚ   DIC ST ST ST ST ST ST ST IV IV IV LAB IV NDEN IV (+)STR IV (+)STR IV ST ST IV IV IV IV \    
    FDV
LAB ST(Oth)
IV FDV
ALV ST(Oth)
IV FDV BK
IV FDV
GR (+)NAS BK
LAB (+)NAS (+)NAS FDV
(+)STR FRC
LAB FDV FRC
NDEN FDV
ALV FRC
(+)STR FRC
FDV (+)STR FDV
AFF (+)STR
IV ALV
LIQ \
GL(Oth)  
GL(Oth)  
GL(Oth)   VOC  
h ST(Oth) LAB ST(Oth) ALV BK ST(Oth) GR LAB
(+)NAS ALV (+)NAS FRC (+)STR FRC NDEN FRC (+)STR
ALV FRC (+)STR (+)STR AFF ALV LIQ LAB PAL
ɚ
LAB ALV ST(Oth) ST(Oth) (+)STR LAB NDEN (+)STR ALV (+)STR PAL
AFF (+)STR PAL
SR LAB ALV PAL

12 hammer
æ

m
hæm


ɚ
 
 

 
 
DMC

 
 
DEN
MDV
 
DEN
   
MDV ST(Oth)
ST(Oth) ALV
ALV

FDV ST(Oth) FDV ST(Oth) FDV


 
BK
OR RESALE
 
BK
MDV ST(Oth) MDV
ST(Oth)

BK
 
GR

ST(Oth)
 
\

FDV (+)NAS (+)NAS BK


 
ALV

FDV
 
BK

FRC
 
FRC
MDV
 
FRC
4 (+)STR
(+)STR
 
FRC
MDV
NDEN

FDV
 
FRC
NDEN

FRC
 
FRC
 
FRC
MDV (+)STR
(+)STR
ALV
FDV
ALV

FRC
 
FRC FRC
 

MDV (+)STR (+)STR


(+)STR
PAL
FDV
PAL

FRC
PAL
AFF
 
MDV (+)STR
PAL
AFF

FDV (+)STR
   
LIQ
ALV

ALV
 
LIQ
PAL

\
 

 
 
GL(Oth) GL(Oth)
PAL

 
 
BK
FRC
MDV

 
 
 

VOC
 
 

 
ST(Oth) LAB ST(Oth) ALV BK ST(Oth) GR LAB ALV (+)NAS FRC (+)STR FRC NDEN FRC (+)STR FRC (+)STR (+)STR AFF
ɚ
0158012887_KLPA3_SC.indd 4 LAB ALV ST(Oth) ST(Oth) (+)STR LAB NDEN (+)STR ALV (+)STR AFF 8/6/15 12:26 PM
LAB ALV

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Chapter 5 ■ Development and Standardization


4
ADMINISTRATION

0158012887_KLPA3_SC.indd 4 8/6/15 12:26 PM

8/31/15 3:39 PM
Developing the KLPA–3 Scoring System
To develop the KLPA–3 scoring system, all instances of sound changes in the responses from the normative sample were
coded for phonological processes. Frequencies for each phonological process by age group was generated. Based on
this initial analysis, a set of phonological processes was identified as developmental. Then Rank Correlation of Observed
Responses and Predicted Probabilities analysis (ROC) was used to investigate the clinical utility of different combinations
of the phonological process usage. Using this procedure, 12 Core Phonological Processes were selected to calculate the
standard score.
Phonological processes that occurred less frequently are not used to calculate the standard score; however, these
supplemental and other phonological processes provide qualitative information. Their definitions are provided in
Chapter 2 of the Manual, and space is available on the Analysis Form to record their occurrences.

Scores Provided by the KLPA–3


The following normative data are reported for the KLPA–3 in the Manual:
■■ Appendix A—Standard scores, confidence intervals, and percentiles for the normative sample by age and sex
■■ Appendix B—Age equivalents for the normative sample by age and sex
■■ Appendix C—Suppression and occurrence of the phonological processes in the normative sample by age

SAMPLE,
Standard Scores
The normative data presented in Appendix A are reported in 2-month intervals for ages 2:0–6:11, 3-month intervals for
ages 7:0–8:11, 6-month intervals for ages 9:0–10:11, 1-year intervals for ages 11:0–13:11, and 2-year intervals for ages
14:0–21:11 for females and males separately. A standard score presents an individual’s performance on an assessment in

NOT FOR
terms of the deviation (distance) from the average performance (mean) of all individuals assessed of the same sex in the
same age group in standard deviation units.
KLPA–3 normative information was developed using the method of Inferential Norming (Wilkins, Rolfhus, Weiss, & Zhu,

ADMINISTRATION
2005; Zhu & Chen, 2011). Various moments of distribution (i.e., means, standard deviations, and skewness) of each
score were calculated for each age group of the normative sample. The moments were plotted across age, and various
polynomial regressions (ranging from linear to 4th degree polynomials) were fit to the moment data. Prediction function
for each moment was selected based on consistency with underlying theoretical expectations and the pattern of growth

OR RESALE
curves observed in the normative sample. For each score, the selected functions were used to derive estimates of
the population moments. The estimated moments were then used to generate theoretical distributions for each of the
reported normative age groups, yielding mid-point percentiles for each raw score. These percentiles were converted to
standard scores with a mean of 100, a standard deviation of 15, and a range of 40 to 140. The irregularities associated
with sampling error were eliminated by smoothing. Appendix A of the Manual presents the standard score equivalents of
the total raw scores for each age group.
Note. The total raw scores for most assessments represent the number of correct responses produced. However,
KLPA–3 total raw scores indicate the number of instances of Core Phonological Processes used (i.e., sound change) by
the individual. Therefore, for the KLPA–3, a higher standard score represents a lower total raw score with fewer instances
of phonological processes used while a lower standard score represents a higher total raw score with more instances of
phonological processes used.

Age Equivalents
Age equivalents were derived to provide the age at which a given score is equal to the median performance. In order
to derive age equivalents for a test, the total raw score that corresponded to a standard score of 100 was identified in
each of the 49 normative age groups and assigned to the midpoint of that group’s age range (e.g., 4:5 for 4:0–4:11). If
the same total raw score was identified in two successive age groups (e.g., 3:6–3:7 and 3:8–3:9), it was assigned to the
younger age group (e.g., 3:6–3:7). If the same total raw score was identified in three successive age groups (e.g., 3:6–3:7,
3:8–3:9, and 3:10–3:11), it was assigned to the middle age group (e.g., 3:8–3:9). If the same range of total raw scores
corresponded to a standard score of 100 in adjacent age groups (e.g., total raw scores of 18 and 19 both correspond

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Chapter 5 ■ Development and Standardization 57

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 57 8/31/15 3:39 PM


to a standard score of 100 in adjacent age groups), the values in the range were evenly divided among the adjacent age
groups. Age equivalents corresponding to raw scores are presented in Appendix B of this Manual.

Percent of Occurrence
Percent of occurrence scores indicate an individual’s standing not in relation to his or her peers, but in relation to the total
number of items on the assessment. Percent of occurrence scores were calculated for each Core Phonological Process
by dividing the number of errors for each phonological process by the total possible opportunities for the phonological
process to occur and multiplying that number by 100.

Suppression of Phonological Processes


The KLPA–3 provides the developmental trends of phonological process suppression as determined by the performance
of the normative sample. Each case in the normative sample was analyzed for suppression of the Core Phonological
Processes, with suppression defined as a phonological process occurring 15% or less in an individual’s speech sound
productions. Then, the data were analyzed to determine the ages by which 90% of the normative sample were able to
suppress each phonological process.

SAMPLE,
NOT FOR
ADMINISTRATION
OR RESALE

58 Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Chapter 5 ■ Development and Standardization

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 58 8/31/15 3:39 PM


6 Evidence of Reliability and Validity

When using a standardized, norm-referenced measure such as the KLPA–3, you must be confident that the scores
obtained are reliable and valid indicators of the skill area that is being measured. The statistical properties of an
assessment tool provide evidence to support the score interpretations and intended uses. This results in greater
confidence in intervention planning.
Psychometric properties that are critical to interpreting scores include reliability and validity. Reliability in scores is
demonstrated through reliability coefficients (including internal consistency, test-retest stability, and inter-rater reliability),
standard errors of measurement (SEM), and confidence intervals. KLPA–3 validity is demonstrated by providing evidence
based on test content, response processes, relationship with the previous edition, and special group studies. The studies
reported in this chapter provide evidence of the reliability and validity of the KLPA–3 as a measure of speech sound

SAMPLE,
ability in the area of phonology in children, adolescents, and young adults.

Evidence of Reliability

NOT FOR
The reliability of an assessment tool refers to its accuracy, consistency, and stability of scores across repeated testing
under identical situations (Anastasi & Urbina, 1997; Sattler, 2008). Although this theoretical situation can never be attained
absolutely, various estimates of reliability can be obtained in practice.

ADMINISTRATION
The difference between an individual’s hypothetical true score and obtained score is called measurement error. A
reliable assessment tool has relatively small measurement error and provides consistent scores within and across
administrations. The reliability of a score should always be considered when interpreting an individual’s obtained scores
and when comparing differences between his or her scores on multiple occasions. The reliability of the KLPA–3 was

OR RESALE
evaluated using test-retest stability, internal consistency, and inter-scorer agreement.

Evidence of Internal Consistency


Internal consistency is a measure of how consistently the items of an assessment tool measure one construct. Internal
consistency reliability coefficients are used to describe the homogeneity of the items in an assessment tool. Many
assessment tools report reliability using the split-half method, but this method is not appropriate for the KLPA–3 due
to the structure and distribution of the items evaluated. That is, item distribution does not follow a linear progression
of difficulty. For example, within a target word such as seven, the /n/ is an early developing sound so phonological
processes associated with the /n/ (i.e., DFC) may not occur whereas the /s/ and /v/ are later developing sounds and
are more likely to incur sound changes with applicable phonological processes. Therefore, the internal consistency of
the KLPA–3 score was examined using coefficient alpha. Coefficient alpha is based on the intercorrelation among all
comparable parts of the same test (i.e., all phonological processes that are identified with sound changes in the item
set). The reliability coefficients represent a measure of uniformity or homogeneity of items throughout the test and are
calculated using the variance of the test scores (in this case, number of phonological processes used for each target
sound) and the variance of the dichotomously scored items (i.e., the number of phonological processes used across all
target sounds).
The computation of reliability coefficients required a complete item set for each individual. Because all individuals in
the normative sample were prompted to say all target words and produce all sounds which were then all subsequently
analyzed for phonological processes using the KLPA–3, a complete item set was available for each individual.

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Chapter 6 ■ Evidence of Reliability and Validity 59

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 59 8/31/15 3:39 PM


Standard Error of Measurement and Confidence Intervals
Reliability coefficients are useful for evaluating an assessment tool’s consistency of measurement for a group of
individuals, but they are not directly applicable to the interpretation of individual scores. The standard error of
measurement (SEM) provides an estimate of the amount of error in an individual’s observed score. The SEM is inversely
related to the reliability of an assessment tool, so the greater the reliability, the smaller the SEM, and the greater
the confidence in the precision of the observed score. The SEM for a single score indicates the variability expected
in obtained scores around the individual’s theoretical true score. In other words, the SEM indicates how much an
individual’s scores may vary if his or her ability were repeatedly measured with the same instrument under identical
circumstances. Because of this, the SEM of an assessment tool helps users to gain a sense of how much an individual’s
observed score is likely to differ from his or her true score. The SEM is commonly expressed in standard deviation
(SD) units.
The SEM is calculated with the formula:

where SD is the theoretical standard deviation unit of the scale and rxx is the reliability coefficient of the scale. The
reliability coefficients reported in Table 6.1 and the standard score SD of 15 were used to compute the SEM.

SAMPLE,
The SEM can also be used to calculate a confidence interval around an individual’s observed score. Confidence intervals
establish the range within which the score would occur if the assessment tool were utilized for the same individual again
(i.e., the range of scores within which the individual’s true score is likely to be).
Confidence intervals at 90% and 95% for the KLPA–3 standard score are reported in Appendix A. Suggestions for

NOT FOR
interpreting score results using confidence intervals are presented in Chapter 4.
Table 6.1 presents the internal reliabilities and the SEM of the KLPA–3 score in standard score units by sex and age and
by the overall normative sample. As the data in Table 6.1 indicate, the average alpha coefficient of the KLPA–3 is excellent

ADMINISTRATION
for both females and males, demonstrating a high degree of reliability.

OR RESALE

60 Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Chapter 6 ■ Evidence of Reliability and Validity

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN_wkg_ch6.indd 60 8/31/15 4:43 PM


tab_4_reliability_sem
Table 6.1 Reliability Coefficients and Standard Errors of
Table 5.3 Reliability
MeasurementCoefficients andand
for Female Standard Errors of
Male Normative
Measurement
Samples for Female and Male Normative
Samples
Age Female Male
2:0–2:5 alpha .98 .98
2:6–2:11 alpha .98 .99
3:0–3:5 alpha .97 .91
3:6–3:11 alpha .94 .96
4:0–4:5 alpha .95 .97
4:6–4:11 alpha .94 .92
5:0–5:11 alpha .96 .93
6:0–6:11 alpha .96 .95
7:0–7:11 alpha .93 .95
8:0–8:11 alpha .84 .92
9:0–10:11 alpha .81 .90
11:0–21:11 alpha .88 .87

SAMPLE,
Overall alpha .94 .95
2:0–2:5 SEM 2.12 2.12
2:6–2:11 SEM 2.12 1.50

NOT FOR
3:0–3:5 SEM 2.60 4.50
3:6–3:11 SEM 3.67 3.00
4:0–4:5 SEM 3.35 2.60
4:6–4:11 SEM 3.67 4.24

ADMINISTRATION
5:0–5:11 SEM
6:0–6:11 SEM
7:0–7:11 SEM
3.00
3.00
3.97
3.97
3.35
3.35

OR RESALE
8:0–8:11 SEM 6.00 4.24
9:0–10:11 SEM 6.54 4.74
11:0–21:11 SEM 5.20 5.41
Overall SEM 4.02 3.75

The average reliability coefficients (rxx) were calculated using Fisher’s z transformation and are the average across age
ranges (Silver & Dunlap, 1987; Strube, 1998). These internal consistency reliability coefficients and SEMs were used to
determine the confidence intervals listed in the normative tables in Appendix A.

Evidence of Test-Retest Stability


Another way of estimating the reliability of an assessment tool is to examine its test-retest stability. Test-retest stability
is the correlation between test and retest scores. To examine retest stability, the individual is given the same test twice,
each time under conditions that are as similar as possible. The individual is not expected to perform exactly the same
way in the two assessment sessions. For example, score differences could be due to differences in the examiner’s
consistency in perceiving and recording differences between target sounds and the individual’s speech sound production
as well as in the examiner’s application of phonological processes underlying those differences. Traditionally, the time
interval between the two assessment sessions is as short as possible to minimize changes in the individual, yet long
enough for any practice or memory effects to dissipate.

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Chapter 6 ■ Evidence of Reliability and Validity 61

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 61 8/31/15 3:39 PM


The KLPA-3 test-retest stability was evaluated in a study in which a sample of individuals were administered the GFTA–3
Sounds-in-Words test on two separate occasions. The KLPA–3 phonological process usage analysis scores for each
administration were applied and then compared. The sample used to measure the stability of KLPA–3 scores over time
included 58 individuals ages 2:0–7:11 with a mean age of 4.3 years. The sample included 32 females and 26 males. The
sample consisted of 15.5% African American individuals, 1.7% Asian individuals, 15.5% Hispanic individuals, 63.8%
White individuals, and 3.5% individuals of other races/ethnic origins. The sample represented three parent/caregiver
education levels: 13.8% had a high school diploma or equivalent, 29.3% had some college or technical school or
associate’s degree, and 56.9% had a bachelor’s degree or more.
After being tested as part of the standardization study, these individuals repeated the test either the same day or within
21 days (mean of 2.6 days), with both tests administered by the same examiner. Because speech sound production is a
learned skill and also a physical skill based on phonation in the respiratory cycle and articulatory movements (Bernthal
& Bankson, 2004), readministering the GFTA–3 on the same day was allowed with automated phonological process
analysis occurring subsequent to each administration. Using the scores from the phonological process analysis of the
test and retest, the KLPA–3 test-retest stability was estimated using Pearson’s product-moment correlation coefficient for
all ages included in the sample. The means and SDs of the standard score are presented in Table 6.2. The table reports
the correlation coefficients corrected for the variability of the normative sample (Allen & Yen, 2002; Magnusson, 1967).
The table also reports the standard differences (i.e., effect sizes) between the first and second analysis scores. The
standard difference was calculated using the mean score difference of the phonological processes between the scores
on the two testing sessions divided by the pooled SD (Cohen, 1988).

SAMPLE,
As the data in Table 6.2 indicate, the KLPA–3 score possesses excellent stability across time. The data also indicate the
mean retest scores are the same as the scores from the first testing
tab_3_retestStability

NOT FOR
Table 6.2  Test-Retest Stability
Table 5.2 Test-Retest Stability
First testing Second testing
Standard
Mean SD Mean SD r Corrected r difference

ADMINISTRATION
KLPA–3 102.9 10.8 102.8 11.2 .87 .93 –0.01

Evidence of Inter-Scorer Agreement

OR RESALE
The KLPA–3 is scored objectively using the Sound Change Booklet. However, scoring of phonological processes requires
accurate transcription of the sound changes for each target word and understanding of which specific phonological
processes apply to the sound changes.
For the inter-scorer study, a team of seven scorers used sound change responses from the GFTA–3 Sounds-in-Words
test that were captured during the standardization data collection phase. Scorers analyzed the recorded sound changes
and matched each sound change to the corresponding phonological process(es). Each phonological process was
counted as 1 point for purposes of calculating a total raw score (i.e., the total number of phonological processes across
all items). To ensure the accuracy of the KLPA–3 in identifying phonological processes related to sound changes, each
protocol was scored twice independently; once by the trained scorer using the Sound Change Booklet and once by a
pre-programmed automated system (developed for the Q-global reporting system). The KLPA–3 inter-scorer agreement
is computed as the percent of absolute agreement in the judgment of phonological process usage between the two
scorers (the trained scorer and the automated scoring system).
Inter-scorer reliability coefficients were calculated according to appropriate intraclass correlation procedures (McGraw &
Wong, 1996; Shrout & Fleiss, 1979). Total test raw scores were used in the analysis. As the data in Table 6.3 indicate inter-
scorer reliabilities were excellent for the KLPA–3.

62 Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Chapter 6 ■ Evidence of Reliability and Validity

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN_wkg_ch6.indd 62 9/18/15 12:55 PM


tab_6_interrater

Table
Table 6.3  RaterAgreement
5.7 Rater Agreementfor
forCore
CoreProcesses
Processes
Core processes Rater agreement
Manner
Deaffrication (DF) 0.97
Gliding of liquids (GL) 1.00
Stopping of fricatives and affricates (ST) 1.00
Stridency deletion (STR) 1.00
Vocalization (VOC) 0.99
Place
Palatal fronting (PF) 0.98
Velar fronting (VF) 0.97
Reduction
Cluster simplification (CS) 1.00
Deletion of final consonant (DFC) 1.00
Syllable reduction (SR) 0.96
Voicing

SAMPLE,
Final devoicing (FDV) 0.98
Initial voicing (IV) 0.99

NOT FOR
Overall 1.00

Evidence of Validity

ADMINISTRATION
Evidence of an assessment tool’s validity refers to the degree to which specific data, research, or theory supports that
an assessment measures the concepts it purports to measure and is applicable to its intended population (AERA, APA, &
NCME, 2014). The validity of an assessment tool is demonstrated by providing evidence to support the assessment tool

OR RESALE
scores’ interpretations and uses.
The evidence supporting the validity of the KLPA–3 was derived during the concurrent development of the GFTA–3
and KLPA–3; therefore, validity findings should be considered within this context. The KLPA–3 purports to measure the
application of phonological processes when evaluating articulation errors with consonant and consonant cluster sounds.
The validity of the KLPA–3 is supported by evidence based on test content, response processes, its relationship with the
previous edition, and the performance of a speech sound disorder (SSD) group.

Evidence Based on Test Content


An examination of the relationship between the content of an assessment tool and the construct it is intended to
measure provides an important source of evidence about the validity of the scores. Validity evidence related to the
assessment content is supported when the content areas being measured are accepted as relating to the proposed
construct (content relevance), and when the content areas measured by the assessment tool are accepted to be an
adequate sampling of these areas (content coverage). The content of assessment tools used with individuals must also
appropriately reflect developmental aspects of the concepts being measured. Inappropriate content (both construct-
related and social appropriateness), item wording, or item construction (administration rules and wording of instructions)
may confound the interpretation and usefulness of assessment tool scores.
The KLPA–3 provides a method for analyzing the phonological processes associated with an individual’s misarticulation
of consonant and consonant cluster sounds. Evidence of validity based on the KLPA–3 content was gathered in
numerous ways, including: literature review; users’ feedback; and expert review and suggestions about the phonological
processes that the KLPA–3 should address, as well as the breadth and appropriateness of the analysis and item

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Chapter 6 ■ Evidence of Reliability and Validity 63

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN_wkg_ch6.indd 63 9/18/15 12:56 PM


coverage. Descriptions of the literature review, user surveys, and content, bias, and item reviews are described in
Chapter 5.

KLPA–3 Content and Scope


Like the previous edition, the content construction of the KLPA–3 builds upon and extends the content of the GFTA–3.
The content design of the GFTA–3 enables the evaluation of speech sound abilities in the area of articulation. The content
design of the KLPA–3 extends this evaluation by enabling the analysis of speech sound abilities in the area of phonology.
Through concurrent development of the KLPA–3 with the GFTA–3, the goal of the content construction was to ensure
that target words provide adequate coverage of the sounds in Standard American English (SAE) so that there are multiple
opportunities to use the Core Phonological Processes in the entire set of target words. Thus, the KLPA–3 analysis of
phonological processes adequately covers the different possible sound changes that may occur for consonants and
consonant clusters. Twenty-three of the 25 SAE consonants are included in the KLPA–3 as a result of final item decisions.
The two that are not included are /ʍ/ and /ʒ/. These sounds occur less frequently in SAE and consequently have a lower
intervention priority than the other consonants. Twenty-three of the more commonly occurring consonant clusters and
25 multisyllabic words provide opportunities to note cluster simplification and syllable reduction, respectively; both
phonological processes are developmental processes and occur frequently. The addition of multiple occurrences of
specific sounds on the GFTA–3 also facilitates an expanded KLPA–3 analysis of phonological processes.
The KLPA–3 measures the occurrence of phonological processes during the production of single words rather than
connected speech. Even though individuals are likely to make more sound changes and apply phonological processes

SAMPLE,
more frequently during connected speech than in producing single words, productions of single target words may be
compared in a consistent manner. Comparisons using connected speech are more difficult because the words are more
likely to be inconsistent from sample to sample (or analysis to analysis).

NOT FOR
Evidence Based on Response Processes
The concept of response process refers to communication and cognitive skills used or behaviors engaged in by the
individual to respond to the items presented. Evidence of validity was gathered through empirical and qualitative

ADMINISTRATION
examination of response processes during the concurrent research phases of the KLPA–3 and the GFTA–3. Steps in
these phases included the analyses of administration, elicitation, comprehension by the individual, recording, scoring,
and interpretation procedures which ensure that the target sounds are being effectively elicited. Detailed descriptions of

OR RESALE
the development phases of the KLPA–3 are presented in Chapter 5.
As part of the concurrent development phases, analysis of individuals’ response processes consisted of pilot-testing
items in small groups to determine if the modified or newly developed items elicited the target sounds. The individuals
who participated in pilot testing were asked to provide feedback about specific target words.
Also during the pilot phase, examiner interpretations of behaviors and scores were informally evaluated. Test developers
reviewed the pilot test protocols to determine how items were presented, how individuals responded, and how responses
were scored and subsequently how responses were analyzed for phonological process patterns. Refinements to the
administration directions and target words were made based on this review and examiners’ recommendations.
Examiners participating in the tryout and standardization phases completed a practice case before being approved to
continue with data collection. Practice cases provided information about which directions needed to be modified for
the next research phase (standardization) or final product. Examiners completed questionnaires at the end of tryout
and standardization, providing further information for refining administration directions. A review of item p-values at the
tryout and standardization phases provided information about item ordering relative to expected trends in speech sound
abilities across age groups. In addition, decisions on item selection took into consideration the adequate sampling of
phonological processes when sound changes were made.
Evidence that the KLPA–3 is a good measure of speech sound abilities in the area of phonology is provided by the
developmental progression of total raw scores (i.e., the total number of phonological processes used in the production
of sounds in initial, medial, and final position). Generally, due to the relatively direct relationship between correct and
incorrect articulation with underlying phonological processes, developmental trends in speech sound production in the
area of phonology align with trends in the area of articulation. Construct validity evidence is provided by the relationship
of the KLPA–3 with the GFTA–3.
64 Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Chapter 6 ■ Evidence of Reliability and Validity

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 64 8/31/15 3:39 PM


The ability to correctly articulate the consonant and consonant cluster sounds begins in infancy and continues through
early childhood, with the greatest increase in ability occurring during the toddler and preschool years. Most individuals
who are developing speech sounds normally can articulate all consonant sounds by age 8. Similarly, since the use of
phonological processes is age related, scores on the KLPA–3 would be expected to decrease as an individual matures.
It follows then that the KLPA–3, which purports to measure speech sound ability in the area of phonology should
demonstrate this developmental pattern (i.e., difference in total raw scores by age). Mean raw scores, as measured by
the number of occurrences of the phonological processes, should decrease with chronological age, demonstrating rapid
decline (fewer instances of phonological process usage as articulation ability grows) in the early years and little or no
change (in phonological process usage accompanying mastery of articulation ability) in later years.
An analysis of the mean raw scores, as measured by the number of occurrences of the phonological processes
throughout the age range, shows that KLPA–3 adheres to the historical National Speech and Hearing Survey (Hull,
Mielke, Willeford, & Timmons, 1976). Overall, the developmental trend remains consistent, with steady decreases in
mean raw scores as measured by number of occurrences of the phonological processes throughout the age range, with
greater rates of decline occurring from ages 2 to 8. The greatest changes in mean raw scores occur between the ages
2 to 8 years with phonological process and articulation mastery by age 9. After age 8, most individuals use few or no
phonological processes. These results support the construct validity of the KLPA–3.
Developmental order A general order of phonological process suppression was established for the standardization
sample. This information is important to understanding the individual’s phonological process profile. Each phonological

SAMPLE,
process has a different rate of suppression; that is, some phonological processes are typically suppressed before others.
The order of suppression of the Core Phonological Processes was determined examining the rate of suppression of the
normative sample for each process. Phonological processes were each judged to be suppressed when 90 percent of the
entire normative sample had suppressed that process. Suppression is defined as the phonological process occurring

NOT FOR
15% or less in an individual’s speech sound production. Table C.1 shows the ages at which the core phonological
processes were suppressed.
Reading down the table reveals the general pattern of early to late development, with final devoicing, initial voicing, and
syllable reduction being suppressed early by both females and males while gliding of liquids appears to be one of the

ADMINISTRATION
most difficult or the last phonological process to be suppressed. As Table C.1 also notes, females and males in the
KLPA–3 normative sample present with different patterns for suppression of phonological processes.

OR RESALE
Evidence Based on Relationships With Other Variables
Understanding how an assessment tool relates to other assessments designed to measure the same or similar
constructs provides additional evidence of a test’s validity. The KLPA–3 was compared to the Khan-Lewis Phonological
Analysis (2nd ed.; KLPA–2; Khan & Lewis, 2002) to demonstrate the similarities and differences in the interpretation of
these two measures.

Correlation With the KLPA–2


The KLPA–3 and KLPA–2 are designed to analyze phonological processes with regard to speech sound ability in
individuals ages 2:0–21:11. Scores on the two assessment tools should be similar because the two assessments measure
similar content.
In evaluating the relationship between the KLPA–3 and KLPA–2, it is important to consider that there is partial item
overlap for some of the items. Practice effects differ by assessment tool and may result in higher or lower means
depending on the order of administration. However, score comparisons between these two editions of the KLPA should
be minimally impacted by factors that may influence the correlation of the initial analysis score and the subsequent
analysis score such as the length of time between (GFTA) testing, structural differences between the two KLPA versions,
and reliability of the analysis scores (Bracken, 1992; Strauss, Spreen, & Hunter, 2000).
In the study of the relationship between the KLPA–3 and KLPA–2, scores from 56 individuals in the standardization
sample (ages 4:0–12:11) were selected. KLPA–3 and KLPA–2 scores were paired based on their respective GFTA–3 and
GFTA–2 administrations using a counter-balanced design. Approximately 50% of the sample completed the GFTA–3 first
and the other half completed the GFTA–2 first. Test sessions were completed either on the same day or up to 31 days

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Chapter 6 ■ Evidence of Reliability and Validity 65

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 65 8/31/15 3:39 PM


apart (mean = 2 days). Sound productions recorded from the two GFTA administrations were then analyzed using the
corresponding KLPA scoring system. The KLPA–3 standard score was correlated with the KLPA–2 standard score.
Based on the design and application of the KLPA–3 and KLPA–2, it was anticipated that there would be a high positive
correlation between the standard scores in both editions even though the KLPA–3 normative population differed from
that of the KLPA–2. A higher percentage of the GFTA–3/KLPA–3 normative sample indicated they were a bilingual
speaker than was reported by the GFTA–2/KLPA–2 normative sample. Changes to scoring procedures in the GFTA–3
include counting dialectal productions as correct.
Correlations were computed separately for each order of administration in a counterbalanced design and corrected for
the variability of the KLPA–3 normative sample (Brennan, 2006; Guilford & Fruchter, 1978). The values in the Mean and
SD columns are the average of the means and SDs of the two administration orders. The average correlation coefficient
across both administration orders was obtained using Fisher’s z transformation. The standard difference (effect size)
is the difference of the two analysis score means divided by the square root of the pooled variance, computed using
Cohen’s (1996) Formula 10.4.
tab_5_klpa3_klpa2_validity

Table 6.4 
5.8 Correlations
CorrelationsBetween
BetweenKLPA–3
the KLPA–3 and KLPA–2
and KLPA–2 Scores
Scores
KLPA–3 KLPA–2
Standard
Mean SD Mean SD r Corrected r difference
Standard score 99.4 17.3 103.1 10.2 .76 .74 0.26

SAMPLE,
As expected, the phonological process analysis scores have positive correlations. Despite changes in the scoring of the
GFTA–3, and the different sample characteristics on which the norms are based, the scores are highly correlated and
the effect size is small. This indicates that the KLPA–3 and KLPA–2 measure similar speech sound abilities in the area

NOT FOR
of phonology.
Although the mean scores for KLPA–3 and KLPA–2 are similar, there is a slight mean score decrease in the KLPA–3 score
over the KLPA–2 score. The score change may be due to differences in the normative samples and the guidelines for

ADMINISTRATION
diagnosis of a speech sound disorder.
Mean score differences may be attributed to the greater number of elicited sound production opportunities that can be
sampled and analyzed in the KLPA–3 versus those analyzed in the KLPA–2. Because the GFTA–3 provides a greater

OR RESALE
number of opportunities to produce target sounds than the GFTA–2, the KLPA–3 in turn provides a greater number
of opportunities for analysis of phonological processes. In other words, where the KLPA–2 allowed scores for only 61
individual phonemes in initial, medial, and final word positions and 16 consonant clusters in initial word position, the
KLPA–3 allows for the analysis of phonological processes for 123 individual phonemes, 23 consonant clusters, and
25 syllable components across 60 items, in their respective sound positions. Consequently, analyzing all instances of
consonants and consonant clusters instead of a select few results in slightly lower KLPA–3 standard scores. That is, if
both were administered today, it is more likely that an individual who is not developing speech skills normally will have a
lower standard score (i.e., a greater number of sound changes) on the KLPA–3 than on the KLPA–2.

Evidence Based on Special Group Studies


Speech-language pathologists evaluate a variety of individuals for evidence of a speech sound disorder in the area of
phonology that may warrant appropriate interventions. Some of these individuals will exhibit developmental delays only
in speech while others may exhibit global impairments in language, cognitive development or delayed development
in multiple behavioral domains. Many individuals who will be evaluated with the KLPA–3 and subsequently receive
intervention will be diagnosed with a speech sound disorder (SSD).
The KLPA–3 is designed to help identify varying degrees of speech sound impairment in the area of phonology among
these individuals. Other individuals with pronounced language disorders and other deficits, such as intellectual disability,
hearing loss, or autism spectrum disorder (ASD), may come to the attention of the speech-language pathologists.
The KLPA–3 is not designed to diagnose these conditions or syndromes, but it may be sensitive to the speech sound
difficulties in the area of phonology exhibited by individuals in these clinical groups.

66 Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Chapter 6 ■ Evidence of Reliability and Validity

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN_wkg_ch6.indd 66 9/18/15 12:37 PM


Individuals Diagnosed With a Speech Sound Disorder
The ASHA (1993) ad hoc committee on Service Delivery in the Schools has defined a speech sound disorder as:
■■ a speech sound disorder is an impairment of the articulation of speech sounds, fluency, and/or voice. Specifically,
an articulation disorder is the atypical production of speech sounds characterized by substitutions, omissions,
additions or distortions that may interfere with intelligibility; while the area of phonology focuses on the sound
system of a language and the rules that govern the sound combinations, relative to the form of language.
The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (5th ed.; DSM–5; APA, 2013) diagnostic criteria for speech
sound disorder include:
■■ Problems with speech sound production are persistent and result in poor intelligibility or disrupt effective
verbal communication
■■ Difficulty with speech sound production limits effective communication that impairs social interaction, academic
achievement, or performance in the workplace.
■■ Symptoms begin in an early developmental period.
■■ The speech sound difficulties are not attributable to another condition, either congenital or acquired. (APA, 2013,
p. 44)
The exact number of individuals diagnosed with speech sound disorders at any given time is difficult to ascertain. For
individuals ages 5–7, most widely cited prevalences range anywhere from 2% to 25% (Law, Boyle, Harris, Harkness,&

SAMPLE,
Nye, 2000). Base rates for individuals receiving special education services under the classification of speech and
language disorder may differ from the base rate in the general population. The National Center for Education Statistics
(2012) stated that 22% of individuals, ages 3–21 and classified as having speech or language impairments, received
special education services in 2009–2010.

NOT FOR
Individuals identified with speech sound disorders are at risk for long-term academic and social difficulties. Longitudinal
research of individuals identified as having speech sound disorders document an increased risk for delays in pre-literacy
skills including phonological awareness (Preston & Edwards, 2010; Raitano Pennington, Tunick, Boada, & Shriberg, 2004;

ADMINISTRATION
Sices, Taylor, Freebairn, Hansen, & Lewis, 2007) and reading and spelling difficulties (Gosse, Hoffman, & Invernizzi, 2012;
Overby et al., 2012; Rvachew, 2007). For individuals with speech sound disorder and language impairment, additional
areas of concern include writing difficulties, overall poor academic achievement, and other learning disabilities that
are more persistent (Lewis, et al., 2015). These concerns contribute to diminished outcomes in adulthood (Johnson,

OR RESALE
Beitchman, & Brownlie, 2010). Studies show that a few individuals with early speech sound disorders do not resolve their
speech sound difficulties and continue to have diminished success in social relationships, educational and economic
advancement (Carrigg, Baker, Parry, & Ballard, 2015). However, speech sound difficulties typically are not persistent
and resolve by around age 8. Individuals with speech sound difficulties were less likely to have a persistence of speech
deficits and those who demonstrated improved speech sound functioning after intervention also exhibited gains in other
domains of academic functioning (Johnson, Beitchman, & Brownlie, 2010; Johnson et al., 1999). These studies emphasize
the significant impact that a speech sound disorder has on individuals, and that early intervention and successful
treatment may produce improved functioning in multiple domains.
A study of individuals diagnosed with speech sound disorder was completed as part of the concurrent validation of the
KLPA–3 and the GFTA–3. A sample of 54 individuals, ages 4:0–8:11 and diagnosed with speech sound disorders, was
tested and their sound change responses were analyzed as part of the KLPA–3 standardization validity research. The
age group for this study was specifically selected to reflect the age range of individuals who are most likely to receive
intervention services. The individuals in this study were recruited from speech-language pathologists who were providing
services in multiple sites across the United States.

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Chapter 6 ■ Evidence of Reliability and Validity 67

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN_wkg_ch6.indd 67 8/31/15 4:52 PM


Demographic
tab_2_clindemo characteristics for this special group study are provided in Table 6.5.

Table 6.5 
5.1 Demographic
DemographicCharacteristics
Characteristicsofofthe
theGFTA–3/KLPA–3
Speech Sound
Speech Sound
Disorder Disorder Sample
Sample
Speech sound
disorder sample
Sex
Female 25.9
Male 74.1
Parent Education Level
0–12 years of school, no diploma 20.4
High school diploma or equivalent 14.8
Some college or technical school, associate's degree 44.4
Bachelor's degree or more 20.4
Race/Ethnicity
African American 1.9
Asian —
Hispanic 16.7
Other
White
Region
SAMPLE, 11.1
70.4

NOT FOR
Midwest 48.1
Northeast 5.6
South 46.3

ADMINISTRATION
West —

The participants in the speech sound disorder study met specific inclusionary criteria. Each participant:
■■ Was diagnosed with a speech sound disorder (i.e., articulation, phonological disorder) as evidenced by a standard

OR RESALE
score of 77 or below on a standardized measure. The standardized test(s) must have been administered within the
last 6 months for ages 4:0-4:11 and within the last 12 months for ages 5:0-8:11.
■■ Was enrolled in speech services at the time of participating in the study.
■■ Was able to take the test in a standard manner without modifications.
■■ Was a monolingual English speaker or if a bilingual speaker, spoke and understood English very well. (Individuals
who spoke English as a second language were not included.)
■■ Had intact vision or corrected vision.
■■ Had normal hearing; those whose hearing was corrected could not exceed 10% of the total sample.
Of the 54 clinical cases, speech-language pathologists reported using the following assessments to qualify individuals as
speech sound disordered: 85.1% used GFTA–2, 11.1% used Clinical Assessment of Articulation and Phonology (2nd ed.;
CAAP-2; Secord & Donohue, 2014), 1.9% used Hodson Assessment of Phonological Patterns (3rd ed.; HAPP-3; Hodson,
2004), and 1.9% used LinguiSystems Articulation Test (LAT; Bowers & Huisingh, 2010).
Forty-nine of the individuals were reported to have a diagnosis of speech sound disorder in articulation, 4 were reported
to have a speech sound disorder in phonology, and 1 was reported to have both an articulation and phonology disorder.
Seven of the individuals in the sample were also reported to have an additional educational placement or diagnosis,
including apraxia, hearing impairment, attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder, a learning disability, an expressive and/or
receptive language disorder, or a language delay.
A matched control sample was selected such that each individual in the speech sound disorder group was matched
to an individual with typically developing speech sound production ability from the normative sample based on age,

68 Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Chapter 6 ■ Evidence of Reliability and Validity

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 68 8/31/15 3:39 PM


race/ethnicity, parent/caregiver education level, and sex. An individual with typical speech sound ability was defined as
an individual who had not previously been diagnosed as having a speech sound disorder and was not currently receiving
speech and language services.
Group comparison statistics are presented in Table 6.6 with means and SDs, and standard differences of the KLPA–3
standard scores. The standard difference (Cohen’s d) is the effect size, which expresses the difference between two
scores in SD units. This allows for comparison of discrepancy scores across assessments. The effect size is computed
as the difference of the two assessment means divided by the square root of the pooled variance (Cohen, 1988). Effect
sizes of 0.50 are considered moderate, and those of 0.80 and above are considered large.
tab_7_MatchART
TABLE 6.6  Mean Performance of the Speech Sound Disorder Group and the Nonclinical Matched Sample
Table 5.10 Mean Performance of the Speech Sound Disorder Group and the Nonclinical Matched Sample
Speech sound disorder Matched control
Standard
Mean SD Mean SD Difference t-value p-value difference
KLPA–3 60.0 19.7 99.6 13.0 39.61 11.97 <0.1 2.37

As reported in Table 6.6, the effect size was large for the KLPA–3 score. These results highlight the ability of the KLPA–3
to discriminate between typically developing individuals and those with speech sound disorders in the area of phonology.

Diagnostic Accuracy

SAMPLE,
Another means of evaluating the clinical utility of an assessment tool is to analyze its ability to accurately identify
individuals who have a specific clinical condition of interest and to rule out that diagnosis. Specific to the KLPA–3, the
clinical condition of interest is speech sound disorder (SSD) in the area of phonology. Because classifying individuals

NOT FOR
as having a speech sound disorder specifically in the area of phonology versus articulation is a complicated issue that
prevents clear identification of base rates and definitive categorization between two groups, these classification validity
findings reported for the KLPA–3 will focus on speech sound disorder classification overall. Classification results based
upon the setting of specific diagnostic cut scores, such as –1.5 SD, is presented as positive predictive power (PPP) and

ADMINISTRATION
negative predictive power (NPP). Classification varies as a function of the cut score used, as well as the base rate for the
clinical condition of interest.
The base rate is most commonly thought of as the prevalence of the clinical condition in the population, but it is more

OR RESALE
clinically useful to think of it as the a priori probability that someone in the speech-language pathologist’s own referral
population will have the condition. This varies widely, depending on the clinical setting. According to estimates from the
National Institute on Deafness and other Communication Disorders (2010), the prevalence of speech sound disorder in
individuals averages between 8% and 9%, ranging from 24.6% for younger age groups to 2% among older individuals.
By the first grade, approximately 5% of children have noticeable speech sound disorders. In screening a population of
school age individuals, you can expect to identify about 10% of those you screen as “at risk for speech disorders and in
need of further testing.” As Table 6.7 indicates, 10% was selected as a base rate for screening the population of school-
age individuals and base rates of 60%, 70%, and 80% were selected for referral populations. Table 6.7 provides the
clinical validity statistics for speech sound disorders based on three cut scores and five base rates using the KLPA–3
standard score.
Values of PPP and NPP are provided for five different base rates: 10%, 80%, 70%, 60% and 50% (for matched sample).
Figure 6.1 shows the possible outcomes of a classification using an assessment tool. D represents someone who truly
has the disorder and ND represents someone who truly has no disorder. The outcomes are + (prediction of disorder)
or – (prediction of no disorder).
PPP is calculated using the formula:
PPP = (a × br) ÷ [(a × br) + (1 – br) × c]
where a and c represent the frequencies indicated in Figure 6.1, and br = base rate. PPP is interpreted as the likelihood
that a person with a positive result actually has the disorder.

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Chapter 6 ■ Evidence of Reliability and Validity 69

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN_wkg_ch6.indd 69 9/18/15 12:56 PM


NPP is calculated using the formula:
NPP = [d × (1 – br)] ÷ [(d × (1 – br)) + (b × br)]
and is interpreted as the likelihood that someone with a negative result actually does not have the disorder. A PPP = 1
indicates no false positives, and a PPP = 0.5 indicates a 50% false positive rate. Similarly, an NPP = 1 indicates no false
negatives, whereas an NPP = 0.5 indicates a 50% false negative rate.


+ –
D a b
ND c d

Figure 6.1  Possible Outcomes of Positive Predictive Power (+) and Negative Predictive Power (–)
Sensitivity and specificity are two additional diagnostic validity statistics that describe how an assessment tool performs.
Sensitivity is computed as a ÷ (a + b) and specificity is computed as d ÷ (c + d). Sensitivity indicates the probability that
someone who has the condition will score positive for it. Specificity indicates the probability that someone who does
not have the condition will score negative. These values do not depend on the base rate. This means sensitivity and

SAMPLE,
specificity provide overall summary statistics of how well the score can classify, although this overall summary can be
misleading for specific base rates. For example, a measure might have both high sensitivity and specificity, yet still have a
large false positive rate for conditions with high base rates.
Table 6.7 reports diagnostic validity statistics and adjusted PPPs and NPPs based on different base rates. The accuracy

NOT FOR
of test results depends on the base rate as well as the cut score, which is why PPP and NPP are used. For example, if
the base rate is low, such as 10%, with a cut score of –1.5 SD, then PPP = .62. This means that 62% of those who are
identified as having a speech sound disorder actually have it. This means that 38% false positives may be acceptable in

ADMINISTRATION
a screening situation where the concern is more on minimizing false negatives. The NPP in this instance is .98, meaning
that 98% of those classified as not having a speech sound disorder, indeed, do not have the disorder, leaving only 2%
false negatives. Conversely, if the base rate is .50 (half the individuals referred have a speech sound disorder), then the
PPP is .94, meaning only 6% of those classified as having a speech sound disorder are misclassified, and the NPP is .84,

OR RESALE
meaning only 16% of those classified as not having a speech sound disorder are misclassified. As the cut score becomes
more extreme (more SDs below the mean), the PPP becomes higher and the NPP gets lower. As the base rate becomes
higher, the PPP becomes higher and the NPP gets lower.
Table 6.7 also reports the sensitivity and specificity statistics for individuals with a speech sound disorder based on
cut scores of 1, 1.5, and 2 SDs below the mean for the KLPA–3 score. The results indicate good to excellent sensitivity
and specificity with cut scores at –1 SD, and –1.5 SD. With a cut score of –2 SD, specificity is excellent at 1.0, but with
sensitivity at .67, only 67% of individuals who have a phonological impairment will be identified as having a speech
sound disorder.
As reported, for the KLPA–3 score, the standard cut scores of 77 (at –1.5 SD from the mean) and 85 (at 1 SD from the
mean) result in good balances between the sensitivity and specificity measures. For example, using the cut score of 77
resulted in a sensitivity of 81% (0.81) and specificity of 94% (0.94). In other words, using the cut score of 77, only 19%
of children with speech sound disorders were missed and only 6% of children without speech sound disorders were
incorrectly identified as having speech sound disorders. Similarly, using the cut score of 85 resulted in a sensitivity of
93% (0.93) and specificity of 83% (0.83). In other words, using the cut score of 85, only 7% of children with speech sound
disorders were missed and only 17% of children without speech sound disorders were incorrectly identified as having
speech sound disorders. Based on Kirk and Vigeland (2014), for an assessment to be clinically valid, “sensitivity and
specificity must be at least .90 for one cut score. Positive predictive value and negative predictive value must be at least
.90 for at least one cut score and one base rate” (p. 371). Review of Table 6.7 shows that KLPA–3 meets this criterion for a
valid assessment of speech sound disorder in the area of phonology.

