What is the Fluharty-2? The preschool speech and language screener explained

The Fluharty Preschool Speech and Language Screening Test, Second Edition (Fluharty-2) is a brief screening test that identifies children ages 3 years, 0 months through 6 years, 11 months who should be referred for a complete speech and language evaluation. Written by Nancy Buono Fluharty and published by PRO-ED in 2000, it is administered one on one and takes about 10 minutes. The Fluharty-2 is a screener. It does not diagnose a speech or language disorder, and it is not an IQ test. A low score simply tells the adults in a child's life that a fuller look by a speech-language pathologist is worth the time. This article walks through the five subtests, how scoring and referral work, what a full evaluation involves, and where the Fluharty-2's strengths and limits lie.

According to PRO-ED's product description, the Fluharty-2 contains five subtests: Articulation, Repeating Sentences, Responding to Directives and Answering Questions, Describing Actions, and Sequencing Events. Together they sample the two broad sides of early communication, understanding language ("receptive language") and producing it ("expressive language"), along with speech-sound production ("articulation"). The subtest names describe the tasks in plain terms.

• Articulation: samples how the child produces speech sounds. The record form also gives the examiner space to note "phonological process" errors (systematic sound-pattern simplifications), voice quality, and fluency, so useful clinical observations are captured even in a short session.

• Repeating Sentences: the child repeats sentences spoken by the examiner, a widely used way to sample expressive grammar and verbal memory in young children.

• Responding to Directives and Answering Questions: the child follows spoken instructions and answers questions, which taps receptive language, or how well the child understands what is said.

• Describing Actions: the child puts what is happening into words, sampling expressive vocabulary and sentence use.

• Sequencing Events: the child relates events in order, sampling the early narrative skills that matter for classroom language.

The kit keeps the tasks concrete and age appropriate: it includes a picture book and a set of 12 colored blocks that the examiner uses during administration. The publisher describes the test as quick to administer and appealing to children, which matters when the examinee is three years old.

The Fluharty-2 is "norm-referenced," meaning a child's performance is compared with that of other children the same age rather than judged against a fixed pass-fail checklist. It reports "standard scores" on the familiar scale with a mean of 100 and a "standard deviation" (a measure of how spread out scores are) of 15 points, for both the subtests and the composites. It also reports "percentiles," which tell you the percentage of same-age children in the norm group scoring at or below a given score, and age equivalents for the composites. Scores summarize performance in four areas: articulation, receptive language, expressive language, and general (composite) language.

The purpose of all this arithmetic is a single practical decision. PRO-ED states that the Fluharty-2 "provides rapid identification of those preschool children for whom a complete speech and language evaluation is recommended." Scores that fall well below the average range signal that referral, using the guidance in the examiner's manual; the publisher does not post a specific numeric cutoff publicly, and screening programs should follow the manual rather than an improvised threshold. The record form also includes Teacher Questionnaires so that examiners can fold in classroom observations when screening children in school settings.

The most important thing to understand about the Fluharty-2 is its job description. The American Speech-Language-Hearing Association is explicit that screening does not result in a diagnosis; it indicates the potential need for further language, speech sound, or hearing assessment. A child who scores below the referral point has not been diagnosed with anything. A child who passes has not been certified as developing typically. The screener sorts children into "probably fine for now" and "worth a closer look," and it does that in about 10 minutes.

The Fluharty-2 is also not an intelligence test. IQ tests such as the RIOT IQ test or the Wechsler scales estimate general cognitive ability across domains like reasoning, spatial ability, and memory. The Fluharty-2 samples speech and language only, and briefly at that. A preschooler can lag in early language for reasons that have nothing to do with intelligence, including hearing problems, limited exposure, or simply a slower start that resolves. In the same way, a strong screening result says nothing about IQ. Parents who receive a Fluharty-2 report should read the numbers as a snapshot of communication skills on one day, not as a verdict on their child's mind.

When a screening flags a child, the next step is a comprehensive assessment by a speech-language pathologist. ASHA describes this as a comprehensive and linguistically appropriate evaluation that typically includes a case history covering birth, medical, and developmental background, an examination of the structures and function of the mouth used for speech, a hearing screening, and direct assessment of language across sound production, vocabulary, grammar, and social use of language.

Diagnostic instruments are the core of that direct assessment, and they go far deeper than any screener. The Preschool Language Scales, Fifth Edition is a comprehensive language measure normed from birth through 7 years, 11 months, so it covers the entire Fluharty-2 age range. For children at the upper end, the Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals, Fifth Edition covers ages 5 through 21. Where the Fluharty-2 spends 10 minutes deciding whether to look closer, these batteries spend an hour or more mapping exactly which language skills are affected and how severely, which is what a diagnosis and a treatment plan require.

