How is CAAP-2 different from the original CAAP?
- The population sample reflects 2013 U.S. Census data and includes children with speech delays and differences (7%).
- The upper age limit was increased to 11 years; 11 months (from 8;11).
- An iPad® version of the test was created as an alternative to the printed version. It automatically calculates scores and generates reports.
- The stimulus picture for “computer” was updated.
- New validity studies comparing CAAP-2 to GFTA-2 and KLPA-2 were conducted.
- The Error Difference Score was removed.
What are the features of the new CAAP-2 app?
- Record audio during test administration.
- Automatically calculate chronological ages and normative data (Standard Scores, Percentile Ranks, and Age Equivalents).
- Generate Phonology Scores directly from the Articulation Inventory data.
- Email or print summary reports.
- Purchase and print Articulation Response Forms in-app.
- Read the manual directly from the app.
to view a demo video of the CAAP-2
Does the test reliability remain the same when you deliver stimulus items digitally (e.g., via an iPad®)?
There have been multiple studies regarding the reliability of delivering stimulus items digitally either via an iPad® or computer (Bowers & Husingh, 2011; Strait et al., 2013; Waite et al., 2013). Strait et al. (2013) reported that twenty-six students between the ages of 5;0 and 10;0 were administered the receptive and expressive tests of the Montgomery Assessment of Vocabulary Acquisition
, Montgomery, 2008) via both the print stimulus easels and the iPad®. Sixteen of the students received the printed version of the test first and 10 of the students received the iPad® version first. The students received the second version of the test 7–10 days later. All scores were significant beyond p<.01. All Pearson’s r correlations for raw scores, standard scores, and percentile ranks were between .95 and .99 for both the receptive and the expressive tests. These results indicate that test reliability does not change when the stimulus items are delivered via an iPad®. Bowers and Husingh (2011) reported similar results when they compared the printed version of the LinguiSystems Articulation Test (LAT)
to the iPad® version. In their 2013 study using the Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals–4th Edition
(Semel et al., 2003), Waite et al. (2013) found no significant difference between administering the printed version of the CELF-4
or the online version.
Bowers, L. & Husingh, R. (2011). Linguisystems articulation test
. East Moline, IL: LinguiSystems.
Strait, M., Holland, E., Johnson, C., & Kjesbo, R. (2013). Montgomery assessment of vocabulary acquisition app
. Greenville, SC: Super Duper Publications.
Waite, M.C., Theodros, D.C., Russell, T.C., Cahill, L.M. (2010). Internet-based telehealth assessment of language using the CELF-4. Language Speech and Hearing Services in the Schools
, 41, 445–4.
What is the population sample size for the CAAP-2?
The sample included 1,486 children in the U.S. and resembles 2013 U.S. Census data.
Does the CAAP-2 have norm-referenced scores?
Yes. The CAAP-2
provides three standard scores to qualify children. The Articulation Section has word and sentence standard scores, and the Phonology section also gives an overall standard score. All standard scores may be converted to percentile ranks and age equivalents.
How long does the CAAP-2 take to administer?
For a young child (2;6–4 years of age) the CAAP-2
takes about 15 minutes to complete. Older children can complete the Consonant Inventory in about 10 minutes, and the School-Age Sentences section in about 5 minutes.
How do I use the CAAP-2 Pals and the Introductory Story?
This component of the assessment is optional. It is helpful with young children who may be apprehensive or difficult to “warm-up” prior to testing. You may also use the CAAP-2
Pals in play to obtain a language sample following testing. If you are testing an older child (> 5 years of age), you may want to skip the Introductory Story altogether. There are directions in the manual for administering the CAAP-2
with or without the Introductory Story.
When do I use the Phonological Process Checklist I?
has a Consonant Singleton Summary table on p. 2 of the Articulation Response Form. The sounds on this summary are divided into Stops, Glides, Fricatives, etc. When filling out this chart, you'll begin to see error patterns. This makes it very easy to decide whether or not to use the Phonological Process Checklist.
When do I use Checklist II?
Use Checklist II (print edition only) in conjunction with the Phonological Process Probes found in the back of the print edition easel. It is very helpfual in assessing children with severe phonological disorders. Additionally, Checklist II is useful as a re-test for specific processes you are presently treating. For example, if you have identified Gliding and Fronting as active processes and are intervening using a cycles approach, you can go back and probe those specific processes without having to administer the entire assessment.
Does the CAAP-2 assess non-developmental phonological processes?
Yes. There are reproducible checklists for Backing, Initial Consonant Deletion, Stridency Deletion, and Consonant Harmony in the appendices of the CAAP-2
manual. These inventories do not have normative data but can identify active processes (>40%). The CAAP-2 App for iPad® automatically calculates Backing, Initial Consonant Deletion, and Stridency Deletion.
Did you compare the CAAP-2 to other articulation tests?
Concurrent validity studies comparing CAAP-2
to the GFTA-2
and the KLPA-2
were significant beyond p<.01 for all raw scores, standard scores, and percentile ranks.
Where can I see the forms for the test?
Click below to view forms for CAAP-2