70 Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Chapter 6 ■ Evidence of Reliability and Validity

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 70 8/31/15 3:39 PM


tab_8_snstvitySpcfcitySW

TABLE 6.7  Clinical


Table 5.11 ClinicalValidity
ValidityStatistics
Statisticsfor
forPhonology
PhonologyError
ErrorScores
ScoresBased
Basedon
onCut
CutScore
ScoreBase
BaseRates
Rates
Base rates
KLPA–3 Standard Predictive Screening Referral Matched
score SD score cut Sensitivity Specificity power 10% 80% 70% 60% sample 50%
–1 SD 85 0.93 0.83 ppp 0.38 0.96 0.93 0.89 0.85
npp 0.99 0.74 0.83 0.88 0.92
–1.5 SD 77 0.83 0.91 ppp 0.50 0.97 0.95 0.93 0.90
npp 0.98 0.58 0.70 0.78 0.84
–2 SD 70 0.67 0.98 ppp 0.80 0.99 0.99 0.98 0.97
npp 0.96 0.42 0.56 0.66 0.75

Summary of Reliability and Validity Evidence


The effect of using different diagnostic criteria in relation to the rate of disorder is illustrated in this chapter. This enables
you to determine which criteria are the most appropriate for your clinical practice. The evidence provides strong support
for the clinical utility of the KLPA–3. Ongoing clinical research may expand knowledge of the applicability of the KLPA–3
in other clinical groups and settings. You will need to evaluate this evidence in light of your clinical practice and expertise

SAMPLE,
to make the most appropriate use of the KLPA–3.

NOT FOR
ADMINISTRATION
OR RESALE

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Chapter 6 ■ Evidence of Reliability and Validity 71

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN_wkg_ch6.indd 71 9/18/15 12:57 PM


SAMPLE,
NOT FOR
ADMINISTRATION
OR RESALE

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 72 8/31/15 3:39 PM


Appendix A

Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles


for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex
Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex

SAMPLE,
NOT FOR
ADMINISTRATION
OR RESALE

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix A ■ Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles 73

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 73 8/31/15 3:39 PM


tab_9_klpa3_normgrp1

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex
Ages 2:0–2:1
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
0 140 136–143 135–143 99.6 140 136–143 135–143 99.6 0
1 137 133–140 132–140 99 131 127–134 126–134 98 1
2 135 131–138 130–138 99 126 122–129 121–130 96 2
3 133 129–136 128–136 99 123 119–126 118–127 94 3
4 132 128–135 127–135 98 121 117–124 117–125 92 4
5 131 127–134 126–134 98 120 116–123 116–124 91 5
6 130 126–133 125–133 98 119 115–122 115–123 90 6
7 129 125–132 124–132 97 118 114–121 114–122 88 7
8 128 124–131 123–132 97 117 113–120 113–121 87 8
9 127 123–130 122–131 96 116 112–119 112–120 86 9
10 126 122–129 121–130 96 115 111–118 111–119 84 10
11 125 121–128 120–129 95 115 111–118 111–119 84 11
12 124 120–127 119–128 95 114 110–117 110–118 82 12
13 123 119–126 118–127 94 113 109–116 109–117 81 13
14 122 118–125 117–126 93 113 109–116 109–117 81 14
15 121 117–124 117–125 92 112 108–115 108–116 79 15

SAMPLE,
16 120 116–123 116–124 91 112 108–115 108–116 79 16
17 119 115–122 115–123 90 111 107–114 107–115 77 17
18 118 114–121 114–122 88 111 107–114 107–115 77 18
19 118 114–121 114–122 88 110 106–113 106–114 75 19
20 117 113–120 113–121 87 110 106–113 106–114 75 20

NOT FOR
21 116 112–119 112–120 86 109 105–112 105–113 73 21
22 115 111–118 111–119 84 109 105–112 105–113 73 22
23 114 110–117 110–118 82 108 104–111 104–112 70 23
24 113 109–116 109–117 81 108 104–111 104–112 70 24

ADMINISTRATION
25 113 109–116 109–117 81 107 103–110 103–111 68 25
26 112 108–115 108–116 79 107 103–110 103–111 68 26
27 111 107–114 107–115 77 106 102–109 102–110 66 27
28 110 106–113 106–114 75 106 102–109 102–110 66 28
29 110 106–113 106–114 75 105 101–108 101–109 63 29

OR RESALE
30 109 105–112 105–113 73 105 101–108 101–109 63 30
31 108 104–111 104–112 70 104 101–107 100–108 61 31
32 108 104–111 104–112 70 104 101–107 100–108 61 32
33 107 103–110 103–111 68 103 100–106 99–107 58 33
34 106 102–109 102–110 66 103 100–106 99–107 58 34
35 106 102–109 102–110 66 102 99–105 98–106 55 35
36 105 101–108 101–109 63 102 99–105 98–106 55 36
37 105 101–108 101–109 63 101 98–104 97–105 53 37
38 104 101–107 100–108 61 101 98–104 97–105 53 38
39 104 101–107 100–108 61 100 97–103 96–104 50 39
40 103 100–106 99–107 58 100 97–103 96–104 50 40
41 103 100–106 99–107 58 99 96–102 95–103 47 41
42 102 99–105 98–106 55 99 96–102 95–103 47 42
43 102 99–105 98–106 55 98 95–101 94–102 45 43
44 101 98–104 97–105 53 98 95–101 94–102 45 44
45 101 98–104 97–105 53 97 94–100 93–101 42 45
46 100 97–103 96–104 50 97 94–100 93–101 42 46
47 99 96–102 95–103 47 96 93–99 92–100 39 47
48 99 96–102 95–103 47 96 93–99 92–100 39 48
49 98 95–101 94–102 45 95 92–99 91–99 37 49
50 98 95–101 94–102 45 95 92–99 91–99 37 50
51 97 94–100 93–101 42 94 91–98 90–98 34 51
52 97 94–100 93–101 42 94 91–98 90–98 34 52
53 96 93–99 92–100 39 93 90–97 89–97 32 53
54 95 92–99 91–99 37 93 90–97 89–97 32 54

74 Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix A ■ Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 74 8/31/15 3:39 PM


tab_9_klpa3_normgrp1 cont.

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex (continued)
Ages 2:0–2:1
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
55 95 92–99 91–99 37 92 89–96 88–96 30 55
56 94 91–98 90–98 34 92 89–96 88–96 30 56
57 94 91–98 90–98 34 91 88–95 87–95 27 57
58 93 90–97 89–97 32 91 88–95 87–95 27 58
59 93 90–97 89–97 32 90 87–94 86–94 25 59
60 92 89–96 88–96 30 90 87–94 86–94 25 60
61 92 89–96 88–96 30 89 86–93 85–93 23 61
62 91 88–95 87–95 27 89 86–93 85–93 23 62
63 90 87–94 86–94 25 88 85–92 84–92 21 63
64 90 87–94 86–94 25 87 84–91 83–91 19 64
65 89 86–93 85–93 23 87 84–91 83–91 19 65
66 89 86–93 85–93 23 86 83–90 82–90 18 66
67 88 85–92 84–92 21 85 82–89 81–89 16 67
68 88 85–92 84–92 21 85 82–89 81–89 16 68
69 87 84–91 83–91 19 84 81–88 80–88 14 69
70 87 84–91 83–91 19 84 81–88 80–88 14 70

SAMPLE,
71 86 83–90 82–90 18 83 80–87 79–87 13 71
72 86 83–90 82–90 18 83 80–87 79–87 13 72
73 85 82–89 81–89 16 82 79–86 78–86 12 73
74 85 82–89 81–89 16 82 79–86 78–86 12 74
75 84 81–88 80–88 14 81 78–85 77–85 10 75

NOT FOR
76 84 81–88 80–88 14 81 78–85 77–85 10 76
77 83 80–87 79–87 13 80 77–84 76–84 9 77
78 83 80–87 79–87 13 80 77–84 76–84 9 78
79 82 79–86 78–86 12 79 76–83 75–83 8 79

ADMINISTRATION
80 82 79–86 78–86 12 79 76–83 75–83 8 80
81 81 78–85 77–85 10 78 75–82 74–83 7 81
82 81 78–85 77–85 10 78 75–82 74–83 7 82
83 80 77–84 76–84 9 78 75–82 74–83 7 83
84 79 76–83 75–83 8 77 74–81 73–82 6 84

OR RESALE
85 79 76–83 75–83 8 77 74–81 73–82 6 85
86 78 75–82 74–83 7 76 73–80 72–81 5 86
87 78 75–82 74–83 7 76 73–80 72–81 5 87
88 77 74–81 73–82 6 75 72–79 71–80 5 88
89 77 74–81 73–82 6 75 72–79 71–80 5 89
90 76 73–80 72–81 5 74 71–78 70–79 4 90
91 76 73–80 72–81 5 74 71–78 70–79 4 91
92 75 72–79 71–80 5 73 70–77 69–78 4 92
93 75 72–79 71–80 5 73 70–77 69–78 4 93
94 74 71–78 70–79 4 72 69–76 68–77 3 94
95 74 71–78 70–79 4 72 69–76 68–77 3 95
96 73 70–77 69–78 4 71 68–75 68–76 3 96
97 73 70–77 69–78 4 71 68–75 68–76 3 97
98 72 69–76 68–77 3 70 67–74 67–75 2 98
99 72 69–76 68–77 3 70 67–74 67–75 2 99
100 71 68–75 68–76 3 69 66–73 66–74 2 100
101 71 68–75 68–76 3 69 66–73 66–74 2 101
102 70 67–74 67–75 2 68 65–72 65–73 2 102
103 70 67–74 67–75 2 68 65–72 65–73 2 103
104 70 67–74 67–75 2 67 64–71 64–72 1 104
105 69 66–73 66–74 2 67 64–71 64–72 1 105
106 69 66–73 66–74 2 66 63–70 63–71 1 106
107 68 65–72 65–73 2 66 63–70 63–71 1 107
108 68 65–72 65–73 2 65 62–69 62–70 1 108
109 67 64–71 64–72 1 65 62–69 62–70 1 109

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix A ■ Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles 75

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 75 8/31/15 3:39 PM


tab_9_klpa3_normgrp1 cont.

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex (continued)
Ages 2:0–2:1
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
110 67 64–71 64–72 1 64 61–68 61–69 1 110
111 67 64–71 64–72 1 64 61–68 61–69 1 111
112 66 63–70 63–71 1 63 60–67 60–68 1 112
113 66 63–70 63–71 1 63 60–67 60–68 1 113
114 65 62–69 62–70 1 62 59–66 59–67 1 114
115 65 62–69 62–70 1 62 59–66 59–67 1 115
116 64 61–68 61–69 1 62 59–66 59–67 1 116
117 64 61–68 61–69 1 61 58–65 58–66 0.5 117
118 64 61–68 61–69 1 61 58–65 58–66 0.5 118
119 63 60–67 60–68 1 60 57–64 57–65 0.4 119
120 63 60–67 60–68 1 60 57–64 57–65 0.4 120
121 62 59–66 59–67 1 59 56–63 56–64 0.3 121
122 62 59–66 59–67 1 59 56–63 56–64 0.3 122
123 62 59–66 59–67 1 59 56–63 56–64 0.3 123
124 61 58–65 58–66 0.5 58 55–62 55–63 0.3 124
125 61 58–65 58–66 0.5 57 54–61 54–62 0.2 125

SAMPLE,
126 60 57–64 57–65 0.4 57 54–61 54–62 0.2 126
127 60 57–64 57–65 0.4 57 54–61 54–62 0.2 127
128 60 57–64 57–65 0.4 56 53–60 53–61 0.2 128
129 59 56–63 56–64 0.3 56 53–60 53–61 0.2 129
130 59 56–63 56–64 0.3 55 52–59 52–60 0.1 130

NOT FOR
131 58 55–62 55–63 0.3 55 52–59 52–60 0.1 131
132 58 55–62 55–63 0.3 54 52–58 51–59 0.1 132
133 57 54–61 54–62 0.2 53 51–57 50–58 0.1 133
134 57 54–61 54–62 0.2 53 51–57 50–58 0.1 134

ADMINISTRATION
135 57 54–61 54–62 0.2 52 50–56 49–57 0.1 135
136 56 53–60 53–61 0.2 52 50–56 49–57 0.1 136
137 56 53–60 53–61 0.2 51 49–55 48–56 0.1 137
138 55 52–59 52–60 0.1 51 49–55 48–56 0.1 138
139 55 52–59 52–60 0.1 50 48–54 47–55 <0.1 139

OR RESALE
140 54 52–58 51–59 0.1 50 48–54 47–55 <0.1 140
141 53 51–57 50–58 0.1 49 47–53 46–54 <0.1 141
142 53 51–57 50–58 0.1 49 47–53 46–54 <0.1 142
143 52 50–56 49–57 0.1 48 46–52 45–53 <0.1 143
144 52 50–56 49–57 0.1 48 46–52 45–53 <0.1 144
145 51 49–55 48–56 0.1 47 45–51 44–52 <0.1 145
146 51 49–55 48–56 0.1 47 45–51 44–52 <0.1 146
147 50 48–54 47–55 <0.1 46 44–50 43–51 <0.1 147
148 49 47–53 46–54 <0.1 46 44–50 43–51 <0.1 148
149 49 47–53 46–54 <0.1 45 43–50 42–50 <0.1 149
150 48 46–52 45–53 <0.1 45 43–50 42–50 <0.1 150
151 47 45–51 44–52 <0.1 44 42–49 41–49 <0.1 151
152 46 44–50 43–51 <0.1 44 42–49 41–49 <0.1 152
153 45 43–50 42–50 <0.1 43 41–48 40–48 <0.1 153
154 44 42–49 41–49 <0.1 43 41–48 40–48 <0.1 154
155 43 41–48 40–48 <0.1 42 40–47 39–47 <0.1 155
156 42 40–47 39–47 <0.1 42 40–47 39–47 <0.1 156
157 41 39–46 38–46 <0.1 41 39–46 38–46 <0.1 157
158 40 38–45 37–45 <0.1 41 39–46 38–46 <0.1 158
159–160 40 38–45 37–45 <0.1 40 38–45 37–45 <0.1 159–160

76 Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix A ■ Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 76 8/31/15 3:39 PM


tab_9_klpa3_normgrp2

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex (continued)
Ages 2:2–2:3
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
0 138 134–141 133–141 99 137 133–140 132–140 99 0
1 135 131–138 130–138 99 128 124–131 123–132 97 1
2 133 129–136 128–136 99 124 120–127 119–128 95 2
3 131 127–134 126–134 98 121 117–124 117–125 92 3
4 130 126–133 125–133 98 120 116–123 116–124 91 4
5 129 125–132 124–132 97 119 115–122 115–123 90 5
6 128 124–131 123–132 97 118 114–121 114–122 88 6
7 127 123–130 122–131 96 117 113–120 113–121 87 7
8 126 122–129 121–130 96 117 113–120 113–121 87 8
9 125 121–128 120–129 95 116 112–119 112–120 86 9
10 124 120–127 119–128 95 115 111–118 111–119 84 10
11 123 119–126 118–127 94 114 110–117 110–118 82 11
12 122 118–125 117–126 93 114 110–117 110–118 82 12
13 121 117–124 117–125 92 113 109–116 109–117 81 13
14 120 116–123 116–124 91 112 108–115 108–116 79 14
15 119 115–122 115–123 90 112 108–115 108–116 79 15

SAMPLE,
16 118 114–121 114–122 88 111 107–114 107–115 77 16
17 117 113–120 113–121 87 111 107–114 107–115 77 17
18 116 112–119 112–120 86 110 106–113 106–114 75 18
19 115 111–118 111–119 84 110 106–113 106–114 75 19
20 114 110–117 110–118 82 109 105–112 105–113 73 20

NOT FOR
21 113 109–116 109–117 81 109 105–112 105–113 73 21
22 113 109–116 109–117 81 108 104–111 104–112 70 22
23 112 108–115 108–116 79 108 104–111 104–112 70 23
24 112 108–115 108–116 79 107 103–110 103–111 68 24

ADMINISTRATION
25 111 107–114 107–115 77 107 103–110 103–111 68 25
26 111 107–114 107–115 77 106 102–109 102–110 66 26
27 110 106–113 106–114 75 106 102–109 102–110 66 27
28 109 105–112 105–113 73 105 101–108 101–109 63 28
29 108 104–111 104–112 70 105 101–108 101–109 63 29

OR RESALE
30 108 104–111 104–112 70 104 101–107 100–108 61 30
31 107 103–110 103–111 68 104 101–107 100–108 61 31
32 107 103–110 103–111 68 103 100–106 99–107 58 32
33 106 102–109 102–110 66 103 100–106 99–107 58 33
34 106 102–109 102–110 66 102 99–105 98–106 55 34
35 105 101–108 101–109 63 101 98–104 97–105 53 35
36 105 101–108 101–109 63 101 98–104 97–105 53 36
37 104 101–107 100–108 61 100 97–103 96–104 50 37
38 103 100–106 99–107 58 100 97–103 96–104 50 38
39 103 100–106 99–107 58 99 96–102 95–103 47 39
40 102 99–105 98–106 55 99 96–102 95–103 47 40
41 102 99–105 98–106 55 98 95–101 94–102 45 41
42 101 98–104 97–105 53 98 95–101 94–102 45 42
43 100 97–103 96–104 50 97 94–100 93–101 42 43
44 100 97–103 96–104 50 97 94–100 93–101 42 44
45 99 96–102 95–103 47 96 93–99 92–100 39 45
46 98 95–101 94–102 45 96 93–99 92–100 39 46
47 98 95–101 94–102 45 95 92–99 91–99 37 47
48 97 94–100 93–101 42 95 92–99 91–99 37 48
49 97 94–100 93–101 42 94 91–98 90–98 34 49
50 96 93–99 92–100 39 94 91–98 90–98 34 50
51 96 93–99 92–100 39 93 90–97 89–97 32 51
52 95 92–99 91–99 37 93 90–97 89–97 32 52
53 94 91–98 90–98 34 92 89–96 88–96 30 53
54 94 91–98 90–98 34 92 89–96 88–96 30 54

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix A ■ Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles 77

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 77 8/31/15 3:39 PM


tab_9_klpa3_normgrp2 cont.

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex (continued)
Ages 2:2–2:3
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
55 93 90–97 89–97 32 91 88–95 87–95 27 55
56 93 90–97 89–97 32 91 88–95 87–95 27 56
57 92 89–96 88–96 30 90 87–94 86–94 25 57
58 92 89–96 88–96 30 90 87–94 86–94 25 58
59 91 88–95 87–95 27 89 86–93 85–93 23 59
60 90 87–94 86–94 25 88 85–92 84–92 21 60
61 90 87–94 86–94 25 88 85–92 84–92 21 61
62 89 86–93 85–93 23 87 84–91 83–91 19 62
63 89 86–93 85–93 23 87 84–91 83–91 19 63
64 88 85–92 84–92 21 86 83–90 82–90 18 64
65 88 85–92 84–92 21 85 82–89 81–89 16 65
66 87 84–91 83–91 19 85 82–89 81–89 16 66
67 87 84–91 83–91 19 84 81–88 80–88 14 67
68 86 83–90 82–90 18 84 81–88 80–88 14 68
69 86 83–90 82–90 18 83 80–87 79–87 13 69
70 85 82–89 81–89 16 83 80–87 79–87 13 70

SAMPLE,
71 85 82–89 81–89 16 82 79–86 78–86 12 71
72 84 81–88 80–88 14 82 79–86 78–86 12 72
73 84 81–88 80–88 14 81 78–85 77–85 10 73
74 83 80–87 79–87 13 81 78–85 77–85 10 74
75 83 80–87 79–87 13 80 77–84 76–84 9 75

NOT FOR
76 82 79–86 78–86 12 80 77–84 76–84 9 76
77 82 79–86 78–86 12 79 76–83 75–83 8 77
78 81 78–85 77–85 10 79 76–83 75–83 8 78
79 81 78–85 77–85 10 78 75–82 74–83 7 79

ADMINISTRATION
80 80 77–84 76–84 9 78 75–82 74–83 7 80
81 80 77–84 76–84 9 78 75–82 74–83 7 81
82 79 76–83 75–83 8 77 74–81 73–82 6 82
83 79 76–83 75–83 8 77 74–81 73–82 6 83
84 78 75–82 74–83 7 76 73–80 72–81 5 84

OR RESALE
85 78 75–82 74–83 7 76 73–80 72–81 5 85
86 77 74–81 73–82 6 75 72–79 71–80 5 86
87 77 74–81 73–82 6 75 72–79 71–80 5 87
88 76 73–80 72–81 5 74 71–78 70–79 4 88
89 76 73–80 72–81 5 74 71–78 70–79 4 89
90 75 72–79 71–80 5 73 70–77 69–78 4 90
91 75 72–79 71–80 5 73 70–77 69–78 4 91
92 74 71–78 70–79 4 73 70–77 69–78 4 92
93 74 71–78 70–79 4 72 69–76 68–77 3 93
94 73 70–77 69–78 4 72 69–76 68–77 3 94
95 73 70–77 69–78 4 71 68–75 68–76 3 95
96 72 69–76 68–77 3 71 68–75 68–76 3 96
97 72 69–76 68–77 3 70 67–74 67–75 2 97
98 71 68–75 68–76 3 70 67–74 67–75 2 98
99 71 68–75 68–76 3 69 66–73 66–74 2 99
100 70 67–74 67–75 2 69 66–73 66–74 2 100
101 70 67–74 67–75 2 68 65–72 65–73 2 101
102 69 66–73 66–74 2 68 65–72 65–73 2 102
103 69 66–73 66–74 2 67 64–71 64–72 1 103
104 68 65–72 65–73 2 67 64–71 64–72 1 104
105 68 65–72 65–73 2 66 63–70 63–71 1 105
106 67 64–71 64–72 1 66 63–70 63–71 1 106
107 67 64–71 64–72 1 65 62–69 62–70 1 107
108 66 63–70 63–71 1 65 62–69 62–70 1 108
109 66 63–70 63–71 1 64 61–68 61–69 1 109

78 Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix A ■ Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 78 8/31/15 3:39 PM


tab_9_klpa3_normgrp2 cont.

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex (continued)
Ages 2:2–2:3
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
110 66 63–70 63–71 1 64 61–68 61–69 1 110
111 65 62–69 62–70 1 63 60–67 60–68 1 111
112 65 62–69 62–70 1 63 60–67 60–68 1 112
113 64 61–68 61–69 1 62 59–66 59–67 1 113
114 64 61–68 61–69 1 62 59–66 59–67 1 114
115 64 61–68 61–69 1 61 58–65 58–66 0.5 115
116 63 60–67 60–68 1 61 58–65 58–66 0.5 116
117 63 60–67 60–68 1 61 58–65 58–66 0.5 117
118 62 59–66 59–67 1 60 57–64 57–65 0.4 118
119 62 59–66 59–67 1 60 57–64 57–65 0.4 119
120 62 59–66 59–67 1 59 56–63 56–64 0.3 120
121 61 58–65 58–66 0.5 59 56–63 56–64 0.3 121
122 61 58–65 58–66 0.5 59 56–63 56–64 0.3 122
123 61 58–65 58–66 0.5 58 55–62 55–63 0.3 123
124 60 57–64 57–65 0.4 58 55–62 55–63 0.3 124
125 60 57–64 57–65 0.4 57 54–61 54–62 0.2 125

SAMPLE,
126 59 56–63 56–64 0.3 57 54–61 54–62 0.2 126
127 59 56–63 56–64 0.3 56 53–60 53–61 0.2 127
128 59 56–63 56–64 0.3 56 53–60 53–61 0.2 128
129 58 55–62 55–63 0.3 55 52–59 52–60 0.1 129
130 58 55–62 55–63 0.3 55 52–59 52–60 0.1 130

NOT FOR
131 57 54–61 54–62 0.2 54 52–58 51–59 0.1 131
132 57 54–61 54–62 0.2 54 52–58 51–59 0.1 132
133 57 54–61 54–62 0.2 53 51–57 50–58 0.1 133
134 56 53–60 53–61 0.2 52 50–56 49–57 0.1 134

ADMINISTRATION
135 56 53–60 53–61 0.2 52 50–56 49–57 0.1 135
136 55 52–59 52–60 0.1 51 49–55 48–56 0.1 136
137 55 52–59 52–60 0.1 51 49–55 48–56 0.1 137
138 54 52–58 51–59 0.1 50 48–54 47–55 <0.1 138
139 54 52–58 51–59 0.1 50 48–54 47–55 <0.1 139

OR RESALE
140 53 51–57 50–58 0.1 49 47–53 46–54 <0.1 140
141 53 51–57 50–58 0.1 49 47–53 46–54 <0.1 141
142 52 50–56 49–57 0.1 48 46–52 45–53 <0.1 142
143 52 50–56 49–57 0.1 48 46–52 45–53 <0.1 143
144 51 49–55 48–56 0.1 47 45–51 44–52 <0.1 144
145 50 48–54 47–55 <0.1 47 45–51 44–52 <0.1 145
146 50 48–54 47–55 <0.1 46 44–50 43–51 <0.1 146
147 49 47–53 46–54 <0.1 46 44–50 43–51 <0.1 147
148 49 47–53 46–54 <0.1 45 43–50 42–50 <0.1 148
149 48 46–52 45–53 <0.1 45 43–50 42–50 <0.1 149
150 47 45–51 44–52 <0.1 44 42–49 41–49 <0.1 150
151 46 44–50 43–51 <0.1 44 42–49 41–49 <0.1 151
152 45 43–50 42–50 <0.1 43 41–48 40–48 <0.1 152
153 44 42–49 41–49 <0.1 43 41–48 40–48 <0.1 153
154 43 41–48 40–48 <0.1 42 40–47 39–47 <0.1 154
155 42 40–47 39–47 <0.1 42 40–47 39–47 <0.1 155
156 41 39–46 38–46 <0.1 41 39–46 38–46 <0.1 156
157 40 38–45 37–45 <0.1 41 39–46 38–46 <0.1 157
158–160 40 38–45 37–45 <0.1 40 38–45 37–45 <0.1 158–160

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix A ■ Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles 79

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 79 8/31/15 3:39 PM


tab_9_klpa3_normgrp3

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex (continued)
Ages 2:4–2:5
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
0 137 133–140 132–140 99 134 130–137 129–137 99 0
1 133 129–136 128–136 99 126 122–129 121–130 96 1
2 131 127–134 126–134 98 122 118–125 117–126 93 2
3 129 125–132 124–132 97 121 117–124 117–125 92 3
4 128 124–131 123–132 97 120 116–123 116–124 91 4
5 127 123–130 122–131 96 119 115–122 115–123 90 5
6 126 122–129 121–130 96 118 114–121 114–122 88 6
7 125 121–128 120–129 95 117 113–120 113–121 87 7
8 124 120–127 119–128 95 116 112–119 112–120 86 8
9 123 119–126 118–127 94 115 111–118 111–119 84 9
10 122 118–125 117–126 93 115 111–118 111–119 84 10
11 121 117–124 117–125 92 114 110–117 110–118 82 11
12 120 116–123 116–124 91 113 109–116 109–117 81 12
13 119 115–122 115–123 90 113 109–116 109–117 81 13
14 118 114–121 114–122 88 112 108–115 108–116 79 14
15 117 113–120 113–121 87 111 107–114 107–115 77 15

SAMPLE,
16 116 112–119 112–120 86 111 107–114 107–115 77 16
17 115 111–118 111–119 84 110 106–113 106–114 75 17
18 114 110–117 110–118 82 110 106–113 106–114 75 18
19 113 109–116 109–117 81 109 105–112 105–113 73 19
20 112 108–115 108–116 79 109 105–112 105–113 73 20

NOT FOR
21 112 108–115 108–116 79 108 104–111 104–112 70 21
22 111 107–114 107–115 77 108 104–111 104–112 70 22
23 111 107–114 107–115 77 107 103–110 103–111 68 23
24 110 106–113 106–114 75 107 103–110 103–111 68 24

ADMINISTRATION
25 110 106–113 106–114 75 106 102–109 102–110 66 25
26 109 105–112 105–113 73 106 102–109 102–110 66 26
27 108 104–111 104–112 70 105 101–108 101–109 63 27
28 108 104–111 104–112 70 105 101–108 101–109 63 28
29 107 103–110 103–111 68 104 101–107 100–108 61 29

OR RESALE
30 107 103–110 103–111 68 104 101–107 100–108 61 30
31 106 102–109 102–110 66 103 100–106 99–107 58 31
32 105 101–108 101–109 63 103 100–106 99–107 58 32
33 105 101–108 101–109 63 102 99–105 98–106 55 33
34 104 101–107 100–108 61 101 98–104 97–105 53 34
35 103 100–106 99–107 58 101 98–104 97–105 53 35
36 102 99–105 98–106 55 100 97–103 96–104 50 36
37 102 99–105 98–106 55 100 97–103 96–104 50 37
38 101 98–104 97–105 53 99 96–102 95–103 47 38
39 100 97–103 96–104 50 99 96–102 95–103 47 39
40 100 97–103 96–104 50 98 95–101 94–102 45 40
41 99 96–102 95–103 47 98 95–101 94–102 45 41
42 99 96–102 95–103 47 97 94–100 93–101 42 42
43 98 95–101 94–102 45 97 94–100 93–101 42 43
44 98 95–101 94–102 45 96 93–99 92–100 39 44
45 97 94–100 93–101 42 96 93–99 92–100 39 45
46 96 93–99 92–100 39 95 92–99 91–99 37 46
47 96 93–99 92–100 39 95 92–99 91–99 37 47
48 95 92–99 91–99 37 94 91–98 90–98 34 48
49 94 91–98 90–98 34 94 91–98 90–98 34 49
50 94 91–98 90–98 34 93 90–97 89–97 32 50
51 93 90–97 89–97 32 93 90–97 89–97 32 51
52 93 90–97 89–97 32 92 89–96 88–96 30 52
53 92 89–96 88–96 30 92 89–96 88–96 30 53
54 91 88–95 87–95 27 91 88–95 87–95 27 54

80 Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix A ■ Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 80 8/31/15 3:39 PM


tab_9_klpa3_normgrp3 cont.

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex (continued)
Ages 2:4–2:5
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
55 91 88–95 87–95 27 91 88–95 87–95 27 55
56 90 87–94 86–94 25 90 87–94 86–94 25 56
57 90 87–94 86–94 25 90 87–94 86–94 25 57
58 89 86–93 85–93 23 89 86–93 85–93 23 58
59 89 86–93 85–93 23 89 86–93 85–93 23 59
60 88 85–92 84–92 21 88 85–92 84–92 21 60
61 88 85–92 84–92 21 87 84–91 83–91 19 61
62 87 84–91 83–91 19 87 84–91 83–91 19 62
63 87 84–91 83–91 19 86 83–90 82–90 18 63
64 86 83–90 82–90 18 86 83–90 82–90 18 64
65 86 83–90 82–90 18 85 82–89 81–89 16 65
66 85 82–89 81–89 16 84 81–88 80–88 14 66
67 85 82–89 81–89 16 84 81–88 80–88 14 67
68 84 81–88 80–88 14 83 80–87 79–87 13 68
69 84 81–88 80–88 14 83 80–87 79–87 13 69
70 83 80–87 79–87 13 82 79–86 78–86 12 70

SAMPLE,
71 83 80–87 79–87 13 82 79–86 78–86 12 71
72 82 79–86 78–86 12 81 78–85 77–85 10 72
73 82 79–86 78–86 12 81 78–85 77–85 10 73
74 81 78–85 77–85 10 80 77–84 76–84 9 74
75 81 78–85 77–85 10 80 77–84 76–84 9 75

NOT FOR
76 80 77–84 76–84 9 79 76–83 75–83 8 76
77 80 77–84 76–84 9 79 76–83 75–83 8 77
78 79 76–83 75–83 8 78 75–82 74–83 7 78
79 79 76–83 75–83 8 78 75–82 74–83 7 79

ADMINISTRATION
80 78 75–82 74–83 7 77 74–81 73–82 6 80
81 78 75–82 74–83 7 77 74–81 73–82 6 81
82 77 74–81 73–82 6 76 73–80 72–81 5 82
83 77 74–81 73–82 6 76 73–80 72–81 5 83
84 76 73–80 72–81 5 75 72–79 71–80 5 84

OR RESALE
85 76 73–80 72–81 5 75 72–79 71–80 5 85
86 75 72–79 71–80 5 74 71–78 70–79 4 86
87 75 72–79 71–80 5 74 71–78 70–79 4 87
88 74 71–78 70–79 4 73 70–77 69–78 4 88
89 74 71–78 70–79 4 73 70–77 69–78 4 89
90 73 70–77 69–78 4 72 69–76 68–77 3 90
91 73 70–77 69–78 4 72 69–76 68–77 3 91
92 72 69–76 68–77 3 72 69–76 68–77 3 92
93 72 69–76 68–77 3 71 68–75 68–76 3 93
94 71 68–75 68–76 3 71 68–75 68–76 3 94
95 71 68–75 68–76 3 70 67–74 67–75 2 95
96 70 67–74 67–75 2 70 67–74 67–75 2 96
97 70 67–74 67–75 2 69 66–73 66–74 2 97
98 69 66–73 66–74 2 69 66–73 66–74 2 98
99 69 66–73 66–74 2 68 65–72 65–73 2 99
100 68 65–72 65–73 2 68 65–72 65–73 2 100
101 68 65–72 65–73 2 67 64–71 64–72 1 101
102 68 65–72 65–73 2 67 64–71 64–72 1 102
103 67 64–71 64–72 1 66 63–70 63–71 1 103
104 67 64–71 64–72 1 66 63–70 63–71 1 104
105 66 63–70 63–71 1 65 62–69 62–70 1 105
106 66 63–70 63–71 1 65 62–69 62–70 1 106
107 66 63–70 63–71 1 64 61–68 61–69 1 107
108 65 62–69 62–70 1 64 61–68 61–69 1 108
109 65 62–69 62–70 1 63 60–67 60–68 1 109

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix A ■ Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles 81

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 81 8/31/15 3:39 PM


tab_9_klpa3_normgrp3 cont.

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex (continued)
Ages 2:4–2:5
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
110 64 61–68 61–69 1 63 60–67 60–68 1 110
111 64 61–68 61–69 1 62 59–66 59–67 1 111
112 64 61–68 61–69 1 62 59–66 59–67 1 112
113 63 60–67 60–68 1 61 58–65 58–66 0.5 113
114 63 60–67 60–68 1 61 58–65 58–66 0.5 114
115 63 60–67 60–68 1 61 58–65 58–66 0.5 115
116 62 59–66 59–67 1 60 57–64 57–65 0.4 116
117 62 59–66 59–67 1 60 57–64 57–65 0.4 117
118 61 58–65 58–66 0.5 59 56–63 56–64 0.3 118
119 61 58–65 58–66 0.5 59 56–63 56–64 0.3 119
120 61 58–65 58–66 0.5 59 56–63 56–64 0.3 120
121 60 57–64 57–65 0.4 58 55–62 55–63 0.3 121
122 60 57–64 57–65 0.4 58 55–62 55–63 0.3 122
123 60 57–64 57–65 0.4 57 54–61 54–62 0.2 123
124 59 56–63 56–64 0.3 57 54–61 54–62 0.2 124
125 59 56–63 56–64 0.3 56 53–60 53–61 0.2 125

SAMPLE,
126 58 55–62 55–63 0.3 56 53–60 53–61 0.2 126
127 58 55–62 55–63 0.3 55 52–59 52–60 0.1 127
128 58 55–62 55–63 0.3 55 52–59 52–60 0.1 128
129 57 54–61 54–62 0.2 54 52–58 51–59 0.1 129
130 57 54–61 54–62 0.2 54 52–58 51–59 0.1 130

NOT FOR
131 56 53–60 53–61 0.2 53 51–57 50–58 0.1 131
132 56 53–60 53–61 0.2 53 51–57 50–58 0.1 132
133 56 53–60 53–61 0.2 52 50–56 49–57 0.1 133
134 55 52–59 52–60 0.1 52 50–56 49–57 0.1 134

ADMINISTRATION
135 55 52–59 52–60 0.1 51 49–55 48–56 0.1 135
136 54 52–58 51–59 0.1 51 49–55 48–56 0.1 136
137 54 52–58 51–59 0.1 50 48–54 47–55 <0.1 137
138 53 51–57 50–58 0.1 50 48–54 47–55 <0.1 138
139 53 51–57 50–58 0.1 49 47–53 46–54 <0.1 139

OR RESALE
140 52 50–56 49–57 0.1 49 47–53 46–54 <0.1 140
141 52 50–56 49–57 0.1 48 46–52 45–53 <0.1 141
142 51 49–55 48–56 0.1 48 46–52 45–53 <0.1 142
143 51 49–55 48–56 0.1 47 45–51 44–52 <0.1 143
144 50 48–54 47–55 <0.1 47 45–51 44–52 <0.1 144
145 49 47–53 46–54 <0.1 46 44–50 43–51 <0.1 145
146 49 47–53 46–54 <0.1 46 44–50 43–51 <0.1 146
147 48 46–52 45–53 <0.1 45 43–50 42–50 <0.1 147
148 48 46–52 45–53 <0.1 45 43–50 42–50 <0.1 148
149 47 45–51 44–52 <0.1 44 42–49 41–49 <0.1 149
150 46 44–50 43–51 <0.1 44 42–49 41–49 <0.1 150
151 45 43–50 42–50 <0.1 43 41–48 40–48 <0.1 151
152 44 42–49 41–49 <0.1 43 41–48 40–48 <0.1 152
153 43 41–48 40–48 <0.1 42 40–47 39–47 <0.1 153
154 42 40–47 39–47 <0.1 42 40–47 39–47 <0.1 154
155 41 39–46 38–46 <0.1 41 39–46 38–46 <0.1 155
156 40 38–45 37–45 <0.1 41 39–46 38–46 <0.1 156
157–160 40 38–45 37–45 <0.1 40 38–45 37–45 <0.1 157–160

82 Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix A ■ Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 82 8/31/15 3:39 PM


tab_9_klpa3_normgrp4

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex (continued)
Ages 2:6–2:7
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
0 136 132–139 131–139 99 131 128–133 128–134 98 0
1 132 128–135 127–135 98 125 122–127 122–128 95 1
2 130 126–133 125–133 98 122 119–124 119–125 93 2
3 128 124–131 123–132 97 121 118–123 118–124 92 3
4 126 122–129 121–130 96 120 117–122 117–123 91 4
5 125 121–128 120–129 95 119 116–121 116–122 90 5
6 124 120–127 119–128 95 118 115–120 115–121 88 6
7 123 119–126 118–127 94 117 114–119 114–120 87 7
8 122 118–125 117–126 93 116 113–118 113–119 86 8
9 121 117–124 117–125 92 115 112–117 112–118 84 9
10 120 116–123 116–124 91 114 111–116 111–117 82 10
11 119 115–122 115–123 90 113 110–115 110–116 81 11
12 118 114–121 114–122 88 113 110–115 110–116 81 12
13 117 113–120 113–121 87 112 109–114 109–115 79 13
14 116 112–119 112–120 86 111 108–113 108–114 77 14
15 115 111–118 111–119 84 111 108–113 108–114 77 15

SAMPLE,
16 114 110–117 110–118 82 110 107–112 107–113 75 16
17 113 109–116 109–117 81 110 107–112 107–113 75 17
18 113 109–116 109–117 81 109 106–111 106–112 73 18
19 112 108–115 108–116 79 109 106–111 106–112 73 19
20 111 107–114 107–115 77 108 105–110 105–111 70 20

NOT FOR
21 110 106–113 106–114 75 108 105–110 105–111 70 21
22 109 105–112 105–113 73 107 104–109 104–110 68 22
23 108 104–111 104–112 70 107 104–109 104–110 68 23
24 108 104–111 104–112 70 106 103–108 103–109 66 24

ADMINISTRATION
25 107 103–110 103–111 68 106 103–108 103–109 66 25
26 106 102–109 102–110 66 105 103–107 102–108 63 26
27 106 102–109 102–110 66 105 103–107 102–108 63 27
28 105 101–108 101–109 63 104 102–106 101–107 61 28
29 105 101–108 101–109 63 104 102–106 101–107 61 29

OR RESALE
30 104 101–107 100–108 61 103 101–105 100–106 58 30
31 103 100–106 99–107 58 103 101–105 100–106 58 31
32 103 100–106 99–107 58 102 100–104 99–105 55 32
33 102 99–105 98–106 55 102 100–104 99–105 55 33
34 102 99–105 98–106 55 101 99–103 98–104 53 34
35 101 98–104 97–105 53 100 98–102 97–103 50 35
36 100 97–103 96–104 50 100 98–102 97–103 50 36
37 99 96–102 95–103 47 99 97–101 96–102 47 37
38 99 96–102 95–103 47 99 97–101 96–102 47 38
39 98 95–101 94–102 45 98 96–100 95–101 45 39
40 98 95–101 94–102 45 98 96–100 95–101 45 40
41 97 94–100 93–101 42 97 95–99 94–100 42 41
42 97 94–100 93–101 42 97 95–99 94–100 42 42
43 96 93–99 92–100 39 96 94–98 93–99 39 43
44 95 92–99 91–99 37 96 94–98 93–99 39 44
45 94 91–98 90–98 34 95 93–97 92–98 37 45
46 94 91–98 90–98 34 95 93–97 92–98 37 46
47 93 90–97 89–97 32 94 92–97 91–97 34 47
48 93 90–97 89–97 32 94 92–97 91–97 34 48
49 92 89–96 88–96 30 93 91–96 90–96 32 49
50 92 89–96 88–96 30 93 91–96 90–96 32 50
51 91 88–95 87–95 27 92 90–95 89–95 30 51
52 91 88–95 87–95 27 92 90–95 89–95 30 52
53 90 87–94 86–94 25 91 89–94 88–94 27 53
54 90 87–94 86–94 25 90 88–93 87–93 25 54

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix A ■ Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles 83

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 83 8/31/15 3:39 PM


tab_9_klpa3_normgrp4 cont.