The Fluharty-2 has genuine strengths for its narrow job, and genuine limits that parents and screening programs should keep in view.

• Strength, speed with real norms: the test pairs a 10-minute administration with norm-referenced standard scores and percentiles, which is more statistical grounding than informal checklists offer.

• Strength, documented development: PRO-ED reports reliability coefficients that support individual administration, criterion validity studies comparing the subtests with the TOLD-P:3 composites, and item reviews indicating little or no bias across gender, disability, racial, socioeconomic, or ethnic groups.

• Limitation, aging and modest norms: the norm sample was 705 children in 21 states, built to match the United States population of 1998 and projections for 2000. That sample is small by modern standards and now more than two decades old, and children's typical performance can drift over time. Our article on why a norm sample matters for test accuracy explains why the age and size of a norm group affect every score a test reports.

• Limitation, screening error is real: in the 2024 evidence review for the US Preventive Services Task Force, published in JAMA, the median "sensitivity" (the share of truly affected children a tool flags) across 23 speech and language screening instruments was 86 percent and the median "specificity" (the share of unaffected children it correctly passes) was 87 percent, with very wide ranges across tools. Some children with real difficulties pass screeners, and some typically developing children get flagged.

• Limitation, the evidence base for universal screening is thin: the Task Force concluded in January 2024 that current evidence is insufficient to weigh the benefits and harms of routinely screening all children age 5 and younger. That is a statement about missing research rather than a recommendation against screening, and clinicians are advised to use judgment case by case.

Most of the technical evidence summarized on the product page comes from the test's own development research, so programs adopting the Fluharty-2 should watch for independent studies in their own populations.

If your child is screened with the Fluharty-2, ask for the actual numbers, including the standard scores and percentiles, and ask what referral criterion was used. Treat a referral as useful information rather than bad news: early evaluation is low risk, and if a real delay exists, earlier support tends to help. Treat a pass with similar calm, and keep raising concerns with your pediatrician if your own observations say something is off, since no 10-minute sample of behavior outranks months of parental observation combined with professional follow-up.

The same score literacy applies at every age. For adults 18 and older who want a rigorous measure of their own cognitive abilities, the RIOT IQ test (the Reasoning and Intelligence Online Test), developed by RIOT IQ with psychometrician Dr. Russell T. Warne, uses 15 subtests across six cognitive indices (verbal reasoning, fluid reasoning, spatial ability, working memory, processing speed, and reaction time), takes about 52 minutes, and reports scores on the same mean-100, standard-deviation-15 scale described above. Like any online measure, it does not replace an individually administered diagnostic evaluation, and that honesty about what a score can and cannot tell you is exactly the habit worth modeling for the next generation of test takers.

No. The Fluharty-2 is a speech and language screener. It samples articulation, receptive language, and expressive language to decide whether a child should be referred for a full speech-language evaluation. It does not measure general cognitive ability and cannot produce an IQ score.

The publisher lists the age range as 3 years, 0 months through 6 years, 11 months, so it spans preschool through kindergarten and into early first grade.

About 10 minutes per child, administered individually by an examiner using the picture book and colored blocks in the kit.

The child is referred for a comprehensive evaluation by a speech-language pathologist, which typically includes a case history, a hearing screening, an oral mechanism examination, and in-depth diagnostic language testing. Only that full evaluation can identify a disorder or rule one out.

Standard scores with a mean of 100 and a standard deviation of 15, plus percentiles, for the subtests and composites, along with age equivalents for the composites. Scores cover articulation, receptive language, expressive language, and general language.

Reasonably good but far from perfect. The 2024 evidence review for the US Preventive Services Task Force found median sensitivity of 86 percent and median specificity of 87 percent across 23 instruments, with wide variation between tools, so both missed cases and false alarms occur.

1. PRO-ED. (2000). Fluharty-2: Fluharty Preschool Speech and Language Screening Test, Second Edition, complete kit [Product page]. proedinc.com

2. American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. (n.d.). Spoken language disorders [Practice Portal]. asha.org

3. US Preventive Services Task Force. (2024). Speech and language delay and disorders in children age 5 years or younger: Screening [Recommendation statement]. uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org

4. Feltner, C., Wallace, I. F., Nowell, S., Orr, C. J., Raffa, B., Middleton, J. C., Vaughan, J., Baker, C., Chou, R., & Kahwati, L. (2024). Screening for speech and language delay and disorders in children 5 years or younger: Evidence report and systematic review for the US Preventive Services Task Force. JAMA, 331(4), 335-351. doi.org

5. Pearson. (n.d.). Preschool Language Scales, Fifth Edition (PLS-5) [Product page]. pearsonassessments.com

6. Pearson. (n.d.). Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals, Fifth Edition (CELF-5) [Product page]. pearsonassessments.com

Sally V, CC BY-SA 4.0, via Wikimedia Commons