Assessment can be challenging at any age, but especially so at secondary school level and beyond. Compared to the early years, language growth during older childhood and adolescence is “gradual and protracted” (Nippold, 1998, p.3). It also becomes increasingly individualistic, as students choose their GCSE subjects, take up hobbies and learn new vocabulary related to their interests. This makes it harder to say what “normal” language development looks like, and to identify when there is a problem.
(If you’d like to read more about later language development, please see my post: https://secondaryschoolslt.com/2026/01/09/later-language-development-what-speech-and-language-therapists-need-to-know-about-the-secondary-school-years/)
Despite a growing body of research, there are still fewer assessments for this age group than there are for younger children. Marilyn Nippold (1998), a leading expert in adolescent language development has argued extensively that many standardized language assessments designed for teenagers actually assess more basic, foundational skills, and fail to measure more advanced, age-appropriate skills.
For example, these tests may assess basic sentence structures and core vocabulary, when these skills are typically mastered several years before. On the other hand, important aspects of adolescent language development such as figurative language, understanding and production of a range of advanced syntactic structures, as well as relevant discourse types, such as expository discourse, may not be covered.
(For my post about expository discourse, please click: https://secondaryschoolslt.com/2026/04/15/what-is-expository-discourse-and-how-is-it-relevant-at-secondary-school/)
This is likely to lead to the identification of only the most severe and obvious language disorders, whilst more subtle difficulties are missed. In other words, it is quite possible for a student with a language disorder to attain an average score on a formal language assessment.
You are likely to come across students with a wide range of difficulties at secondary school. Some will continue to display obvious oral language difficulties. But many will have “outgrown” these, only for difficulties with more complex written language or pragmatics to come to the fore. Though subtle, such difficulties still have a considerable impact on classroom learning and social functioning. Yet, they are likely to be missed if standardised assessments are relied on exclusively.
Done well, assessment at secondary level also requires more from us, as Speech and Language Therapists (SLTs), in terms of our linguistic knowledge. Nippold (2023) points out that many of us are less familiar with the details of later language development, or what to expect at different ages. Yet, if we are to say with confidence which students have language disorders and which do not, then we will need a robust understanding of advanced syntax, including later-developing syntactic structures, such as passives, adverbial clauses and clefts.
Finding solutions
There is far too much to say about assessment to fit into one (or even 3!) blog posts. For more comprehensive accounts, please see Nelson (1998), Larson and McKinley (2003) or Paul and Norbury (2012). The latter very helpfully split language development into four distinct developmental stages: emerging language, developing language, language for learning and advanced language.
Students with language disorders may well be at stages typically associated with younger children. In my experience, many of my Year 7 and 8 students have been at the “Language for Learning” level typically associated with the older years of primary school. Some of my older ones, and those with more subtle difficulties have been at the “Advanced Language” stage. Meanwhile, a few have had “Developing Language”, normally associated with children aged 2 to 5.
The authors provide detailed advice for assessing students at each stage across a whole range of areas, from the “literate” lexicon and figurative language, to comprehension and production of syntax, different types of discourse, pragmatics and the “metas”.
Given this wealth of available information, I just wanted to share a few ideas that I’ve found most useful in my everyday practice. I also try to keep in mind Larson and McKinley’s (2003, p.179) philosophy that assessment should be “descriptive/ explanatory, authentic, dynamic, student-centred, and multidimensional”.
For Part 2 of this blog series on assessment, where I talk about student-focused assessment, dynamic assessment and curriculum-based language assessment (CBLA), please click here – https://secondaryschoolslt.com/2026/07/10/language-assessment-at-secondary-school-student-focused-dynamic-and-curriculum-based-assessment-part-2/ .
Notes
Larson, V.L. and McKinley, N.L. (2003) Communication solutions for older students. Thinking Pub.
Nelson, N. W. (1998) Childhood Language Disorders in Context: Infancy Through Adolescence. 2nd edn. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Nippold, M.A. (1998) Later language development: The school-age and adolescent years. 2nd ed. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.
Nippold, M.A. (2023). Grammar guide for speech-language pathologists: Steps to analyzing complex syntax. San Diego: Plural Publishing.
Paul, R. and Norbury, C. (2012) Language Disorders from Infancy Through Adolescence: Listening, Speaking, Reading, Writing, and Communicating. 4th edn. St. Louis, MO: Elsevier.
Leave a Reply