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex (continued)
Ages 2:6–2:7
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
55 89 86–93 85–93 23 90 88–93 87–93 25 55
56 89 86–93 85–93 23 89 87–92 86–92 23 56
57 88 85–92 84–92 21 88 86–91 85–91 21 57
58 88 85–92 84–92 21 87 85–90 84–90 19 58
59 87 84–91 83–91 19 87 85–90 84–90 19 59
60 87 84–91 83–91 19 86 84–89 83–89 18 60
61 86 83–90 82–90 18 86 84–89 83–89 18 61
62 85 82–89 81–89 16 85 83–88 82–88 16 62
63 85 82–89 81–89 16 84 82–87 81–87 14 63
64 84 81–88 80–88 14 84 82–87 81–87 14 64
65 84 81–88 80–88 14 84 82–87 81–87 14 65
66 83 80–87 79–87 13 83 81–86 80–86 13 66
67 83 80–87 79–87 13 83 81–86 80–86 13 67
68 82 79–86 78–86 12 82 80–85 79–85 12 68
69 82 79–86 78–86 12 82 80–85 79–85 12 69
70 81 78–85 77–85 10 81 79–84 78–84 10 70

SAMPLE,
71 81 78–85 77–85 10 81 79–84 78–84 10 71
72 80 77–84 76–84 9 80 78–83 77–83 9 72
73 80 77–84 76–84 9 80 78–83 77–83 9 73
74 79 76–83 75–83 8 79 77–82 76–82 8 74
75 79 76–83 75–83 8 79 77–82 76–82 8 75

NOT FOR
76 78 75–82 74–83 7 78 76–81 75–81 7 76
77 78 75–82 74–83 7 78 76–81 75–81 7 77
78 77 74–81 73–82 6 77 75–80 74–80 6 78
79 77 74–81 73–82 6 77 75–80 74–80 6 79

ADMINISTRATION
80 76 73–80 72–81 5 76 74–79 73–79 5 80
81 76 73–80 72–81 5 76 74–79 73–79 5 81
82 75 72–79 71–80 5 75 73–78 72–78 5 82
83 75 72–79 71–80 5 75 73–78 72–78 5 83
84 74 71–78 70–79 4 75 73–78 72–78 5 84

OR RESALE
85 74 71–78 70–79 4 74 72–77 71–77 4 85
86 73 70–77 69–78 4 74 72–77 71–77 4 86
87 73 70–77 69–78 4 73 71–76 70–76 4 87
88 72 69–76 68–77 3 73 71–76 70–76 4 88
89 72 69–76 68–77 3 73 71–76 70–76 4 89
90 71 68–75 68–76 3 72 70–75 69–75 3 90
91 71 68–75 68–76 3 72 70–75 69–75 3 91
92 70 67–74 67–75 2 71 69–74 68–74 3 92
93 70 67–74 67–75 2 71 69–74 68–74 3 93
94 69 66–73 66–74 2 70 68–73 67–73 2 94
95 69 66–73 66–74 2 70 68–73 67–73 2 95
96 69 66–73 66–74 2 69 67–72 66–72 2 96
97 68 65–72 65–73 2 69 67–72 66–72 2 97
98 68 65–72 65–73 2 68 66–71 65–71 2 98
99 67 64–71 64–72 1 68 66–71 65–71 2 99
100 67 64–71 64–72 1 67 65–70 64–70 1 100
101 67 64–71 64–72 1 67 65–70 64–70 1 101
102 66 63–70 63–71 1 66 64–69 63–69 1 102
103 66 63–70 63–71 1 66 64–69 63–69 1 103
104 65 62–69 62–70 1 65 63–68 62–68 1 104
105 65 62–69 62–70 1 65 63–68 62–68 1 105
106 64 61–68 61–69 1 64 62–67 61–67 1 106
107 64 61–68 61–69 1 64 62–67 61–67 1 107
108 64 61–68 61–69 1 63 61–66 60–66 1 108
109 63 60–67 60–68 1 63 61–66 60–66 1 109

84 Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix A ■ Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 84 8/31/15 3:39 PM


tab_9_klpa3_normgrp4 cont.

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex (continued)
Ages 2:6–2:7
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
110 63 60–67 60–68 1 62 60–65 59–65 1 110
111 63 60–67 60–68 1 62 60–65 59–65 1 111
112 62 59–66 59–67 1 61 59–64 58–64 0.5 112
113 62 59–66 59–67 1 61 59–64 58–64 0.5 113
114 61 58–65 58–66 0.5 60 58–63 57–63 0.4 114
115 61 58–65 58–66 0.5 60 58–63 57–63 0.4 115
116 61 58–65 58–66 0.5 60 58–63 57–63 0.4 116
117 60 57–64 57–65 0.4 59 57–62 56–62 0.3 117
118 60 57–64 57–65 0.4 59 57–62 56–62 0.3 118
119 59 56–63 56–64 0.3 58 56–61 56–61 0.3 119
120 59 56–63 56–64 0.3 58 56–61 56–61 0.3 120
121 59 56–63 56–64 0.3 58 56–61 56–61 0.3 121
122 58 55–62 55–63 0.3 57 55–60 55–60 0.2 122
123 58 55–62 55–63 0.3 57 55–60 55–60 0.2 123
124 57 54–61 54–62 0.2 57 55–60 55–60 0.2 124
125 57 54–61 54–62 0.2 56 54–59 54–59 0.2 125

SAMPLE,
126 57 54–61 54–62 0.2 56 54–59 54–59 0.2 126
127 56 53–60 53–61 0.2 55 53–58 53–58 0.1 127
128 56 53–60 53–61 0.2 54 52–57 52–57 0.1 128
129 55 52–59 52–60 0.1 54 52–57 52–57 0.1 129
130 55 52–59 52–60 0.1 53 51–56 51–56 0.1 130

NOT FOR
131 55 52–59 52–60 0.1 53 51–56 51–56 0.1 131
132 54 52–58 51–59 0.1 52 50–55 50–55 0.1 132
133 54 52–58 51–59 0.1 52 50–55 50–55 0.1 133
134 53 51–57 50–58 0.1 51 49–54 49–54 0.1 134

ADMINISTRATION
135 53 51–57 50–58 0.1 51 49–54 49–54 0.1 135
136 52 50–56 49–57 0.1 50 48–53 48–53 <0.1 136
137 52 50–56 49–57 0.1 50 48–53 48–53 <0.1 137
138 51 49–55 48–56 0.1 49 47–52 47–52 <0.1 138
139 50 48–54 47–55 <0.1 49 47–52 47–52 <0.1 139

OR RESALE
140 50 48–54 47–55 <0.1 48 46–51 46–51 <0.1 140
141 49 47–53 46–54 <0.1 48 46–51 46–51 <0.1 141
142 49 47–53 46–54 <0.1 47 45–50 45–50 <0.1 142
143 48 46–52 45–53 <0.1 47 45–50 45–50 <0.1 143
144 48 46–52 45–53 <0.1 46 44–49 44–49 <0.1 144
145 47 45–51 44–52 <0.1 46 44–49 44–49 <0.1 145
146 46 44–50 43–51 <0.1 45 43–48 43–48 <0.1 146
147 45 43–50 42–50 <0.1 45 43–48 43–48 <0.1 147
148 44 42–49 41–49 <0.1 44 42–47 42–47 <0.1 148
149 44 42–49 41–49 <0.1 44 42–47 42–47 <0.1 149
150 43 41–48 40–48 <0.1 43 41–46 41–46 <0.1 150
151 43 41–48 40–48 <0.1 43 41–46 41–46 <0.1 151
152 42 40–47 39–47 <0.1 42 40–45 40–45 <0.1 152
153 41 39–46 38–46 <0.1 42 40–45 40–45 <0.1 153
154 40 38–45 37–45 <0.1 41 39–44 39–45 <0.1 154
155 40 38–45 37–45 <0.1 41 39–44 39–45 <0.1 155
156–160 40 38–45 37–45 <0.1 40 38–43 38–44 <0.1 156–160

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix A ■ Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles 85

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 85 8/31/15 3:39 PM


tab_9_klpa3_normgrp5

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex (continued)
Ages 2:8–2:9
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
0 135 131–138 130–138 99 129 126–131 126–132 97 0
1 131 127–134 126–134 98 124 121–126 121–127 95 1
2 128 124–131 123–132 97 121 118–123 118–124 92 2
3 125 121–128 120–129 95 120 117–122 117–123 91 3
4 124 120–127 119–128 95 119 116–121 116–122 90 4
5 123 119–126 118–127 94 118 115–120 115–121 88 5
6 122 118–125 117–126 93 117 114–119 114–120 87 6
7 121 117–124 117–125 92 116 113–118 113–119 86 7
8 120 116–123 116–124 91 115 112–117 112–118 84 8
9 119 115–122 115–123 90 114 111–116 111–117 82 9
10 118 114–121 114–122 88 113 110–115 110–116 81 10
11 117 113–120 113–121 87 112 109–114 109–115 79 11
12 116 112–119 112–120 86 111 108–113 108–114 77 12
13 115 111–118 111–119 84 111 108–113 108–114 77 13
14 114 110–117 110–118 82 110 107–112 107–113 75 14
15 113 109–116 109–117 81 110 107–112 107–113 75 15

SAMPLE,
16 112 108–115 108–116 79 109 106–111 106–112 73 16
17 111 107–114 107–115 77 109 106–111 106–112 73 17
18 110 106–113 106–114 75 108 105–110 105–111 70 18
19 109 105–112 105–113 73 108 105–110 105–111 70 19
20 108 104–111 104–112 70 107 104–109 104–110 68 20

NOT FOR
21 107 103–110 103–111 68 107 104–109 104–110 68 21
22 107 103–110 103–111 68 106 103–108 103–109 66 22
23 106 102–109 102–110 66 106 103–108 103–109 66 23
24 105 101–108 101–109 63 105 103–107 102–108 63 24

ADMINISTRATION
25 105 101–108 101–109 63 105 103–107 102–108 63 25
26 104 101–107 100–108 61 104 102–106 101–107 61 26
27 103 100–106 99–107 58 104 102–106 101–107 61 27
28 102 99–105 98–106 55 103 101–105 100–106 58 28
29 102 99–105 98–106 55 103 101–105 100–106 58 29

OR RESALE
30 101 98–104 97–105 53 102 100–104 99–105 55 30
31 100 97–103 96–104 50 102 100–104 99–105 55 31
32 99 96–102 95–103 47 101 99–103 98–104 53 32
33 98 95–101 94–102 45 101 99–103 98–104 53 33
34 98 95–101 94–102 45 100 98–102 97–103 50 34
35 97 94–100 93–101 42 99 97–101 96–102 47 35
36 97 94–100 93–101 42 99 97–101 96–102 47 36
37 96 93–99 92–100 39 98 96–100 95–101 45 37
38 95 92–99 91–99 37 98 96–100 95–101 45 38
39 95 92–99 91–99 37 97 95–99 94–100 42 39
40 94 91–98 90–98 34 97 95–99 94–100 42 40
41 94 91–98 90–98 34 96 94–98 93–99 39 41
42 93 90–97 89–97 32 96 94–98 93–99 39 42
43 93 90–97 89–97 32 95 93–97 92–98 37 43
44 93 90–97 89–97 32 95 93–97 92–98 37 44
45 92 89–96 88–96 30 94 92–97 91–97 34 45
46 92 89–96 88–96 30 94 92–97 91–97 34 46
47 91 88–95 87–95 27 93 91–96 90–96 32 47
48 91 88–95 87–95 27 93 91–96 90–96 32 48
49 90 87–94 86–94 25 92 90–95 89–95 30 49
50 90 87–94 86–94 25 91 89–94 88–94 27 50
51 89 86–93 85–93 23 91 89–94 88–94 27 51
52 89 86–93 85–93 23 90 88–93 87–93 25 52
53 88 85–92 84–92 21 90 88–93 87–93 25 53
54 88 85–92 84–92 21 89 87–92 86–92 23 54

86 Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix A ■ Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 86 8/31/15 3:39 PM


tab_9_klpa3_normgrp5 cont.

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex (continued)
Ages 2:8–2:9
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
55 87 84–91 83–91 19 89 87–92 86–92 23 55
56 87 84–91 83–91 19 88 86–91 85–91 21 56
57 86 83–90 82–90 18 88 86–91 85–91 21 57
58 85 82–89 81–89 16 87 85–90 84–90 19 58
59 85 82–89 81–89 16 87 85–90 84–90 19 59
60 84 81–88 80–88 14 86 84–89 83–89 18 60
61 84 81–88 80–88 14 85 83–88 82–88 16 61
62 83 80–87 79–87 13 85 83–88 82–88 16 62
63 83 80–87 79–87 13 84 82–87 81–87 14 63
64 82 79–86 78–86 12 84 82–87 81–87 14 64
65 82 79–86 78–86 12 83 81–86 80–86 13 65
66 81 78–85 77–85 10 83 81–86 80–86 13 66
67 81 78–85 77–85 10 82 80–85 79–85 12 67
68 80 77–84 76–84 9 82 80–85 79–85 12 68
69 80 77–84 76–84 9 81 79–84 78–84 10 69
70 79 76–83 75–83 8 81 79–84 78–84 10 70

SAMPLE,
71 78 75–82 74–83 7 80 78–83 77–83 9 71
72 78 75–82 74–83 7 80 78–83 77–83 9 72
73 77 74–81 73–82 6 79 77–82 76–82 8 73
74 77 74–81 73–82 6 79 77–82 76–82 8 74
75 76 73–80 72–81 5 78 76–81 75–81 7 75

NOT FOR
76 76 73–80 72–81 5 78 76–81 75–81 7 76
77 75 72–79 71–80 5 77 75–80 74–80 6 77
78 75 72–79 71–80 5 77 75–80 74–80 6 78
79 74 71–78 70–79 4 77 75–80 74–80 6 79

ADMINISTRATION
80 74 71–78 70–79 4 76 74–79 73–79 5 80
81 73 70–77 69–78 4 76 74–79 73–79 5 81
82 73 70–77 69–78 4 75 73–78 72–78 5 82
83 72 69–76 68–77 3 75 73–78 72–78 5 83
84 72 69–76 68–77 3 74 72–77 71–77 4 84

OR RESALE
85 72 69–76 68–77 3 74 72–77 71–77 4 85
86 71 68–75 68–76 3 73 71–76 70–76 4 86
87 71 68–75 68–76 3 73 71–76 70–76 4 87
88 70 67–74 67–75 2 72 70–75 69–75 3 88
89 70 67–74 67–75 2 72 70–75 69–75 3 89
90 69 66–73 66–74 2 71 69–74 68–74 3 90
91 69 66–73 66–74 2 71 69–74 68–74 3 91
92 68 65–72 65–73 2 70 68–73 67–73 2 92
93 68 65–72 65–73 2 70 68–73 67–73 2 93
94 67 64–71 64–72 1 69 67–72 66–72 2 94
95 67 64–71 64–72 1 69 67–72 66–72 2 95
96 67 64–71 64–72 1 68 66–71 65–71 2 96
97 66 63–70 63–71 1 68 66–71 65–71 2 97
98 66 63–70 63–71 1 67 65–70 64–70 1 98
99 66 63–70 63–71 1 67 65–70 64–70 1 99
100 65 62–69 62–70 1 66 64–69 63–69 1 100
101 65 62–69 62–70 1 66 64–69 63–69 1 101
102 64 61–68 61–69 1 65 63–68 62–68 1 102
103 64 61–68 61–69 1 65 63–68 62–68 1 103
104 64 61–68 61–69 1 64 62–67 61–67 1 104
105 63 60–67 60–68 1 64 62–67 61–67 1 105
106 63 60–67 60–68 1 63 61–66 60–66 1 106
107 63 60–67 60–68 1 63 61–66 60–66 1 107
108 62 59–66 59–67 1 62 60–65 59–65 1 108
109 62 59–66 59–67 1 62 60–65 59–65 1 109

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix A ■ Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles 87

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 87 8/31/15 3:39 PM


tab_9_klpa3_normgrp5 cont.

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex (continued)
Ages 2:8–2:9
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
110 62 59–66 59–67 1 62 60–65 59–65 1 110
111 61 58–65 58–66 0.5 61 59–64 58–64 0.5 111
112 61 58–65 58–66 0.5 61 59–64 58–64 0.5 112
113 60 57–64 57–65 0.4 60 58–63 57–63 0.4 113
114 60 57–64 57–65 0.4 60 58–63 57–63 0.4 114
115 59 56–63 56–64 0.3 59 57–62 56–62 0.3 115
116 59 56–63 56–64 0.3 59 57–62 56–62 0.3 116
117 59 56–63 56–64 0.3 59 57–62 56–62 0.3 117
118 58 55–62 55–63 0.3 58 56–61 56–61 0.3 118
119 58 55–62 55–63 0.3 58 56–61 56–61 0.3 119
120 57 54–61 54–62 0.2 57 55–60 55–60 0.2 120
121 57 54–61 54–62 0.2 57 55–60 55–60 0.2 121
122 57 54–61 54–62 0.2 56 54–59 54–59 0.2 122
123 56 53–60 53–61 0.2 56 54–59 54–59 0.2 123
124 56 53–60 53–61 0.2 55 53–58 53–58 0.1 124
125 55 52–59 52–60 0.1 55 53–58 53–58 0.1 125

SAMPLE,
126 55 52–59 52–60 0.1 54 52–57 52–57 0.1 126
127 54 52–58 51–59 0.1 54 52–57 52–57 0.1 127
128 54 52–58 51–59 0.1 53 51–56 51–56 0.1 128
129 53 51–57 50–58 0.1 53 51–56 51–56 0.1 129
130 53 51–57 50–58 0.1 52 50–55 50–55 0.1 130

NOT FOR
131 52 50–56 49–57 0.1 52 50–55 50–55 0.1 131
132 52 50–56 49–57 0.1 51 49–54 49–54 0.1 132
133 52 50–56 49–57 0.1 51 49–54 49–54 0.1 133
134 51 49–55 48–56 0.1 50 48–53 48–53 <0.1 134

ADMINISTRATION
135 51 49–55 48–56 0.1 50 48–53 48–53 <0.1 135
136 50 48–54 47–55 <0.1 49 47–52 47–52 <0.1 136
137 50 48–54 47–55 <0.1 49 47–52 47–52 <0.1 137
138 49 47–53 46–54 <0.1 48 46–51 46–51 <0.1 138
139 48 46–52 45–53 <0.1 48 46–51 46–51 <0.1 139

OR RESALE
140 48 46–52 45–53 <0.1 47 45–50 45–50 <0.1 140
141 47 45–51 44–52 <0.1 47 45–50 45–50 <0.1 141
142 46 44–50 43–51 <0.1 46 44–49 44–49 <0.1 142
143 46 44–50 43–51 <0.1 46 44–49 44–49 <0.1 143
144 45 43–50 42–50 <0.1 45 43–48 43–48 <0.1 144
145 44 42–49 41–49 <0.1 45 43–48 43–48 <0.1 145
146 43 41–48 40–48 <0.1 44 42–47 42–47 <0.1 146
147 42 40–47 39–47 <0.1 44 42–47 42–47 <0.1 147
148 42 40–47 39–47 <0.1 43 41–46 41–46 <0.1 148
149 41 39–46 38–46 <0.1 43 41–46 41–46 <0.1 149
150 41 39–46 38–46 <0.1 42 40–45 40–45 <0.1 150
151 40 38–45 37–45 <0.1 42 40–45 40–45 <0.1 151
152 40 38–45 37–45 <0.1 41 39–44 39–45 <0.1 152
153 40 38–45 37–45 <0.1 41 39–44 39–45 <0.1 153
154–160 40 38–45 37–45 <0.1 40 38–43 38–44 <0.1 154–160

88 Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix A ■ Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 88 8/31/15 3:39 PM


tab_9_klpa3_normgrp6

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex (continued)
Ages 2:10–2:11
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
0 134 130–137 129–137 99 128 125–130 125–131 97 0
1 130 126–133 125–133 98 124 121–126 121–127 95 1
2 127 123–130 122–131 96 121 118–123 118–124 92 2
3 124 120–127 119–128 95 120 117–122 117–123 91 3
4 122 118–125 117–126 93 119 116–121 116–122 90 4
5 121 117–124 117–125 92 118 115–120 115–121 88 5
6 120 116–123 116–124 91 117 114–119 114–120 87 6
7 119 115–122 115–123 90 116 113–118 113–119 86 7
8 118 114–121 114–122 88 115 112–117 112–118 84 8
9 117 113–120 113–121 87 114 111–116 111–117 82 9
10 116 112–119 112–120 86 113 110–115 110–116 81 10
11 115 111–118 111–119 84 112 109–114 109–115 79 11
12 114 110–117 110–118 82 111 108–113 108–114 77 12
13 113 109–116 109–117 81 111 108–113 108–114 77 13
14 112 108–115 108–116 79 110 107–112 107–113 75 14
15 111 107–114 107–115 77 109 106–111 106–112 73 15

SAMPLE,
16 110 106–113 106–114 75 109 106–111 106–112 73 16
17 109 105–112 105–113 73 108 105–110 105–111 70 17
18 108 104–111 104–112 70 108 105–110 105–111 70 18
19 107 103–110 103–111 68 107 104–109 104–110 68 19
20 106 102–109 102–110 66 107 104–109 104–110 68 20

NOT FOR
21 105 101–108 101–109 63 106 103–108 103–109 66 21
22 104 101–107 100–108 61 105 103–107 102–108 63 22
23 103 100–106 99–107 58 105 103–107 102–108 63 23
24 102 99–105 98–106 55 104 102–106 101–107 61 24

ADMINISTRATION
25 102 99–105 98–106 55 104 102–106 101–107 61 25
26 101 98–104 97–105 53 103 101–105 100–106 58 26
27 101 98–104 97–105 53 103 101–105 100–106 58 27
28 100 97–103 96–104 50 102 100–104 99–105 55 28
29 99 96–102 95–103 47 102 100–104 99–105 55 29

OR RESALE
30 98 95–101 94–102 45 101 99–103 98–104 53 30
31 98 95–101 94–102 45 101 99–103 98–104 53 31
32 97 94–100 93–101 42 100 98–102 97–103 50 32
33 97 94–100 93–101 42 99 97–101 96–102 47 33
34 96 93–99 92–100 39 99 97–101 96–102 47 34
35 96 93–99 92–100 39 98 96–100 95–101 45 35
36 95 92–99 91–99 37 98 96–100 95–101 45 36
37 94 91–98 90–98 34 97 95–99 94–100 42 37
38 94 91–98 90–98 34 97 95–99 94–100 42 38
39 93 90–97 89–97 32 96 94–98 93–99 39 39
40 93 90–97 89–97 32 96 94–98 93–99 39 40
41 92 89–96 88–96 30 95 93–97 92–98 37 41
42 92 89–96 88–96 30 94 92–97 91–97 34 42
43 91 88–95 87–95 27 94 92–97 91–97 34 43
44 91 88–95 87–95 27 93 91–96 90–96 32 44
45 90 87–94 86–94 25 93 91–96 90–96 32 45
46 90 87–94 86–94 25 92 90–95 89–95 30 46
47 89 86–93 85–93 23 92 90–95 89–95 30 47
48 89 86–93 85–93 23 91 89–94 88–94 27 48
49 88 85–92 84–92 21 91 89–94 88–94 27 49
50 88 85–92 84–92 21 90 88–93 87–93 25 50
51 87 84–91 83–91 19 90 88–93 87–93 25 51
52 87 84–91 83–91 19 89 87–92 86–92 23 52
53 86 83–90 82–90 18 89 87–92 86–92 23 53
54 86 83–90 82–90 18 88 86–91 85–91 21 54

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix A ■ Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles 89

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 89 8/31/15 3:39 PM


tab_9_klpa3_normgrp6 cont.

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex (continued)
Ages 2:10–2:11
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
55 85 82–89 81–89 16 87 85–90 84–90 19 55
56 85 82–89 81–89 16 87 85–90 84–90 19 56
57 84 81–88 80–88 14 86 84–89 83–89 18 57
58 84 81–88 80–88 14 86 84–89 83–89 18 58
59 83 80–87 79–87 13 85 83–88 82–88 16 59
60 83 80–87 79–87 13 85 83–88 82–88 16 60
61 82 79–86 78–86 12 84 82–87 81–87 14 61
62 82 79–86 78–86 12 84 82–87 81–87 14 62
63 81 78–85 77–85 10 83 81–86 80–86 13 63
64 80 77–84 76–84 9 83 81–86 80–86 13 64
65 80 77–84 76–84 9 82 80–85 79–85 12 65
66 79 76–83 75–83 8 82 80–85 79–85 12 66
67 79 76–83 75–83 8 81 79–84 78–84 10 67
68 78 75–82 74–83 7 81 79–84 78–84 10 68
69 78 75–82 74–83 7 80 78–83 77–83 9 69
70 77 74–81 73–82 6 80 78–83 77–83 9 70

SAMPLE,
71 77 74–81 73–82 6 79 77–82 76–82 8 71
72 76 73–80 72–81 5 79 77–82 76–82 8 72
73 76 73–80 72–81 5 78 76–81 75–81 7 73
74 75 72–79 71–80 5 78 76–81 75–81 7 74
75 75 72–79 71–80 5 77 75–80 74–80 6 75

NOT FOR
76 74 71–78 70–79 4 77 75–80 74–80 6 76
77 74 71–78 70–79 4 77 75–80 74–80 6 77
78 73 70–77 69–78 4 76 74–79 73–79 5 78
79 73 70–77 69–78 4 76 74–79 73–79 5 79

ADMINISTRATION
80 72 69–76 68–77 3 75 73–78 72–78 5 80
81 72 69–76 68–77 3 75 73–78 72–78 5 81
82 71 68–75 68–76 3 74 72–77 71–77 4 82
83 71 68–75 68–76 3 74 72–77 71–77 4 83
84 70 67–74 67–75 2 73 71–76 70–76 4 84

OR RESALE
85 70 67–74 67–75 2 73 71–76 70–76 4 85
86 69 66–73 66–74 2 72 70–75 69–75 3 86
87 69 66–73 66–74 2 72 70–75 69–75 3 87
88 69 66–73 66–74 2 71 69–74 68–74 3 88
89 68 65–72 65–73 2 71 69–74 68–74 3 89
90 68 65–72 65–73 2 70 68–73 67–73 2 90
91 68 65–72 65–73 2 70 68–73 67–73 2 91
92 67 64–71 64–72 1 69 67–72 66–72 2 92
93 67 64–71 64–72 1 69 67–72 66–72 2 93
94 67 64–71 64–72 1 68 66–71 65–71 2 94
95 66 63–70 63–71 1 68 66–71 65–71 2 95
96 66 63–70 63–71 1 67 65–70 64–70 1 96
97 66 63–70 63–71 1 67 65–70 64–70 1 97
98 65 62–69 62–70 1 66 64–69 63–69 1 98
99 65 62–69 62–70 1 66 64–69 63–69 1 99
100 64 61–68 61–69 1 65 63–68 62–68 1 100
101 64 61–68 61–69 1 65 63–68 62–68 1 101
102 64 61–68 61–69 1 64 62–67 61–67 1 102
103 63 60–67 60–68 1 64 62–67 61–67 1 103
104 63 60–67 60–68 1 63 61–66 60–66 1 104
105 63 60–67 60–68 1 63 61–66 60–66 1 105
106 62 59–66 59–67 1 62 60–65 59–65 1 106
107 62 59–66 59–67 1 62 60–65 59–65 1 107
108 62 59–66 59–67 1 62 60–65 59–65 1 108
109 61 58–65 58–66 0.5 61 59–64 58–64 0.5 109

90 Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix A ■ Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 90 8/31/15 3:39 PM


tab_9_klpa3_normgrp6 cont.

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex (continued)
Ages 2:10–2:11
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
110 61 58–65 58–66 0.5 61 59–64 58–64 0.5 110
111 61 58–65 58–66 0.5 60 58–63 57–63 0.4 111
112 60 57–64 57–65 0.4 60 58–63 57–63 0.4 112
113 59 56–63 56–64 0.3 60 58–63 57–63 0.4 113
114 59 56–63 56–64 0.3 59 57–62 56–62 0.3 114
115 58 55–62 55–63 0.3 59 57–62 56–62 0.3 115
116 58 55–62 55–63 0.3 58 56–61 56–61 0.3 116
117 58 55–62 55–63 0.3 57 55–60 55–60 0.2 117
118 57 54–61 54–62 0.2 57 55–60 55–60 0.2 118
119 57 54–61 54–62 0.2 56 54–59 54–59 0.2 119
120 56 53–60 53–61 0.2 55 53–58 53–58 0.1 120
121 56 53–60 53–61 0.2 55 53–58 53–58 0.1 121
122 55 52–59 52–60 0.1 54 52–57 52–57 0.1 122
123 55 52–59 52–60 0.1 54 52–57 52–57 0.1 123
124 54 52–58 51–59 0.1 54 52–57 52–57 0.1 124
125 54 52–58 51–59 0.1 53 51–56 51–56 0.1 125

SAMPLE,
126 53 51–57 50–58 0.1 53 51–56 51–56 0.1 126
127 53 51–57 50–58 0.1 52 50–55 50–55 0.1 127
128 52 50–56 49–57 0.1 52 50–55 50–55 0.1 128
129 52 50–56 49–57 0.1 51 49–54 49–54 0.1 129
130 51 49–55 48–56 0.1 51 49–54 49–54 0.1 130

NOT FOR
131 51 49–55 48–56 0.1 50 48–53 48–53 <0.1 131
132 50 48–54 47–55 <0.1 50 48–53 48–53 <0.1 132
133 50 48–54 47–55 <0.1 49 47–52 47–52 <0.1 133
134 49 47–53 46–54 <0.1 49 47–52 47–52 <0.1 134

ADMINISTRATION
135 49 47–53 46–54 <0.1 48 46–51 46–51 <0.1 135
136 48 46–52 45–53 <0.1 48 46–51 46–51 <0.1 136
137 48 46–52 45–53 <0.1 47 45–50 45–50 <0.1 137
138 47 45–51 44–52 <0.1 47 45–50 45–50 <0.1 138
139 46 44–50 43–51 <0.1 46 44–49 44–49 <0.1 139

OR RESALE
140 46 44–50 43–51 <0.1 46 44–49 44–49 <0.1 140
141 45 43–50 42–50 <0.1 45 43–48 43–48 <0.1 141
142 44 42–49 41–49 <0.1 45 43–48 43–48 <0.1 142
143 44 42–49 41–49 <0.1 44 42–47 42–47 <0.1 143
144 43 41–48 40–48 <0.1 44 42–47 42–47 <0.1 144
145 43 41–48 40–48 <0.1 43 41–46 41–46 <0.1 145
146 42 40–47 39–47 <0.1 43 41–46 41–46 <0.1 146
147 41 39–46 38–46 <0.1 42 40–45 40–45 <0.1 147
148 40 38–45 37–45 <0.1 42 40–45 40–45 <0.1 148
149 40 38–45 37–45 <0.1 41 39–44 39–45 <0.1 149
150 40 38–45 37–45 <0.1 41 39–44 39–45 <0.1 150
151–160 40 38–45 37–45 <0.1 40 38–43 38–44 <0.1 151

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix A ■ Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles 91

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 91 8/31/15 3:39 PM


tab_9_klpa3_normgrp7

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex (continued)
Ages 3:0–3:1
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
0 132 127–135 126–136 98 127 118–131 117–133 96 0
1 129 124–132 123–133 97 123 114–128 113–129 94 1
2 126 121–129 120–130 96 120 111–125 110–126 91 2
3 124 119–127 118–128 95 119 111–124 109–125 90 3
4 122 117–125 116–126 93 118 110–123 108–124 88 4
5 120 115–124 114–124 91 117 109–122 107–123 87 5
6 119 114–123 113–123 90 116 108–121 107–123 86 6
7 118 113–122 113–122 88 115 107–120 106–122 84 7
8 117 112–121 112–121 87 114 106–119 105–121 82 8
9 116 111–120 111–120 86 113 105–119 104–120 81 9
10 115 110–119 110–119 84 112 104–118 103–119 79 10
11 114 109–118 109–119 82 111 103–117 102–118 77 11
12 113 108–117 108–118 81 111 103–117 102–118 77 12
13 112 107–116 107–117 79 110 102–116 101–117 75 13
14 111 107–115 106–116 77 109 101–115 100–116 73 14
15 110 106–114 105–115 75 108 101–114 99–115 70 15

SAMPLE,
16 109 105–113 104–114 73 108 101–114 99–115 70 16
17 108 104–112 103–113 70 107 100–113 98–114 68 17
18 107 103–111 102–112 68 106 99–112 97–113 66 18
19 106 102–110 101–111 66 106 99–112 97–113 66 19
20 106 102–110 101–111 66 105 98–111 97–113 63 20

NOT FOR
21 105 101–109 100–110 63 105 98–111 97–113 63 21
22 104 100–108 99–109 61 104 97–110 96–112 61 22
23 103 99–107 98–108 58 104 97–110 96–112 61 23
24 102 98–106 97–107 55 103 96–109 95–111 58 24

ADMINISTRATION
25 101 97–105 96–106 53 103 96–109 95–111 58 25
26 100 96–104 95–105 50 102 95–109 94–110 55 26
27 99 95–103 94–104 47 102 95–109 94–110 55 27
28 98 94–102 93–103 45 101 94–108 93–109 53 28
29 97 93–101 92–102 42 101 94–108 93–109 53 29

OR RESALE
30 97 93–101 92–102 42 100 93–107 92–108 50 30
31 96 92–100 91–101 39 100 93–107 92–108 50 31
32 95 91–99 90–100 37 99 92–106 91–107 47 32
33 95 91–99 90–100 37 98 91–105 90–106 45 33
34 94 90–98 89–99 34 98 91–105 90–106 45 34
35 94 90–98 89–99 34 97 91–104 89–105 42 35
36 93 89–97 88–98 32 97 91–104 89–105 42 36
37 93 89–97 88–98 32 96 90–103 88–104 39 37
38 93 89–97 88–98 32 96 90–103 88–104 39 38
39 92 88–96 87–97 30 95 89–102 87–103 37 39
40 92 88–96 87–97 30 94 88–101 87–103 34 40
41 91 87–95 86–96 27 94 88–101 87–103 34 41
42 91 87–95 86–96 27 93 87–100 86–102 32 42
43 90 86–94 85–95 25 93 87–100 86–102 32 43
44 90 86–94 85–95 25 92 86–99 85–101 30 44
45 89 85–93 84–94 23 92 86–99 85–101 30 45
46 89 85–93 84–94 23 91 85–99 84–100 27 46
47 88 84–93 83–93 21 91 85–99 84–100 27 47
48 88 84–93 83–93 21 90 84–98 83–99 25 48
49 87 83–92 82–92 19 90 84–98 83–99 25 49
50 87 83–92 82–92 19 89 83–97 82–98 23 50
51 86 82–91 81–91 18 89 83–97 82–98 23 51
52 86 82–91 81–91 18 88 82–96 81–97 21 52
53 85 81–90 81–90 16 87 81–95 80–96 19 53
54 85 81–90 81–90 16 87 81–95 80–96 19 54

92 Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix A ■ Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 92 8/31/15 3:39 PM


tab_9_klpa3_normgrp7 cont.

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex (continued)
Ages 3:0–3:1
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
55 84 80–89 80–89 14 86 81–94 79–95 18 55
56 83 79–88 79–88 13 86 81–94 79–95 18 56
57 83 79–88 79–88 13 85 80–93 78–94 16 57
58 82 78–87 78–87 12 85 80–93 78–94 16 58
59 82 78–87 78–87 12 84 79–92 77–93 14 59
60 81 77–86 77–87 10 84 79–92 77–93 14 60
61 81 77–86 77–87 10 83 78–91 77–93 13 61
62 80 76–85 76–86 9 83 78–91 77–93 13 62
63 80 76–85 76–86 9 82 77–90 76–92 12 63
64 79 75–84 75–85 8 82 77–90 76–92 12 64
65 79 75–84 75–85 8 81 76–89 75–91 10 65
66 78 75–83 74–84 7 81 76–89 75–91 10 66
67 78 75–83 74–84 7 80 75–89 74–90 9 67
68 77 74–82 73–83 6 80 75–89 74–90 9 68
69 77 74–82 73–83 6 79 74–88 73–89 8 69
70 76 73–81 72–82 5 79 74–88 73–89 8 70

SAMPLE,
71 76 73–81 72–82 5 78 73–87 72–88 7 71
72 75 72–80 71–81 5 78 73–87 72–88 7 72
73 75 72–80 71–81 5 77 72–86 71–87 6 73
74 74 71–79 70–80 4 77 72–86 71–87 6 74
75 74 71–79 70–80 4 76 71–85 70–86 5 75

NOT FOR
76 73 70–78 69–79 4 76 71–85 70–86 5 76
77 73 70–78 69–79 4 76 71–85 70–86 5 77
78 72 69–77 68–78 3 75 71–84 69–85 5 78
79 72 69–77 68–78 3 75 71–84 69–85 5 79

ADMINISTRATION
80 71 68–76 67–77 3 74 70–83 68–84 4 80
81 71 68–76 67–77 3 74 70–83 68–84 4 81
82 70 67–75 66–76 2 73 69–82 67–83 4 82
83 70 67–75 66–76 2 73 69–82 67–83 4 83
84 69 66–74 65–75 2 72 68–81 66–83 3 84

OR RESALE
85 69 66–74 65–75 2 72 68–81 66–83 3 85
86 69 66–74 65–75 2 71 67–80 66–82 3 86
87 68 65–73 64–74 2 71 67–80 66–82 3 87
88 68 65–73 64–74 2 70 66–79 65–81 2 88
89 68 65–73 64–74 2 70 66–79 65–81 2 89
90 67 64–72 63–73 1 70 66–79 65–81 2 90
91 67 64–72 63–73 1 69 65–79 64–80 2 91
92 67 64–72 63–73 1 68 64–78 63–79 2 92
93 66 63–71 62–72 1 68 64–78 63–79 2 93
94 66 63–71 62–72 1 68 64–78 63–79 2 94
95 66 63–71 62–72 1 67 63–77 62–78 1 95
96 65 62–70 61–71 1 67 63–77 62–78 1 96
97 65 62–70 61–71 1 66 62–76 61–77 1 97
98 64 61–69 60–70 1 66 62–76 61–77 1 98
99 64 61–69 60–70 1 65 61–75 60–76 1 99
100 64 61–69 60–70 1 65 61–75 60–76 1 100
101 63 60–68 59–69 1 64 61–74 59–75 1 101
102 63 60–68 59–69 1 64 61–74 59–75 1 102
103 63 60–68 59–69 1 63 60–73 58–74 1 103
104 62 59–67 58–68 1 63 60–73 58–74 1 104
105 62 59–67 58–68 1 62 59–72 57–73 1 105
106 62 59–67 58–68 1 62 59–72 57–73 1 106
107 61 58–66 57–67 0.5 61 58–71 56–73 0.5 107
108 61 58–66 57–67 0.5 61 58–71 56–73 0.5 108
109 60 57–65 56–66 0.4 61 58–71 56–73 0.5 109

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix A ■ Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles 93

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 93 8/31/15 3:39 PM


tab_9_klpa3_normgrp7 cont.

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex (continued)
Ages 3:0–3:1
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
110 60 57–65 56–66 0.4 60 57–70 56–72 0.4 110
111 59 56–64 55–65 0.3 60 57–70 56–72 0.4 111
112 59 56–64 55–65 0.3 60 57–70 56–72 0.4 112
113 58 55–63 54–64 0.3 59 56–69 55–71 0.3 113
114 58 55–63 54–64 0.3 59 56–69 55–71 0.3 114
115 57 54–62 53–63 0.2 58 55–69 54–70 0.3 115
116 57 54–62 53–63 0.2 58 55–69 54–70 0.3 116
117 56 53–61 52–62 0.2 57 54–68 53–69 0.2 117
118 56 53–61 52–62 0.2 57 54–68 53–69 0.2 118
119 55 52–60 51–61 0.1 56 53–67 52–68 0.2 119
120 55 52–60 51–61 0.1 55 52–66 51–67 0.1 120
121 54 51–60 50–60 0.1 55 52–66 51–67 0.1 121
122 54 51–60 50–60 0.1 54 51–65 50–66 0.1 122
123 53 50–59 49–59 0.1 53 50–64 49–65 0.1 123
124 53 50–59 49–59 0.1 53 50–64 49–65 0.1 124
125 52 49–58 49–58 0.1 53 50–64 49–65 0.1 125

SAMPLE,
126 52 49–58 49–58 0.1 52 50–63 48–64 0.1 126
127 51 48–57 48–57 0.1 52 50–63 48–64 0.1 127
128 51 48–57 48–57 0.1 51 49–62 47–63 0.1 128
129 50 47–56 47–56 <0.1 51 49–62 47–63 0.1 129
130 50 47–56 47–56 <0.1 50 48–61 46–63 <0.1 130

NOT FOR
131 49 46–55 46–55 <0.1 50 48–61 46–63 <0.1 131
132 48 45–54 45–54 <0.1 49 47–60 46–62 <0.1 132
133 48 45–54 45–54 <0.1 49 47–60 46–62 <0.1 133
134 47 44–53 44–54 <0.1 48 46–59 45–61 <0.1 134

ADMINISTRATION
135 47 44–53 44–54 <0.1 48 46–59 45–61 <0.1 135
136 46 43–52 43–53 <0.1 47 45–59 44–60 <0.1 136
137 46 43–52 43–53 <0.1 47 45–59 44–60 <0.1 137
138 45 43–51 42–52 <0.1 46 44–58 43–59 <0.1 138
139 44 42–50 41–51 <0.1 46 44–58 43–59 <0.1 139

OR RESALE
140 43 41–49 40–50 <0.1 45 43–57 42–58 <0.1 140
141 43 41–49 40–50 <0.1 45 43–57 42–58 <0.1 141
142 42 40–48 39–49 <0.1 44 42–56 41–57 <0.1 142
143 41 39–47 38–48 <0.1 44 42–56 41–57 <0.1 143
144 41 39–47 38–48 <0.1 43 41–55 40–56 <0.1 144
145 40 38–46 37–47 <0.1 43 41–55 40–56 <0.1 145
146 40 38–46 37–47 <0.1 42 40–54 39–55 <0.1 146
147 40 38–46 37–47 <0.1 42 40–54 39–55 <0.1 147
148 40 38–46 37–47 <0.1 41 40–53 38–54 <0.1 148
149 40 38–46 37–47 <0.1 41 40–53 38–54 <0.1 149
150–160 40 38–46 37–47 <0.1 40 39–52 37–53 <0.1 150–160

94 Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix A ■ Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 94 8/31/15 3:39 PM


tab_9_klpa3_normgrp8

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex (continued)
Ages 3:2–3:3
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
0 130 125–133 124–134 98 127 118–131 117–133 96 0
1 127 122–130 121–131 96 123 114–128 113–129 94 1
2 125 120–128 119–129 95 120 111–125 110–126 91 2
3 123 118–126 117–127 94 118 110–123 108–124 88 3
4 120 115–124 114–124 91 117 109–122 107–123 87 4
5 118 113–122 113–122 88 116 108–121 107–123 86 5
6 117 112–121 112–121 87 115 107–120 106–122 84 6
7 116 111–120 111–120 86 114 106–119 105–121 82 7
8 115 110–119 110–119 84 113 105–119 104–120 81 8
9 114 109–118 109–119 82 112 104–118 103–119 79 9
10 113 108–117 108–118 81 111 103–117 102–118 77 10
11 112 107–116 107–117 79 110 102–116 101–117 75 11
12 111 107–115 106–116 77 109 101–115 100–116 73 12
13 110 106–114 105–115 75 108 101–114 99–115 70 13
14 109 105–113 104–114 73 108 101–114 99–115 70 14
15 108 104–112 103–113 70 107 100–113 98–114 68 15

SAMPLE,
16 107 103–111 102–112 68 107 100–113 98–114 68 16
17 106 102–110 101–111 66 106 99–112 97–113 66 17
18 105 101–109 100–110 63 105 98–111 97–113 63 18
19 104 100–108 99–109 61 105 98–111 97–113 63 19
20 103 99–107 98–108 58 104 97–110 96–112 61 20

NOT FOR
21 102 98–106 97–107 55 103 96–109 95–111 58 21
22 102 98–106 97–107 55 103 96–109 95–111 58 22
23 101 97–105 96–106 53 102 95–109 94–110 55 23
24 100 96–104 95–105 50 102 95–109 94–110 55 24

ADMINISTRATION
25 100 96–104 95–105 50 101 94–108 93–109 53 25
26 99 95–103 94–104 47 101 94–108 93–109 53 26
27 98 94–102 93–103 45 100 93–107 92–108 50 27
28 97 93–101 92–102 42 100 93–107 92–108 50 28
29 97 93–101 92–102 42 99 92–106 91–107 47 29

OR RESALE
30 96 92–100 91–101 39 99 92–106 91–107 47 30
31 95 91–99 90–100 37 98 91–105 90–106 45 31
32 95 91–99 90–100 37 98 91–105 90–106 45 32
33 94 90–98 89–99 34 97 91–104 89–105 42 33
34 94 90–98 89–99 34 97 91–104 89–105 42 34
35 93 89–97 88–98 32 96 90–103 88–104 39 35
36 93 89–97 88–98 32 96 90–103 88–104 39 36
37 93 89–97 88–98 32 95 89–102 87–103 37 37
38 92 88–96 87–97 30 94 88–101 87–103 34 38
39 92 88–96 87–97 30 94 88–101 87–103 34 39
40 91 87–95 86–96 27 93 87–100 86–102 32 40
41 91 87–95 86–96 27 93 87–100 86–102 32 41
42 90 86–94 85–95 25 92 86–99 85–101 30 42
43 90 86–94 85–95 25 92 86–99 85–101 30 43
44 89 85–93 84–94 23 91 85–99 84–100 27 44
45 88 84–93 83–93 21 91 85–99 84–100 27 45
46 88 84–93 83–93 21 90 84–98 83–99 25 46
47 87 83–92 82–92 19 90 84–98 83–99 25 47
48 86 82–91 81–91 18 89 83–97 82–98 23 48
49 86 82–91 81–91 18 89 83–97 82–98 23 49
50 85 81–90 81–90 16 88 82–96 81–97 21 50
51 84 80–89 80–89 14 88 82–96 81–97 21 51
52 84 80–89 80–89 14 87 81–95 80–96 19 52
53 83 79–88 79–88 13 87 81–95 80–96 19 53
54 83 79–88 79–88 13 86 81–94 79–95 18 54

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix A ■ Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles 95

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 95 8/31/15 3:39 PM


tab_9_klpa3_normgrp8 cont.

