Adapting and translating the Mullen Scales of Early Learning for the South African context.
Juan Bornman, MaryAnn Romski, Kerstin Tonsing and 4 others
PMID 29781700WHAT IT FOUND
Across four language groups, the translated Mullen Scales produced similar total and subscale scores.
Older children scored higher than younger children. This supports using the adapted scales with other assessment information, not alone.
Key findings
01The adapted MSEL produced similar total raw scores and similar scores on the four subscales across the four language groups.
02Total MSEL raw scores increased in order from the youngest to the oldest age group and differed across age groups.
03The age comparisons found no difference for the upper age ranges 51–56, 57–62 and 63–68 months.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTsWhat it means for OTsWhat it means for SLPs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
Typical development was based on teacher report, not formal screening. The sample was small and homogeneous, and the authors say it is not suitable for formal validity, reliability or norms. Seven of 205 children did not complete the assessment. The English group had 42 children analysed, and attempts to recruit more children were unsuccessful. The measure was less sensitive for children between 51 and 68 months. No background information beyond age, home language and school language exposure was collected. The gross motor scale was not interpreted.
The easy way to misread this
Do not treat the adapted MSEL as a validated, normed assessment for South African children. The authors state the sample is too small and homogeneous for formal validity, reliability or norms. The scales should be used with other assessment information, not alone.