A discussion of the benefits and limitations of the technique is included, highlighting the utility of the technique to the field of speech-language pathology.

To advance use of the ICF in education, it is important to incorporate the measurement of both knowledge acquisition and behavior change related to ICF-based programs. Ultimately, widespread implementation of the ICF represents not only a substantial opportunity but also poses a significant challenge.

This study examines preschoolers' acquisition of the maxims of the Cooperative Principle and the sociocognitive scaffolds that support this acquisition. In Study 1, 84 children between 3 and 5 years old were required to make passive judgments of violations of the Cooperative Principle. Results showed that children consistently identified violations of the Cooperative Principle and their performance improved with age. In Study 2, a subgroup of 38 children between 3 and 4 years old completed a standard false belief (Theory of Mind) task. Both groups identified violations of the Cooperative Principle at a level better than chance, although neither age group passed the false belief task at a level better than chance. This study joins previous research in placing the emergence of the Cooperative Principle in the preschool years. Results also suggest that false belief understanding is not a prerequisite for recognizing violated maxims of the Cooperative Principle in routine conversational exchanges. 333Wenonah Campbell is currently located

Purpose The purpose of this article is to explore and describe the approaches and specific assessment tools that speech-language pathologists are currently using to assess social communication disorders (SCDs) in children, in relation to current best practices. Method Ninety-four speech-language pathologists completed an online survey asking them to identify which of the following approaches they use to assess children with SCD: parent/teacher report, naturalistic observation, formal assessment, language sample analysis, interviews, semistructured tasks, and peer/self-report. Participants were also asked to identify specific assessment tools they use within each approach. Results Participants most commonly assess SCDs by combining interviews, naturalistic observation, language sampling, parent/teacher report, and formal assessment. Semistructured tasks and peer/self-report tools were less frequently utilized. Several established parent/teacher report and formal assessment tools were commonly identified for assessing SCDs. Most participants use an informal approach for interviews, language sampling, and naturalistic observations in their SCD assessment process. Conclusions Generally, participants follow best practices for assessing SCDs by combining several different approaches. Some considerations for future assessment are identified, including the use of established protocols in the place of informal approaches in order to make the assessment of SCDs more systematic. Future directions for research are discussed.