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex (continued)
Ages 3:2–3:3
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
55 82 78–87 78–87 12 86 81–94 79–95 18 55
56 82 78–87 78–87 12 85 80–93 78–94 16 56
57 81 77–86 77–87 10 85 80–93 78–94 16 57
58 81 77–86 77–87 10 84 79–92 77–93 14 58
59 80 76–85 76–86 9 84 79–92 77–93 14 59
60 80 76–85 76–86 9 83 78–91 77–93 13 60
61 79 75–84 75–85 8 83 78–91 77–93 13 61
62 79 75–84 75–85 8 82 77–90 76–92 12 62
63 78 75–83 74–84 7 82 77–90 76–92 12 63
64 78 75–83 74–84 7 81 76–89 75–91 10 64
65 77 74–82 73–83 6 81 76–89 75–91 10 65
66 77 74–82 73–83 6 80 75–89 74–90 9 66
67 76 73–81 72–82 5 79 74–88 73–89 8 67
68 76 73–81 72–82 5 79 74–88 73–89 8 68
69 75 72–80 71–81 5 78 73–87 72–88 7 69
70 75 72–80 71–81 5 78 73–87 72–88 7 70

SAMPLE,
71 74 71–79 70–80 4 77 72–86 71–87 6 71
72 74 71–79 70–80 4 77 72–86 71–87 6 72
73 73 70–78 69–79 4 76 71–85 70–86 5 73
74 73 70–78 69–79 4 76 71–85 70–86 5 74
75 72 69–77 68–78 3 75 71–84 69–85 5 75

NOT FOR
76 72 69–77 68–78 3 75 71–84 69–85 5 76
77 71 68–76 67–77 3 75 71–84 69–85 5 77
78 71 68–76 67–77 3 74 70–83 68–84 4 78
79 70 67–75 66–76 2 74 70–83 68–84 4 79

ADMINISTRATION
80 70 67–75 66–76 2 73 69–82 67–83 4 80
81 69 66–74 65–75 2 73 69–82 67–83 4 81
82 69 66–74 65–75 2 72 68–81 66–83 3 82
83 68 65–73 64–74 2 72 68–81 66–83 3 83
84 68 65–73 64–74 2 71 67–80 66–82 3 84

OR RESALE
85 68 65–73 64–74 2 71 67–80 66–82 3 85
86 67 64–72 63–73 1 70 66–79 65–81 2 86
87 67 64–72 63–73 1 70 66–79 65–81 2 87
88 67 64–72 63–73 1 69 65–79 64–80 2 88
89 66 63–71 62–72 1 69 65–79 64–80 2 89
90 66 63–71 62–72 1 68 64–78 63–79 2 90
91 66 63–71 62–72 1 68 64–78 63–79 2 91
92 65 62–70 61–71 1 67 63–77 62–78 1 92
93 65 62–70 61–71 1 67 63–77 62–78 1 93
94 65 62–70 61–71 1 66 62–76 61–77 1 94
95 64 61–69 60–70 1 66 62–76 61–77 1 95
96 64 61–69 60–70 1 65 61–75 60–76 1 96
97 64 61–69 60–70 1 65 61–75 60–76 1 97
98 63 60–68 59–69 1 64 61–74 59–75 1 98
99 63 60–68 59–69 1 64 61–74 59–75 1 99
100 62 59–67 58–68 1 63 60–73 58–74 1 100
101 62 59–67 58–68 1 63 60–73 58–74 1 101
102 61 58–66 57–67 0.5 62 59–72 57–73 1 102
103 61 58–66 57–67 0.5 62 59–72 57–73 1 103
104 60 57–65 56–66 0.4 61 58–71 56–73 0.5 104
105 60 57–65 56–66 0.4 61 58–71 56–73 0.5 105
106 59 56–64 55–65 0.3 60 57–70 56–72 0.4 106
107 59 56–64 55–65 0.3 60 57–70 56–72 0.4 107
108 58 55–63 54–64 0.3 60 57–70 56–72 0.4 108
109 58 55–63 54–64 0.3 59 56–69 55–71 0.3 109

96 Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix A ■ Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 96 8/31/15 3:39 PM


tab_9_klpa3_normgrp8 cont.

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex (continued)
Ages 3:2–3:3
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
110 57 54–62 53–63 0.2 59 56–69 55–71 0.3 110
111 57 54–62 53–63 0.2 58 55–69 54–70 0.3 111
112 56 53–61 52–62 0.2 58 55–69 54–70 0.3 112
113 56 53–61 52–62 0.2 57 54–68 53–69 0.2 113
114 55 52–60 51–61 0.1 57 54–68 53–69 0.2 114
115 55 52–60 51–61 0.1 56 53–67 52–68 0.2 115
116 54 51–60 50–60 0.1 55 52–66 51–67 0.1 116
117 54 51–60 50–60 0.1 55 52–66 51–67 0.1 117
118 53 50–59 49–59 0.1 54 51–65 50–66 0.1 118
119 53 50–59 49–59 0.1 54 51–65 50–66 0.1 119
120 52 49–58 49–58 0.1 53 50–64 49–65 0.1 120
121 52 49–58 49–58 0.1 53 50–64 49–65 0.1 121
122 51 48–57 48–57 0.1 53 50–64 49–65 0.1 122
123 50 47–56 47–56 <0.1 52 50–63 48–64 0.1 123
124 50 47–56 47–56 <0.1 52 50–63 48–64 0.1 124
125 49 46–55 46–55 <0.1 51 49–62 47–63 0.1 125

SAMPLE,
126 49 46–55 46–55 <0.1 51 49–62 47–63 0.1 126
127 48 45–54 45–54 <0.1 50 48–61 46–63 <0.1 127
128 48 45–54 45–54 <0.1 50 48–61 46–63 <0.1 128
129 47 44–53 44–54 <0.1 49 47–60 46–62 <0.1 129
130 47 44–53 44–54 <0.1 49 47–60 46–62 <0.1 130

NOT FOR
131 46 43–52 43–53 <0.1 48 46–59 45–61 <0.1 131
132 45 43–51 42–52 <0.1 48 46–59 45–61 <0.1 132
133 45 43–51 42–52 <0.1 47 45–59 44–60 <0.1 133
134 44 42–50 41–51 <0.1 47 45–59 44–60 <0.1 134

ADMINISTRATION
135 44 42–50 41–51 <0.1 46 44–58 43–59 <0.1 135
136 43 41–49 40–50 <0.1 46 44–58 43–59 <0.1 136
137 43 41–49 40–50 <0.1 45 43–57 42–58 <0.1 137
138 42 40–48 39–49 <0.1 45 43–57 42–58 <0.1 138
139 42 40–48 39–49 <0.1 44 42–56 41–57 <0.1 139

OR RESALE
140 41 39–47 38–48 <0.1 44 42–56 41–57 <0.1 140
141 40 38–46 37–47 <0.1 43 41–55 40–56 <0.1 141
142 40 38–46 37–47 <0.1 43 41–55 40–56 <0.1 142
143 40 38–46 37–47 <0.1 42 40–54 39–55 <0.1 143
144 40 38–46 37–47 <0.1 42 40–54 39–55 <0.1 144
145 40 38–46 37–47 <0.1 41 40–53 38–54 <0.1 145
146–160 40 38–46 37–47 <0.1 40 39–52 37–53 <0.1 146–160

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix A ■ Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles 97

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 97 8/31/15 3:39 PM


tab_9_klpa3_normgrp9

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex (continued)
Ages 3:4–3:5
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
0 128 123–131 122–132 97 126 117–130 116–132 96 0
1 125 120–128 119–129 95 122 113–127 112–128 93 1
2 122 117–125 116–126 93 119 111–124 109–125 90 2
3 120 115–124 114–124 91 117 109–122 107–123 87 3
4 118 113–122 113–122 88 116 108–121 107–123 86 4
5 116 111–120 111–120 86 115 107–120 106–122 84 5
6 115 110–119 110–119 84 114 106–119 105–121 82 6
7 114 109–118 109–119 82 113 105–119 104–120 81 7
8 113 108–117 108–118 81 112 104–118 103–119 79 8
9 112 107–116 107–117 79 111 103–117 102–118 77 9
10 111 107–115 106–116 77 110 102–116 101–117 75 10
11 110 106–114 105–115 75 109 101–115 100–116 73 11
12 109 105–113 104–114 73 108 101–114 99–115 70 12
13 108 104–112 103–113 70 108 101–114 99–115 70 13
14 107 103–111 102–112 68 107 100–113 98–114 68 14
15 106 102–110 101–111 66 106 99–112 97–113 66 15

SAMPLE,
16 105 101–109 100–110 63 105 98–111 97–113 63 16
17 104 100–108 99–109 61 105 98–111 97–113 63 17
18 103 99–107 98–108 58 104 97–110 96–112 61 18
19 103 99–107 98–108 58 104 97–110 96–112 61 19
20 102 98–106 97–107 55 103 96–109 95–111 58 20

NOT FOR
21 101 97–105 96–106 53 102 95–109 94–110 55 21
22 101 97–105 96–106 53 102 95–109 94–110 55 22
23 100 96–104 95–105 50 101 94–108 93–109 53 23
24 99 95–103 94–104 47 101 94–108 93–109 53 24

ADMINISTRATION
25 98 94–102 93–103 45 100 93–107 92–108 50 25
26 97 93–101 92–102 42 100 93–107 92–108 50 26
27 97 93–101 92–102 42 99 92–106 91–107 47 27
28 96 92–100 91–101 39 99 92–106 91–107 47 28
29 96 92–100 91–101 39 98 91–105 90–106 45 29

OR RESALE
30 95 91–99 90–100 37 98 91–105 90–106 45 30
31 94 90–98 89–99 34 97 91–104 89–105 42 31
32 94 90–98 89–99 34 97 91–104 89–105 42 32
33 93 89–97 88–98 32 96 90–103 88–104 39 33
34 93 89–97 88–98 32 96 90–103 88–104 39 34
35 93 89–97 88–98 32 95 89–102 87–103 37 35
36 92 88–96 87–97 30 94 88–101 87–103 34 36
37 92 88–96 87–97 30 94 88–101 87–103 34 37
38 91 87–95 86–96 27 93 87–100 86–102 32 38
39 91 87–95 86–96 27 93 87–100 86–102 32 39
40 90 86–94 85–95 25 92 86–99 85–101 30 40
41 90 86–94 85–95 25 92 86–99 85–101 30 41
42 89 85–93 84–94 23 91 85–99 84–100 27 42
43 89 85–93 84–94 23 91 85–99 84–100 27 43
44 88 84–93 83–93 21 90 84–98 83–99 25 44
45 87 83–92 82–92 19 89 83–97 82–98 23 45
46 87 83–92 82–92 19 89 83–97 82–98 23 46
47 86 82–91 81–91 18 88 82–96 81–97 21 47
48 85 81–90 81–90 16 88 82–96 81–97 21 48
49 85 81–90 81–90 16 87 81–95 80–96 19 49
50 84 80–89 80–89 14 87 81–95 80–96 19 50
51 83 79–88 79–88 13 86 81–94 79–95 18 51
52 83 79–88 79–88 13 85 80–93 78–94 16 52
53 82 78–87 78–87 12 85 80–93 78–94 16 53
54 82 78–87 78–87 12 84 79–92 77–93 14 54

98 Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix A ■ Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 98 8/31/15 3:39 PM


tab_9_klpa3_normgrp9 cont.

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex (continued)
Ages 3:4–3:5
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
55 81 77–86 77–87 10 84 79–92 77–93 14 55
56 81 77–86 77–87 10 83 78–91 77–93 13 56
57 80 76–85 76–86 9 83 78–91 77–93 13 57
58 80 76–85 76–86 9 82 77–90 76–92 12 58
59 79 75–84 75–85 8 82 77–90 76–92 12 59
60 79 75–84 75–85 8 81 76–89 75–91 10 60
61 78 75–83 74–84 7 81 76–89 75–91 10 61
62 78 75–83 74–84 7 80 75–89 74–90 9 62
63 77 74–82 73–83 6 80 75–89 74–90 9 63
64 77 74–82 73–83 6 79 74–88 73–89 8 64
65 76 73–81 72–82 5 79 74–88 73–89 8 65
66 75 72–80 71–81 5 78 73–87 72–88 7 66
67 75 72–80 71–81 5 78 73–87 72–88 7 67
68 74 71–79 70–80 4 77 72–86 71–87 6 68
69 74 71–79 70–80 4 77 72–86 71–87 6 69
70 73 70–78 69–79 4 76 71–85 70–86 5 70

SAMPLE,
71 73 70–78 69–79 4 76 71–85 70–86 5 71
72 72 69–77 68–78 3 75 71–84 69–85 5 72
73 72 69–77 68–78 3 75 71–84 69–85 5 73
74 71 68–76 67–77 3 74 70–83 68–84 4 74
75 71 68–76 67–77 3 74 70–83 68–84 4 75

NOT FOR
76 70 67–75 66–76 2 74 70–83 68–84 4 76
77 70 67–75 66–76 2 73 69–82 67–83 4 77
78 69 66–74 65–75 2 73 69–82 67–83 4 78
79 69 66–74 65–75 2 72 68–81 66–83 3 79

ADMINISTRATION
80 69 66–74 65–75 2 72 68–81 66–83 3 80
81 68 65–73 64–74 2 71 67–80 66–82 3 81
82 68 65–73 64–74 2 71 67–80 66–82 3 82
83 67 64–72 63–73 1 70 66–79 65–81 2 83
84 67 64–72 63–73 1 70 66–79 65–81 2 84

OR RESALE
85 67 64–72 63–73 1 69 65–79 64–80 2 85
86 66 63–71 62–72 1 69 65–79 64–80 2 86
87 66 63–71 62–72 1 68 64–78 63–79 2 87
88 66 63–71 62–72 1 68 64–78 63–79 2 88
89 65 62–70 61–71 1 67 63–77 62–78 1 89
90 65 62–70 61–71 1 67 63–77 62–78 1 90
91 65 62–70 61–71 1 66 62–76 61–77 1 91
92 64 61–69 60–70 1 66 62–76 61–77 1 92
93 64 61–69 60–70 1 65 61–75 60–76 1 93
94 64 61–69 60–70 1 65 61–75 60–76 1 94
95 63 60–68 59–69 1 64 61–74 59–75 1 95
96 63 60–68 59–69 1 64 61–74 59–75 1 96
97 62 59–67 58–68 1 63 60–73 58–74 1 97
98 62 59–67 58–68 1 63 60–73 58–74 1 98
99 61 58–66 57–67 0.5 62 59–72 57–73 1 99
100 61 58–66 57–67 0.5 62 59–72 57–73 1 100
101 60 57–65 56–66 0.4 61 58–71 56–73 0.5 101
102 60 57–65 56–66 0.4 61 58–71 56–73 0.5 102
103 59 56–64 55–65 0.3 61 58–71 56–73 0.5 103
104 59 56–64 55–65 0.3 60 57–70 56–72 0.4 104
105 58 55–63 54–64 0.3 60 57–70 56–72 0.4 105
106 58 55–63 54–64 0.3 59 56–69 55–71 0.3 106
107 57 54–62 53–63 0.2 59 56–69 55–71 0.3 107
108 57 54–62 53–63 0.2 58 55–69 54–70 0.3 108
109 56 53–61 52–62 0.2 58 55–69 54–70 0.3 109

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix A ■ Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles 99

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 99 8/31/15 3:39 PM


tab_9_klpa3_normgrp9 cont.

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex (continued)
Ages 3:4–3:5
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
110 56 53–61 52–62 0.2 57 54–68 53–69 0.2 110
111 55 52–60 51–61 0.1 56 53–67 52–68 0.2 111
112 55 52–60 51–61 0.1 56 53–67 52–68 0.2 112
113 54 51–60 50–60 0.1 55 52–66 51–67 0.1 113
114 53 50–59 49–59 0.1 55 52–66 51–67 0.1 114
115 53 50–59 49–59 0.1 54 51–65 50–66 0.1 115
116 52 49–58 49–58 0.1 54 51–65 50–66 0.1 116
117 51 48–57 48–57 0.1 53 50–64 49–65 0.1 117
118 51 48–57 48–57 0.1 53 50–64 49–65 0.1 118
119 50 47–56 47–56 <0.1 52 50–63 48–64 0.1 119
120 50 47–56 47–56 <0.1 52 50–63 48–64 0.1 120
121 49 46–55 46–55 <0.1 51 49–62 47–63 0.1 121
122 49 46–55 46–55 <0.1 51 49–62 47–63 0.1 122
123 48 45–54 45–54 <0.1 50 48–61 46–63 <0.1 123
124 47 44–53 44–54 <0.1 50 48–61 46–63 <0.1 124
125 47 44–53 44–54 <0.1 49 47–60 46–62 <0.1 125

SAMPLE,
126 46 43–52 43–53 <0.1 49 47–60 46–62 <0.1 126
127 45 43–51 42–52 <0.1 48 46–59 45–61 <0.1 127
128 45 43–51 42–52 <0.1 48 46–59 45–61 <0.1 128
129 44 42–50 41–51 <0.1 47 45–59 44–60 <0.1 129
130 43 41–49 40–50 <0.1 47 45–59 44–60 <0.1 130

NOT FOR
131 43 41–49 40–50 <0.1 46 44–58 43–59 <0.1 131
132 42 40–48 39–49 <0.1 46 44–58 43–59 <0.1 132
133 42 40–48 39–49 <0.1 45 43–57 42–58 <0.1 133
134 41 39–47 38–48 <0.1 45 43–57 42–58 <0.1 134

ADMINISTRATION
135 41 39–47 38–48 <0.1 44 42–56 41–57 <0.1 135
136 40 38–46 37–47 <0.1 44 42–56 41–57 <0.1 136
137 40 38–46 37–47 <0.1 43 41–55 40–56 <0.1 137
138 40 38–46 37–47 <0.1 42 40–54 39–55 <0.1 138
139 40 38–46 37–47 <0.1 42 40–54 39–55 <0.1 139

OR RESALE
140 40 38–46 37–47 <0.1 41 40–53 38–54 <0.1 140
141 40 38–46 37–47 <0.1 41 40–53 38–54 <0.1 141
142–160 40 38–46 37–47 <0.1 40 39–52 37–53 <0.1 142–160

100 Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix A ■ Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 100 8/31/15 3:39 PM


tab_9_klpa3_normgrp10

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex (continued)
Ages 3:6–3:7
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
0 127 120–131 119–132 96 125 119–129 118–130 95 0
1 123 116–127 115–128 94 121 115–125 115–126 92 1
2 119 112–124 111–125 90 118 113–122 112–123 88 2
3 117 110–122 109–123 87 116 111–120 110–121 86 3
4 116 109–121 108–122 86 115 110–119 109–120 84 4
5 115 108–120 107–121 84 114 109–118 108–119 82 5
6 114 107–119 106–120 82 113 108–117 107–118 81 6
7 113 107–118 105–119 81 112 107–116 106–117 79 7
8 112 106–117 105–118 79 111 106–115 105–116 77 8
9 111 105–116 104–117 77 110 105–114 104–115 75 9
10 110 104–115 103–116 75 109 104–113 103–114 73 10
11 109 103–114 102–115 73 108 103–112 102–113 70 11
12 108 102–113 101–114 70 107 102–111 101–112 68 12
13 107 101–112 100–113 68 106 101–110 100–111 66 13
14 106 100–111 99–112 66 106 101–110 100–111 66 14
15 105 99–110 98–111 63 105 100–110 99–110 63 15

SAMPLE,
16 104 98–109 97–111 61 104 99–109 98–109 61 16
17 103 97–109 96–110 58 104 99–109 98–109 61 17
18 102 96–108 95–109 55 103 98–108 97–109 58 18
19 101 95–107 94–108 53 102 97–107 96–108 55 19
20 100 94–106 93–107 50 102 97–107 96–108 55 20

NOT FOR
21 99 93–105 92–106 47 101 96–106 95–107 53 21
22 98 92–104 91–105 45 101 96–106 95–107 53 22
23 98 92–104 91–105 45 100 95–105 94–106 50 23
24 97 91–103 90–104 42 99 94–104 93–105 47 24

ADMINISTRATION
25 97 91–103 90–104 42 99 94–104 93–105 47 25
26 96 91–102 89–103 39 98 93–103 92–104 45 26
27 96 91–102 89–103 39 97 92–102 91–103 42 27
28 95 90–101 89–102 37 97 92–102 91–103 42 28
29 95 90–101 89–102 37 96 91–101 91–102 39 29

OR RESALE
30 94 89–100 88–101 34 96 91–101 91–102 39 30
31 94 89–100 88–101 34 95 90–100 90–101 37 31
32 93 88–99 87–100 32 95 90–100 90–101 37 32
33 93 88–99 87–100 32 94 90–99 89–100 34 33
34 93 88–99 87–100 32 94 90–99 89–100 34 34
35 92 87–98 86–99 30 93 89–98 88–99 32 35
36 92 87–98 86–99 30 93 89–98 88–99 32 36
37 92 87–98 86–99 30 92 88–97 87–98 30 37
38 91 86–97 85–98 27 92 88–97 87–98 30 38
39 90 85–96 84–97 25 91 87–96 86–97 27 39
40 89 84–95 83–96 23 91 87–96 86–97 27 40
41 89 84–95 83–96 23 90 86–95 85–96 25 41
42 88 83–94 82–95 21 90 86–95 85–96 25 42
43 88 83–94 82–95 21 89 85–94 84–95 23 43
44 87 82–93 81–95 19 88 84–93 83–94 21 44
45 86 81–93 80–94 18 88 84–93 83–94 21 45
46 86 81–93 80–94 18 87 83–92 82–93 19 46
47 85 80–92 79–93 16 87 83–92 82–93 19 47
48 84 79–91 78–92 14 86 82–91 81–92 18 48
49 83 78–90 77–91 13 86 82–91 81–92 18 49
50 83 78–90 77–91 13 85 81–90 80–91 16 50
51 82 77–89 76–90 12 85 81–90 80–91 16 51
52 82 77–89 76–90 12 84 80–89 79–90 14 52
53 81 76–88 75–89 10 83 79–88 78–89 13 53
54 81 76–88 75–89 10 83 79–88 78–89 13 54

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix A ■ Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles 101

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 101 8/31/15 3:39 PM


tab_9_klpa3_normgrp10 cont.

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex (continued)
Ages 3:6–3:7
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
55 80 76–87 74–88 9 82 78–87 77–88 12 55
56 80 76–87 74–88 9 82 78–87 77–88 12 56
57 79 75–86 73–87 8 81 77–86 76–87 10 57
58 79 75–86 73–87 8 81 77–86 76–87 10 58
59 78 74–85 73–86 7 80 76–86 75–86 9 59
60 77 73–84 72–85 6 80 76–86 75–86 9 60
61 77 73–84 72–85 6 79 75–85 74–85 8 61
62 76 72–83 71–84 5 79 75–85 74–85 8 62
63 76 72–83 71–84 5 78 74–84 73–85 7 63
64 75 71–82 70–83 5 78 74–84 73–85 7 64
65 74 70–81 69–82 4 78 74–84 73–85 7 65
66 74 70–81 69–82 4 77 73–83 72–84 6 66
67 73 69–80 68–81 4 77 73–83 72–84 6 67
68 73 69–80 68–81 4 76 72–82 71–83 5 68
69 72 68–79 67–80 3 76 72–82 71–83 5 69
70 72 68–79 67–80 3 75 71–81 70–82 5 70

SAMPLE,
71 72 68–79 67–80 3 75 71–81 70–82 5 71
72 71 67–78 66–80 3 75 71–81 70–82 5 72
73 71 67–78 66–80 3 74 70–80 69–81 4 73
74 70 66–77 65–79 2 74 70–80 69–81 4 74
75 70 66–77 65–79 2 73 69–79 68–80 4 75

NOT FOR
76 69 65–77 64–78 2 73 69–79 68–80 4 76
77 69 65–77 64–78 2 72 68–78 67–79 3 77
78 68 64–76 63–77 2 72 68–78 67–79 3 78
79 68 64–76 63–77 2 71 67–77 67–78 3 79

ADMINISTRATION
80 68 64–76 63–77 2 71 67–77 67–78 3 80
81 67 63–75 62–76 1 70 66–76 66–77 2 81
82 67 63–75 62–76 1 70 66–76 66–77 2 82
83 67 63–75 62–76 1 69 66–75 65–76 2 83
84 66 62–74 61–75 1 69 66–75 65–76 2 84

OR RESALE
85 66 62–74 61–75 1 68 65–74 64–75 2 85
86 65 61–73 60–74 1 68 65–74 64–75 2 86
87 65 61–73 60–74 1 67 64–73 63–74 1 87
88 65 61–73 60–74 1 67 64–73 63–74 1 88
89 64 60–72 59–73 1 66 63–72 62–73 1 89
90 64 60–72 59–73 1 66 63–72 62–73 1 90
91 63 60–71 58–72 1 65 62–71 61–72 1 91
92 63 60–71 58–72 1 65 62–71 61–72 1 92
93 63 60–71 58–72 1 64 61–70 60–71 1 93
94 62 59–70 58–71 1 64 61–70 60–71 1 94
95 62 59–70 58–71 1 63 60–69 59–70 1 95
96 61 58–69 57–70 0.5 63 60–69 59–70 1 96
97 61 58–69 57–70 0.5 62 59–68 58–69 1 97
98 60 57–68 56–69 0.4 62 59–68 58–69 1 98
99 60 57–68 56–69 0.4 61 58–67 57–68 0.5 99
100 59 56–67 55–68 0.3 61 58–67 57–68 0.5 100
101 59 56–67 55–68 0.3 60 57–66 56–67 0.4 101
102 58 55–66 54–67 0.3 60 57–66 56–67 0.4 102
103 58 55–66 54–67 0.3 60 57–66 56–67 0.4 103
104 57 54–65 53–66 0.2 59 56–65 55–66 0.3 104
105 57 54–65 53–66 0.2 59 56–65 55–66 0.3 105
106 56 53–64 52–65 0.2 58 55–64 54–65 0.3 106
107 56 53–64 52–65 0.2 57 54–63 53–64 0.2 107
108 55 52–63 51–64 0.1 57 54–63 53–64 0.2 108
109 55 52–63 51–64 0.1 56 53–62 52–63 0.2 109

102 Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix A ■ Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 102 8/31/15 3:39 PM


tab_9_klpa3_normgrp10 cont.

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex (continued)
Ages 3:6–3:7
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
110 54 51–62 50–64 0.1 56 53–62 52–63 0.2 110
111 54 51–62 50–64 0.1 55 52–62 51–62 0.1 111
112 53 50–62 49–63 0.1 55 52–62 51–62 0.1 112
113 53 50–62 49–63 0.1 54 51–61 50–61 0.1 113
114 52 49–61 48–62 0.1 54 51–61 50–61 0.1 114
115 51 48–60 47–61 0.1 53 50–60 49–61 0.1 115
116 51 48–60 47–61 0.1 53 50–60 49–61 0.1 116
117 50 47–59 46–60 <0.1 52 49–59 48–60 0.1 117
118 49 46–58 45–59 <0.1 52 49–59 48–60 0.1 118
119 49 46–58 45–59 <0.1 51 48–58 47–59 0.1 119
120 48 45–57 44–58 <0.1 51 48–58 47–59 0.1 120
121 47 44–56 43–57 <0.1 50 47–57 46–58 <0.1 121
122 47 44–56 43–57 <0.1 50 47–57 46–58 <0.1 122
123 46 44–55 42–56 <0.1 49 46–56 45–57 <0.1 123
124 45 43–54 42–55 <0.1 49 46–56 45–57 <0.1 124
125 45 43–54 42–55 <0.1 48 45–55 44–56 <0.1 125

SAMPLE,
126 44 42–53 41–54 <0.1 48 45–55 44–56 <0.1 126
127 43 41–52 40–53 <0.1 47 44–54 43–55 <0.1 127
128 42 40–51 39–52 <0.1 47 44–54 43–55 <0.1 128
129 42 40–51 39–52 <0.1 46 43–53 43–54 <0.1 129
130 41 39–50 38–51 <0.1 45 42–52 42–53 <0.1 130

NOT FOR
131 40 38–49 37–50 <0.1 45 42–52 42–53 <0.1 131
132 40 38–49 37–50 <0.1 44 42–51 41–52 <0.1 132
133 40 38–49 37–50 <0.1 44 42–51 41–52 <0.1 133
134 40 38–49 37–50 <0.1 43 41–50 40–51 <0.1 134

ADMINISTRATION
135 40 38–49 37–50 <0.1 42 40–49 39–50 <0.1 135
136 40 38–49 37–50 <0.1 41 39–48 38–49 <0.1 136
137–160 40 38–49 37–50 <0.1 40 38–47 37–48 <0.1 137–160

OR RESALE

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix A ■ Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles 103

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 103 8/31/15 3:39 PM


tab_9_klpa3_normgrp11

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex (continued)
Ages 3:8–3:9
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
0 125 118–129 117–130 95 124 118–128 117–129 95 0
1 121 114–125 113–127 92 120 114–124 114–125 91 1
2 118 111–123 110–124 88 117 112–121 111–122 87 2
3 116 109–121 108–122 86 115 110–119 109–120 84 3
4 115 108–120 107–121 84 114 109–118 108–119 82 4
5 114 107–119 106–120 82 113 108–117 107–118 81 5
6 113 107–118 105–119 81 112 107–116 106–117 79 6
7 112 106–117 105–118 79 111 106–115 105–116 77 7
8 111 105–116 104–117 77 110 105–114 104–115 75 8
9 110 104–115 103–116 75 109 104–113 103–114 73 9
10 109 103–114 102–115 73 108 103–112 102–113 70 10
11 108 102–113 101–114 70 107 102–111 101–112 68 11
12 107 101–112 100–113 68 106 101–110 100–111 66 12
13 106 100–111 99–112 66 105 100–110 99–110 63 13
14 105 99–110 98–111 63 105 100–110 99–110 63 14
15 104 98–109 97–111 61 104 99–109 98–109 61 15

SAMPLE,
16 103 97–109 96–110 58 103 98–108 97–109 58 16
17 102 96–108 95–109 55 103 98–108 97–109 58 17
18 101 95–107 94–108 53 102 97–107 96–108 55 18
19 100 94–106 93–107 50 102 97–107 96–108 55 19
20 99 93–105 92–106 47 101 96–106 95–107 53 20

NOT FOR
21 98 92–104 91–105 45 100 95–105 94–106 50 21
22 97 91–103 90–104 42 100 95–105 94–106 50 22
23 96 91–102 89–103 39 99 94–104 93–105 47 23
24 96 91–102 89–103 39 98 93–103 92–104 45 24

ADMINISTRATION
25 95 90–101 89–102 37 97 92–102 91–103 42 25
26 95 90–101 89–102 37 97 92–102 91–103 42 26
27 95 90–101 89–102 37 96 91–101 91–102 39 27
28 94 89–100 88–101 34 96 91–101 91–102 39 28
29 93 88–99 87–100 32 95 90–100 90–101 37 29

OR RESALE
30 93 88–99 87–100 32 95 90–100 90–101 37 30
31 92 87–98 86–99 30 94 90–99 89–100 34 31
32 92 87–98 86–99 30 94 90–99 89–100 34 32
33 91 86–97 85–98 27 93 89–98 88–99 32 33
34 91 86–97 85–98 27 93 89–98 88–99 32 34
35 90 85–96 84–97 25 92 88–97 87–98 30 35
36 90 85–96 84–97 25 91 87–96 86–97 27 36
37 90 85–96 84–97 25 91 87–96 86–97 27 37
38 89 84–95 83–96 23 90 86–95 85–96 25 38
39 88 83–94 82–95 21 89 85–94 84–95 23 39
40 88 83–94 82–95 21 89 85–94 84–95 23 40
41 87 82–93 81–95 19 88 84–93 83–94 21 41
42 87 82–93 81–95 19 88 84–93 83–94 21 42
43 86 81–93 80–94 18 87 83–92 82–93 19 43
44 86 81–93 80–94 18 86 82–91 81–92 18 44
45 85 80–92 79–93 16 86 82–91 81–92 18 45
46 85 80–92 79–93 16 85 81–90 80–91 16 46
47 84 79–91 78–92 14 85 81–90 80–91 16 47
48 83 78–90 77–91 13 84 80–89 79–90 14 48
49 83 78–90 77–91 13 84 80–89 79–90 14 49
50 82 77–89 76–90 12 83 79–88 78–89 13 50
51 82 77–89 76–90 12 83 79–88 78–89 13 51
52 81 76–88 75–89 10 82 78–87 77–88 12 52
53 81 76–88 75–89 10 82 78–87 77–88 12 53
54 80 76–87 74–88 9 81 77–86 76–87 10 54

104 Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix A ■ Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 104 8/31/15 3:39 PM


tab_9_klpa3_normgrp11 cont.

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex (continued)
Ages 3:8–3:9
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
55 80 76–87 74–88 9 81 77–86 76–87 10 55
56 79 75–86 73–87 8 80 76–86 75–86 9 56
57 78 74–85 73–86 7 80 76–86 75–86 9 57
58 78 74–85 73–86 7 79 75–85 74–85 8 58
59 77 73–84 72–85 6 79 75–85 74–85 8 59
60 77 73–84 72–85 6 78 74–84 73–85 7 60
61 76 72–83 71–84 5 78 74–84 73–85 7 61
62 75 71–82 70–83 5 77 73–83 72–84 6 62
63 75 71–82 70–83 5 77 73–83 72–84 6 63
64 74 70–81 69–82 4 76 72–82 71–83 5 64
65 74 70–81 69–82 4 76 72–82 71–83 5 65
66 73 69–80 68–81 4 75 71–81 70–82 5 66
67 73 69–80 68–81 4 75 71–81 70–82 5 67
68 72 68–79 67–80 3 74 70–80 69–81 4 68
69 72 68–79 67–80 3 74 70–80 69–81 4 69
70 71 67–78 66–80 3 73 69–79 68–80 4 70

SAMPLE,
71 71 67–78 66–80 3 73 69–79 68–80 4 71
72 70 66–77 65–79 2 72 68–78 67–79 3 72
73 70 66–77 65–79 2 72 68–78 67–79 3 73
74 69 65–77 64–78 2 71 67–77 67–78 3 74
75 69 65–77 64–78 2 71 67–77 67–78 3 75

NOT FOR
76 68 64–76 63–77 2 70 66–76 66–77 2 76
77 68 64–76 63–77 2 70 66–76 66–77 2 77
78 67 63–75 62–76 1 69 66–75 65–76 2 78
79 67 63–75 62–76 1 69 66–75 65–76 2 79

ADMINISTRATION
80 67 63–75 62–76 1 68 65–74 64–75 2 80
81 66 62–74 61–75 1 68 65–74 64–75 2 81
82 66 62–74 61–75 1 67 64–73 63–74 1 82
83 65 61–73 60–74 1 67 64–73 63–74 1 83
84 65 61–73 60–74 1 66 63–72 62–73 1 84

OR RESALE
85 65 61–73 60–74 1 66 63–72 62–73 1 85
86 64 60–72 59–73 1 65 62–71 61–72 1 86
87 64 60–72 59–73 1 65 62–71 61–72 1 87
88 64 60–72 59–73 1 64 61–70 60–71 1 88
89 63 60–71 58–72 1 64 61–70 60–71 1 89
90 63 60–71 58–72 1 63 60–69 59–70 1 90
91 63 60–71 58–72 1 63 60–69 59–70 1 91
92 62 59–70 58–71 1 62 59–68 58–69 1 92
93 62 59–70 58–71 1 62 59–68 58–69 1 93
94 61 58–69 57–70 0.5 61 58–67 57–68 0.5 94
95 61 58–69 57–70 0.5 61 58–67 57–68 0.5 95
96 60 57–68 56–69 0.4 60 57–66 56–67 0.4 96
97 60 57–68 56–69 0.4 60 57–66 56–67 0.4 97
98 59 56–67 55–68 0.3 60 57–66 56–67 0.4 98
99 59 56–67 55–68 0.3 59 56–65 55–66 0.3 99
100 58 55–66 54–67 0.3 59 56–65 55–66 0.3 100
101 58 55–66 54–67 0.3 58 55–64 54–65 0.3 101
102 57 54–65 53–66 0.2 57 54–63 53–64 0.2 102
103 56 53–64 52–65 0.2 57 54–63 53–64 0.2 103
104 56 53–64 52–65 0.2 56 53–62 52–63 0.2 104
105 55 52–63 51–64 0.1 56 53–62 52–63 0.2 105
106 54 51–62 50–64 0.1 55 52–62 51–62 0.1 106
107 54 51–62 50–64 0.1 55 52–62 51–62 0.1 107
108 53 50–62 49–63 0.1 54 51–61 50–61 0.1 108
109 52 49–61 48–62 0.1 54 51–61 50–61 0.1 109

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix A ■ Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles 105

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 105 8/31/15 3:39 PM


tab_9_klpa3_normgrp11 cont.

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex (continued)
Ages 3:8–3:9
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
110 52 49–61 48–62 0.1 53 50–60 49–61 0.1 110
111 51 48–60 47–61 0.1 53 50–60 49–61 0.1 111
112 50 47–59 46–60 <0.1 52 49–59 48–60 0.1 112
113 50 47–59 46–60 <0.1 52 49–59 48–60 0.1 113
114 49 46–58 45–59 <0.1 51 48–58 47–59 0.1 114
115 48 45–57 44–58 <0.1 51 48–58 47–59 0.1 115
116 47 44–56 43–57 <0.1 50 47–57 46–58 <0.1 116
117 47 44–56 43–57 <0.1 50 47–57 46–58 <0.1 117
118 46 44–55 42–56 <0.1 49 46–56 45–57 <0.1 118
119 45 43–54 42–55 <0.1 49 46–56 45–57 <0.1 119
120 45 43–54 42–55 <0.1 48 45–55 44–56 <0.1 120
121 44 42–53 41–54 <0.1 47 44–54 43–55 <0.1 121
122 44 42–53 41–54 <0.1 47 44–54 43–55 <0.1 122
123 43 41–52 40–53 <0.1 46 43–53 43–54 <0.1 123
124 42 40–51 39–52 <0.1 46 43–53 43–54 <0.1 124
125 41 39–50 38–51 <0.1 45 42–52 42–53 <0.1 125

SAMPLE,
126 41 39–50 38–51 <0.1 45 42–52 42–53 <0.1 126
127 40 38–49 37–50 <0.1 44 42–51 41–52 <0.1 127
128 40 38–49 37–50 <0.1 43 41–50 40–51 <0.1 128
129 40 38–49 37–50 <0.1 42 40–49 39–50 <0.1 129
130 40 38–49 37–50 <0.1 41 39–48 38–49 <0.1 130

NOT FOR
131–160 40 38–49 37–50 <0.1 40 38–47 37–48 <0.1 131–160

ADMINISTRATION
OR RESALE

106 Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix A ■ Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 106 8/31/15 3:39 PM


tab_9_klpa3_normgrp12

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex (continued)
Ages 3:10–3:11
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
0 124 117–128 116–129 95 123 117–127 116–128 94 0
1 119 112–124 111–125 90 119 114–123 113–124 90 1
2 116 109–121 108–122 86 116 111–120 110–121 86 2
3 115 108–120 107–121 84 114 109–118 108–119 82 3
4 113 107–118 105–119 81 113 108–117 107–118 81 4
5 112 106–117 105–118 79 112 107–116 106–117 79 5
6 111 105–116 104–117 77 111 106–115 105–116 77 6
7 110 104–115 103–116 75 110 105–114 104–115 75 7
8 109 103–114 102–115 73 109 104–113 103–114 73 8
9 108 102–113 101–114 70 108 103–112 102–113 70 9
10 107 101–112 100–113 68 107 102–111 101–112 68 10
11 105 99–110 98–111 63 106 101–110 100–111 66 11
12 104 98–109 97–111 61 105 100–110 99–110 63 12
13 103 97–109 96–110 58 104 99–109 98–109 61 13
14 102 96–108 95–109 55 104 99–109 98–109 61 14
15 101 95–107 94–108 53 103 98–108 97–109 58 15

SAMPLE,
16 101 95–107 94–108 53 102 97–107 96–108 55 16
17 100 94–106 93–107 50 102 97–107 96–108 55 17
18 99 93–105 92–106 47 101 96–106 95–107 53 18
19 98 92–104 91–105 45 101 96–106 95–107 53 19
20 97 91–103 90–104 42 100 95–105 94–106 50 20

NOT FOR
21 97 91–103 90–104 42 99 94–104 93–105 47 21
22 96 91–102 89–103 39 99 94–104 93–105 47 22
23 96 91–102 89–103 39 98 93–103 92–104 45 23
24 95 90–101 89–102 37 97 92–102 91–103 42 24

ADMINISTRATION
25 95 90–101 89–102 37 96 91–101 91–102 39 25
26 94 89–100 88–101 34 96 91–101 91–102 39 26
27 93 88–99 87–100 32 95 90–100 90–101 37 27
28 93 88–99 87–100 32 95 90–100 90–101 37 28
29 92 87–98 86–99 30 94 90–99 89–100 34 29

OR RESALE
30 92 87–98 86–99 30 94 90–99 89–100 34 30
31 91 86–97 85–98 27 93 89–98 88–99 32 31
32 91 86–97 85–98 27 93 89–98 88–99 32 32
33 90 85–96 84–97 25 92 88–97 87–98 30 33
34 90 85–96 84–97 25 91 87–96 86–97 27 34
35 89 84–95 83–96 23 90 86–95 85–96 25 35
36 89 84–95 83–96 23 90 86–95 85–96 25 36
37 88 83–94 82–95 21 89 85–94 84–95 23 37
38 88 83–94 82–95 21 88 84–93 83–94 21 38
39 87 82–93 81–95 19 87 83–92 82–93 19 39
40 87 82–93 81–95 19 87 83–92 82–93 19 40
41 86 81–93 80–94 18 86 82–91 81–92 18 41
42 85 80–92 79–93 16 86 82–91 81–92 18 42
43 85 80–92 79–93 16 85 81–90 80–91 16 43
44 84 79–91 78–92 14 84 80–89 79–90 14 44
45 83 78–90 77–91 13 84 80–89 79–90 14 45
46 83 78–90 77–91 13 83 79–88 78–89 13 46
47 82 77–89 76–90 12 83 79–88 78–89 13 47
48 82 77–89 76–90 12 82 78–87 77–88 12 48
49 81 76–88 75–89 10 82 78–87 77–88 12 49
50 81 76–88 75–89 10 81 77–86 76–87 10 50
51 80 76–87 74–88 9 81 77–86 76–87 10 51
52 79 75–86 73–87 8 80 76–86 75–86 9 52
53 79 75–86 73–87 8 80 76–86 75–86 9 53
54 78 74–85 73–86 7 79 75–85 74–85 8 54

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix A ■ Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles 107

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 107 8/31/15 3:39 PM


tab_9_klpa3_normgrp12 cont.

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex (continued)
Ages 3:10–3:11
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
55 78 74–85 73–86 7 79 75–85 74–85 8 55
56 77 73–84 72–85 6 78 74–84 73–85 7 56
57 77 73–84 72–85 6 77 73–83 72–84 6 57
58 76 72–83 71–84 5 76 72–82 71–83 5 58
59 76 72–83 71–84 5 76 72–82 71–83 5 59
60 75 71–82 70–83 5 75 71–81 70–82 5 60
61 75 71–82 70–83 5 75 71–81 70–82 5 61
62 74 70–81 69–82 4 74 70–80 69–81 4 62
63 74 70–81 69–82 4 74 70–80 69–81 4 63
64 73 69–80 68–81 4 73 69–79 68–80 4 64
65 72 68–79 67–80 3 73 69–79 68–80 4 65
66 72 68–79 67–80 3 72 68–78 67–79 3 66
67 71 67–78 66–80 3 72 68–78 67–79 3 67
68 71 67–78 66–80 3 71 67–77 67–78 3 68
69 70 66–77 65–79 2 71 67–77 67–78 3 69
70 70 66–77 65–79 2 70 66–76 66–77 2 70

SAMPLE,
71 69 65–77 64–78 2 70 66–76 66–77 2 71
72 69 65–77 64–78 2 69 66–75 65–76 2 72
73 68 64–76 63–77 2 69 66–75 65–76 2 73
74 68 64–76 63–77 2 68 65–74 64–75 2 74
75 67 63–75 62–76 1 68 65–74 64–75 2 75

NOT FOR
76 67 63–75 62–76 1 67 64–73 63–74 1 76
77 66 62–74 61–75 1 67 64–73 63–74 1 77
78 66 62–74 61–75 1 66 63–72 62–73 1 78
79 66 62–74 61–75 1 66 63–72 62–73 1 79

ADMINISTRATION
80 65 61–73 60–74 1 65 62–71 61–72 1 80
81 65 61–73 60–74 1 65 62–71 61–72 1 81
82 64 60–72 59–73 1 64 61–70 60–71 1 82
83 64 60–72 59–73 1 64 61–70 60–71 1 83
84 63 60–71 58–72 1 63 60–69 59–70 1 84

OR RESALE
85 63 60–71 58–72 1 63 60–69 59–70 1 85
86 63 60–71 58–72 1 62 59–68 58–69 1 86
87 62 59–70 58–71 1 62 59–68 58–69 1 87
88 62 59–70 58–71 1 61 58–67 57–68 0.5 88
89 61 58–69 57–70 0.5 61 58–67 57–68 0.5 89
90 61 58–69 57–70 0.5 60 57–66 56–67 0.4 90
91 60 57–68 56–69 0.4 60 57–66 56–67 0.4 91
92 60 57–68 56–69 0.4 59 56–65 55–66 0.3 92
93 60 57–68 56–69 0.4 59 56–65 55–66 0.3 93
94 59 56–67 55–68 0.3 59 56–65 55–66 0.3 94
95 59 56–67 55–68 0.3 58 55–64 54–65 0.3 95
96 58 55–66 54–67 0.3 57 54–63 53–64 0.2 96
97 58 55–66 54–67 0.3 57 54–63 53–64 0.2 97
98 57 54–65 53–66 0.2 56 53–62 52–63 0.2 98
99 56 53–64 52–65 0.2 56 53–62 52–63 0.2 99
100 56 53–64 52–65 0.2 55 52–62 51–62 0.1 100
101 55 52–63 51–64 0.1 55 52–62 51–62 0.1 101
102 55 52–63 51–64 0.1 54 51–61 50–61 0.1 102
103 54 51–62 50–64 0.1 54 51–61 50–61 0.1 103
104 53 50–62 49–63 0.1 53 50–60 49–61 0.1 104
105 53 50–62 49–63 0.1 53 50–60 49–61 0.1 105
106 52 49–61 48–62 0.1 52 49–59 48–60 0.1 106
107 51 48–60 47–61 0.1 52 49–59 48–60 0.1 107
108 50 47–59 46–60 <0.1 51 48–58 47–59 0.1 108
109 50 47–59 46–60 <0.1 51 48–58 47–59 0.1 109

108 Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix A ■ Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 108 8/31/15 3:39 PM


tab_9_klpa3_normgrp12 cont.

