Comprehensive languageTOLD-P:5Ages 4;0–8;11

Test of Language Development - Primary, Fifth Edition

TOLD-P:5 is the comprehensive language battery for the early elementary range, valued for strong sentence-level grammar subtests and competitive psychometrics.

At a glance

Publisher
PRO-ED
Edition year
2019
Age range
4;0–8;11
Domain
Comprehensive language
Administration time
30–60 minutes

Standard scores for this battery use a mean of 100 and a standard deviation of 15 unless noted otherwise in the publisher manual. Always cross-reference against the current edition of the manual before clinical use — publishers update norms and scoring tables on regular cycles.

What TOLD-P:5 is

The Test of Language Development - Primary, Fifth Edition is the early elementary alternative to CELF-5 and CASL-2 in the four-to-nine age window. TOLD-P:5 is built around nine subtests organised across listening, organising, and speaking domains, plus a Spoken Language composite that functions as the headline standard score. The battery is published by PRO-ED and is widely used in private practice and university clinic settings, although it has lower district-level penetration than CELF-5. TOLD-P:5 is particularly strong on sentence-level grammar and morphology probes, which are clinically meaningful for the developmental language disorder population in the primary grades.

Subtests and structure

  • Picture Vocabulary
  • Relational Vocabulary
  • Oral Vocabulary
  • Syntactic Understanding
  • Sentence Imitation
  • Morphological Completion
  • Word Discrimination
  • Phonemic Analysis
  • Word Articulation

What TOLD-P:5 measures

TOLD-P:5 measures three overlapping constructs through its three domain organisation: listening (receptive vocabulary, syntactic understanding, and word discrimination), organising (relational vocabulary and morphological completion as integration tasks), and speaking (expressive vocabulary, sentence imitation, and word articulation). The Spoken Language composite functions as a Core score for school decisions. The Sentence Imitation subtest is highly correlated with developmental language disorder identification and is one of the more clinically sensitive single tasks in the early elementary range. Morphological Completion uses an item format similar to the classic Wug test and probes productive morphology in elicited contexts.

Strengths and limitations

Strengths

  • Strong sentence-level grammar coverage for the early elementary range
  • Sentence Imitation is one of the most sensitive single subtests for DLD identification
  • Morphological Completion probes productive morphology directly
  • Competitive normative sample size and reliability for the age range

Limitations

  • Lower district-level recognition than CELF-5 in many U.S. school systems
  • Word Articulation subtest is too brief for clinical articulation diagnosis
  • Listening domain composite can be inflated by single-word vocabulary breadth
  • Age range is narrow compared with CELF-5 — does not extend past age 8;11

How language sample analysis complements TOLD-P:5

TOLD-P:5 has good sentence-level grammar coverage but it is still a structured-task battery. A connected-speech sample captures the spontaneous use of the morphology TOLD-P:5 elicits — and a child can perform well on Morphological Completion with prompted item formats while still omitting tense and agreement marking in conversational play. Pair TOLD-P:5 with a 50-utterance language sample scored for MLU-M, percent grammatical utterances, and Brown's morpheme tracking, and the combined picture is much stronger than the standardised composite alone. Sentence Imitation correlates with grammatical maturity in connected speech but it is not a substitute for measuring the speech itself, especially for IEP goal-writing where you need to anchor targets in functional production.

When the school will only fund one comprehensive battery and the child is six, TOLD-P:5 Sentence Imitation often catches what CELF-5 will miss. Use it on private intake even if the school later runs CELF-5.
Catch what the school will miss

References

  1. Newcomer, P. L., & Hammill, D. D. (2019). Test of Language Development - Primary, Fifth Edition. PRO-ED.
  2. Conti-Ramsden, G., Botting, N., & Faragher, B. (2001). Psycholinguistic markers for specific language impairment (SLI). Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 42(6), 741–748.
  3. Spaulding, T. J., Plante, E., & Farinella, K. A. (2006). Eligibility criteria for language impairment: Is the low end of normal always appropriate? LSHSS, 37(1), 61–72.