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex (continued)
Ages 3:10–3:11
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
110 49 46–58 45–59 <0.1 50 47–57 46–58 <0.1 110
111 48 45–57 44–58 <0.1 50 47–57 46–58 <0.1 111
112 47 44–56 43–57 <0.1 49 46–56 45–57 <0.1 112
113 47 44–56 43–57 <0.1 49 46–56 45–57 <0.1 113
114 46 44–55 42–56 <0.1 48 45–55 44–56 <0.1 114
115 45 43–54 42–55 <0.1 48 45–55 44–56 <0.1 115
116 44 42–53 41–54 <0.1 47 44–54 43–55 <0.1 116
117 44 42–53 41–54 <0.1 47 44–54 43–55 <0.1 117
118 43 41–52 40–53 <0.1 46 43–53 43–54 <0.1 118
119 42 40–51 39–52 <0.1 45 42–52 42–53 <0.1 119
120 41 39–50 38–51 <0.1 44 42–51 41–52 <0.1 120
121 40 38–49 37–50 <0.1 43 41–50 40–51 <0.1 121
122 40 38–49 37–50 <0.1 42 40–49 39–50 <0.1 122
123 40 38–49 37–50 <0.1 41 39–48 38–49 <0.1 123
124–160 40 38–49 37–50 <0.1 40 38–47 37–48 <0.1 124–160

SAMPLE,
NOT FOR
ADMINISTRATION
OR RESALE

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix A ■ Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles 109

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 109 8/31/15 3:39 PM


tab_9_klpa3_normgrp13

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex (continued)
Ages 4:0–4:1
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
0 122 116–126 115–127 93 122 117–125 116–126 93 0
1 118 112–122 111–123 88 118 113–122 113–122 88 1
2 115 109–119 108–120 84 115 110–119 110–119 84 2
3 114 108–119 107–120 82 113 108–117 108–118 81 3
4 112 106–117 105–118 79 112 107–116 107–117 79 4
5 111 105–116 104–117 77 111 107–115 106–116 77 5
6 110 104–115 103–116 75 110 106–114 105–115 75 6
7 109 103–114 102–115 73 109 105–113 104–114 73 7
8 108 102–113 101–114 70 108 104–112 103–113 70 8
9 107 101–112 100–113 68 107 103–111 102–112 68 9
10 105 100–110 99–111 63 106 102–110 101–111 66 10
11 104 99–109 98–110 61 105 101–109 100–110 63 11
12 103 98–108 97–109 58 104 100–108 99–109 61 12
13 102 97–107 96–108 55 103 99–107 98–108 58 13
14 101 96–106 95–107 53 102 98–106 97–107 55 14
15 100 95–105 94–106 50 101 97–105 96–106 53 15

SAMPLE,
16 99 94–104 93–105 47 101 97–105 96–106 53 16
17 98 93–103 92–104 45 100 96–104 95–105 50 17
18 98 93–103 92–104 45 100 96–104 95–105 50 18
19 97 92–102 91–103 42 99 95–103 94–104 47 19
20 96 91–101 90–102 39 99 95–103 94–104 47 20

NOT FOR
21 96 91–101 90–102 39 98 94–102 93–103 45 21
22 95 90–100 89–101 37 98 94–102 93–103 45 22
23 95 90–100 89–101 37 97 93–101 92–102 42 23
24 94 89–100 88–101 34 96 92–100 91–101 39 24

ADMINISTRATION
25 93 88–99 87–100 32 95 91–99 90–100 37 25
26 93 88–99 87–100 32 95 91–99 90–100 37 26
27 92 87–98 86–99 30 94 90–98 89–99 34 27
28 92 87–98 86–99 30 94 90–98 89–99 34 28
29 91 86–97 85–98 27 93 89–97 88–98 32 29

OR RESALE
30 90 85–96 84–97 25 93 89–97 88–98 32 30
31 90 85–96 84–97 25 92 88–96 87–97 30 31
32 89 84–95 83–96 23 91 87–95 86–96 27 32
33 89 84–95 83–96 23 90 86–94 85–95 25 33
34 88 83–94 82–95 21 89 85–93 84–94 23 34
35 87 82–93 81–94 19 88 84–93 83–93 21 35
36 87 82–93 81–94 19 88 84–93 83–93 21 36
37 86 81–92 80–93 18 87 83–92 82–92 19 37
38 86 81–92 80–93 18 86 82–91 81–91 18 38
39 85 81–91 80–92 16 85 81–90 81–90 16 39
40 84 80–90 79–91 14 84 80–89 80–89 14 40
41 84 80–90 79–91 14 84 80–89 80–89 14 41
42 83 79–89 78–90 13 83 79–88 79–88 13 42
43 83 79–89 78–90 13 83 79–88 79–88 13 43
44 82 78–88 77–89 12 82 78–87 78–87 12 44
45 81 77–87 76–88 10 82 78–87 78–87 12 45
46 81 77–87 76–88 10 81 77–86 77–87 10 46
47 80 76–86 75–87 9 81 77–86 77–87 10 47
48 80 76–86 75–87 9 80 76–85 76–86 9 48
49 79 75–85 74–86 8 80 76–85 76–86 9 49
50 78 74–84 73–85 7 79 75–84 75–85 8 50
51 78 74–84 73–85 7 79 75–84 75–85 8 51
52 77 73–83 72–84 6 78 75–83 74–84 7 52
53 77 73–83 72–84 6 78 75–83 74–84 7 53
54 76 72–82 71–83 5 77 74–82 73–83 6 54

110 Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix A ■ Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 110 8/31/15 3:40 PM


tab_9_klpa3_normgrp13 cont.

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex (continued)
Ages 4:0–4:1
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
55 75 71–81 70–82 5 77 74–82 73–83 6 55
56 75 71–81 70–82 5 76 73–81 72–82 5 56
57 74 70–81 69–82 4 75 72–80 71–81 5 57
58 74 70–81 69–82 4 74 71–79 70–80 4 58
59 73 69–80 68–81 4 74 71–79 70–80 4 59
60 72 68–79 67–80 3 73 70–78 69–79 4 60
61 72 68–79 67–80 3 73 70–78 69–79 4 61
62 71 67–78 66–79 3 72 69–77 68–78 3 62
63 70 66–77 65–78 2 72 69–77 68–78 3 63
64 70 66–77 65–78 2 71 68–76 67–77 3 64
65 69 65–76 64–77 2 71 68–76 67–77 3 65
66 69 65–76 64–77 2 70 67–75 66–76 2 66
67 69 65–76 64–77 2 70 67–75 66–76 2 67
68 68 64–75 63–76 2 69 66–74 65–75 2 68
69 68 64–75 63–76 2 69 66–74 65–75 2 69
70 67 63–74 62–75 1 68 65–73 64–74 2 70

SAMPLE,
71 67 63–74 62–75 1 68 65–73 64–74 2 71
72 66 62–73 61–74 1 67 64–72 63–73 1 72
73 66 62–73 61–74 1 67 64–72 63–73 1 73
74 65 62–72 61–73 1 66 63–71 62–72 1 74
75 65 62–72 61–73 1 66 63–71 62–72 1 75

NOT FOR
76 64 61–71 60–72 1 65 62–70 61–71 1 76
77 64 61–71 60–72 1 65 62–70 61–71 1 77
78 63 60–70 59–71 1 64 61–69 60–70 1 78
79 63 60–70 59–71 1 64 61–69 60–70 1 79

ADMINISTRATION
80 62 59–69 58–70 1 63 60–68 59–69 1 80
81 62 59–69 58–70 1 63 60–68 59–69 1 81
82 61 58–68 57–69 0.5 62 59–67 58–68 1 82
83 61 58–68 57–69 0.5 62 59–67 58–68 1 83
84 61 58–68 57–69 0.5 61 58–66 57–67 0.5 84

OR RESALE
85 60 57–67 56–68 0.4 61 58–66 57–67 0.5 85
86 60 57–67 56–68 0.4 60 57–65 56–66 0.4 86
87 59 56–66 55–67 0.3 60 57–65 56–66 0.4 87
88 59 56–66 55–67 0.3 60 57–65 56–66 0.4 88
89 58 55–65 54–66 0.3 59 56–64 55–65 0.3 89
90 58 55–65 54–66 0.3 59 56–64 55–65 0.3 90
91 57 54–64 53–65 0.2 58 55–63 54–64 0.3 91
92 57 54–64 53–65 0.2 57 54–62 53–63 0.2 92
93 56 53–63 52–64 0.2 57 54–62 53–63 0.2 93
94 55 52–62 51–63 0.1 56 53–61 52–62 0.2 94
95 55 52–62 51–63 0.1 55 52–60 51–61 0.1 95
96 54 51–62 50–63 0.1 55 52–60 51–61 0.1 96
97 54 51–62 50–63 0.1 54 51–60 50–60 0.1 97
98 53 50–61 49–62 0.1 54 51–60 50–60 0.1 98
99 53 50–61 49–62 0.1 53 50–59 49–59 0.1 99
100 52 49–60 48–61 0.1 53 50–59 49–59 0.1 100
101 52 49–60 48–61 0.1 52 49–58 49–58 0.1 101
102 51 48–59 47–60 0.1 52 49–58 49–58 0.1 102
103 50 47–58 46–59 <0.1 51 48–57 48–57 0.1 103
104 50 47–58 46–59 <0.1 50 47–56 47–56 <0.1 104
105 49 46–57 45–58 <0.1 49 46–55 46–55 <0.1 105
106 48 45–56 44–57 <0.1 48 45–54 45–54 <0.1 106
107 48 45–56 44–57 <0.1 48 45–54 45–54 <0.1 107
108 47 44–55 43–56 <0.1 47 44–53 44–54 <0.1 108
109 46 43–54 42–55 <0.1 47 44–53 44–54 <0.1 109

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix A ■ Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles 111

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 111 8/31/15 3:40 PM


tab_9_klpa3_normgrp13 cont.

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex (continued)
Ages 4:0–4:1
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
110 45 43–53 42–54 <0.1 46 43–52 43–53 <0.1 110
111 44 42–52 41–53 <0.1 46 43–52 43–53 <0.1 111
112 44 42–52 41–53 <0.1 45 43–51 42–52 <0.1 112
113 43 41–51 40–52 <0.1 44 42–50 41–51 <0.1 113
114 42 40–50 39–51 <0.1 43 41–49 40–50 <0.1 114
115 41 39–49 38–50 <0.1 43 41–49 40–50 <0.1 115
116 40 38–48 37–49 <0.1 42 40–48 39–49 <0.1 116
117 40 38–48 37–49 <0.1 42 40–48 39–49 <0.1 117
118 40 38–48 37–49 <0.1 41 39–47 38–48 <0.1 118
119–160 40 38–48 37–49 <0.1 40 38–46 37–47 <0.1 119–160

SAMPLE,
NOT FOR
ADMINISTRATION
OR RESALE

112 Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix A ■ Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 112 8/31/15 3:40 PM


tab_9_klpa3_normgrp14

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex (continued)
Ages 4:2–4:3
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
0 121 115–125 114–126 92 122 117–125 116–126 93 0
1 117 111–121 110–122 87 118 113–122 113–122 88 1
2 114 108–119 107–120 82 114 109–118 109–119 82 2
3 113 107–118 106–119 81 112 107–116 107–117 79 3
4 111 105–116 104–117 77 111 107–115 106–116 77 4
5 110 104–115 103–116 75 110 106–114 105–115 75 5
6 109 103–114 102–115 73 109 105–113 104–114 73 6
7 108 102–113 101–114 70 108 104–112 103–113 70 7
8 107 101–112 100–113 68 107 103–111 102–112 68 8
9 106 100–111 99–112 66 106 102–110 101–111 66 9
10 104 99–109 98–110 61 105 101–109 100–110 63 10
11 103 98–108 97–109 58 104 100–108 99–109 61 11
12 102 97–107 96–108 55 103 99–107 98–108 58 12
13 101 96–106 95–107 53 102 98–106 97–107 55 13
14 100 95–105 94–106 50 101 97–105 96–106 53 14
15 99 94–104 93–105 47 101 97–105 96–106 53 15

SAMPLE,
16 98 93–103 92–104 45 100 96–104 95–105 50 16
17 97 92–102 91–103 42 100 96–104 95–105 50 17
18 96 91–101 90–102 39 99 95–103 94–104 47 18
19 95 90–100 89–101 37 98 94–102 93–103 45 19
20 94 89–100 88–101 34 98 94–102 93–103 45 20

NOT FOR
21 94 89–100 88–101 34 97 93–101 92–102 42 21
22 93 88–99 87–100 32 97 93–101 92–102 42 22
23 93 88–99 87–100 32 96 92–100 91–101 39 23
24 92 87–98 86–99 30 95 91–99 90–100 37 24

ADMINISTRATION
25 91 86–97 85–98 27 94 90–98 89–99 34 25
26 91 86–97 85–98 27 94 90–98 89–99 34 26
27 90 85–96 84–97 25 93 89–97 88–98 32 27
28 89 84–95 83–96 23 93 89–97 88–98 32 28
29 88 83–94 82–95 21 92 88–96 87–97 30 29

OR RESALE
30 88 83–94 82–95 21 91 87–95 86–96 27 30
31 87 82–93 81–94 19 90 86–94 85–95 25 31
32 87 82–93 81–94 19 89 85–93 84–94 23 32
33 86 81–92 80–93 18 88 84–93 83–93 21 33
34 85 81–91 80–92 16 87 83–92 82–92 19 34
35 85 81–91 80–92 16 86 82–91 81–91 18 35
36 84 80–90 79–91 14 85 81–90 81–90 16 36
37 84 80–90 79–91 14 85 81–90 81–90 16 37
38 83 79–89 78–90 13 84 80–89 80–89 14 38
39 83 79–89 78–90 13 83 79–88 79–88 13 39
40 82 78–88 77–89 12 83 79–88 79–88 13 40
41 82 78–88 77–89 12 82 78–87 78–87 12 41
42 81 77–87 76–88 10 82 78–87 78–87 12 42
43 81 77–87 76–88 10 81 77–86 77–87 10 43
44 80 76–86 75–87 9 80 76–85 76–86 9 44
45 80 76–86 75–87 9 80 76–85 76–86 9 45
46 79 75–85 74–86 8 79 75–84 75–85 8 46
47 78 74–84 73–85 7 79 75–84 75–85 8 47
48 78 74–84 73–85 7 78 75–83 74–84 7 48
49 77 73–83 72–84 6 78 75–83 74–84 7 49
50 77 73–83 72–84 6 77 74–82 73–83 6 50
51 76 72–82 71–83 5 77 74–82 73–83 6 51
52 76 72–82 71–83 5 76 73–81 72–82 5 52
53 75 71–81 70–82 5 76 73–81 72–82 5 53
54 75 71–81 70–82 5 75 72–80 71–81 5 54

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix A ■ Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles 113

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 113 8/31/15 3:40 PM


tab_9_klpa3_normgrp14 cont.

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex (continued)
Ages 4:2–4:3
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
55 74 70–81 69–82 4 75 72–80 71–81 5 55
56 73 69–80 68–81 4 74 71–79 70–80 4 56
57 73 69–80 68–81 4 73 70–78 69–79 4 57
58 72 68–79 67–80 3 73 70–78 69–79 4 58
59 72 68–79 67–80 3 72 69–77 68–78 3 59
60 71 67–78 66–79 3 72 69–77 68–78 3 60
61 70 66–77 65–78 2 71 68–76 67–77 3 61
62 70 66–77 65–78 2 70 67–75 66–76 2 62
63 69 65–76 64–77 2 70 67–75 66–76 2 63
64 69 65–76 64–77 2 69 66–74 65–75 2 64
65 68 64–75 63–76 2 69 66–74 65–75 2 65
66 68 64–75 63–76 2 68 65–73 64–74 2 66
67 67 63–74 62–75 1 68 65–73 64–74 2 67
68 67 63–74 62–75 1 67 64–72 63–73 1 68
69 66 62–73 61–74 1 67 64–72 63–73 1 69
70 65 62–72 61–73 1 66 63–71 62–72 1 70

SAMPLE,
71 65 62–72 61–73 1 66 63–71 62–72 1 71
72 64 61–71 60–72 1 65 62–70 61–71 1 72
73 64 61–71 60–72 1 65 62–70 61–71 1 73
74 63 60–70 59–71 1 64 61–69 60–70 1 74
75 63 60–70 59–71 1 64 61–69 60–70 1 75

NOT FOR
76 62 59–69 58–70 1 63 60–68 59–69 1 76
77 62 59–69 58–70 1 63 60–68 59–69 1 77
78 61 58–68 57–69 0.5 62 59–67 58–68 1 78
79 61 58–68 57–69 0.5 62 59–67 58–68 1 79

ADMINISTRATION
80 60 57–67 56–68 0.4 61 58–66 57–67 0.5 80
81 60 57–67 56–68 0.4 61 58–66 57–67 0.5 81
82 59 56–66 55–67 0.3 60 57–65 56–66 0.4 82
83 59 56–66 55–67 0.3 60 57–65 56–66 0.4 83
84 58 55–65 54–66 0.3 59 56–64 55–65 0.3 84

OR RESALE
85 58 55–65 54–66 0.3 59 56–64 55–65 0.3 85
86 57 54–64 53–65 0.2 58 55–63 54–64 0.3 86
87 57 54–64 53–65 0.2 58 55–63 54–64 0.3 87
88 56 53–63 52–64 0.2 57 54–62 53–63 0.2 88
89 55 52–62 51–63 0.1 57 54–62 53–63 0.2 89
90 54 51–62 50–63 0.1 56 53–61 52–62 0.2 90
91 54 51–62 50–63 0.1 56 53–61 52–62 0.2 91
92 53 50–61 49–62 0.1 55 52–60 51–61 0.1 92
93 53 50–61 49–62 0.1 54 51–60 50–60 0.1 93
94 52 49–60 48–61 0.1 54 51–60 50–60 0.1 94
95 51 48–59 47–60 0.1 53 50–59 49–59 0.1 95
96 51 48–59 47–60 0.1 53 50–59 49–59 0.1 96
97 50 47–58 46–59 <0.1 52 49–58 49–58 0.1 97
98 50 47–58 46–59 <0.1 52 49–58 49–58 0.1 98
99 49 46–57 45–58 <0.1 51 48–57 48–57 0.1 99
100 48 45–56 44–57 <0.1 51 48–57 48–57 0.1 100
101 47 44–55 43–56 <0.1 50 47–56 47–56 <0.1 101
102 47 44–55 43–56 <0.1 50 47–56 47–56 <0.1 102
103 46 43–54 42–55 <0.1 49 46–55 46–55 <0.1 103
104 46 43–54 42–55 <0.1 48 45–54 45–54 <0.1 104
105 45 43–53 42–54 <0.1 48 45–54 45–54 <0.1 105
106 44 42–52 41–53 <0.1 47 44–53 44–54 <0.1 106
107 43 41–51 40–52 <0.1 46 43–52 43–53 <0.1 107
108 42 40–50 39–51 <0.1 45 43–51 42–52 <0.1 108
109 41 39–49 38–50 <0.1 44 42–50 41–51 <0.1 109

114 Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix A ■ Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 114 8/31/15 3:40 PM


tab_9_klpa3_normgrp14 cont.

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex (continued)
Ages 4:2–4:3
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
110 41 39–49 38–50 <0.1 43 41–49 40–50 <0.1 110
111 40 38–48 37–49 <0.1 43 41–49 40–50 <0.1 111
112 40 38–48 37–49 <0.1 42 40–48 39–49 <0.1 112
113 40 38–48 37–49 <0.1 41 39–47 38–48 <0.1 113
114–160 40 38–48 37–49 <0.1 40 38–46 37–47 <0.1 114–160

SAMPLE,
NOT FOR
ADMINISTRATION
OR RESALE

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix A ■ Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles 115

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 115 8/31/15 3:40 PM


tab_9_klpa3_normgrp15

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex (continued)
Ages 4:4–4:5
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
0 120 114–124 113–125 91 121 116–125 115–125 92 0
1 116 110–120 109–121 86 117 112–121 112–121 87 1
2 113 107–118 106–119 81 114 109–118 109–119 82 2
3 112 106–117 105–118 79 112 107–116 107–117 79 3
4 109 103–114 102–115 73 110 106–114 105–115 75 4
5 108 102–113 101–114 70 109 105–113 104–114 73 5
6 107 101–112 100–113 68 108 104–112 103–113 70 6
7 106 100–111 99–112 66 107 103–111 102–112 68 7
8 104 99–109 98–110 61 106 102–110 101–111 66 8
9 103 98–108 97–109 58 105 101–109 100–110 63 9
10 102 97–107 96–108 55 104 100–108 99–109 61 10
11 101 96–106 95–107 53 103 99–107 98–108 58 11
12 100 95–105 94–106 50 102 98–106 97–107 55 12
13 99 94–104 93–105 47 101 97–105 96–106 53 13
14 98 93–103 92–104 45 101 97–105 96–106 53 14
15 97 92–102 91–103 42 100 96–104 95–105 50 15

SAMPLE,
16 96 91–101 90–102 39 99 95–103 94–104 47 16
17 95 90–100 89–101 37 99 95–103 94–104 47 17
18 94 89–100 88–101 34 98 94–102 93–103 45 18
19 94 89–100 88–101 34 97 93–101 92–102 42 19
20 93 88–99 87–100 32 97 93–101 92–102 42 20

NOT FOR
21 93 88–99 87–100 32 96 92–100 91–101 39 21
22 92 87–98 86–99 30 96 92–100 91–101 39 22
23 92 87–98 86–99 30 95 91–99 90–100 37 23
24 91 86–97 85–98 27 94 90–98 89–99 34 24

ADMINISTRATION
25 90 85–96 84–97 25 93 89–97 88–98 32 25
26 89 84–95 83–96 23 93 89–97 88–98 32 26
27 89 84–95 83–96 23 92 88–96 87–97 30 27
28 88 83–94 82–95 21 91 87–95 86–96 27 28
29 87 82–93 81–94 19 90 86–94 85–95 25 29

OR RESALE
30 86 81–92 80–93 18 89 85–93 84–94 23 30
31 86 81–92 80–93 18 88 84–93 83–93 21 31
32 85 81–91 80–92 16 87 83–92 82–92 19 32
33 85 81–91 80–92 16 86 82–91 81–91 18 33
34 84 80–90 79–91 14 85 81–90 81–90 16 34
35 83 79–89 78–90 13 84 80–89 80–89 14 35
36 83 79–89 78–90 13 84 80–89 80–89 14 36
37 82 78–88 77–89 12 83 79–88 79–88 13 37
38 82 78–88 77–89 12 83 79–88 79–88 13 38
39 81 77–87 76–88 10 82 78–87 78–87 12 39
40 81 77–87 76–88 10 81 77–86 77–87 10 40
41 80 76–86 75–87 9 80 76–85 76–86 9 41
42 79 75–85 74–86 8 80 76–85 76–86 9 42
43 79 75–85 74–86 8 79 75–84 75–85 8 43
44 78 74–84 73–85 7 78 75–83 74–84 7 44
45 78 74–84 73–85 7 78 75–83 74–84 7 45
46 77 73–83 72–84 6 77 74–82 73–83 6 46
47 77 73–83 72–84 6 77 74–82 73–83 6 47
48 76 72–82 71–83 5 76 73–81 72–82 5 48
49 76 72–82 71–83 5 76 73–81 72–82 5 49
50 75 71–81 70–82 5 75 72–80 71–81 5 50
51 74 70–81 69–82 4 75 72–80 71–81 5 51
52 74 70–81 69–82 4 74 71–79 70–80 4 52
53 73 69–80 68–81 4 74 71–79 70–80 4 53
54 72 68–79 67–80 3 73 70–78 69–79 4 54

116 Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix A ■ Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 116 8/31/15 3:40 PM


tab_9_klpa3_normgrp15 cont.

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex (continued)
Ages 4:4–4:5
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
55 72 68–79 67–80 3 73 70–78 69–79 4 55
56 71 67–78 66–79 3 72 69–77 68–78 3 56
57 70 66–77 65–78 2 72 69–77 68–78 3 57
58 70 66–77 65–78 2 71 68–76 67–77 3 58
59 69 65–76 64–77 2 70 67–75 66–76 2 59
60 69 65–76 64–77 2 70 67–75 66–76 2 60
61 68 64–75 63–76 2 69 66–74 65–75 2 61
62 68 64–75 63–76 2 68 65–73 64–74 2 62
63 67 63–74 62–75 1 68 65–73 64–74 2 63
64 67 63–74 62–75 1 67 64–72 63–73 1 64
65 66 62–73 61–74 1 67 64–72 63–73 1 65
66 66 62–73 61–74 1 66 63–71 62–72 1 66
67 65 62–72 61–73 1 66 63–71 62–72 1 67
68 64 61–71 60–72 1 65 62–70 61–71 1 68
69 64 61–71 60–72 1 65 62–70 61–71 1 69
70 63 60–70 59–71 1 64 61–69 60–70 1 70

SAMPLE,
71 63 60–70 59–71 1 64 61–69 60–70 1 71
72 62 59–69 58–70 1 63 60–68 59–69 1 72
73 62 59–69 58–70 1 63 60–68 59–69 1 73
74 61 58–68 57–69 0.5 62 59–67 58–68 1 74
75 61 58–68 57–69 0.5 62 59–67 58–68 1 75

NOT FOR
76 60 57–67 56–68 0.4 61 58–66 57–67 0.5 76
77 60 57–67 56–68 0.4 61 58–66 57–67 0.5 77
78 59 56–66 55–67 0.3 60 57–65 56–66 0.4 78
79 59 56–66 55–67 0.3 60 57–65 56–66 0.4 79

ADMINISTRATION
80 58 55–65 54–66 0.3 59 56–64 55–65 0.3 80
81 58 55–65 54–66 0.3 59 56–64 55–65 0.3 81
82 57 54–64 53–65 0.2 58 55–63 54–64 0.3 82
83 57 54–64 53–65 0.2 57 54–62 53–63 0.2 83
84 56 53–63 52–64 0.2 57 54–62 53–63 0.2 84

OR RESALE
85 56 53–63 52–64 0.2 56 53–61 52–62 0.2 85
86 55 52–62 51–63 0.1 56 53–61 52–62 0.2 86
87 55 52–62 51–63 0.1 55 52–60 51–61 0.1 87
88 54 51–62 50–63 0.1 55 52–60 51–61 0.1 88
89 53 50–61 49–62 0.1 54 51–60 50–60 0.1 89
90 52 49–60 48–61 0.1 54 51–60 50–60 0.1 90
91 51 48–59 47–60 0.1 53 50–59 49–59 0.1 91
92 51 48–59 47–60 0.1 53 50–59 49–59 0.1 92
93 50 47–58 46–59 <0.1 52 49–58 49–58 0.1 93
94 50 47–58 46–59 <0.1 52 49–58 49–58 0.1 94
95 49 46–57 45–58 <0.1 51 48–57 48–57 0.1 95
96 49 46–57 45–58 <0.1 51 48–57 48–57 0.1 96
97 48 45–56 44–57 <0.1 50 47–56 47–56 <0.1 97
98 47 44–55 43–56 <0.1 49 46–55 46–55 <0.1 98
99 46 43–54 42–55 <0.1 48 45–54 45–54 <0.1 99
100 45 43–53 42–54 <0.1 47 44–53 44–54 <0.1 100
101 44 42–52 41–53 <0.1 47 44–53 44–54 <0.1 101
102 44 42–52 41–53 <0.1 46 43–52 43–53 <0.1 102
103 43 41–51 40–52 <0.1 45 43–51 42–52 <0.1 103
104 42 40–50 39–51 <0.1 45 43–51 42–52 <0.1 104
105 41 39–49 38–50 <0.1 44 42–50 41–51 <0.1 105
106 40 38–48 37–49 <0.1 43 41–49 40–50 <0.1 106
107 40 38–48 37–49 <0.1 42 40–48 39–49 <0.1 107
108 40 38–48 37–49 <0.1 41 39–47 38–48 <0.1 108
109–160 40 38–48 37–49 <0.1 40 38–46 37–47 <0.1 109–160

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix A ■ Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles 117

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 117 8/31/15 3:40 PM


tab_9_klpa3_normgrp16

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex (continued)
Ages 4:6–4:7
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
0 120 113–124 112–126 91 121 113–126 112–127 92 0
1 112 106–117 105–118 79 116 108–121 107–122 86 1
2 111 105–116 104–117 77 113 106–118 104–120 81 2
3 110 104–115 103–116 75 111 104–117 102–118 77 3
4 108 102–113 101–114 70 109 102–115 101–116 73 4
5 106 100–111 99–112 66 108 101–114 100–115 70 5
6 105 99–110 98–111 63 107 100–113 99–114 68 6
7 103 97–109 96–110 58 106 99–112 98–113 66 7
8 102 96–108 95–109 55 105 98–111 97–112 63 8
9 100 94–106 93–107 50 104 97–110 96–111 61 9
10 99 93–105 92–106 47 103 96–109 95–110 58 10
11 98 92–104 91–105 45 102 95–108 94–109 55 11
12 97 91–103 90–104 42 101 94–107 93–109 53 12
13 96 91–102 89–103 39 100 94–106 92–108 50 13
14 95 90–101 89–102 37 100 94–106 92–108 50 14
15 95 90–101 89–102 37 99 93–106 91–107 47 15

SAMPLE,
16 94 89–100 88–101 34 98 92–105 91–106 45 16
17 93 88–99 87–100 32 98 92–105 91–106 45 17
18 93 88–99 87–100 32 97 91–104 90–105 42 18
19 92 87–98 86–99 30 97 91–104 90–105 42 19
20 91 86–97 85–98 27 96 90–103 89–104 39 20

NOT FOR
21 90 85–96 84–97 25 95 89–102 88–103 37 21
22 89 84–95 83–96 23 95 89–102 88–103 37 22
23 89 84–95 83–96 23 94 88–101 87–102 34 23
24 88 83–94 82–95 21 93 87–100 86–101 32 24

ADMINISTRATION
25 87 82–93 81–95 19 92 86–99 85–100 30 25
26 87 82–93 81–95 19 92 86–99 85–100 30 26
27 86 81–93 80–94 18 91 85–98 84–99 27 27
28 85 80–92 79–93 16 90 84–97 83–98 25 28
29 85 80–92 79–93 16 89 83–96 82–98 23 29

OR RESALE
30 84 79–91 78–92 14 88 83–95 81–97 21 30
31 83 78–90 77–91 13 87 82–94 80–96 19 31
32 82 77–89 76–90 12 86 81–94 79–95 18 32
33 82 77–89 76–90 12 85 80–93 79–94 16 33
34 81 76–88 75–89 10 84 79–92 78–93 14 34
35 81 76–88 75–89 10 83 78–91 77–92 13 35
36 80 76–87 74–88 9 83 78–91 77–92 13 36
37 80 76–87 74–88 9 82 77–90 76–91 12 37
38 79 75–86 73–87 8 82 77–90 76–91 12 38
39 78 74–85 73–86 7 81 76–89 75–90 10 39
40 78 74–85 73–86 7 80 75–88 74–89 9 40
41 77 73–84 72–85 6 79 74–87 73–88 8 41
42 77 73–84 72–85 6 78 73–86 72–87 7 42
43 76 72–83 71–84 5 78 73–86 72–87 7 43
44 75 71–82 70–83 5 77 72–85 71–86 6 44
45 75 71–82 70–83 5 76 71–84 70–86 5 45
46 74 70–81 69–82 4 76 71–84 70–86 5 46
47 74 70–81 69–82 4 75 71–83 69–85 5 47
48 73 69–80 68–81 4 75 71–83 69–85 5 48
49 73 69–80 68–81 4 74 70–83 68–84 4 49
50 72 68–79 67–80 3 74 70–83 68–84 4 50
51 71 67–78 66–80 3 73 69–82 68–83 4 51
52 71 67–78 66–80 3 73 69–82 68–83 4 52
53 70 66–77 65–79 2 72 68–81 67–82 3 53
54 70 66–77 65–79 2 72 68–81 67–82 3 54

118 Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix A ■ Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 118 8/31/15 3:40 PM


tab_9_klpa3_normgrp16 cont.

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex (continued)
Ages 4:6–4:7
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
55 69 65–77 64–78 2 71 67–80 66–81 3 55
56 69 65–77 64–78 2 71 67–80 66–81 3 56
57 68 64–76 63–77 2 70 66–79 65–80 2 57
58 68 64–76 63–77 2 69 65–78 64–79 2 58
59 67 63–75 62–76 1 68 64–77 63–78 2 59
60 66 62–74 61–75 1 68 64–77 63–78 2 60
61 66 62–74 61–75 1 67 63–76 62–77 1 61
62 65 61–73 60–74 1 66 62–75 61–76 1 62
63 65 61–73 60–74 1 66 62–75 61–76 1 63
64 64 60–72 59–73 1 65 61–74 60–75 1 64
65 64 60–72 59–73 1 65 61–74 60–75 1 65
66 63 60–71 58–72 1 64 60–73 59–75 1 66
67 63 60–71 58–72 1 64 60–73 59–75 1 67
68 62 59–70 58–71 1 63 60–72 58–74 1 68
69 62 59–70 58–71 1 63 60–72 58–74 1 69
70 61 58–69 57–70 0.5 62 59–71 57–73 1 70

SAMPLE,
71 61 58–69 57–70 0.5 62 59–71 57–73 1 71
72 60 57–68 56–69 0.4 61 58–71 56–72 0.5 72
73 60 57–68 56–69 0.4 61 58–71 56–72 0.5 73
74 59 56–67 55–68 0.3 60 57–70 56–71 0.4 74
75 59 56–67 55–68 0.3 60 57–70 56–71 0.4 75

NOT FOR
76 58 55–66 54–67 0.3 59 56–69 55–70 0.3 76
77 58 55–66 54–67 0.3 59 56–69 55–70 0.3 77
78 57 54–65 53–66 0.2 58 55–68 54–69 0.3 78
79 57 54–65 53–66 0.2 58 55–68 54–69 0.3 79

ADMINISTRATION
80 56 53–64 52–65 0.2 57 54–67 53–68 0.2 80
81 56 53–64 52–65 0.2 56 53–66 52–67 0.2 81
82 55 52–63 51–64 0.1 55 52–65 51–66 0.1 82
83 54 51–62 50–64 0.1 54 51–64 50–65 0.1 83
84 54 51–62 50–64 0.1 54 51–64 50–65 0.1 84

OR RESALE
85 53 50–62 49–63 0.1 53 50–63 49–64 0.1 85
86 53 50–62 49–63 0.1 53 50–63 49–64 0.1 86
87 52 49–61 48–62 0.1 52 49–62 48–63 0.1 87
88 51 48–60 47–61 0.1 52 49–62 48–63 0.1 88
89 51 48–60 47–61 0.1 51 48–61 47–63 0.1 89
90 50 47–59 46–60 <0.1 51 48–61 47–63 0.1 90
91 49 46–58 45–59 <0.1 50 48–60 46–62 <0.1 91
92 49 46–58 45–59 <0.1 50 48–60 46–62 <0.1 92
93 48 45–57 44–58 <0.1 49 47–60 45–61 <0.1 93
94 47 44–56 43–57 <0.1 49 47–60 45–61 <0.1 94
95 46 44–55 42–56 <0.1 48 46–59 45–60 <0.1 95
96 45 43–54 42–55 <0.1 48 46–59 45–60 <0.1 96
97 44 42–53 41–54 <0.1 47 45–58 44–59 <0.1 97
98 43 41–52 40–53 <0.1 46 44–57 43–58 <0.1 98
99 42 40–51 39–52 <0.1 45 43–56 42–57 <0.1 99
100 41 39–50 38–51 <0.1 45 43–56 42–57 <0.1 100
101 40 38–49 37–50 <0.1 44 42–55 41–56 <0.1 101
102 40 38–49 37–50 <0.1 44 42–55 41–56 <0.1 102
103 40 38–49 37–50 <0.1 43 41–54 40–55 <0.1 103
104 40 38–49 37–50 <0.1 42 40–53 39–54 <0.1 104
105 40 38–49 37–50 <0.1 41 39–52 38–53 <0.1 105
106–160 40 38–49 37–50 <0.1 40 38–51 37–52 <0.1 106–160

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix A ■ Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles 119

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 119 8/31/15 3:40 PM


tab_9_klpa3_normgrp17

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex (continued)
Ages 4:8–4:9
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
0 119 112–124 111–125 90 120 112–125 111–126 91 0
1 111 105–116 104–117 77 116 108–121 107–122 86 1
2 109 103–114 102–115 73 112 105–117 103–119 79 2
3 108 102–113 101–114 70 110 103–116 102–117 75 3
4 107 101–112 100–113 68 108 101–114 100–115 70 4
5 105 99–110 98–111 63 107 100–113 99–114 68 5
6 103 97–109 96–110 58 106 99–112 98–113 66 6
7 102 96–108 95–109 55 105 98–111 97–112 63 7
8 101 95–107 94–108 53 104 97–110 96–111 61 8
9 99 93–105 92–106 47 103 96–109 95–110 58 9
10 98 92–104 91–105 45 102 95–108 94–109 55 10
11 97 91–103 90–104 42 101 94–107 93–109 53 11
12 96 91–102 89–103 39 100 94–106 92–108 50 12
13 95 90–101 89–102 37 99 93–106 91–107 47 13
14 94 89–100 88–101 34 99 93–106 91–107 47 14
15 93 88–99 87–100 32 98 92–105 91–106 45 15

SAMPLE,
16 92 87–98 86–99 30 97 91–104 90–105 42 16
17 91 86–97 85–98 27 97 91–104 90–105 42 17
18 90 85–96 84–97 25 96 90–103 89–104 39 18
19 89 84–95 83–96 23 96 90–103 89–104 39 19
20 88 83–94 82–95 21 95 89–102 88–103 37 20

NOT FOR
21 87 82–93 81–95 19 94 88–101 87–102 34 21
22 87 82–93 81–95 19 94 88–101 87–102 34 22
23 86 81–93 80–94 18 93 87–100 86–101 32 23
24 85 80–92 79–93 16 92 86–99 85–100 30 24

ADMINISTRATION
25 84 79–91 78–92 14 91 85–98 84–99 27 25
26 84 79–91 78–92 14 91 85–98 84–99 27 26
27 83 78–90 77–91 13 90 84–97 83–98 25 27
28 82 77–89 76–90 12 89 83–96 82–98 23 28
29 81 76–88 75–89 10 88 83–95 81–97 21 29

OR RESALE
30 80 76–87 74–88 9 87 82–94 80–96 19 30
31 79 75–86 73–87 8 86 81–94 79–95 18 31
32 79 75–86 73–87 8 85 80–93 79–94 16 32
33 78 74–85 73–86 7 84 79–92 78–93 14 33
34 77 73–84 72–85 6 83 78–91 77–92 13 34
35 77 73–84 72–85 6 82 77–90 76–91 12 35
36 76 72–83 71–84 5 81 76–89 75–90 10 36
37 76 72–83 71–84 5 80 75–88 74–89 9 37
38 75 71–82 70–83 5 80 75–88 74–89 9 38
39 75 71–82 70–83 5 79 74–87 73–88 8 39
40 74 70–81 69–82 4 79 74–87 73–88 8 40
41 74 70–81 69–82 4 78 73–86 72–87 7 41
42 73 69–80 68–81 4 77 72–85 71–86 6 42
43 73 69–80 68–81 4 76 71–84 70–86 5 43
44 72 68–79 67–80 3 76 71–84 70–86 5 44
45 72 68–79 67–80 3 75 71–83 69–85 5 45
46 71 67–78 66–80 3 74 70–83 68–84 4 46
47 71 67–78 66–80 3 74 70–83 68–84 4 47
48 70 66–77 65–79 2 73 69–82 68–83 4 48
49 70 66–77 65–79 2 73 69–82 68–83 4 49
50 69 65–77 64–78 2 72 68–81 67–82 3 50
51 69 65–77 64–78 2 72 68–81 67–82 3 51
52 68 64–76 63–77 2 71 67–80 66–81 3 52
53 68 64–76 63–77 2 70 66–79 65–80 2 53
54 67 63–75 62–76 1 70 66–79 65–80 2 54

120 Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix A ■ Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 120 8/31/15 3:40 PM


tab_9_klpa3_normgrp17 cont.

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex (continued)
Ages 4:8–4:9
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
55 67 63–75 62–76 1 69 65–78 64–79 2 55
56 66 62–74 61–75 1 69 65–78 64–79 2 56
57 66 62–74 61–75 1 68 64–77 63–78 2 57
58 65 61–73 60–74 1 67 63–76 62–77 1 58
59 65 61–73 60–74 1 66 62–75 61–76 1 59
60 64 60–72 59–73 1 66 62–75 61–76 1 60
61 64 60–72 59–73 1 65 61–74 60–75 1 61
62 63 60–71 58–72 1 64 60–73 59–75 1 62
63 63 60–71 58–72 1 64 60–73 59–75 1 63
64 62 59–70 58–71 1 63 60–72 58–74 1 64
65 62 59–70 58–71 1 63 60–72 58–74 1 65
66 61 58–69 57–70 0.5 62 59–71 57–73 1 66
67 61 58–69 57–70 0.5 62 59–71 57–73 1 67
68 60 57–68 56–69 0.4 61 58–71 56–72 0.5 68
69 60 57–68 56–69 0.4 61 58–71 56–72 0.5 69
70 59 56–67 55–68 0.3 60 57–70 56–71 0.4 70

SAMPLE,
71 59 56–67 55–68 0.3 60 57–70 56–71 0.4 71
72 58 55–66 54–67 0.3 59 56–69 55–70 0.3 72
73 58 55–66 54–67 0.3 59 56–69 55–70 0.3 73
74 57 54–65 53–66 0.2 58 55–68 54–69 0.3 74
75 57 54–65 53–66 0.2 58 55–68 54–69 0.3 75

NOT FOR
76 56 53–64 52–65 0.2 57 54–67 53–68 0.2 76
77 56 53–64 52–65 0.2 57 54–67 53–68 0.2 77
78 55 52–63 51–64 0.1 56 53–66 52–67 0.2 78
79 55 52–63 51–64 0.1 56 53–66 52–67 0.2 79

ADMINISTRATION
80 54 51–62 50–64 0.1 55 52–65 51–66 0.1 80
81 53 50–62 49–63 0.1 55 52–65 51–66 0.1 81
82 53 50–62 49–63 0.1 54 51–64 50–65 0.1 82
83 52 49–61 48–62 0.1 53 50–63 49–64 0.1 83
84 51 48–60 47–61 0.1 52 49–62 48–63 0.1 84

OR RESALE
85 50 47–59 46–60 <0.1 51 48–61 47–63 0.1 85
86 50 47–59 46–60 <0.1 51 48–61 47–63 0.1 86
87 49 46–58 45–59 <0.1 50 48–60 46–62 <0.1 87
88 48 45–57 44–58 <0.1 50 48–60 46–62 <0.1 88
89 47 44–56 43–57 <0.1 49 47–60 45–61 <0.1 89
90 46 44–55 42–56 <0.1 48 46–59 45–60 <0.1 90
91 45 43–54 42–55 <0.1 48 46–59 45–60 <0.1 91
92 45 43–54 42–55 <0.1 47 45–58 44–59 <0.1 92
93 44 42–53 41–54 <0.1 46 44–57 43–58 <0.1 93
94 43 41–52 40–53 <0.1 46 44–57 43–58 <0.1 94
95 42 40–51 39–52 <0.1 45 43–56 42–57 <0.1 95
96 41 39–50 38–51 <0.1 44 42–55 41–56 <0.1 96
97 40 38–49 37–50 <0.1 43 41–54 40–55 <0.1 97
98 40 38–49 37–50 <0.1 43 41–54 40–55 <0.1 98
99 40 38–49 37–50 <0.1 42 40–53 39–54 <0.1 99
100 40 38–49 37–50 <0.1 41 39–52 38–53 <0.1 100
101–160 40 38–49 37–50 <0.1 40 38–51 37–52 <0.1 101–160

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix A ■ Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles 121

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 121 8/31/15 3:40 PM


tab_9_klpa3_normgrp18

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex (continued)
Ages 4:10–4:11
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
0 118 111–123 110–124 88 120 112–125 111–126 91 0
1 110 104–115 103–116 75 115 107–120 106–121 84 1
2 108 102–113 101–114 70 111 104–117 102–118 77 2
3 106 100–111 99–112 66 109 102–115 101–116 73 3
4 104 98–109 97–111 61 107 100–113 99–114 68 4
5 102 96–108 95–109 55 106 99–112 98–113 66 5
6 101 95–107 94–108 53 105 98–111 97–112 63 6
7 100 94–106 93–107 50 104 97–110 96–111 61 7
8 98 92–104 91–105 45 103 96–109 95–110 58 8
9 97 91–103 90–104 42 102 95–108 94–109 55 9
10 96 91–102 89–103 39 101 94–107 93–109 53 10
11 95 90–101 89–102 37 100 94–106 92–108 50 11
12 94 89–100 88–101 34 99 93–106 91–107 47 12
13 93 88–99 87–100 32 98 92–105 91–106 45 13
14 92 87–98 86–99 30 98 92–105 91–106 45 14
15 91 86–97 85–98 27 97 91–104 90–105 42 15

SAMPLE,
16 90 85–96 84–97 25 96 90–103 89–104 39 16
17 89 84–95 83–96 23 96 90–103 89–104 39 17
18 89 84–95 83–96 23 95 89–102 88–103 37 18
19 88 83–94 82–95 21 95 89–102 88–103 37 19
20 87 82–93 81–95 19 94 88–101 87–102 34 20

NOT FOR
21 86 81–93 80–94 18 93 87–100 86–101 32 21
22 85 80–92 79–93 16 93 87–100 86–101 32 22
23 84 79–91 78–92 14 92 86–99 85–100 30 23
24 83 78–90 77–91 13 91 85–98 84–99 27 24

ADMINISTRATION
25 82 77–89 76–90 12 90 84–97 83–98 25 25
26 81 76–88 75–89 10 89 83–96 82–98 23 26
27 80 76–87 74–88 9 88 83–95 81–97 21 27
28 80 76–87 74–88 9 87 82–94 80–96 19 28
29 79 75–86 73–87 8 86 81–94 79–95 18 29

OR RESALE
30 78 74–85 73–86 7 85 80–93 79–94 16 30
31 77 73–84 72–85 6 84 79–92 78–93 14 31
32 76 72–83 71–84 5 83 78–91 77–92 13 32
33 75 71–82 70–83 5 82 77–90 76–91 12 33
34 75 71–82 70–83 5 81 76–89 75–90 10 34
35 74 70–81 69–82 4 80 75–88 74–89 9 35
36 74 70–81 69–82 4 79 74–87 73–88 8 36
37 73 69–80 68–81 4 78 73–86 72–87 7 37
38 73 69–80 68–81 4 78 73–86 72–87 7 38
39 72 68–79 67–80 3 77 72–85 71–86 6 39
40 72 68–79 67–80 3 77 72–85 71–86 6 40
41 71 67–78 66–80 3 76 71–84 70–86 5 41
42 71 67–78 66–80 3 75 71–83 69–85 5 42
43 70 66–77 65–79 2 74 70–83 68–84 4 43
44 70 66–77 65–79 2 74 70–83 68–84 4 44
45 69 65–77 64–78 2 73 69–82 68–83 4 45
46 69 65–77 64–78 2 72 68–81 67–82 3 46
47 68 64–76 63–77 2 72 68–81 67–82 3 47
48 68 64–76 63–77 2 71 67–80 66–81 3 48
49 67 63–75 62–76 1 71 67–80 66–81 3 49
50 67 63–75 62–76 1 70 66–79 65–80 2 50
51 66 62–74 61–75 1 70 66–79 65–80 2 51
52 66 62–74 61–75 1 69 65–78 64–79 2 52
53 65 61–73 60–74 1 68 64–77 63–78 2 53
54 65 61–73 60–74 1 68 64–77 63–78 2 54

122 Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix A ■ Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 122 8/31/15 3:40 PM


tab_9_klpa3_normgrp18 cont.

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex (continued)
Ages 4:10–4:11
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
55 64 60–72 59–73 1 67 63–76 62–77 1 55
56 64 60–72 59–73 1 67 63–76 62–77 1 56
57 63 60–71 58–72 1 66 62–75 61–76 1 57
58 62 59–70 58–71 1 65 61–74 60–75 1 58
59 62 59–70 58–71 1 64 60–73 59–75 1 59
60 61 58–69 57–70 0.5 64 60–73 59–75 1 60
61 61 58–69 57–70 0.5 63 60–72 58–74 1 61
62 60 57–68 56–69 0.4 62 59–71 57–73 1 62
63 60 57–68 56–69 0.4 62 59–71 57–73 1 63
64 59 56–67 55–68 0.3 61 58–71 56–72 0.5 64
65 59 56–67 55–68 0.3 61 58–71 56–72 0.5 65
66 58 55–66 54–67 0.3 60 57–70 56–71 0.4 66
67 58 55–66 54–67 0.3 60 57–70 56–71 0.4 67
68 57 54–65 53–66 0.2 59 56–69 55–70 0.3 68
69 57 54–65 53–66 0.2 59 56–69 55–70 0.3 69
70 56 53–64 52–65 0.2 58 55–68 54–69 0.3 70

SAMPLE,
71 56 53–64 52–65 0.2 58 55–68 54–69 0.3 71
72 55 52–63 51–64 0.1 57 54–67 53–68 0.2 72
73 55 52–63 51–64 0.1 57 54–67 53–68 0.2 73
74 54 51–62 50–64 0.1 56 53–66 52–67 0.2 74
75 53 50–62 49–63 0.1 55 52–65 51–66 0.1 75

NOT FOR
76 53 50–62 49–63 0.1 55 52–65 51–66 0.1 76
77 52 49–61 48–62 0.1 54 51–64 50–65 0.1 77
78 51 48–60 47–61 0.1 53 50–63 49–64 0.1 78
79 51 48–60 47–61 0.1 53 50–63 49–64 0.1 79

ADMINISTRATION
80 50 47–59 46–60 <0.1 52 49–62 48–63 0.1 80
81 49 46–58 45–59 <0.1 51 48–61 47–63 0.1 81
82 48 45–57 44–58 <0.1 50 48–60 46–62 <0.1 82
83 47 44–56 43–57 <0.1 49 47–60 45–61 <0.1 83
84 47 44–56 43–57 <0.1 48 46–59 45–60 <0.1 84

OR RESALE
85 46 44–55 42–56 <0.1 47 45–58 44–59 <0.1 85
86 45 43–54 42–55 <0.1 47 45–58 44–59 <0.1 86
87 44 42–53 41–54 <0.1 46 44–57 43–58 <0.1 87
88 43 41–52 40–53 <0.1 46 44–57 43–58 <0.1 88
89 42 40–51 39–52 <0.1 45 43–56 42–57 <0.1 89
90 42 40–51 39–52 <0.1 44 42–55 41–56 <0.1 90
91 41 39–50 38–51 <0.1 44 42–55 41–56 <0.1 91
92 40 38–49 37–50 <0.1 43 41–54 40–55 <0.1 92
93 40 38–49 37–50 <0.1 42 40–53 39–54 <0.1 93
94 40 38–49 37–50 <0.1 42 40–53 39–54 <0.1 94
95 40 38–49 37–50 <0.1 41 39–52 38–53 <0.1 95
96 40 38–49 37–50 <0.1 41 39–52 38–53 <0.1 96
97–160 40 38–49 37–50 <0.1 40 38–51 37–52 <0.1 97–160

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix A ■ Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles 123

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 123 8/31/15 3:40 PM


tab_9_klpa3_normgrp19

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex (continued)
Ages 5:0–5:1
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
0 117 112–121 111–122 87 119 112–124 110–125 90 0
1 107 102–111 101–112 68 114 107–119 106–120 82 1
2 104 99–109 98–109 61 110 103–115 102–117 75 2
3 103 98–108 97–109 58 108 101–114 100–115 70 3
4 101 96–106 95–107 53 106 100–112 98–113 66 4
5 100 95–105 94–106 50 105 99–111 97–112 63 5
6 99 94–104 93–105 47 104 98–110 96–111 61 6
7 98 93–103 92–104 45 103 97–109 96–110 58 7
8 97 92–102 91–103 42 102 96–108 95–109 55 8
9 96 91–101 91–102 39 101 95–107 94–108 53 9
10 95 90–100 90–101 37 100 94–106 93–107 50 10
11 94 90–99 89–100 34 99 93–105 92–106 47 11
12 93 89–98 88–99 32 98 92–104 91–105 45 12
13 92 88–97 87–98 30 97 91–103 90–104 42 13
14 91 87–96 86–97 27 97 91–103 90–104 42 14
15 90 86–95 85–96 25 96 90–102 89–104 39 15

SAMPLE,
16 89 85–94 84–95 23 95 89–101 88–103 37 16
17 88 84–93 83–94 21 95 89–101 88–103 37 17
18 87 83–92 82–93 19 94 88–100 87–102 34 18
19 86 82–91 81–92 18 94 88–100 87–102 34 19
20 85 81–90 80–91 16 93 87–100 86–101 32 20

NOT FOR
21 85 81–90 80–91 16 92 86–99 85–100 30 21
22 84 80–89 79–90 14 91 86–98 84–99 27 22
23 83 79–88 78–89 13 90 85–97 83–98 25 23
24 82 78–87 77–88 12 89 84–96 83–97 23 24

ADMINISTRATION
25 81 77–86 76–87 10 88 83–95 82–96 21 25
26 80 76–86 75–86 9 87 82–94 81–95 19 26
27 79 75–85 74–85 8 86 81–93 80–94 18 27
28 78 74–84 73–85 7 85 80–92 79–93 16 28
29 77 73–83 72–84 6 84 79–91 78–92 14 29

OR RESALE
30 76 72–82 71–83 5 83 78–90 77–91 13 30
31 75 71–81 70–82 5 82 77–89 76–90 12 31
32 74 70–80 69–81 4 81 76–88 75–90 10 32
33 73 69–79 68–80 4 80 75–87 74–89 9 33
34 73 69–79 68–80 4 79 74–87 73–88 8 34
35 72 68–78 67–79 3 78 73–86 72–87 7 35
36 72 68–78 67–79 3 77 73–85 71–86 6 36
37 71 67–77 67–78 3 76 72–84 70–85 5 37
38 70 66–76 66–77 2 76 72–84 70–85 5 38
39 70 66–76 66–77 2 75 71–83 70–84 5 39
40 69 66–75 65–76 2 75 71–83 70–84 5 40
41 69 66–75 65–76 2 74 70–82 69–83 4 41
42 68 65–74 64–75 2 73 69–81 68–82 4 42
43 68 65–74 64–75 2 72 68–80 67–81 3 43
44 67 64–73 63–74 1 72 68–80 67–81 3 44
45 67 64–73 63–74 1 71 67–79 66–80 3 45
46 66 63–72 62–73 1 70 66–78 65–79 2 46
47 65 62–71 61–72 1 70 66–78 65–79 2 47
48 65 62–71 61–72 1 69 65–77 64–78 2 48
49 64 61–70 60–71 1 69 65–77 64–78 2 49
50 64 61–70 60–71 1 68 64–76 63–77 2 50
51 63 60–69 59–70 1 68 64–76 63–77 2 51
52 63 60–69 59–70 1 67 63–75 62–77 1 52
53 62 59–68 58–69 1 66 62–74 61–76 1 53
54 62 59–68 58–69 1 66 62–74 61–76 1 54

124 Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix A ■ Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 124 8/31/15 3:40 PM


tab_9_klpa3_normgrp19 cont.

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex (continued)
Ages 5:0–5:1
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
55 61 58–67 57–68 0.5 65 61–74 60–75 1 55
56 61 58–67 57–68 0.5 65 61–74 60–75 1 56
57 60 57–66 56–67 0.4 64 60–73 59–74 1 57
58 60 57–66 56–67 0.4 63 60–72 58–73 1 58
59 59 56–65 55–66 0.3 62 59–71 57–72 1 59
60 59 56–65 55–66 0.3 62 59–71 57–72 1 60
61 58 55–64 54–65 0.3 61 58–70 56–71 0.5 61
62 58 55–64 54–65 0.3 60 57–69 56–70 0.4 62
63 57 54–63 53–64 0.2 60 57–69 56–70 0.4 63
64 57 54–63 53–64 0.2 59 56–68 55–69 0.3 64
65 56 53–62 52–63 0.2 59 56–68 55–69 0.3 65
66 56 53–62 52–63 0.2 58 55–67 54–68 0.3 66
67 55 52–62 51–62 0.1 58 55–67 54–68 0.3 67
68 54 51–61 50–61 0.1 57 54–66 53–67 0.2 68
69 54 51–61 50–61 0.1 57 54–66 53–67 0.2 69
70 53 50–60 49–61 0.1 56 53–65 52–66 0.2 70

SAMPLE,
71 52 49–59 48–60 0.1 55 52–64 51–65 0.1 71
72 52 49–59 48–60 0.1 55 52–64 51–65 0.1 72
73 51 48–58 47–59 0.1 54 51–63 50–64 0.1 73
74 50 47–57 46–58 <0.1 54 51–63 50–64 0.1 74
75 49 46–56 45–57 <0.1 53 50–62 49–64 0.1 75

NOT FOR
76 48 45–55 44–56 <0.1 52 49–61 48–63 0.1 76
77 47 44–54 43–55 <0.1 51 48–61 47–62 0.1 77
78 46 43–53 43–54 <0.1 50 47–60 46–61 <0.1 78
79 45 42–52 42–53 <0.1 50 47–60 46–61 <0.1 79

ADMINISTRATION
80 44 42–51 41–52 <0.1 49 46–59 45–60 <0.1 80
81 43 41–50 40–51 <0.1 48 46–58 44–59 <0.1 81
82 42 40–49 39–50 <0.1 47 45–57 43–58 <0.1 82
83 42 40–49 39–50 <0.1 46 44–56 43–57 <0.1 83
84 41 39–48 38–49 <0.1 46 44–56 43–57 <0.1 84

OR RESALE
85 41 39–48 38–49 <0.1 45 43–55 42–56 <0.1 85
86 40 38–47 37–48 <0.1 44 42–54 41–55 <0.1 86
87 40 38–47 37–48 <0.1 44 42–54 41–55 <0.1 87
88 40 38–47 37–48 <0.1 43 41–53 40–54 <0.1 88
89 40 38–47 37–48 <0.1 42 40–52 39–53 <0.1 89
90 40 38–47 37–48 <0.1 42 40–52 39–53 <0.1 90
91 40 38–47 37–48 <0.1 41 39–51 38–52 <0.1 91
92–160 40 38–47 37–48 <0.1 40 38–50 37–51 <0.1 92–160

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix A ■ Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles 125

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 125 8/31/15 3:40 PM


tab_9_klpa3_normgrp20

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex (continued)
Ages 5:2–5:3
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
0 117 112–121 111–122 87 119 112–124 110–125 90 0
1 104 99–109 98–109 61 113 106–118 105–119 81 1
2 102 97–107 96–108 55 109 102–114 101–116 73 2
3 101 96–106 95–107 53 107 100–113 99–114 68 3
4 99 94–104 93–105 47 105 99–111 97–112 63 4
5 97 92–102 91–103 42 104 98–110 96–111 61 5
6 96 91–101 91–102 39 103 97–109 96–110 58 6
7 95 90–100 90–101 37 102 96–108 95–109 55 7
8 94 90–99 89–100 34 101 95–107 94–108 53 8
9 93 89–98 88–99 32 100 94–106 93–107 50 9
10 92 88–97 87–98 30 99 93–105 92–106 47 10
11 91 87–96 86–97 27 98 92–104 91–105 45 11
12 90 86–95 85–96 25 97 91–103 90–104 42 12
13 89 85–94 84–95 23 96 90–102 89–104 39 13
14 88 84–93 83–94 21 96 90–102 89–104 39 14
15 87 83–92 82–93 19 95 89–101 88–103 37 15

SAMPLE,
16 86 82–91 81–92 18 94 88–100 87–102 34 16
17 85 81–90 80–91 16 93 87–100 86–101 32 17
18 84 80–89 79–90 14 93 87–100 86–101 32 18
19 83 79–88 78–89 13 92 86–99 85–100 30 19
20 82 78–87 77–88 12 91 86–98 84–99 27 20

NOT FOR
21 81 77–86 76–87 10 90 85–97 83–98 25 21
22 81 77–86 76–87 10 89 84–96 83–97 23 22
23 80 76–86 75–86 9 88 83–95 82–96 21 23
24 79 75–85 74–85 8 87 82–94 81–95 19 24

ADMINISTRATION
25 78 74–84 73–85 7 86 81–93 80–94 18 25
26 77 73–83 72–84 6 85 80–92 79–93 16 26
27 77 73–83 72–84 6 84 79–91 78–92 14 27
28 76 72–82 71–83 5 83 78–90 77–91 13 28
29 75 71–81 70–82 5 82 77–89 76–90 12 29

OR RESALE
30 74 70–80 69–81 4 81 76–88 75–90 10 30
31 73 69–79 68–80 4 80 75–87 74–89 9 31
32 72 68–78 67–79 3 79 74–87 73–88 8 32
33 72 68–78 67–79 3 78 73–86 72–87 7 33
34 71 67–77 67–78 3 77 73–85 71–86 6 34
35 71 67–77 67–78 3 76 72–84 70–85 5 35
36 70 66–76 66–77 2 75 71–83 70–84 5 36
37 69 66–75 65–76 2 74 70–82 69–83 4 37
38 69 66–75 65–76 2 74 70–82 69–83 4 38
39 68 65–74 64–75 2 73 69–81 68–82 4 39
40 68 65–74 64–75 2 73 69–81 68–82 4 40
41 67 64–73 63–74 1 72 68–80 67–81 3 41
42 67 64–73 63–74 1 71 67–79 66–80 3 42
43 66 63–72 62–73 1 70 66–78 65–79 2 43
44 66 63–72 62–73 1 70 66–78 65–79 2 44
45 65 62–71 61–72 1 69 65–77 64–78 2 45
46 64 61–70 60–71 1 68 64–76 63–77 2 46
47 64 61–70 60–71 1 68 64–76 63–77 2 47
48 63 60–69 59–70 1 67 63–75 62–77 1 48
49 63 60–69 59–70 1 67 63–75 62–77 1 49
50 62 59–68 58–69 1 66 62–74 61–76 1 50
51 62 59–68 58–69 1 66 62–74 61–76 1 51
52 61 58–67 57–68 0.5 65 61–74 60–75 1 52
53 61 58–67 57–68 0.5 64 60–73 59–74 1 53
54 60 57–66 56–67 0.4 64 60–73 59–74 1 54

126 Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix A ■ Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 126 8/31/15 3:40 PM


tab_9_klpa3_normgrp20 cont.

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex (continued)
Ages 5:2–5:3
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
55 59 56–65 55–66 0.3 63 60–72 58–73 1 55
56 59 56–65 55–66 0.3 63 60–72 58–73 1 56
57 58 55–64 54–65 0.3 62 59–71 57–72 1 57
58 58 55–64 54–65 0.3 61 58–70 56–71 0.5 58
59 57 54–63 53–64 0.2 60 57–69 56–70 0.4 59
60 56 53–62 52–63 0.2 60 57–69 56–70 0.4 60
61 56 53–62 52–63 0.2 59 56–68 55–69 0.3 61
62 55 52–62 51–62 0.1 58 55–67 54–68 0.3 62
63 55 52–62 51–62 0.1 58 55–67 54–68 0.3 63
64 54 51–61 50–61 0.1 57 54–66 53–67 0.2 64
65 53 50–60 49–61 0.1 56 53–65 52–66 0.2 65
66 52 49–59 48–60 0.1 56 53–65 52–66 0.2 66
67 52 49–59 48–60 0.1 55 52–64 51–65 0.1 67
68 51 48–58 47–59 0.1 54 51–63 50–64 0.1 68
69 50 47–57 46–58 <0.1 54 51–63 50–64 0.1 69
70 49 46–56 45–57 <0.1 53 50–62 49–64 0.1 70

SAMPLE,
71 48 45–55 44–56 <0.1 52 49–61 48–63 0.1 71
72 47 44–54 43–55 <0.1 52 49–61 48–63 0.1 72
73 46 43–53 43–54 <0.1 51 48–61 47–62 0.1 73
74 45 42–52 42–53 <0.1 50 47–60 46–61 <0.1 74
75 44 42–51 41–52 <0.1 49 46–59 45–60 <0.1 75

NOT FOR
76 43 41–50 40–51 <0.1 48 46–58 44–59 <0.1 76
77 42 40–49 39–50 <0.1 47 45–57 43–58 <0.1 77
78 41 39–48 38–49 <0.1 46 44–56 43–57 <0.1 78
79 40 38–47 37–48 <0.1 46 44–56 43–57 <0.1 79

ADMINISTRATION
80 40 38–47 37–48 <0.1 45 43–55 42–56 <0.1 80
81 40 38–47 37–48 <0.1 44 42–54 41–55 <0.1 81
82 40 38–47 37–48 <0.1 44 42–54 41–55 <0.1 82
83 40 38–47 37–48 <0.1 43 41–53 40–54 <0.1 83
84 40 38–47 37–48 <0.1 43 41–53 40–54 <0.1 84

OR RESALE
85 40 38–47 37–48 <0.1 42 40–52 39–53 <0.1 85
86 40 38–47 37–48 <0.1 42 40–52 39–53 <0.1 86
87 40 38–47 37–48 <0.1 41 39–51 38–52 <0.1 87
88–160 40 38–47 37–48 <0.1 40 38–50 37–51 <0.1 88–160

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix A ■ Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles 127

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 127 8/31/15 3:40 PM


tab_9_klpa3_normgrp21

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex (continued)
Ages 5:4–5:5
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
0 116 111–120 110–121 86 118 111–123 110–124 88 0
1 101 96–106 95–107 53 113 106–118 105–119 81 1
2 99 94–104 93–105 47 108 101–114 100–115 70 2
3 98 93–103 92–104 45 106 100–112 98–113 66 3
4 97 92–102 91–103 42 104 98–110 96–111 61 4
5 95 90–100 90–101 37 103 97–109 96–110 58 5
6 94 90–99 89–100 34 102 96–108 95–109 55 6
7 93 89–98 88–99 32 101 95–107 94–108 53 7
8 92 88–97 87–98 30 100 94–106 93–107 50 8
9 91 87–96 86–97 27 99 93–105 92–106 47 9
10 90 86–95 85–96 25 98 92–104 91–105 45 10
11 89 85–94 84–95 23 97 91–103 90–104 42 11
12 88 84–93 83–94 21 96 90–102 89–104 39 12
13 87 83–92 82–93 19 95 89–101 88–103 37 13
14 86 82–91 81–92 18 95 89–101 88–103 37 14
15 85 81–90 80–91 16 94 88–100 87–102 34 15

SAMPLE,
16 84 80–89 79–90 14 93 87–100 86–101 32 16
17 83 79–88 78–89 13 92 86–99 85–100 30 17
18 82 78–87 77–88 12 91 86–98 84–99 27 18
19 81 77–86 76–87 10 90 85–97 83–98 25 19
20 80 76–86 75–86 9 89 84–96 83–97 23 20

NOT FOR
21 79 75–85 74–85 8 88 83–95 82–96 21 21
22 78 74–84 73–85 7 87 82–94 81–95 19 22
23 77 73–83 72–84 6 86 81–93 80–94 18 23
24 76 72–82 71–83 5 85 80–92 79–93 16 24

ADMINISTRATION
25 75 71–81 70–82 5 84 79–91 78–92 14 25
26 74 70–80 69–81 4 83 78–90 77–91 13 26
27 73 69–79 68–80 4 82 77–89 76–90 12 27
28 72 68–78 67–79 3 81 76–88 75–90 10 28
29 72 68–78 67–79 3 80 75–87 74–89 9 29

OR RESALE
30 71 67–77 67–78 3 79 74–87 73–88 8 30
31 70 66–76 66–77 2 78 73–86 72–87 7 31
32 70 66–76 66–77 2 77 73–85 71–86 6 32
33 69 66–75 65–76 2 76 72–84 70–85 5 33
34 69 66–75 65–76 2 75 71–83 70–84 5 34
35 68 65–74 64–75 2 74 70–82 69–83 4 35
36 68 65–74 64–75 2 73 69–81 68–82 4 36
37 67 64–73 63–74 1 72 68–80 67–81 3 37
38 67 64–73 63–74 1 72 68–80 67–81 3 38
39 66 63–72 62–73 1 71 67–79 66–80 3 39
40 66 63–72 62–73 1 71 67–79 66–80 3 40
41 65 62–71 61–72 1 70 66–78 65–79 2 41
42 65 62–71 61–72 1 69 65–77 64–78 2 42
43 64 61–70 60–71 1 68 64–76 63–77 2 43
44 64 61–70 60–71 1 68 64–76 63–77 2 44
45 63 60–69 59–70 1 67 63–75 62–77 1 45
46 63 60–69 59–70 1 66 62–74 61–76 1 46
47 62 59–68 58–69 1 66 62–74 61–76 1 47
48 62 59–68 58–69 1 65 61–74 60–75 1 48
49 61 58–67 57–68 0.5 65 61–74 60–75 1 49
50 60 57–66 56–67 0.4 64 60–73 59–74 1 50
51 60 57–66 56–67 0.4 64 60–73 59–74 1 51
52 59 56–65 55–66 0.3 63 60–72 58–73 1 52
53 58 55–64 54–65 0.3 62 59–71 57–72 1 53
54 58 55–64 54–65 0.3 62 59–71 57–72 1 54

128 Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix A ■ Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 128 8/31/15 3:40 PM


tab_9_klpa3_normgrp21 cont.

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex (continued)
Ages 5:4–5:5
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
55 57 54–63 53–64 0.2 61 58–70 56–71 0.5 55
56 56 53–62 52–63 0.2 61 58–70 56–71 0.5 56
57 56 53–62 52–63 0.2 60 57–69 56–70 0.4 57
58 55 52–62 51–62 0.1 59 56–68 55–69 0.3 58
59 54 51–61 50–61 0.1 58 55–67 54–68 0.3 59
60 54 51–61 50–61 0.1 57 54–66 53–67 0.2 60
61 53 50–60 49–61 0.1 56 53–65 52–66 0.2 61
62 52 49–59 48–60 0.1 56 53–65 52–66 0.2 62
63 51 48–58 47–59 0.1 55 52–64 51–65 0.1 63
64 50 47–57 46–58 <0.1 54 51–63 50–64 0.1 64
65 49 46–56 45–57 <0.1 53 50–62 49–64 0.1 65
66 48 45–55 44–56 <0.1 53 50–62 49–64 0.1 66
67 47 44–54 43–55 <0.1 52 49–61 48–63 0.1 67
68 46 43–53 43–54 <0.1 51 48–61 47–62 0.1 68
69 45 42–52 42–53 <0.1 50 47–60 46–61 <0.1 69
70 44 42–51 41–52 <0.1 50 47–60 46–61 <0.1 70

SAMPLE,
71 43 41–50 40–51 <0.1 49 46–59 45–60 <0.1 71
72 42 40–49 39–50 <0.1 48 46–58 44–59 <0.1 72
73 41 39–48 38–49 <0.1 47 45–57 43–58 <0.1 73
74 40 38–47 37–48 <0.1 46 44–56 43–57 <0.1 74
75 40 38–47 37–48 <0.1 45 43–55 42–56 <0.1 75

NOT FOR
76 40 38–47 37–48 <0.1 44 42–54 41–55 <0.1 76
77 40 38–47 37–48 <0.1 43 41–53 40–54 <0.1 77
78 40 38–47 37–48 <0.1 42 40–52 39–53 <0.1 78
79 40 38–47 37–48 <0.1 42 40–52 39–53 <0.1 79

ADMINISTRATION
80 40 38–47 37–48 <0.1 41 39–51 38–52 <0.1 80
81–160 40 38–47 37–48 <0.1 40 38–50 37–51 <0.1 81–160

OR RESALE

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix A ■ Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles 129

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 129 8/31/15 3:40 PM


tab_9_klpa3_normgrp22

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex (continued)
Ages 5:6–5:7
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
0 115 110–119 109–120 84 118 111–123 110–124 88 0
1 100 95–105 94–106 50 112 105–117 104–118 79 1
2 97 92–102 91–103 42 107 100–113 99–114 68 2
3 95 90–100 90–101 37 105 99–111 97–112 63 3
4 94 90–99 89–100 34 103 97–109 96–110 58 4
5 93 89–98 88–99 32 102 96–108 95–109 55 5
6 92 88–97 87–98 30 101 95–107 94–108 53 6
7 91 87–96 86–97 27 100 94–106 93–107 50 7
8 90 86–95 85–96 25 99 93–105 92–106 47 8
9 89 85–94 84–95 23 98 92–104 91–105 45 9
10 88 84–93 83–94 21 97 91–103 90–104 42 10
11 87 83–92 82–93 19 96 90–102 89–104 39 11
12 86 82–91 81–92 18 95 89–101 88–103 37 12
13 85 81–90 80–91 16 94 88–100 87–102 34 13
14 84 80–89 79–90 14 93 87–100 86–101 32 14
15 83 79–88 78–89 13 92 86–99 85–100 30 15

SAMPLE,
16 82 78–87 77–88 12 91 86–98 84–99 27 16
17 81 77–86 76–87 10 90 85–97 83–98 25 17
18 80 76–86 75–86 9 89 84–96 83–97 23 18
19 79 75–85 74–85 8 88 83–95 82–96 21 19
20 78 74–84 73–85 7 87 82–94 81–95 19 20

NOT FOR
21 77 73–83 72–84 6 86 81–93 80–94 18 21
22 76 72–82 71–83 5 85 80–92 79–93 16 22
23 75 71–81 70–82 5 84 79–91 78–92 14 23
24 74 70–80 69–81 4 83 78–90 77–91 13 24

ADMINISTRATION
25 73 69–79 68–80 4 82 77–89 76–90 12 25
26 72 68–78 67–79 3 81 76–88 75–90 10 26
27 71 67–77 67–78 3 80 75–87 74–89 9 27
28 70 66–76 66–77 2 79 74–87 73–88 8 28
29 70 66–76 66–77 2 78 73–86 72–87 7 29

OR RESALE
30 69 66–75 65–76 2 77 73–85 71–86 6 30
31 69 66–75 65–76 2 76 72–84 70–85 5 31
32 68 65–74 64–75 2 75 71–83 70–84 5 32
33 67 64–73 63–74 1 74 70–82 69–83 4 33
34 67 64–73 63–74 1 73 69–81 68–82 4 34
35 66 63–72 62–73 1 73 69–81 68–82 4 35
36 66 63–72 62–73 1 72 68–80 67–81 3 36
37 65 62–71 61–72 1 71 67–79 66–80 3 37
38 65 62–71 61–72 1 70 66–78 65–79 2 38
39 64 61–70 60–71 1 69 65–77 64–78 2 39
40 64 61–70 60–71 1 69 65–77 64–78 2 40
41 63 60–69 59–70 1 68 64–76 63–77 2 41
42 63 60–69 59–70 1 67 63–75 62–77 1 42
43 62 59–68 58–69 1 66 62–74 61–76 1 43
44 62 59–68 58–69 1 66 62–74 61–76 1 44
45 61 58–67 57–68 0.5 65 61–74 60–75 1 45
46 61 58–67 57–68 0.5 64 60–73 59–74 1 46
47 60 57–66 56–67 0.4 64 60–73 59–74 1 47
48 60 57–66 56–67 0.4 63 60–72 58–73 1 48
49 59 56–65 55–66 0.3 63 60–72 58–73 1 49
50 59 56–65 55–66 0.3 62 59–71 57–72 1 50
51 58 55–64 54–65 0.3 62 59–71 57–72 1 51
52 57 54–63 53–64 0.2 61 58–70 56–71 0.5 52
53 57 54–63 53–64 0.2 60 57–69 56–70 0.4 53
54 56 53–62 52–63 0.2 59 56–68 55–69 0.3 54

130 Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix A ■ Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 130 8/31/15 3:40 PM


tab_9_klpa3_normgrp22 cont.

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex (continued)
Ages 5:6–5:7
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
55 55 52–62 51–62 0.1 58 55–67 54–68 0.3 55
56 55 52–62 51–62 0.1 58 55–67 54–68 0.3 56
57 54 51–61 50–61 0.1 57 54–66 53–67 0.2 57
58 53 50–60 49–61 0.1 56 53–65 52–66 0.2 58
59 52 49–59 48–60 0.1 55 52–64 51–65 0.1 59
60 51 48–58 47–59 0.1 54 51–63 50–64 0.1 60
61 50 47–57 46–58 <0.1 53 50–62 49–64 0.1 61
62 49 46–56 45–57 <0.1 53 50–62 49–64 0.1 62
63 48 45–55 44–56 <0.1 52 49–61 48–63 0.1 63
64 47 44–54 43–55 <0.1 51 48–61 47–62 0.1 64
65 46 43–53 43–54 <0.1 50 47–60 46–61 <0.1 65
66 45 42–52 42–53 <0.1 49 46–59 45–60 <0.1 66
67 44 42–51 41–52 <0.1 48 46–58 44–59 <0.1 67
68 43 41–50 40–51 <0.1 47 45–57 43–58 <0.1 68
69 42 40–49 39–50 <0.1 46 44–56 43–57 <0.1 69
70 41 39–48 38–49 <0.1 45 43–55 42–56 <0.1 70

SAMPLE,
71 40 38–47 37–48 <0.1 44 42–54 41–55 <0.1 71
72 40 38–47 37–48 <0.1 43 41–53 40–54 <0.1 72
73 40 38–47 37–48 <0.1 42 40–52 39–53 <0.1 73
74 40 38–47 37–48 <0.1 41 39–51 38–52 <0.1 74
75 40 38–47 37–48 <0.1 41 39–51 38–52 <0.1 75

NOT FOR
76–160 40 38–47 37–48 <0.1 40 38–50 37–51 <0.1 76–160

ADMINISTRATION
OR RESALE

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix A ■ Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles 131

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 131 8/31/15 3:40 PM


tab_9_klpa3_normgrp23

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex (continued)
Ages 5:8–5:9
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
0 115 110–119 109–120 84 117 110–122 109–123 87 0
1 99 94–104 93–105 47 111 104–116 103–117 77 1
2 96 91–101 91–102 39 105 99–111 97–112 63 2
3 94 90–99 89–100 34 103 97–109 96–110 58 3
4 93 89–98 88–99 32 101 95–107 94–108 53 4
5 91 87–96 86–97 27 100 94–106 93–107 50 5
6 90 86–95 85–96 25 99 93–105 92–106 47 6
7 89 85–94 84–95 23 98 92–104 91–105 45 7
8 88 84–93 83–94 21 97 91–103 90–104 42 8
9 87 83–92 82–93 19 96 90–102 89–104 39 9
10 86 82–91 81–92 18 95 89–101 88–103 37 10
11 85 81–90 80–91 16 94 88–100 87–102 34 11
12 84 80–89 79–90 14 93 87–100 86–101 32 12
13 83 79–88 78–89 13 92 86–99 85–100 30 13
14 82 78–87 77–88 12 91 86–98 84–99 27 14
15 81 77–86 76–87 10 90 85–97 83–98 25 15

SAMPLE,
16 80 76–86 75–86 9 89 84–96 83–97 23 16
17 79 75–85 74–85 8 88 83–95 82–96 21 17
18 78 74–84 73–85 7 87 82–94 81–95 19 18
19 77 73–83 72–84 6 86 81–93 80–94 18 19
20 76 72–82 71–83 5 85 80–92 79–93 16 20

NOT FOR
21 75 71–81 70–82 5 84 79–91 78–92 14 21
22 74 70–80 69–81 4 83 78–90 77–91 13 22
23 73 69–79 68–80 4 82 77–89 76–90 12 23
24 72 68–78 67–79 3 81 76–88 75–90 10 24

ADMINISTRATION
25 72 68–78 67–79 3 80 75–87 74–89 9 25
26 71 67–77 67–78 3 79 74–87 73–88 8 26
27 70 66–76 66–77 2 78 73–86 72–87 7 27
28 70 66–76 66–77 2 77 73–85 71–86 6 28
29 69 66–75 65–76 2 76 72–84 70–85 5 29

OR RESALE
30 68 65–74 64–75 2 75 71–83 70–84 5 30
31 68 65–74 64–75 2 74 70–82 69–83 4 31
32 67 64–73 63–74 1 73 69–81 68–82 4 32
33 66 63–72 62–73 1 72 68–80 67–81 3 33
34 66 63–72 62–73 1 71 67–79 66–80 3 34
35 65 62–71 61–72 1 71 67–79 66–80 3 35
36 65 62–71 61–72 1 70 66–78 65–79 2 36
37 64 61–70 60–71 1 69 65–77 64–78 2 37
38 64 61–70 60–71 1 68 64–76 63–77 2 38
39 63 60–69 59–70 1 67 63–75 62–77 1 39
40 63 60–69 59–70 1 67 63–75 62–77 1 40
41 62 59–68 58–69 1 66 62–74 61–76 1 41
42 62 59–68 58–69 1 65 61–74 60–75 1 42
43 61 58–67 57–68 0.5 64 60–73 59–74 1 43
44 60 57–66 56–67 0.4 64 60–73 59–74 1 44
45 60 57–66 56–67 0.4 63 60–72 58–73 1 45
46 59 56–65 55–66 0.3 62 59–71 57–72 1 46
47 58 55–64 54–65 0.3 61 58–70 56–71 0.5 47
48 58 55–64 54–65 0.3 60 57–69 56–70 0.4 48
49 57 54–63 53–64 0.2 60 57–69 56–70 0.4 49
50 57 54–63 53–64 0.2 59 56–68 55–69 0.3 50
51 56 53–62 52–63 0.2 59 56–68 55–69 0.3 51
52 55 52–62 51–62 0.1 58 55–67 54–68 0.3 52
53 54 51–61 50–61 0.1 57 54–66 53–67 0.2 53
54 53 50–60 49–61 0.1 56 53–65 52–66 0.2 54

132 Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix A ■ Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 132 8/31/15 3:40 PM


tab_9_klpa3_normgrp23 cont.

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex (continued)
Ages 5:8–5:9
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
55 52 49–59 48–60 0.1 55 52–64 51–65 0.1 55
56 51 48–58 47–59 0.1 54 51–63 50–64 0.1 56
57 50 47–57 46–58 <0.1 53 50–62 49–64 0.1 57
58 50 47–57 46–58 <0.1 52 49–61 48–63 0.1 58
59 49 46–56 45–57 <0.1 51 48–61 47–62 0.1 59
60 48 45–55 44–56 <0.1 50 47–60 46–61 <0.1 60
61 47 44–54 43–55 <0.1 49 46–59 45–60 <0.1 61
62 46 43–53 43–54 <0.1 49 46–59 45–60 <0.1 62
63 45 42–52 42–53 <0.1 48 46–58 44–59 <0.1 63
64 44 42–51 41–52 <0.1 47 45–57 43–58 <0.1 64
65 42 40–49 39–50 <0.1 46 44–56 43–57 <0.1 65
66 41 39–48 38–49 <0.1 45 43–55 42–56 <0.1 66
67 40 38–47 37–48 <0.1 44 42–54 41–55 <0.1 67
68 40 38–47 37–48 <0.1 43 41–53 40–54 <0.1 68
69 40 38–47 37–48 <0.1 42 40–52 39–53 <0.1 69
70 40 38–47 37–48 <0.1 41 39–51 38–52 <0.1 70

SAMPLE,
71–160 40 38–47 37–48 <0.1 40 38–50 37–51 <0.1 71–160

NOT FOR
ADMINISTRATION
OR RESALE

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix A ■ Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles 133

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 133 8/31/15 3:40 PM


tab_9_klpa3_normgrp24

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex (continued)
Ages 5:10–5:11
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
0 114 109–118 108–119 82 117 110–122 109–123 87 0
1 99 94–104 93–105 47 110 103–115 102–117 75 1
2 95 90–100 90–101 37 104 98–110 96–111 61 2
3 92 88–97 87–98 30 101 95–107 94–108 53 3
4 90 86–95 85–96 25 99 93–105 92–106 47 4
5 89 85–94 84–95 23 98 92–104 91–105 45 5
6 87 83–92 82–93 19 97 91–103 90–104 42 6
7 86 82–91 81–92 18 96 90–102 89–104 39 7
8 85 81–90 80–91 16 95 89–101 88–103 37 8
9 84 80–89 79–90 14 94 88–100 87–102 34 9
10 83 79–88 78–89 13 93 87–100 86–101 32 10
11 82 78–87 77–88 12 92 86–99 85–100 30 11
12 81 77–86 76–87 10 91 86–98 84–99 27 12
13 80 76–86 75–86 9 90 85–97 83–98 25 13
14 79 75–85 74–85 8 89 84–96 83–97 23 14
15 78 74–84 73–85 7 88 83–95 82–96 21 15

SAMPLE,
16 77 73–83 72–84 6 87 82–94 81–95 19 16
17 77 73–83 72–84 6 86 81–93 80–94 18 17
18 76 72–82 71–83 5 85 80–92 79–93 16 18
19 75 71–81 70–82 5 84 79–91 78–92 14 19
20 74 70–80 69–81 4 83 78–90 77–91 13 20

NOT FOR
21 74 70–80 69–81 4 82 77–89 76–90 12 21
22 73 69–79 68–80 4 81 76–88 75–90 10 22
23 72 68–78 67–79 3 80 75–87 74–89 9 23
24 72 68–78 67–79 3 79 74–87 73–88 8 24

ADMINISTRATION
25 71 67–77 67–78 3 78 73–86 72–87 7 25
26 70 66–76 66–77 2 77 73–85 71–86 6 26
27 69 66–75 65–76 2 76 72–84 70–85 5 27
28 68 65–74 64–75 2 75 71–83 70–84 5 28
29 68 65–74 64–75 2 74 70–82 69–83 4 29

OR RESALE
30 67 64–73 63–74 1 73 69–81 68–82 4 30
31 66 63–72 62–73 1 73 69–81 68–82 4 31
32 66 63–72 62–73 1 72 68–80 67–81 3 32
33 65 62–71 61–72 1 71 67–79 66–80 3 33
34 64 61–70 60–71 1 70 66–78 65–79 2 34
35 64 61–70 60–71 1 69 65–77 64–78 2 35
36 63 60–69 59–70 1 68 64–76 63–77 2 36
37 62 59–68 58–69 1 67 63–75 62–77 1 37
38 62 59–68 58–69 1 66 62–74 61–76 1 38
39 61 58–67 57–68 0.5 65 61–74 60–75 1 39
40 60 57–66 56–67 0.4 65 61–74 60–75 1 40
41 60 57–66 56–67 0.4 64 60–73 59–74 1 41
42 59 56–65 55–66 0.3 63 60–72 58–73 1 42
43 58 55–64 54–65 0.3 62 59–71 57–72 1 43
44 57 54–63 53–64 0.2 61 58–70 56–71 0.5 44
45 57 54–63 53–64 0.2 60 57–69 56–70 0.4 45
46 56 53–62 52–63 0.2 59 56–68 55–69 0.3 46
47 55 52–62 51–62 0.1 58 55–67 54–68 0.3 47
48 54 51–61 50–61 0.1 57 54–66 53–67 0.2 48
49 53 50–60 49–61 0.1 56 53–65 52–66 0.2 49
50 52 49–59 48–60 0.1 55 52–64 51–65 0.1 50
51 52 49–59 48–60 0.1 54 51–63 50–64 0.1 51
52 51 48–58 47–59 0.1 53 50–62 49–64 0.1 52
53 50 47–57 46–58 <0.1 53 50–62 49–64 0.1 53
54 48 45–55 44–56 <0.1 52 49–61 48–63 0.1 54

134 Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix A ■ Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 134 8/31/15 3:40 PM


tab_9_klpa3_normgrp24 cont.

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex (continued)
Ages 5:10–5:11
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
55 47 44–54 43–55 <0.1 51 48–61 47–62 0.1 55
56 46 43–53 43–54 <0.1 50 47–60 46–61 <0.1 56
57 45 42–52 42–53 <0.1 49 46–59 45–60 <0.1 57
58 43 41–50 40–51 <0.1 48 46–58 44–59 <0.1 58
59 42 40–49 39–50 <0.1 47 45–57 43–58 <0.1 59
60 41 39–48 38–49 <0.1 46 44–56 43–57 <0.1 60
61 40 38–47 37–48 <0.1 45 43–55 42–56 <0.1 61
62 40 38–47 37–48 <0.1 44 42–54 41–55 <0.1 62
63 40 38–47 37–48 <0.1 43 41–53 40–54 <0.1 63
64 40 38–47 37–48 <0.1 42 40–52 39–53 <0.1 64
65 40 38–47 37–48 <0.1 41 39–51 38–52 <0.1 65
66–160 40 38–47 37–48 <0.1 40 38–50 37–51 <0.1 66–160

SAMPLE,
NOT FOR
ADMINISTRATION
OR RESALE

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix A ■ Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles 135

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 135 8/31/15 3:40 PM


tab_9_klpa3_normgrp25

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex (continued)
Ages 6:0–6:1
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
0 114 109–118 108–119 82 116 110–120 109–121 86 0
1 98 93–103 92–104 45 108 102–113 101–114 70 1
2 94 90–99 89–100 34 103 98–108 97–109 58 2
3 91 87–96 86–97 27 99 94–104 93–105 47 3
4 89 85–94 84–95 23 98 93–103 92–104 45 4
5 87 83–92 82–93 19 97 92–102 91–103 42 5
6 86 82–91 81–92 18 96 91–101 90–102 39 6
7 85 81–90 80–91 16 95 90–100 89–101 37 7
8 83 79–88 78–89 13 94 89–100 88–101 34 8
9 82 78–87 77–88 12 93 88–99 87–100 32 9
10 81 77–86 76–87 10 92 87–98 86–99 30 10
11 80 76–86 75–86 9 91 86–97 85–98 27 11
12 79 75–85 74–85 8 90 85–96 84–97 25 12
13 78 74–84 73–85 7 89 84–95 83–96 23 13
14 77 73–83 72–84 6 88 83–94 82–95 21 14
15 76 72–82 71–83 5 87 82–93 81–94 19 15

SAMPLE,
16 76 72–82 71–83 5 86 81–92 80–93 18 16
17 75 71–81 70–82 5 85 81–91 80–92 16 17
18 74 70–80 69–81 4 84 80–90 79–91 14 18
19 73 69–79 68–80 4 83 79–89 78–90 13 19
20 73 69–79 68–80 4 82 78–88 77–89 12 20

NOT FOR
21 72 68–78 67–79 3 81 77–87 76–88 10 21
22 71 67–77 67–78 3 80 76–86 75–87 9 22
23 71 67–77 67–78 3 79 75–85 74–86 8 23
24 70 66–76 66–77 2 78 74–84 73–85 7 24

ADMINISTRATION
25 69 66–75 65–76 2 77 73–83 72–84 6 25
26 68 65–74 64–75 2 76 72–82 71–83 5 26
27 67 64–73 63–74 1 75 71–81 70–82 5 27
28 66 63–72 62–73 1 74 70–81 69–82 4 28
29 66 63–72 62–73 1 73 69–80 68–81 4 29

OR RESALE
30 65 62–71 61–72 1 72 68–79 67–80 3 30
31 65 62–71 61–72 1 71 67–78 66–79 3 31
32 64 61–70 60–71 1 71 67–78 66–79 3 32
33 63 60–69 59–70 1 70 66–77 65–78 2 33
34 62 59–68 58–69 1 69 65–76 64–77 2 34
35 61 58–67 57–68 0.5 68 64–75 63–76 2 35
36 61 58–67 57–68 0.5 67 63–74 62–75 1 36
37 60 57–66 56–67 0.4 66 62–73 61–74 1 37
38 60 57–66 56–67 0.4 65 62–72 61–73 1 38
39 59 56–65 55–66 0.3 65 62–72 61–73 1 39
40 58 55–64 54–65 0.3 64 61–71 60–72 1 40
41 57 54–63 53–64 0.2 63 60–70 59–71 1 41
42 56 53–62 52–63 0.2 62 59–69 58–70 1 42
43 55 52–62 51–62 0.1 61 58–68 57–69 0.5 43
44 54 51–61 50–61 0.1 60 57–67 56–68 0.4 44
45 53 50–60 49–61 0.1 59 56–66 55–67 0.3 45
46 53 50–60 49–61 0.1 58 55–65 54–66 0.3 46
47 52 49–59 48–60 0.1 57 54–64 53–65 0.2 47
48 51 48–58 47–59 0.1 55 52–62 51–63 0.1 48
49 50 47–57 46–58 <0.1 54 51–62 50–63 0.1 49
50 48 45–55 44–56 <0.1 53 50–61 49–62 0.1 50
51 47 44–54 43–55 <0.1 52 49–60 48–61 0.1 51
52 46 43–53 43–54 <0.1 51 48–59 47–60 0.1 52
53 44 42–51 41–52 <0.1 50 47–58 46–59 <0.1 53
54 42 40–49 39–50 <0.1 49 46–57 45–58 <0.1 54

136 Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix A ■ Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 136 8/31/15 3:40 PM


tab_9_klpa3_normgrp25 cont.

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex (continued)
Ages 6:0–6:1
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
55 41 39–48 38–49 <0.1 48 45–56 44–57 <0.1 55
56 40 38–47 37–48 <0.1 47 44–55 43–56 <0.1 56
57 40 38–47 37–48 <0.1 46 43–54 42–55 <0.1 57
58 40 38–47 37–48 <0.1 45 43–53 42–54 <0.1 58
59 40 38–47 37–48 <0.1 44 42–52 41–53 <0.1 59
60 40 38–47 37–48 <0.1 43 41–51 40–52 <0.1 60
61 40 38–47 37–48 <0.1 42 40–50 39–51 <0.1 61
62 40 38–47 37–48 <0.1 41 39–49 38–50 <0.1 62
63–160 40 38–47 37–48 <0.1 40 38–48 37–49 <0.1 63–160

SAMPLE,
NOT FOR
ADMINISTRATION
OR RESALE

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix A ■ Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles 137

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 137 8/31/15 3:40 PM


tab_9_klpa3_normgrp26

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex (continued)
Ages 6:2–6:3
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
0 113 108–117 107–118 81 116 110–120 109–121 86 0
1 98 93–103 92–104 45 107 101–112 100–113 68 1
2 94 90–99 89–100 34 102 97–107 96–108 55 2
3 91 87–96 86–97 27 98 93–103 92–104 45 3
4 88 84–93 83–94 21 96 91–101 90–102 39 4
5 87 83–92 82–93 19 95 90–100 89–101 37 5
6 85 81–90 80–91 16 94 89–100 88–101 34 6
7 85 81–90 80–91 16 93 88–99 87–100 32 7
8 83 79–88 78–89 13 92 87–98 86–99 30 8
9 81 77–86 76–87 10 91 86–97 85–98 27 9
10 80 76–86 75–86 9 90 85–96 84–97 25 10
11 79 75–85 74–85 8 89 84–95 83–96 23 11
12 77 73–83 72–84 6 88 83–94 82–95 21 12
13 77 73–83 72–84 6 87 82–93 81–94 19 13
14 76 72–82 71–83 5 86 81–92 80–93 18 14
15 75 71–81 70–82 5 85 81–91 80–92 16 15

SAMPLE,
16 74 70–80 69–81 4 84 80–90 79–91 14 16
17 74 70–80 69–81 4 83 79–89 78–90 13 17
18 73 69–79 68–80 4 82 78–88 77–89 12 18
19 72 68–78 67–79 3 81 77–87 76–88 10 19
20 71 67–77 67–78 3 80 76–86 75–87 9 20

NOT FOR
21 70 66–76 66–77 2 79 75–85 74–86 8 21
22 69 66–75 65–76 2 78 74–84 73–85 7 22
23 69 66–75 65–76 2 77 73–83 72–84 6 23
24 68 65–74 64–75 2 76 72–82 71–83 5 24

ADMINISTRATION
25 68 65–74 64–75 2 75 71–81 70–82 5 25
26 67 64–73 63–74 1 74 70–81 69–82 4 26
27 66 63–72 62–73 1 73 69–80 68–81 4 27
28 65 62–71 61–72 1 72 68–79 67–80 3 28
29 65 62–71 61–72 1 71 67–78 66–79 3 29

OR RESALE
30 64 61–70 60–71 1 70 66–77 65–78 2 30
31 64 61–70 60–71 1 69 65–76 64–77 2 31
32 63 60–69 59–70 1 69 65–76 64–77 2 32
33 62 59–68 58–69 1 68 64–75 63–76 2 33
34 61 58–67 57–68 0.5 67 63–74 62–75 1 34
35 60 57–66 56–67 0.4 66 62–73 61–74 1 35
36 60 57–66 56–67 0.4 65 62–72 61–73 1 36
37 59 56–65 55–66 0.3 64 61–71 60–72 1 37
38 58 55–64 54–65 0.3 63 60–70 59–71 1 38
39 57 54–63 53–64 0.2 62 59–69 58–70 1 39
40 56 53–62 52–63 0.2 60 57–67 56–68 0.4 40
41 55 52–62 51–62 0.1 59 56–66 55–67 0.3 41
42 54 51–61 50–61 0.1 58 55–65 54–66 0.3 42
43 53 50–60 49–61 0.1 57 54–64 53–65 0.2 43
44 52 49–59 48–60 0.1 56 53–63 52–64 0.2 44
45 51 48–58 47–59 0.1 55 52–62 51–63 0.1 45
46 50 47–57 46–58 <0.1 54 51–62 50–63 0.1 46
47 48 45–55 44–56 <0.1 52 49–60 48–61 0.1 47
48 47 44–54 43–55 <0.1 51 48–59 47–60 0.1 48
49 45 42–52 42–53 <0.1 50 47–58 46–59 <0.1 49
50 44 42–51 41–52 <0.1 49 46–57 45–58 <0.1 50
51 42 40–49 39–50 <0.1 48 45–56 44–57 <0.1 51
52 41 39–48 38–49 <0.1 47 44–55 43–56 <0.1 52
53 40 38–47 37–48 <0.1 46 43–54 42–55 <0.1 53
54 40 38–47 37–48 <0.1 44 42–52 41–53 <0.1 54

138 Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix A ■ Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 138 8/31/15 3:40 PM


tab_9_klpa3_normgrp26 cont.

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex (continued)
Ages 6:2–6:3
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
55 40 38–47 37–48 <0.1 43 41–51 40–52 <0.1 55
56 40 38–47 37–48 <0.1 42 40–50 39–51 <0.1 56
57 40 38–47 37–48 <0.1 41 39–49 38–50 <0.1 57
58–160 40 38–47 37–48 <0.1 40 38–48 37–49 <0.1 58–160

SAMPLE,
NOT FOR
ADMINISTRATION
OR RESALE

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix A ■ Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles 139

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 139 8/31/15 3:40 PM


tab_9_klpa3_normgrp27

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex (continued)
Ages 6:4–6:5
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
0 113 108–117 107–118 81 115 109–119 108–120 84 0
1 97 92–102 91–103 42 106 100–111 99–112 66 1
2 94 90–99 89–100 34 101 96–106 95–107 53 2
3 90 86–95 85–96 25 97 92–102 91–103 42 3
4 88 84–93 83–94 21 95 90–100 89–101 37 4
5 86 82–91 81–92 18 93 88–99 87–100 32 5
6 85 81–90 80–91 16 92 87–98 86–99 30 6
7 83 79–88 78–89 13 91 86–97 85–98 27 7
8 82 78–87 77–88 12 90 85–96 84–97 25 8
9 81 77–86 76–87 10 89 84–95 83–96 23 9
10 79 75–85 74–85 8 88 83–94 82–95 21 10
11 78 74–84 73–85 7 87 82–93 81–94 19 11
12 77 73–83 72–84 6 86 81–92 80–93 18 12
13 76 72–82 71–83 5 85 81–91 80–92 16 13
14 75 71–81 70–82 5 84 80–90 79–91 14 14
15 74 70–80 69–81 4 83 79–89 78–90 13 15

SAMPLE,
16 73 69–79 68–80 4 82 78–88 77–89 12 16
17 72 68–78 67–79 3 81 77–87 76–88 10 17
18 71 67–77 67–78 3 80 76–86 75–87 9 18
19 70 66–76 66–77 2 79 75–85 74–86 8 19
20 70 66–76 66–77 2 78 74–84 73–85 7 20

NOT FOR
21 69 66–75 65–76 2 77 73–83 72–84 6 21
22 68 65–74 64–75 2 76 72–82 71–83 5 22
23 68 65–74 64–75 2 75 71–81 70–82 5 23
24 67 64–73 63–74 1 74 70–81 69–82 4 24

ADMINISTRATION
25 66 63–72 62–73 1 73 69–80 68–81 4 25
26 66 63–72 62–73 1 72 68–79 67–80 3 26
27 65 62–71 61–72 1 71 67–78 66–79 3 27
28 64 61–70 60–71 1 70 66–77 65–78 2 28
29 63 60–69 59–70 1 69 65–76 64–77 2 29

OR RESALE
30 63 60–69 59–70 1 69 65–76 64–77 2 30
31 62 59–68 58–69 1 68 64–75 63–76 2 31
32 62 59–68 58–69 1 67 63–74 62–75 1 32
33 61 58–67 57–68 0.5 66 62–73 61–74 1 33
34 59 56–65 55–66 0.3 65 62–72 61–73 1 34
35 59 56–65 55–66 0.3 64 61–71 60–72 1 35
36 58 55–64 54–65 0.3 63 60–70 59–71 1 36
37 57 54–63 53–64 0.2 62 59–69 58–70 1 37
38 56 53–62 52–63 0.2 61 58–68 57–69 0.5 38
39 55 52–62 51–62 0.1 59 56–66 55–67 0.3 39
40 53 50–60 49–61 0.1 57 54–64 53–65 0.2 40
41 52 49–59 48–60 0.1 56 53–63 52–64 0.2 41
42 51 48–58 47–59 0.1 55 52–62 51–63 0.1 42
43 49 46–56 45–57 <0.1 54 51–62 50–63 0.1 43
44 47 44–54 43–55 <0.1 53 50–61 49–62 0.1 44
45 45 42–52 42–53 <0.1 51 48–59 47–60 0.1 45
46 44 42–51 41–52 <0.1 49 46–57 45–58 <0.1 46
47 42 40–49 39–50 <0.1 47 44–55 43–56 <0.1 47
48 40 38–47 37–48 <0.1 46 43–54 42–55 <0.1 48
49 40 38–47 37–48 <0.1 45 43–53 42–54 <0.1 49
50 40 38–47 37–48 <0.1 44 42–52 41–53 <0.1 50
51 40 38–47 37–48 <0.1 42 40–50 39–51 <0.1 51
52 40 38–47 37–48 <0.1 41 39–49 38–50 <0.1 52
53–160 40 38–47 37–48 <0.1 40 38–48 37–49 <0.1 53–160

140 Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix A ■ Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 140 8/31/15 3:40 PM


tab_9_klpa3_normgrp28

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex (continued)
Ages 6:6–6:7
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
0 113 108–117 107–118 81 115 109–119 108–120 84 0
1 97 92–102 91–103 42 104 99–109 98–110 61 1
2 93 89–98 88–99 32 100 95–105 94–106 50 2
3 90 86–95 85–96 25 96 91–101 90–102 39 3
4 88 84–93 83–94 21 94 89–100 88–101 34 4
5 86 82–91 81–92 18 92 87–98 86–99 30 5
6 84 80–89 79–90 14 90 85–96 84–97 25 6
7 83 79–88 78–89 13 89 84–95 83–96 23 7
8 81 77–86 76–87 10 88 83–94 82–95 21 8
9 80 76–86 75–86 9 87 82–93 81–94 19 9
10 78 74–84 73–85 7 86 81–92 80–93 18 10
11 77 73–83 72–84 6 85 81–91 80–92 16 11
12 76 72–82 71–83 5 84 80–90 79–91 14 12
13 75 71–81 70–82 5 83 79–89 78–90 13 13
14 74 70–80 69–81 4 82 78–88 77–89 12 14
15 73 69–79 68–80 4 81 77–87 76–88 10 15

SAMPLE,
16 72 68–78 67–79 3 80 76–86 75–87 9 16
17 71 67–77 67–78 3 79 75–85 74–86 8 17
18 70 66–76 66–77 2 78 74–84 73–85 7 18
19 69 66–75 65–76 2 77 73–83 72–84 6 19
20 69 66–75 65–76 2 76 72–82 71–83 5 20

NOT FOR
21 68 65–74 64–75 2 75 71–81 70–82 5 21
22 67 64–73 63–74 1 74 70–81 69–82 4 22
23 67 64–73 63–74 1 73 69–80 68–81 4 23
24 66 63–72 62–73 1 72 68–79 67–80 3 24

ADMINISTRATION
25 65 62–71 61–72 1 71 67–78 66–79 3 25
26 65 62–71 61–72 1 70 66–77 65–78 2 26
27 64 61–70 60–71 1 69 65–76 64–77 2 27
28 63 60–69 59–70 1 68 64–75 63–76 2 28
29 63 60–69 59–70 1 67 63–74 62–75 1 29

OR RESALE
30 62 59–68 58–69 1 67 63–74 62–75 1 30
31 61 58–67 57–68 0.5 66 62–73 61–74 1 31
32 60 57–66 56–67 0.4 65 62–72 61–73 1 32
33 59 56–65 55–66 0.3 64 61–71 60–72 1 33
34 58 55–64 54–65 0.3 63 60–70 59–71 1 34
35 56 53–62 52–63 0.2 61 58–68 57–69 0.5 35
36 55 52–62 51–62 0.1 60 57–67 56–68 0.4 36
37 53 50–60 49–61 0.1 59 56–66 55–67 0.3 37
38 52 49–59 48–60 0.1 57 54–64 53–65 0.2 38
39 50 47–57 46–58 <0.1 56 53–63 52–64 0.2 39
40 49 46–56 45–57 <0.1 54 51–62 50–63 0.1 40
41 48 45–55 44–56 <0.1 52 49–60 48–61 0.1 41
42 46 43–53 43–54 <0.1 51 48–59 47–60 0.1 42
43 45 42–52 42–53 <0.1 50 47–58 46–59 <0.1 43
44 43 41–50 40–51 <0.1 48 45–56 44–57 <0.1 44
45 42 40–49 39–50 <0.1 47 44–55 43–56 <0.1 45
46 40 38–47 37–48 <0.1 45 43–53 42–54 <0.1 46
47 40 38–47 37–48 <0.1 44 42–52 41–53 <0.1 47
48 40 38–47 37–48 <0.1 43 41–51 40–52 <0.1 48
49 40 38–47 37–48 <0.1 41 39–49 38–50 <0.1 49
50–160 40 38–47 37–48 <0.1 40 38–48 37–49 <0.1 50–160

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix A ■ Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles 141

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 141 8/31/15 3:40 PM


tab_9_klpa3_normgrp29

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex (continued)
Ages 6:8–6:9
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
0 112 107–116 106–117 79 114 108–119 107–120 82 0
1 96 91–101 91–102 39 102 97–107 96–108 55 1
2 93 89–98 88–99 32 99 94–104 93–105 47 2
3 89 85–94 84–95 23 95 90–100 89–101 37 3
4 87 83–92 82–93 19 93 88–99 87–100 32 4
5 85 81–90 80–91 16 91 86–97 85–98 27 5
6 83 79–88 78–89 13 89 84–95 83–96 23 6
7 81 77–86 76–87 10 87 82–93 81–94 19 7
8 79 75–85 74–85 8 86 81–92 80–93 18 8
9 78 74–84 73–85 7 85 81–91 80–92 16 9
10 77 73–83 72–84 6 84 80–90 79–91 14 10
11 76 72–82 71–83 5 83 79–89 78–90 13 11
12 75 71–81 70–82 5 82 78–88 77–89 12 12
13 74 70–80 69–81 4 81 77–87 76–88 10 13
14 73 69–79 68–80 4 80 76–86 75–87 9 14
15 72 68–78 67–79 3 79 75–85 74–86 8 15

SAMPLE,
16 71 67–77 67–78 3 78 74–84 73–85 7 16
17 70 66–76 66–77 2 77 73–83 72–84 6 17
18 69 66–75 65–76 2 76 72–82 71–83 5 18
19 68 65–74 64–75 2 75 71–81 70–82 5 19
20 68 65–74 64–75 2 74 70–81 69–82 4 20

NOT FOR
21 67 64–73 63–74 1 73 69–80 68–81 4 21
22 66 63–72 62–73 1 72 68–79 67–80 3 22
23 65 62–71 61–72 1 71 67–78 66–79 3 23
24 64 61–70 60–71 1 70 66–77 65–78 2 24

ADMINISTRATION
25 63 60–69 59–70 1 69 65–76 64–77 2 25
26 63 60–69 59–70 1 68 64–75 63–76 2 26
27 62 59–68 58–69 1 67 63–74 62–75 1 27
28 61 58–67 57–68 0.5 66 62–73 61–74 1 28
29 60 57–66 56–67 0.4 65 62–72 61–73 1 29

OR RESALE
30 58 55–64 54–65 0.3 64 61–71 60–72 1 30
31 57 54–63 53–64 0.2 63 60–70 59–71 1 31
32 55 52–62 51–62 0.1 61 58–68 57–69 0.5 32
33 54 51–61 50–61 0.1 60 57–67 56–68 0.4 33
34 53 50–60 49–61 0.1 59 56–66 55–67 0.3 34
35 51 48–58 47–59 0.1 58 55–65 54–66 0.3 35
36 50 47–57 46–58 <0.1 56 53–63 52–64 0.2 36
37 48 45–55 44–56 <0.1 55 52–62 51–63 0.1 37
38 46 43–53 43–54 <0.1 53 50–61 49–62 0.1 38
39 44 42–51 41–52 <0.1 52 49–60 48–61 0.1 39
40 42 40–49 39–50 <0.1 50 47–58 46–59 <0.1 40
41 40 38–47 37–48 <0.1 48 45–56 44–57 <0.1 41
42 40 38–47 37–48 <0.1 46 43–54 42–55 <0.1 42
43 40 38–47 37–48 <0.1 44 42–52 41–53 <0.1 43
44 40 38–47 37–48 <0.1 42 40–50 39–51 <0.1 44
45 40 38–47 37–48 <0.1 41 39–49 38–50 <0.1 45
46–160 40 38–47 37–48 <0.1 40 38–48 37–49 <0.1 46–160

142 Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix A ■ Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 142 8/31/15 3:40 PM


tab_9_klpa3_normgrp30

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex (continued)
Ages 6:10–6:11
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
0 112 107–116 106–117 79 114 108–119 107–120 82 0
1 96 91–101 91–102 39 100 95–105 94–106 50 1
2 93 89–98 88–99 32 97 92–102 91–103 42 2
3 88 84–93 83–94 21 94 89–100 88–101 34 3
4 86 82–91 81–92 18 92 87–98 86–99 30 4
5 83 79–88 78–89 13 90 85–96 84–97 25 5
6 82 78–87 77–88 12 88 83–94 82–95 21 6
7 80 76–86 75–86 9 86 81–92 80–93 18 7
8 79 75–85 74–85 8 85 81–91 80–92 16 8
9 78 74–84 73–85 7 84 80–90 79–91 14 9
10 76 72–82 71–83 5 83 79–89 78–90 13 10
11 75 71–81 70–82 5 82 78–88 77–89 12 11
12 74 70–80 69–81 4 81 77–87 76–88 10 12
13 73 69–79 68–80 4 80 76–86 75–87 9 13
14 72 68–78 67–79 3 79 75–85 74–86 8 14
15 71 67–77 67–78 3 78 74–84 73–85 7 15

SAMPLE,
16 70 66–76 66–77 2 77 73–83 72–84 6 16
17 69 66–75 65–76 2 76 72–82 71–83 5 17
18 68 65–74 64–75 2 75 71–81 70–82 5 18
19 67 64–73 63–74 1 74 70–81 69–82 4 19
20 66 63–72 62–73 1 73 69–80 68–81 4 20

NOT FOR
21 65 62–71 61–72 1 72 68–79 67–80 3 21
22 64 61–70 60–71 1 71 67–78 66–79 3 22
23 63 60–69 59–70 1 70 66–77 65–78 2 23
24 62 59–68 58–69 1 69 65–76 64–77 2 24

ADMINISTRATION
25 61 58–67 57–68 0.5 68 64–75 63–76 2 25
26 60 57–66 56–67 0.4 66 62–73 61–74 1 26
27 59 56–65 55–66 0.3 65 62–72 61–73 1 27
28 58 55–64 54–65 0.3 64 61–71 60–72 1 28
29 57 54–63 53–64 0.2 63 60–70 59–71 1 29

OR RESALE
30 56 53–62 52–63 0.2 61 58–68 57–69 0.5 30
31 55 52–62 51–62 0.1 60 57–67 56–68 0.4 31
32 53 50–60 49–61 0.1 59 56–66 55–67 0.3 32
33 52 49–59 48–60 0.1 58 55–65 54–66 0.3 33
34 49 46–56 45–57 <0.1 56 53–63 52–64 0.2 34
35 47 44–54 43–55 <0.1 55 52–62 51–63 0.1 35
36 45 42–52 42–53 <0.1 53 50–61 49–62 0.1 36
37 43 41–50 40–51 <0.1 52 49–60 48–61 0.1 37
38 41 39–48 38–49 <0.1 51 48–59 47–60 0.1 38
39 40 38–47 37–48 <0.1 49 46–57 45–58 <0.1 39
40 40 38–47 37–48 <0.1 47 44–55 43–56 <0.1 40
41 40 38–47 37–48 <0.1 45 43–53 42–54 <0.1 41
42 40 38–47 37–48 <0.1 43 41–51 40–52 <0.1 42
43 40 38–47 37–48 <0.1 41 39–49 38–50 <0.1 43
44–160 40 38–47 37–48 <0.1 40 38–48 37–49 <0.1 44–160

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix A ■ Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles 143

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 143 8/31/15 3:40 PM


tab_9_klpa3_normgrp31

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex (continued)
Ages 7:0–7:2
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
0 112 105–117 104–118 79 113 107–118 106–119 81 0
1 95 89–101 88–103 37 99 94–104 93–105 47 1
2 93 87–100 86–101 32 96 91–101 90–102 39 2
3 87 82–94 81–95 19 93 88–99 87–100 32 3
4 85 80–92 79–93 16 91 86–97 85–98 27 4
5 81 76–88 75–90 10 89 84–95 83–96 23 5
6 80 75–87 74–89 9 87 82–93 81–94 19 6
7 77 73–85 71–86 6 85 81–91 80–92 16 7
8 76 72–84 70–85 5 84 80–90 79–91 14 8
9 75 71–83 70–84 5 83 79–89 78–90 13 9
10 74 70–82 69–83 4 82 78–88 77–89 12 10
11 73 69–81 68–82 4 81 77–87 76–88 10 11
12 72 68–80 67–81 3 79 75–85 74–86 8 12
13 71 67–79 66–80 3 78 74–84 73–85 7 13
14 70 66–78 65–79 2 77 73–83 72–84 6 14
15 69 65–77 64–78 2 76 72–82 71–83 5 15

SAMPLE,
16 68 64–76 63–77 2 75 71–81 70–82 5 16
17 67 63–75 62–77 1 74 70–81 69–82 4 17
18 66 62–74 61–76 1 73 69–80 68–81 4 18
19 65 61–74 60–75 1 72 68–79 67–80 3 19
20 64 60–73 59–74 1 71 67–78 66–79 3 20

NOT FOR
21 63 60–72 58–73 1 70 66–77 65–78 2 21
22 61 58–70 56–71 0.5 69 65–76 64–77 2 22
23 60 57–69 56–70 0.4 68 64–75 63–76 2 23
24 59 56–68 55–69 0.3 67 63–74 62–75 1 24

ADMINISTRATION
25 57 54–66 53–67 0.2 66 62–73 61–74 1 25
26 56 53–65 52–66 0.2 64 61–71 60–72 1 26
27 54 51–63 50–64 0.1 62 59–69 58–70 1 27
28 53 50–62 49–64 0.1 61 58–68 57–69 0.5 28
29 51 48–61 47–62 0.1 60 57–67 56–68 0.4 29

OR RESALE
30 49 46–59 45–60 <0.1 59 56–66 55–67 0.3 30
31 47 45–57 43–58 <0.1 58 55–65 54–66 0.3 31
32 45 43–55 42–56 <0.1 56 53–63 52–64 0.2 32
33 42 40–52 39–53 <0.1 54 51–62 50–63 0.1 33
34 41 39–51 38–52 <0.1 52 49–60 48–61 0.1 34
35 40 38–50 37–51 <0.1 50 47–58 46–59 <0.1 35
36 40 38–50 37–51 <0.1 48 45–56 44–57 <0.1 36
37 40 38–50 37–51 <0.1 47 44–55 43–56 <0.1 37
38 40 38–50 37–51 <0.1 45 43–53 42–54 <0.1 38
39 40 38–50 37–51 <0.1 43 41–51 40–52 <0.1 39
40 40 38–50 37–51 <0.1 41 39–49 38–50 <0.1 40
41–160 40 38–50 37–51 <0.1 40 38–48 37–49 <0.1 41–160

144 Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix A ■ Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 144 8/31/15 3:40 PM


tab_9_klpa3_normgrp32

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex (continued)
Ages 7:3–7:5
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
0 111 104–116 103–117 77 113 107–118 106–119 81 0
1 94 88–100 87–102 34 98 93–103 92–104 45 1
2 92 86–99 85–100 30 95 90–100 89–101 37 2
3 86 81–93 80–94 18 92 87–98 86–99 30 3
4 84 79–91 78–92 14 90 85–96 84–97 25 4
5 80 75–87 74–89 9 87 82–93 81–94 19 5
6 78 73–86 72–87 7 85 81–91 80–92 16 6
7 75 71–83 70–84 5 83 79–89 78–90 13 7
8 74 70–82 69–83 4 81 77–87 76–88 10 8
9 73 69–81 68–82 4 80 76–86 75–87 9 9
10 72 68–80 67–81 3 79 75–85 74–86 8 10
11 71 67–79 66–80 3 78 74–84 73–85 7 11
12 70 66–78 65–79 2 77 73–83 72–84 6 12
13 69 65–77 64–78 2 76 72–82 71–83 5 13
14 68 64–76 63–77 2 75 71–81 70–82 5 14
15 67 63–75 62–77 1 74 70–81 69–82 4 15

SAMPLE,
16 66 62–74 61–76 1 73 69–80 68–81 4 16
17 65 61–74 60–75 1 72 68–79 67–80 3 17
18 64 60–73 59–74 1 71 67–78 66–79 3 18
19 62 59–71 57–72 1 70 66–77 65–78 2 19
20 61 58–70 56–71 0.5 69 65–76 64–77 2 20

NOT FOR
21 60 57–69 56–70 0.4 67 63–74 62–75 1 21
22 58 55–67 54–68 0.3 66 62–73 61–74 1 22
23 57 54–66 53–67 0.2 65 62–72 61–73 1 23
24 55 52–64 51–65 0.1 64 61–71 60–72 1 24

ADMINISTRATION
25 53 50–62 49–64 0.1 63 60–70 59–71 1 25
26 50 47–60 46–61 <0.1 61 58–68 57–69 0.5 26
27 48 46–58 44–59 <0.1 59 56–66 55–67 0.3 27
28 46 44–56 43–57 <0.1 57 54–64 53–65 0.2 28
29 44 42–54 41–55 <0.1 54 51–62 50–63 0.1 29

OR RESALE
30 42 40–52 39–53 <0.1 52 49–60 48–61 0.1 30
31 40 38–50 37–51 <0.1 50 47–58 46–59 <0.1 31
32 40 38–50 37–51 <0.1 48 45–56 44–57 <0.1 32
33 40 38–50 37–51 <0.1 46 43–54 42–55 <0.1 33
34 40 38–50 37–51 <0.1 44 42–52 41–53 <0.1 34
35 40 38–50 37–51 <0.1 42 40–50 39–51 <0.1 35
36 40 38–50 37–51 <0.1 41 39–49 38–50 <0.1 36
37–160 40 38–50 37–51 <0.1 40 38–48 37–49 <0.1 37–160

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix A ■ Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles 145

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 145 8/31/15 3:40 PM


tab_9_klpa3_normgrp33

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex (continued)
Ages 7:6–7:8
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
0 111 104–116 103–117 77 112 106–117 105–118 79 0
1 93 87–100 86–101 32 97 92–102 91–103 42 1
2 91 86–98 84–99 27 94 89–100 88–101 34 2
3 86 81–93 80–94 18 91 86–97 85–98 27 3
4 84 79–91 78–92 14 89 84–95 83–96 23 4
5 79 74–87 73–88 8 86 81–92 80–93 18 5
6 77 73–85 71–86 6 83 79–89 78–90 13 6
7 74 70–82 69–83 4 81 77–87 76–88 10 7
8 73 69–81 68–82 4 79 75–85 74–86 8 8
9 72 68–80 67–81 3 78 74–84 73–85 7 9
10 70 66–78 65–79 2 77 73–83 72–84 6 10
11 69 65–77 64–78 2 76 72–82 71–83 5 11
12 68 64–76 63–77 2 75 71–81 70–82 5 12
13 67 63–75 62–77 1 74 70–81 69–82 4 13
14 66 62–74 61–76 1 73 69–80 68–81 4 14
15 65 61–74 60–75 1 72 68–79 67–80 3 15

SAMPLE,
16 64 60–73 59–74 1 71 67–78 66–79 3 16
17 63 60–72 58–73 1 70 66–77 65–78 2 17
18 61 58–70 56–71 0.5 69 65–76 64–77 2 18
19 59 56–68 55–69 0.3 67 63–74 62–75 1 19
20 57 54–66 53–67 0.2 66 62–73 61–74 1 20

NOT FOR
21 56 53–65 52–66 0.2 64 61–71 60–72 1 21
22 54 51–63 50–64 0.1 63 60–70 59–71 1 22
23 52 49–61 48–63 0.1 62 59–69 58–70 1 23
24 50 47–60 46–61 <0.1 60 57–67 56–68 0.4 24

ADMINISTRATION
25 47 45–57 43–58 <0.1 58 55–65 54–66 0.3 25
26 45 43–55 42–56 <0.1 55 52–62 51–63 0.1 26
27 42 40–52 39–53 <0.1 52 49–60 48–61 0.1 27
28 40 38–50 37–51 <0.1 50 47–58 46–59 <0.1 28
29 40 38–50 37–51 <0.1 47 44–55 43–56 <0.1 29

OR RESALE
30 40 38–50 37–51 <0.1 45 43–53 42–54 <0.1 30
31 40 38–50 37–51 <0.1 43 41–51 40–52 <0.1 31
32 40 38–50 37–51 <0.1 42 40–50 39–51 <0.1 32
33 40 38–50 37–51 <0.1 41 39–49 38–50 <0.1 33
34–160 40 38–50 37–51 <0.1 40 38–48 37–49 <0.1 34–160

146 Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix A ■ Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 146 8/31/15 3:40 PM


tab_9_klpa3_normgrp34

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex (continued)
Ages 7:9–7:11
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
0 110 103–115 102–117 75 112 106–117 105–118 79 0
1 93 87–100 86–101 32 96 91–101 90–102 39 1
2 91 86–98 84–99 27 93 88–99 87–100 32 2
3 85 80–92 79–93 16 90 85–96 84–97 25 3
4 83 78–90 77–91 13 86 81–92 80–93 18 4
5 78 73–86 72–87 7 83 79–89 78–90 13 5
6 77 73–85 71–86 6 81 77–87 76–88 10 6
7 74 70–82 69–83 4 79 75–85 74–86 8 7
8 73 69–81 68–82 4 77 73–83 72–84 6 8
9 71 67–79 66–80 3 76 72–82 71–83 5 9
10 70 66–78 65–79 2 75 71–81 70–82 5 10
11 69 65–77 64–78 2 74 70–81 69–82 4 11
12 67 63–75 62–77 1 73 69–80 68–81 4 12
13 66 62–74 61–76 1 72 68–79 67–80 3 13
14 65 61–74 60–75 1 71 67–78 66–79 3 14
15 63 60–72 58–73 1 70 66–77 65–78 2 15

SAMPLE,
16 61 58–70 56–71 0.5 69 65–76 64–77 2 16
17 59 56–68 55–69 0.3 67 63–74 62–75 1 17
18 58 55–67 54–68 0.3 65 62–72 61–73 1 18
19 55 52–64 51–65 0.1 63 60–70 59–71 1 19
20 53 50–62 49–64 0.1 61 58–68 57–69 0.5 20

NOT FOR
21 51 48–61 47–62 0.1 59 56–66 55–67 0.3 21
22 48 46–58 44–59 <0.1 57 54–64 53–65 0.2 22
23 46 44–56 43–57 <0.1 55 52–62 51–63 0.1 23
24 43 41–53 40–54 <0.1 52 49–60 48–61 0.1 24

ADMINISTRATION
25 40 38–50 37–51 <0.1 50 47–58 46–59 <0.1 25
26 40 38–50 37–51 <0.1 47 44–55 43–56 <0.1 26
27 40 38–50 37–51 <0.1 45 43–53 42–54 <0.1 27
28 40 38–50 37–51 <0.1 43 41–51 40–52 <0.1 28
29 40 38–50 37–51 <0.1 42 40–50 39–51 <0.1 29

OR RESALE
30 40 38–50 37–51 <0.1 41 39–49 38–50 <0.1 30
31–160 40 38–50 37–51 <0.1 40 38–48 37–49 <0.1 31–160

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix A ■ Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles 147

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 147 8/31/15 3:40 PM


tab_9_klpa3_normgrp35

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex (continued)
Ages 8:0–8:2
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
0 110 100–117 99–118 75 111 104–117 102–118 77 0
1 91 84–101 83–102 27 95 89–102 88–103 37 1
2 89 82–99 81–101 23 92 86–99 85–100 30 2
3 84 78–95 77–96 14 89 83–96 82–98 23 3
4 81 76–92 74–94 10 85 80–93 79–94 16 4
5 76 72–88 70–90 5 82 77–90 76–91 12 5
6 74 70–86 68–88 4 79 74–87 73–88 8 6
7 71 67–84 66–86 3 77 72–85 71–86 6 7
8 70 67–83 65–85 2 76 71–84 70–86 5 8
9 69 66–82 64–84 2 75 71–83 69–85 5 9
10 67 64–81 62–82 1 73 69–82 68–83 4 10
11 66 63–80 62–81 1 71 67–80 66–81 3 11
12 64 61–78 60–80 1 70 66–79 65–80 2 12
13 63 61–77 59–79 1 69 65–78 64–79 2 13
14 60 58–75 57–76 0.4 69 65–78 64–79 2 14
15 58 56–73 55–75 0.3 66 62–75 61–76 1 15

SAMPLE,
16 56 55–71 53–73 0.2 64 60–73 59–75 1 16
17 54 53–70 51–71 0.1 62 59–71 57–73 1 17
18 51 51–67 49–69 0.1 60 57–70 56–71 0.4 18
19 49 49–65 47–67 <0.1 57 54–67 53–68 0.2 19
20 47 47–64 46–65 <0.1 55 52–65 51–66 0.1 20

NOT FOR
21 44 45–61 43–63 <0.1 52 49–62 48–63 0.1 21
22 42 43–60 41–61 <0.1 49 47–60 45–61 <0.1 22
23 40 41–58 40–59 <0.1 47 45–58 44–59 <0.1 23
24 40 41–58 40–59 <0.1 45 43–56 42–57 <0.1 24

ADMINISTRATION
25 40 41–58 40–59 <0.1 43 41–54 40–55 <0.1 25
26–160 40 41–58 40–59 <0.1 40 38–51 37–52 <0.1 26–160

OR RESALE

148 Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix A ■ Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 148 8/31/15 3:40 PM


tab_9_klpa3_normgrp36

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex (continued)
Ages 8:3–8:5
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
0 109 99–116 98–117 73 110 103–116 102–117 75 0
1 91 84–101 83–102 27 95 89–102 88–103 37 1
2 88 82–98 80–100 21 91 85–98 84–99 27 2
3 83 77–94 76–96 13 87 82–94 80–96 19 3
4 80 75–91 73–93 9 83 78–91 77–92 13 4
5 74 70–86 68–88 4 80 75–88 74–89 9 5
6 72 68–85 67–86 3 77 72–85 71–86 6 6
7 70 67–83 65–85 2 75 71–83 69–85 5 7
8 69 66–82 64–84 2 74 70–83 68–84 4 8
9 67 64–81 62–82 1 73 69–82 68–83 4 9
10 65 62–79 61–80 1 71 67–80 66–81 3 10
11 63 61–77 59–79 1 69 65–78 64–79 2 11
12 61 59–76 57–77 0.5 68 64–77 63–78 2 12
13 60 58–75 57–76 0.4 66 62–75 61–76 1 13
14 57 56–72 54–74 0.2 65 61–74 60–75 1 14
15 55 54–70 52–72 0.1 62 59–71 57–73 1 15

SAMPLE,
16 53 52–69 51–70 0.1 59 56–69 55–70 0.3 16
17 50 50–66 48–68 <0.1 57 54–67 53–68 0.2 17
18 48 48–65 46–66 <0.1 55 52–65 51–66 0.1 18
19 45 46–62 44–64 <0.1 53 50–63 49–64 0.1 19
20 41 42–59 41–60 <0.1 51 48–61 47–63 0.1 20

NOT FOR
21 40 41–58 40–59 <0.1 48 46–59 45–60 <0.1 21
22 40 41–58 40–59 <0.1 45 43–56 42–57 <0.1 22
23 40 41–58 40–59 <0.1 43 41–54 40–55 <0.1 23
24–160 40 41–58 40–59 <0.1 40 38–51 37–52 <0.1 24–160

ADMINISTRATION
OR RESALE

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix A ■ Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles 149

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 149 8/31/15 3:40 PM


tab_9_klpa3_normgrp37

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex (continued)
Ages 8:6–8:8
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
0 109 99–116 98–117 73 109 102–115 101–116 73 0
1 90 83–100 82–101 25 94 88–101 87–102 34 1
2 87 81–97 79–99 19 90 84–97 83–98 25 2
3 82 77–93 75–95 12 85 80–93 79–94 16 3
4 79 74–91 72–92 8 81 76–89 75–90 10 4
5 73 69–86 67–87 4 78 73–86 72–87 7 5
6 71 67–84 66–86 3 75 71–83 69–85 5 6
7 69 66–82 64–84 2 73 69–82 68–83 4 7
8 67 64–81 62–82 1 72 68–81 67–82 3 8
9 65 62–79 61–80 1 71 67–80 66–81 3 9
10 63 61–77 59–79 1 69 65–78 64–79 2 10
11 60 58–75 57–76 0.4 67 63–76 62–77 1 11
12 58 56–73 55–75 0.3 65 61–74 60–75 1 12
13 55 54–70 52–72 0.1 63 60–72 58–74 1 13
14 53 52–69 51–70 0.1 61 58–71 56–72 0.5 14
15 51 51–67 49–69 0.1 58 55–68 54–69 0.3 15

SAMPLE,
16 47 47–64 46–65 <0.1 57 54–67 53–68 0.2 16
17 44 45–61 43–63 <0.1 55 52–65 51–66 0.1 17
18 40 41–58 40–59 <0.1 53 50–63 49–64 0.1 18
19 40 41–58 40–59 <0.1 51 48–61 47–63 0.1 19
20 40 41–58 40–59 <0.1 48 46–59 45–60 <0.1 20

NOT FOR
21 40 41–58 40–59 <0.1 45 43–56 42–57 <0.1 21
22 40 41–58 40–59 <0.1 43 41–54 40–55 <0.1 22
23–160 40 41–58 40–59 <0.1 40 38–51 37–52 <0.1 23–160

ADMINISTRATION
OR RESALE

150 Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix A ■ Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 150 8/31/15 3:40 PM


tab_9_klpa3_normgrp38

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex (continued)
Ages 8:9–8:11
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
0 108 98–115 97–117 70 108 101–114 100–115 70 0
1 89 82–99 81–101 23 94 88–101 87–102 34 1
2 86 80–97 78–98 18 88 83–95 81–97 21 2
3 81 76–92 74–94 10 83 78–91 77–92 13 3
4 76 72–88 70–90 5 79 74–87 73–88 8 4
5 71 67–84 66–86 3 76 71–84 70–86 5 5
6 69 66–82 64–84 2 73 69–82 68–83 4 6
7 67 64–81 62–82 1 71 67–80 66–81 3 7
8 65 62–79 61–80 1 70 66–79 65–80 2 8
9 62 60–76 58–78 1 69 65–78 64–79 2 9
10 60 58–75 57–76 0.4 67 63–76 62–77 1 10
11 56 55–71 53–73 0.2 64 60–73 59–75 1 11
12 52 51–68 50–70 0.1 61 58–71 56–72 0.5 12
13 48 48–65 46–66 <0.1 57 54–67 53–68 0.2 13
14 44 45–61 43–63 <0.1 54 51–64 50–65 0.1 14
15 40 41–58 40–59 <0.1 50 48–60 46–62 <0.1 15

SAMPLE,
16 40 41–58 40–59 <0.1 48 46–59 45–60 <0.1 16
17 40 41–58 40–59 <0.1 45 43–56 42–57 <0.1 17
18 40 41–58 40–59 <0.1 43 41–54 40–55 <0.1 18
19 40 41–58 40–59 <0.1 41 39–52 38–53 <0.1 19
20 40 41–58 40–59 <0.1 41 39–52 38–53 <0.1 20

NOT FOR
21–160 40 41–58 40–59 <0.1 40 38–51 37–52 <0.1 21–160

ADMINISTRATION
OR RESALE

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix A ■ Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles 151

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 151 8/31/15 3:40 PM


tab_9_klpa3_normgrp39

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex (continued)
Ages 9:0–9:5
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
0 107 97–114 95–116 68 108 100–114 99–116 70 0
1 88 82–99 80–101 21 93 87–101 85–102 32 1
2 84 78–96 77–97 14 86 80–94 79–96 18 2
3 74 70–88 69–89 4 81 76–90 75–91 10 3
4 70 67–84 65–86 2 77 72–86 71–88 6 4
5 67 65–82 63–84 1 73 69–83 67–84 4 5
6 65 63–80 61–82 1 70 66–80 65–81 2 6
7 63 61–79 60–80 1 68 64–78 63–80 2 7
8 61 60–77 58–79 0.5 66 62–76 61–78 1 8
9 58 57–75 56–76 0.3 63 60–74 58–75 1 9
10 55 55–72 53–74 0.1 60 57–71 56–72 0.4 10
11 51 52–69 50–71 0.1 56 53–67 52–69 0.2 11
12 44 46–63 44–65 <0.1 52 50–64 48–65 0.1 12
13 42 44–62 43–63 <0.1 49 47–61 46–62 <0.1 13
14 40 43–60 41–62 <0.1 46 44–58 43–60 <0.1 14
15 40 43–60 41–62 <0.1 43 42–56 40–57 <0.1 15

SAMPLE,
16 40 43–60 41–62 <0.1 41 40–54 39–55 <0.1 16
17–160 40 43–60 41–62 <0.1 40 39–53 38–54 <0.1 17–160

NOT FOR
ADMINISTRATION
OR RESALE

152 Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix A ■ Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 152 8/31/15 3:40 PM


tab_9_klpa3_normgrp40

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex (continued)
Ages 9:6–9:11
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
0 107 97–114 95–116 68 107 99–113 98–115 68 0
1 87 81–98 79–100 19 92 86–100 84–101 30 1
2 82 77–94 75–96 12 84 79–93 77–94 14 2
3 72 69–86 67–88 3 79 74–88 73–89 8 3
4 69 66–84 65–85 2 74 70–84 68–85 4 4
5 63 61–79 60–80 1 69 65–79 64–80 2 5
6 60 59–76 57–78 0.4 66 62–76 61–78 1 6
7 56 56–73 54–75 0.2 64 61–75 59–76 1 7
8 53 53–71 52–72 0.1 61 58–72 57–73 0.5 8
9 48 49–67 47–68 <0.1 55 52–67 51–68 0.1 9
10 45 47–64 45–66 <0.1 51 49–63 48–64 0.1 10
11 41 43–61 42–63 <0.1 48 46–60 45–62 <0.1 11
12 40 43–60 41–62 <0.1 43 42–56 40–57 <0.1 12
13 40 43–60 41–62 <0.1 41 40–54 39–55 <0.1 13
14–160 40 43–60 41–62 <0.1 40 39–53 38–54 <0.1 14–160

SAMPLE,
NOT FOR
ADMINISTRATION
OR RESALE

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix A ■ Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles 153

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 153 8/31/15 3:40 PM


tab_9_klpa3_normgrp41

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex (continued)
Ages 10:0–10:5
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
0 106 96–114 94–115 66 106 98–112 97–114 66 0
1 86 80–97 78–99 18 91 85–99 84–100 27 1
2 79 74–92 73–93 8 82 77–91 75–92 12 2
3 71 68–85 66–87 3 76 71–85 70–87 5 3
4 67 65–82 63–84 1 70 66–80 65–81 2 4
5 59 58–76 56–77 0.3 64 61–75 59–76 1 5
6 55 55–72 53–74 0.1 60 57–71 56–72 0.4 6
7 52 52–70 51–72 0.1 56 53–67 52–69 0.2 7
8 47 48–66 47–67 <0.1 52 50–64 48–65 0.1 8
9 41 43–61 42–63 <0.1 48 46–60 45–62 <0.1 9
10 40 43–60 41–62 <0.1 44 43–57 41–58 <0.1 10
11 40 43–60 41–62 <0.1 42 41–55 39–56 <0.1 11
12–160 40 43–60 41–62 <0.1 40 39–53 38–54 <0.1 12–160

SAMPLE,
NOT FOR
ADMINISTRATION
OR RESALE

154 Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix A ■ Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 154 8/31/15 3:40 PM


tab_9_klpa3_normgrp42

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex (continued)
Ages 10:6–10:11
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
0 105 95–113 94–114 63 105 97–112 96–113 63 0
1 84 78–96 77–97 14 89 83–97 82–98 23 1
2 76 72–89 70–91 5 81 76–90 75–91 10 2
3 69 66–84 65–85 2 73 69–83 67–84 4 3
4 64 62–80 60–81 1 68 64–78 63–80 2 4
5 56 56–73 54–75 0.2 62 59–73 57–74 1 5
6 51 52–69 50–71 0.1 56 53–67 52–69 0.2 6
7 47 48–66 47–67 <0.1 52 50–64 48–65 0.1 7
8 42 44–62 43–63 <0.1 48 46–60 45–62 <0.1 8
9 40 43–60 41–62 <0.1 45 43–58 42–59 <0.1 9
10 40 43–60 41–62 <0.1 42 41–55 39–56 <0.1 10
11–160 40 43–60 41–62 <0.1 40 39–53 38–54 <0.1 11–160

SAMPLE,
NOT FOR
ADMINISTRATION
OR RESALE

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix A ■ Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles 155

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 155 8/31/15 3:40 PM


tab_9_klpa3_normgrp43

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex (continued)
Ages 11:0–11:11
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
0 104 96–111 95–112 61 105 97–112 95–114 63 0
1 82 77–92 75–93 12 87 81–96 79–98 19 1
2 76 71–86 70–88 5 78 73–89 72–90 7 2
3 67 63–78 62–80 1 70 66–82 65–83 2 3
4 61 58–73 57–75 0.5 65 62–77 60–79 1 4
5 56 54–69 52–70 0.2 59 57–72 55–74 0.3 5
6 49 48–63 46–64 <0.1 52 50–66 49–67 0.1 6
7 44 43–58 42–60 <0.1 47 46–62 45–63 <0.1 7
8 40 40–55 38–56 <0.1 45 44–60 43–61 <0.1 8
9 40 40–55 38–56 <0.1 42 42–57 40–59 <0.1 9
10–160 40 40–55 38–56 <0.1 40 40–56 39–57 <0.1 10–160

SAMPLE,
NOT FOR
ADMINISTRATION
OR RESALE

156 Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix A ■ Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 156 8/31/15 3:40 PM


tab_9_klpa3_normgrp44

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex (continued)
Ages 12:0–12:11
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
0 103 95–110 94–112 58 104 96–111 94–113 61 0
1 80 75–90 73–91 9 85 79–95 78–96 16 1
2 74 70–85 68–86 4 75 71–86 69–87 5 2
3 64 61–76 59–77 1 67 64–79 62–81 1 3
4 59 56–71 55–73 0.3 62 59–75 58–76 1 4
5 53 51–66 50–68 0.1 56 54–69 52–71 0.2 5
6 46 45–60 44–61 <0.1 49 48–63 46–65 <0.1 6
7 42 41–56 40–58 <0.1 46 45–61 44–62 <0.1 7
8 40 40–55 38–56 <0.1 42 42–57 40–59 <0.1 8
9–160 40 40–55 38–56 <0.1 40 40–56 39–57 <0.1 9–160

SAMPLE,
NOT FOR
ADMINISTRATION
OR RESALE

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix A ■ Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles 157

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 157 8/31/15 3:40 PM


tab_9_klpa3_normgrp45

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex (continued)
Ages 13:0–13:11
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
0 102 94–109 93–111 55 104 96–111 94–113 61 0
1 77 72–87 71–89 6 83 77–93 76–94 13 1
2 70 66–81 65–83 2 71 67–83 66–84 3 2
3 59 56–71 55–73 0.3 63 60–76 59–77 1 3
4 52 50–65 49–67 0.1 58 56–71 54–73 0.3 4
5 46 45–60 44–61 <0.1 53 51–67 50–68 0.1 5
6 42 41–56 40–58 <0.1 43 43–58 41–60 <0.1 6
7–160 40 40–55 38–56 <0.1 40 40–56 39–57 <0.1 7–160

SAMPLE,
NOT FOR
ADMINISTRATION
OR RESALE

158 Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix A ■ Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 158 8/31/15 3:40 PM


tab_9_klpa3_normgrp46

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex (continued)
Ages 14:0–15:11
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
0 102 94–109 93–111 55 103 95–110 93–112 58 0
1 69 65–80 64–82 2 79 74–89 73–91 8 1
2 62 59–74 58–76 1 65 62–77 60–79 1 2
3 55 53–68 51–69 0.1 57 55–70 53–72 0.2 3
4 46 45–60 44–61 <0.1 51 50–65 48–67 0.1 4
5 41 41–56 39–57 <0.1 42 42–57 40–59 <0.1 5
6–160 40 40–55 38–56 <0.1 40 40–56 39–57 <0.1 6–160

SAMPLE,
NOT FOR
ADMINISTRATION
OR RESALE

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix A ■ Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles 159

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 159 8/31/15 3:40 PM


tab_9_klpa3_normgrp47

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex (continued)
Ages 16:0–17:11
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
0 101 93–108 92–110 53 102 94–109 93–111 55 0
1 63 60–75 58–76 1 74 70–85 68–87 4 1
2 55 53–68 51–69 0.1 61 58–74 57–75 0.5 2
3 42 41–56 40–58 <0.1 49 48–63 46–65 <0.1 3
4–160 40 40–55 38–56 <0.1 40 40–56 39–57 <0.1 4–160

SAMPLE,
NOT FOR
ADMINISTRATION
OR RESALE

160 Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix A ■ Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 160 8/31/15 3:40 PM


tab_9_klpa3_normgrp48

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex (continued)
Ages 18:0–19:11
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
0 101 93–108 92–110 53 102 94–109 93–111 55 0
1 55 53–68 51–69 0.1 67 64–79 62–81 1 1
2 43 42–57 41–59 <0.1 48 47–63 46–64 <0.1 2
3–160 40 40–55 38–56 <0.1 40 40–56 39–57 <0.1 3–160

SAMPLE,
NOT FOR
ADMINISTRATION
OR RESALE

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix A ■ Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles 161

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 161 8/31/15 3:40 PM


tab_9_klpa3_normgrp49

Table A.1 Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex (continued)
Ages 20:0–21:11
Female Male

Standard Confidence interval Standard Confidence interval


Raw score score 90% 95% Percentile score 90% 95% Percentile Raw score
0 100 92–108 91–109 50 100 92–108 91–109 50 0
1 50 48–64 47–65 <0.1 57 55–70 53–72 0.2 1
2–160 40 40–55 38–56 <0.1 40 40–56 39–57 <0.1 2–160

SAMPLE,
NOT FOR
ADMINISTRATION
OR RESALE

162 Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix A ■ Standard Scores, Confidence Intervals, and Percentiles

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 162 8/31/15 3:40 PM


Appendix B

Age Equivalents for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex

SAMPLE,
NOT FOR
ADMINISTRATION
OR RESALE

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix B ■ Age Equivalents for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex 163

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 163 8/31/15 3:40 PM


tab_10_age_eq

Table B.1 Age Equivalents for Females and Males


Age equivalents
Raw score Female Male
0 5:8–5:9 7:0–7:2
1 5:6–5:7 6:10–6:11
2 5:4–5:5 6:6–6:7
3 5:2–5:3 6:2–6:3
4 5:2–5:3 5:10–5:11
5 5:0–5:1 5:8–5:9
6 5:0–5:1 5:6–5:7
7 4:10–4:11 5:6–5:7
8 4:8–4:9 5:4–5:5
9 4:6–4:7 5:2–5:3
10 4:6–4:7 5:0–5:1
11 4:4–4:5 4:10–4:11
12 4:4–4:5 4:8–4:9
13 4:4–4:5 4:6–4:7
14 4:2–4:3 4:6–4:7
15 4:0–4:1 4:4–4:5

SAMPLE,
16 4:0–4:1 4:2–4:3
17 3:10–3:11 4:0–4:1
18 3:10–3:11 4:0–4:1
19 3:8–3:9 3:10–3:11

NOT FOR
20 3:6–3:7 3:10–3:11
21 3:6–3:7 3:8–3:9
22 3:4–3:5 3:8–3:9
23 3:4–3:5 3:6–3:7

ADMINISTRATION
24 3:2–3:3 3:4–3:5
25 3:2–3:3 3:4–3:5
26 3:0–3:1 3:4–3:5
27 3:0–3:1 3:2–3:3

OR RESALE
28 2:10–2:11 3:2–3:3
29 2:10–2:11 3:0–3:1
30 2:8–2:9 3:0–3:1
31 2:8–2:9 3:0–3:1
32 2:8–2:9 2:10–2:11
33 2:8–2:9 2:10–2:11
34 2:6–2:7 2:8–2:9
35 2:6–2:7 2:6–2:7
36 2:6–2:7 2:4–2:5
37 2:6–2:7 2:2–2:3
38 2:4–2:5 2:2–2:3
39 2:4–2:5 2:0–2:1
40 2:4–2:5 2:0–2:1
41 2:4–2:5 <2:0
42 2:2–2:3 <2:0
43 2:2–2:3 <2:0
44 2:2–2:3 <2:0
45 2:0–2:1 <2:0
46 2:0–2:1 <2:0
47–160 <2:0 <2:0

164 Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix B ■ Age Equivalents for the Normative Sample by Age and Sex

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 164 8/31/15 3:40 PM


Appendix C

Suppression and Occurrence of the Phonological Processes


in the Normative Sample by Age

Table C.1 Ages at Which 90% of the KLPA–3 Normative Sample Suppressed Each Phonological Process
Table C.2 Percent of Occurrence Corresponding to KLPA–3 Phonological Errors in the Normative Sample

SAMPLE,
NOT FOR
ADMINISTRATION
OR RESALE

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix C ■ Suppression and Occurrence of the Phonological Processes in the Normative Sample by Age 165

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 165 8/31/15 3:40 PM


tab_12_ninety_Mastery

Table C.1 Ages at Which 90% of the KLPA–3 Normative


Sample Suppressed Each Phonological Process
Phonological Process
Age Female Male

2:0–2:5 FDV, IV DF, FDV, IV

2:6–2:11 SR SR

3:0–3:5 DFC, ST, VF DFC, VF

3:6–3:11 DF

4:0–4:5 STR CS, ST, STR

4:6–4:11 CS, PF PF

5:0–5:11

6:0–6:11 VOC, GL

7:0–7:11 GL

8:0–8:11 VOC

SAMPLE,
NOT FOR
ADMINISTRATION
OR RESALE

166 Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix C ■ Suppression and Occurrence of the Phonological Processes in the Normative Sample by Age

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN_ApxC.indd 166 9/21/15 12:01 PM


tab_13_Percent_Occurrence

Table C.2 Percent of Occurrence Corresponding to KLPA–3 Phonological Errors in the Normative Sample
Manner Place Reduction Voicing
Stopping of Deletion
Gliding of fricatives Stridency Palatal Velar Cluster of final Syllable Final Initial

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 167
Deaffrication liquids and affricates deletion Vocalization fronting fronting simplification consonant reduction devoicing voicing
Total number of
possible errors 8 20 48 42 15 12 23 23 36 25 35 33
Number of errors

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 13 5 2 2 7 8 4 4 3 4 3 3
2 25 10 4 5 13 17 9 9 6 8 6 6
3 38 15 6 7 20 25 13 13 8 12 9 9
4 50 20 8 10 27 33 17 17 11 16 11 12
5 63 25 10 12 33 42 22 22 14 20 14 15
6 75 30 13 14 40 50 26 26 17 24 17 18
7 88 35 15 17 47 58 30 30 19 28 20 21
8 100 40 17 19 53 67 35 35 22 32 23 24
9 45 19 21 60 75 39 39 25 36 26 27
10 50 21 24 67 83 43 43 28 40 29 30
11 55 23 26 73 92 48 48 31 44 31 33
12 60 25 29 80 100 52 52 33 48 34 36
13 65 27 31 87 57 57 36 52 37 39
14 70 29 33 93 61 61 39 56 40 42
15 75 31 36 100 65 65 42 60 43 45
16 80 33 38 70 70 44 64 46 48
17 85 35 40 74 74 47 68 49 52
SAMPLE,
NOT FOR
18 90 38 43 78 78 50 72 51 55
19 95 40 45 83 83 53 76 54 58
20 100 42 48 87 87 56 80 57 61
21
22
44
46
OR RESALE
50
52
91
96
91
96
58
61
84
88
60
63
64
67
23 48 55 100 100 64 92 66 70

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix C ■ Suppression and Occurrence of the Phonological Processes in the Normative Sample by Age
24 50 57 67 96 69 73
25 52 60 69 100 71 76

167
ADMINISTRATION

8/31/15 3:40 PM
tab_13_Percent_Occurrence cont.

Table C.2 Percent of Occurrence Corresponding to KLPA–3 Phonological Errors in the Normative Sample (continued)

168
Manner Place Reduction Voicing
Stopping of Deletion
Gliding of fricatives Stridency Palatal Velar Cluster of final Syllable Final Initial

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 168
Deaffrication liquids and affricates deletion Vocalization fronting fronting simplification consonant reduction devoicing voicing
Total number of
possible errors 8 20 48 42 15 12 23 23 36 25 35 33
Number of errors
26 54 62 72 74 79
27 56 64 75 77 82
28 58 67 78 80 85
29 60 69 81 83 88
30 63 71 83 86 91
31 65 74 86 89 94
32 67 76 89 91 97
33 69 79 92 94 100
34 71 81 94 97
35 73 83 97 100
36 75 86 100
37 77 88
38 79 90
39 81 93
40 83 95
41 85 98
42 88 100
43 90
SAMPLE,
NOT FOR
44 92
45 94
46 96
47
48
98
100
OR RESALE

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix C ■ Suppression and Occurrence of the Phonological Processes in the Normative Sample by Age
ADMINISTRATION

8/31/15 3:40 PM
Appendix D

List of Examiners for the Tryout and Standardization Research


Phases

SAMPLE,
NOT FOR
ADMINISTRATION
OR RESALE

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix D ■ List of Examiners for the Tryout and Standardization Research Phases 169

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 169 8/31/15 3:40 PM


Alabama Arkansas Fort Collins
Huntsville Jonesboro Krista Lavigne
Shannon Fletcher Robin Everett Littleton
Anne McKinley Lowell Greta Churillo
Lincoln Megan Fraser Jessica Gates
Candace Scearce Mabelvale Parker
Montevallo Alicia Davidson Ellen Thompson
Jennifer A. Parrish Springdale Connecticut
Spanish Fort Stephanie Hall Shelton
Rita Rabon California Jessica Lockavitch
Vestavia Durham Delaware
Julie Rosenthal Carla Hulfish Magnolia
Alaska Huntington Beach Heather Smith
Anchorage Jessica Haro Florida

SAMPLE,
Deanna Clark Irvine Apopka
Soldotna Kera Lefler Kristi Jackley
Amy Hogue Murrieta Brandon

NOT FOR
Arizona Denise Smith Kristen Bond
Avondale Orange Davie
Meghan Cabanilla Elizabeth Deller Robyn Nadler

ADMINISTRATION
Gilbert Roseville Eustis
Margaret Jetty Melanie Rivera Marcia Shapiro
Julie Jones-Black South Lake Tahoe Hollywood

OR RESALE
Erinn Lind
Robin Thayer
Glendale
Carey Galles
Stockton
Christine Swan
Vanessa Montoya
Lake Worth
Maria Edward
Nicole Weber Colorado Lakeland
Kingman Aurora Gissel Marmol
Jennifer Howe Deborah Diedrich Anderson Melbourne
Oro Valley Aurora Sara Bretz
Kimberly Smejkal Catherine Newton Miami
Phoenix Castle Rock Monica Galvez
Heidi Benson Rodriguez Brenda Mortensen North Lauderdale
Scottsdale Centennial Demetria Rawls
Jennifer Schwartz Dianne Fulwider Orlando
Tucson Colorado Springs Laura Sajeski
Krista Tolo Renae Allemann Vivian Seda
Amy Graham Port Saint Lucie
Amanda Lindsay

170 Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix D ■ List of Examiners for the Tryout and Standardization Research Phases

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 170 8/31/15 3:40 PM


Satellite Beach Benton Kentucky
Sharlea Robbins Mikala Wilder Lexington
Seminole Bolingbrook Brandy Shumake-Young
Susan Herman Jacqueline Navarro Louisville
Tampa Burbank Sandra Burnette
Meaghan McKenna Monique Richardson Mayfield
Wellington Chicago Jaime Prince
Genicarmen Noble Jeanine Jesberg Pineville
Georgia Jeanne Yee Leigh Roark
Camilla Des Plaines Louisiana
Deborah Murphy Lauren Lascelles Albany
Cumming East Peoria Bobbi Smith
Marla Mann Brenda Frank Covington
Kingsland Frankfort Kay Parker

SAMPLE,
Patricia Sullivan Katherine Doherty Springs
Loganville Homer Glen Melanie Mulkey
Angel Ferguson Amy Handzik Independence

NOT FOR
Hawaii Raleigh Celeste Mauro
Honolulu Jessica Morber Maryland
Brandi Merryman Saint Charles Baltimore

ADMINISTRATION
Idaho Karlen Tolkson Donna Azman
Boise Springfield Easton
Amber Romriell Melissa Cory Gladys Marcum

OR RESALE
Idaho Falls
Ashley Guthrie
Meridian
Laura Reitz
Waterloo
Dawn Cross
Ellicott City
Emily Markus
Gaithersburg
Emily Sorensen Indiana Kevin Crippen
Middleton La Porte Massachusetts
Angela Clegg Erin Conroy Athol
Melissa DeLamere Iowa Jasmine Ribeiro
Loris Friesen Spencer Auburn
Nampa Lindy Laubenthal Matthew Frederick
Melissa Swander Kansas Mendon
Illinois Overland Park Amanda Farley
Algonquin Martha Allee Somerville
Marie Anne Hoffmann Wellington Kathleen Dougherty
Bedford Park Renee Ferguson Michigan
Paula Moore Berrien Springs
Michelle Anzuers

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix D ■ List of Examiners for the Tryout and Standardization Research Phases 171

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 171 8/31/15 3:40 PM


Spring Leakesville New York
Alexia Derma-Salazar Heather Nicholson Clyde
Ruth Reeves Quitman JoAnn Salerno
Berrien Springs Cynthia Weathers East Rochester
Lara Scheidler-Smith Ripley Stacy Jackson
Burt Suzette Haynes Flushing
Jean Chalker Missouri Rachel Osofsky
East Lansing Blue Springs Geneva
Jodi Cohen Lisa Stacy Julie Tumbelekis
Gaylord Cape Girardeau Glenwood Landing
Staci Brown Danielle Healy Donna Braun
Grand Rapids Caruthersville Middlesex
Linsey Jones Sharon Riggs Michele Snyder
Holland Hillsboro Nesconset

SAMPLE,
Carter Baer Kimberly Green Megan Wingert
Kalamazoo Jackson New York
Lauren Goetting Polly Koch Mona Greenfield

NOT FOR
Lowell Kansas City Ontario
Rachel Ort Brandy Mosier Jane Aubertine
White Lake O’Fallon Rochester

ADMINISTRATION
Leah King Colleen Martens Suzanne Engle
Minnesota Saint Louis Ellen Shulman
Duluth Kelly Brady Saratoga Springs

OR RESALE
Abbie Pannkuk
Grand Rapids
Pamela Olson
Rasheedah Furqan
Bernadette Pankey
Slater
Rebecca C. Gestwick
Walworth
Janice Gibala Broxholm
Luverne Sarah E. Marriott North Carolina
Jacqueline Johnson Montana Boone
Maple Grove Ennis Sheila Temple
Anisha Knatcal Kaitlin Sonderer Burlington
Woodbury Nebraska Kathleen Maxfield
Angela Vokac Aurora Charlotte
Mississippi Rhonda Standage Melissa Maxwell
Canton New Jersey Cornelius
Dorothy Taylor Old Tappan Tracy Eakins
Jackson Olga Di Palo Anita Risdon
Germaine Graham New Mexico Graham
Jasmine Topp Los Lunas Stefanie Nance
Alisha Romero-Moore

172 Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix D ■ List of Examiners for the Tryout and Standardization Research Phases

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 172 8/31/15 3:40 PM


Hendersonville Pennsylvania Texas
Cathleen Dufort Easton Allen
High Point Kym DeFour Katherine Shepard
Jo Ellen Ryan Lancaster Austin
Hillsborough Marie Kurtz Lauren Elgin
Carolyn Phillips Montoursville Edinburg
Hope Mills Eve Hilsher Aleida Ferrer
Laural Farrell Saylorsburg Angeline Rivera
Manteo Doreen Cruz-Delgado El Paso
Terry Anderson Sharpsville Karissa Martinez
Reidsville Carlye Slaughter Nancy Ramirez
Mae Booth Warminster Helotes
Christine Johnson Jamie Pasternack Michelle Fleckenstein
Ohio South Carolina Jaclyn Molina Moreno

SAMPLE,
Cincinnati Chester Hewitt
Emily Otto Crystal Randolph Shelly Stripling
Leetonia Greenville Kyle

NOT FOR
Carly Coldwell Julia Mari Colon Latrichielle Sorrells
Oklahoma Greer Live Oak
Broken Arrow Anita Schumaker Allison Staves

ADMINISTRATION
Ashley Lemaster Simpsonville Lubbock
Heavener Tiffany Scott Ashley Roark
Brandi Duncan South Dakota Mission
Jenks

OR RESALE
Sandra Smith
Newcastle
Rapid City
Samantha Hoff
Wessington
Frances De La Garza
Richmond
Amy Young
DeAnn Smith Lori Liebing San Antonio
Oklahoma City Tennessee Julie Cripps
Shelley Ryland Bartlett Sarah Galvan-Rodriguez
Sapulpa Andrea Moore Yolanda Garcia
Casey Nelson Blountville Saher Hyderali
Tulsa Samantha Wampler Amanda Martinez
Jessica MacDonald Cleveland Chastity Martinez
Oregon Kathryne Kerley Nina Moreno
Ashland Cordova Dora Munoz
Jeanne Chouard Adrienne Jackson Kristina Navarro
Portland Nashville Madeleine Paul
Laura Jensen Geneine Snell Beatrice Villarreal
Rachel Walker

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix D ■ List of Examiners for the Tryout and Standardization Research Phases 173

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 173 8/31/15 3:40 PM


Kara Wolf Seattle
Utah Zayra Marrero - Burgos
Farmington Spokane
Jane Fenton Priscilla Rabinovitch
Layton Tacoma
Katherine Poland Margot Koehler
Murray West Virginia
Sara Gibb Morgantown
Chela Williams Leigh Smitley
Salt Lake City Wisconsin
Kristen Ipson Oconomowoc
Taylorsville Jann Fujimoto
Ann Acosta Phillips
Vermont Jane Dettmering

SAMPLE,
Burlington Plymouth
Colleen Quaglietta Jennifer Kiekhoefer
Hyde Park South Range

NOT FOR
Stacey Moulton Sarah James
Milton Wabeno
Jenna Lewandowski Amy Stefanovic

ADMINISTRATION
Saint Albans Wauwatosa
Kristine Jenkins Laura Murray
Virginia

OR RESALE
Fredericksburg
Jacquelyn Tabony
Marion
Leigh Porter
Midlothian
Melanie Derry
Purcellville
Jana Bennett
Williamsburg
Amanda Beavers
Woodbridge
Crystal Joson
Washington
Kent
Sharon Hughes

174 Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix D ■ List of Examiners for the Tryout and Standardization Research Phases

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 174 8/31/15 3:40 PM


Appendix E

Phonetic Symbols and Diacritics for Transcription

SAMPLE,
NOT FOR
ADMINISTRATION
OR RESALE

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix E ■ Phonetic Symbols and Diacritics for Transcription 175

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 175 8/31/15 3:40 PM


International Phonetic Alphabet International Phonetic Alphabet
Symbols for Standard American Symbols for Standard American
English Consonants English Vowels
Phonetic Phonetic Phonetic Phonetic
Symbol Example Transcription Symbol Example Transcription
p pig pɪg i leaf lif
b boy bɔɪ ɪ pig pɪg
t table tebəl e plate plet
d duck dʌk ɘ web wɘb
k cup kʌp ӕ hammer hæmɚ
g go go ɑ star stɑr
h house haʊs ɔ door dɔr
m monkey mʌŋki o go go
n knife naɪf ʊ cookie kʊki
ŋ ring rɪŋ u shoe ʃu
f fish fɪʃ ʌ shovel ʃʌvəl

SAMPLE,
v vacuum vækjum ə zebra zibrə
ɵ thumb ɵʌm  knife naɪf
ð that ðæt  house haʊs

NOT FOR
s soap sop  boy bɔɪ
z zebra zibrə ɝ shirt ʃɝt
ʃ shoe ʃu ɚ brother brʌðɚ

ADMINISTRATION
ʒ television tɘləvɪʒən
ʧ chair ʧɘr
ʤ giraffe ʤəræf
l lion laɪən

OR RESALE
r red rɘd
j yellow jɘlo
w watch wɑʧ

Additional International Phonetic Symbols

Phonetic Symbol Identification Phonetic Transcription

~ Nasalization r ı̃

͆ Dentalization st̪ɑr

ᵔ Lateralization slaɪd

: Prolongation n:

ʰ Aspiration pʰəʤɑməz

ʔ Glottal Stop taɪʔɚ

˺ Unreleased k ̚ʌp

. Syllabic ӕpl.

176 Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix E ■ Phonetic Symbols and Diacritics for Transcription

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 176 8/31/15 3:40 PM


Appendix F

Reproducible Pages

SAMPLE,
NOT FOR
ADMINISTRATION
OR RESALE

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ Appendix F ■ Reproducible Pages 177

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 177 8/31/15 3:40 PM


D
b

Name: Examiner: Date:


Consonant Analysis
Phonetic Inventory for Consonants in Single Words

Word-Initial Consonants Produced Word-Medial Consonants Produced Word-Final Consonants Produced

m n ŋ m n ŋ m n ŋ

p b t d ʧ ʤ k g p b t d ʧ ʤ k g p b t d ʧ ʤ k g

ɵ ð ɵ ð ɵ ð
f v ʃ f v ʃ ʒ f v ʃ ʒ
s z s z s z
r r r ɚ
w j h w j h
l l l əl

Consonant Clusters: Consonant Clusters: Consonant Clusters:


________________________________ ________________________________ ________________________________
________________________________ ________________________________ ________________________________
________________________________ ________________________________ ________________________________

Core Phonological Process Analysis

SAMPLE, Age Female


Phonological Process
Male

NOT FOR
2:0–2:5 FDV, IV DF, FDV, IV

2:6–2:11 SR SR

3:0–3:5 DFC, ST, VF DFC, VF

ADMINISTRATION
3:6–3:11 DF

4:0–4:5 STR CS, ST, STR

4:6–4:11 CS, PF PF

OR RESALE
C
5:0–5:11
W
6:0–6:11 VOC, GL r
P
7:0–7:11 GL
o
8:0–8:11 VOC P
N
8
P
Summary of Consonant Analysis
• Phonetic Inventory _______________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
015801284
• Core Phonological Processes ______________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
• Supplemental Phonological Processes _____________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
• Other Phonological Process _______________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
• Processes Per Word (PPW) ________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Copyright © 2015 NCS Pearson, Inc. All rights reserved. Printed in the U.S.A. This page is reproducible, with copyright notice.
KLPA–3 j Analysis Form 11

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN_ApxF.indd 178 9/21/15 2:30 PM


Decentralization: producing a central vowel as a front or boy ž [bɔ] // ž [ɔ]
back vowel
cup ž [kop] /ʌ/ ž [o]

Name: Examiner: Date:


Vowel Analysis
Phonetic Inventory for Vowels in Single Words

Vowels Produced Vowel Phonological Processes Individual’s Vowel Usage

Front Central Back Backing

i u Fronting
leaf zoo
High Centralization
ɪ ʊ
pig cookie Decentralization
e ə o
plate zebra soap Raising
Mid
ɘ ʌ ɔ Lowering
web cup frog
æ ɑ Diphthongization
Low hammer watch
Monophthongization
Diphthongs
  
house knife boy

SAMPLE,
Summary of Vowel Analysis
• Vowels Produced _________________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

NOT FOR
• Vowel Phonological Processes Used ________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

ADMINISTRATION
OR RESALE
Copyright © 2015 NCS Pearson, Inc. All rights reserved. Portions of this work were previously published.
Warning: No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy,
recording, or any information storage and retrieval system, without the express written permission of the copyright owner.
Pearson, PSI Design, PsychCorp, KLPA, Q-global, and Q-interactive are trademarks, in the U.S. and/or other countries, of Pearson Education, Inc.
or its affiliates.
PsychCorp is an imprint of Pearson Clinical Assessment.
NCS Pearson, Inc., 5601 Green Valley Drive, Bloomington MN 55437
800.627.7271 www.PearsonClinical.com
Printed in the United States of America.

0158012844_KLPA3_AF.indd 12 8/11/15 12:27 PM

Copyright © 2015 NCS Pearson, Inc. All rights reserved. Printed in the U.S.A. This page is reproducible, with copyright notice.

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 179 8/31/15 3:40 PM


SAMPLE,
NOT FOR
ADMINISTRATION
OR RESALE

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 180 8/31/15 3:40 PM


References
Allen, M. J., & Yen, W. M. (2002). Introduction to measurement theory. Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.
American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement in
Education. (2014). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: Author.
American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (5th ed.). Washington,
DC: Author.
American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. (1993). Definitions of communication disorders and variations
[Relevant Paper]. Available from http://www.asha.org/policy/RP1993-00208/
American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. (2007). Scope of Practice in Speech-Language Pathology [Scope of

SAMPLE,
Practice]. Available from www.asha.org/policy
American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (n.d.). Cultural Competence. (Practice Portal). Retrieved May, 14, 2015,
from www.asha.org/Practice-Portal/Professional-Issues/Cultural-Competence

NOT FOR
Anastasi, A., & Urbina, S. (1997). Psychological testing (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Bauman-Waengler, J. (2011). Articulatory and phonological impairments: A Clinical Focus (4th ed.). Boston: Pearson, Inc.
Bernthal, J. E., and Bankson, N. R. (1998). Articulation disorders. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

ADMINISTRATION
Bernthal, J. E., & Bankson, N. W. (2004). Articulation and phonological disorders (5th ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Bernthal, J. E., Bankson, N. W., & Flipsen, P., Jr. (2013). Articulation and phonological disorders: Speech sound disorders
in children (7th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.

OR RESALE
Bleile, K. M. (2004). Manual of articulation and phonological disorders: Infancy through adulthood (2nd ed.). Clifton Park,
NY: Thompson Delmar Learning.
Bowers, L., & Huisingh, R. (2010) LinguiSystems articulation test (LAT). East Moline, IL: LinguiSystems.
Bracken, B. A. (1992). The interpretation of tests. In M. Zeidner & R. Most (Eds.), Psychological testing: An inside view (pp.
119–156). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
Brennan, R. L. (Ed.). (2006). Educational measurement (4th ed.). Westport, CT: ACE/Praeger Publishers.
Carrigg, B., Baker, E., Parry, L., & Ballard, K. J. (2015). Persistent speech sound disorder in a 22-year-old male:
Communication, educational, socio-emotional, and vocational outcomes. SIG 16 Perspectives on School-Based
Issues, 16, 37–49. doi:10.1044/sbi16.2.37
Chomsky, N. & Halle, M. (1968). The sound pattern of English. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Cohen, B. H. (1996). Explaining psychological statistics. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks & Cole.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates.
Daniloff, R., & Moll, K. (1968). Coarticulation of lip rounding. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 11, 707–721.
Davis, B. L. (2005). Goal and target selection for developmental speech disorders. In A. G. Kamhi & K. E. Pollock (Eds.),
Phonological disorders in children: Clinical decision making in assessment and intervention (pp. 89–100). Baltimore,
MD: Brookes.

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ References References 181

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 181 8/31/15 3:40 PM


Donegan, P. (2013). Normal vowel development. In M. J. Ball & F. E. Gibbon (Eds.), Handbook of vowels and vowel
disorders (pp. 24-60). New York, NY: Psychology Press.
Edwards, M. L., & Shriberg, L. B. (1983). Phonology: Applications in communicative disorders. San Diego, CA: College-
Hill Press.
Eisenberg, S. L. & Hitchcock, E. R. (2010). Using standardized tests to inventory consonant and vowel production:
A comparison of 11 tests of articulation and phonology. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools,
41, 488–503.
Fisher, H., & Logemann, J. (1971). Fisher-Logemann test of articulation competence. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
Geirut, J. A. (2005). Phonological intervention. The how or the what? In A. G. Kamhi & K. E. Pollock (Eds.), Phonological
disorders in children: Clinical decision making in assessment and intervention (pp. 201–210). Baltimore, MD: Brookes.
Goffman, L., Smith, A., Heisler, L. & Ho, M. (2008) The breadth of coarticulatory units in children and adults. Journal of
Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 51(6), 1424–1437.
Goldman, R., & Fristoe, M. (2015). Goldman-Fristoe test of articulation (3rd ed.). Bloomington, MN: Pearson.
Gosse, C. S., Hoffman, L. M., & Invernizzi, M. A. (2012). Overlap in speech-language and reading services
for kindergartners and first graders. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 43, 66–
80. doi:10.1044/0161-1461(2011/10-0056)

SAMPLE,
Guilford, J. P., & Fruchter, B. (1978). Fundamental statistics in psychology and education (6th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Hodson, B. W. (2004). Hodson assessment of phonological patterns (3rd ed.). Austin, TX: PRO-ED.
Hull, F. M., Mielke, P. W., Jr., Willeford, J. A., & Timmons, R. J. (1976). National Speech and Hearing Survey (Final report

NOT FOR
for USOE Project No. 50978, Grant No. OE-32-15-0050-5010 [607]). Washington, DC: Bureau of Education for the
Handicapped (DHEW/OE). (ERIC Document Reproduction Sevice No. ED 129 045)
Johnson, C. J., Beitchman, J. H., & Brownlie, E. B. (2010). Twenty-Year-Follow-Up of Children With and Without Speech-
Language Impairments: Family, Educational, Occupational, and Quality of Life Outcomes. American Journal of

ADMINISTRATION
Speech-Language Pathology, 19, 51–65. doi:10.1044/1058-0360(2009/08-0083)
Johnson, C. J., Beitchman, J. H., Young, A., Escobar, M., Atkinson, L., Wilson, B., . . . Wang, M. (1999). Fourteen-year
follow-up of children with and without speech/language impairments: Speech/language stability outcomes. Journal

OR RESALE
of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 42(3), 744–760.
Khan, L., & Bird, A. (1983). Guidelines for reporting a phonological process assessment. Texas Journal of Audiology and
Speech Pathology, 9, 6–8.
Khan, L. M. L., & Lewis, N. P. (1986). Khan-Lewis phonological analysis. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service.
Khan, L. M. L., & Lewis, N. P. (2002). Khan-Lewis phonological analysis (2nd ed.). Circle Pines, MN: American
Guidance Service.
Kirk, C., & Vigeland, L. (2014). A psychometric review of norm-referenced tests used to assess phonological error
patterns. Language, Speech, & Hearing Services in Schools, 45(4), 365–377.
Law, J., Boyle, J., Harris, F., Harkness, A., & Nye, C. (2000). Prevalence and natural history of primary speech
and language delay: findings from a systematic review of the literature. International Journal of Language &
Communication Disorders, 35, 165–188.
Lawrence, C. W. (1992). Assessing the use of age-equivalent scores in clinical management. Language, Speech, and
Hearing Services in Schools, 23, 6–8.
Lewis, B. A., Freebairn, L., Tag, J., Ciesla, A. A., Iyengar, S. K., Stein, C. M., & Taylor, H. G. (2015). Adolescent outcomes
of children with early speech sound disorders with and without language impairment. American Journal of Speech-
Language Pathology, 24, 150–163. doi:10.1044/2014_AJSLP-14-0075
Lewis, N., & Khan, L. (1982, March). Adapting traditional articulation tests for phonological processes analysis.
Paper presented at the regional conference of the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association, Colorado
Springs, CO.

182 Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ References References

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 182 8/31/15 3:40 PM


Lowe, Robert. J. (1994). Phonology: Assessment and intervention applications in speech pathology. Baltimore, MD:
Williams & Wilkins.
Magnusson, D. (1967). Test theory. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
McCauley, R. J. (2001). Assessment of language disorders in children. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc
McCauley, R. J., & Swisher, L. (1984). Psychometric review of language and articulation tests for preschool children.
Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 49, 34–42.
McGowan, R. W., McGowan, R. S., Denny, M., & Nittrouer, S. (2014). A longitudinal study of very young children’s vowel
production. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 57, 1–15.
McGraw, K. O., & Wong, S. P. (1996). Forming inferences about some intraclass correlation coefficients. Psychological
Methods, 1, 30–46.
National Center for Education Statistics (NCES). (2012). The condition of education. Jessup, MD: Author.
National Institute on Deafness and other Communication Disorders. (2010). Statistics on Voice, Speech, and Language.
Retrieved April 23, 2015, from https://www.nidcd.nih.gov/health/statistics/pages/vsl.aspx
Overby, M. S., Trainin, G., Smit, A. B., Bernthal, J. S., & Nelson, R. (2012). Preliteracy speech sound production skill and
later literacy outcomes: A study using the Templin Archive. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 43,
97–115. doi:10.1044/0161-1461(2011/10-0064)

SAMPLE,
Preston, J., & Edwards, M. L. (2010). Phonological awareness and types of sound errors in preschoolers with speech
sound disorders. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 53, 44–60.
Raitano, N. A., Pennington, B. F., Tunick, R. A., Boada, R., & Shriberg, L. D. (2004). Pre-literacy skills of subgroups of

NOT FOR
children with speech sound disorders. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 45(4), 821–835.
Ruggles, S., Alexander, J. T., Genadek, K., Goeken, R., Schroeder, M. B., & Sobek, M. (2010). Integrated public use
microdata series: Version 5.0 [Machine-readable database]. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota.
Rvachew, S. (2007). Phonological processing and reading in children with speech sound disorders. American Journal of

ADMINISTRATION
Speech-Language Pathology, 16, 260–270.
Sattler, J. M. (2008). Assessment of children: Cognitive foundations (5th ed.). La Mesa, CA: Jerome M. Sattler,
Publisher, Inc.

OR RESALE
Secord, W., & Donohue, J. S. (2014). Clinical assessment of articulation and phonology (2nd ed.). Greenville, SC: Super
Duper Publications.
Shrout, P. E., & Fleiss, J. L. (1979). Intraclass correlations: Uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychological Bulletin,
2, 420–428.
Sices, L., Taylor, H. G, Freebairn, L., Hansen, A., & Lewis, B. (2007). Relationship between speech-sound disorders and
early literacy skills in preschool-age children: Impact on comorbid language impairment. Journal of Developmental
Behavioral Pediatrics, 28(6), 438–447.
Silver, N. C., & Dunlap, W. P. (1987). Averaging correlation coefficients: Should Fisher’s z transformation be used? Journal
of Applied Psychology, 72(1), 146–148.
Strauss, E., Spreen, O., & Hunter, M. (2000). Implications of test revisions for research. Psychological Assessment,
12(3), 237–244.
Strube, M. J. (1998). Some comments on the use of magnitude-of-effect estimates. Journal of Counseling Psychology,
35(3), 342–345.
Wiig, E. H., Secord, W. A., & Semel, E. M. (2004). Clinical evaluation of language fundamentals–Preschool (2nd ed.). San
Antonio, TX: Harcourt Assessment.
Wiig, E. H., Semel, E. M., & Secord, W. A. (2014). Clinical evaluation of language fundamentals (5th ed.). Bloomington,
MN: Pearson.

Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ References References 183

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 183 8/31/15 3:40 PM


Wilkins, C., Rolfhus, E., Weiss, L., & Zhu, J. (2005). A simulation study comparing inferential and traditional norming with
small sample sizes. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association,
Montreal, Canada.
Zhu, J. J., & Chen, H.-Y. (2011). Utility of inferential norming with smaller sample sizes. Journal of Psychoeducational
Assessments, 29(6), 570–580.

SAMPLE,
NOT FOR
ADMINISTRATION
OR RESALE

184 Khan-Lewis Phonological Analysis ■ References References

0158012879_KLPA3_MAN.indb 184 8/31/15 3:40 PM

Вам также может понравиться