Which pair of test procedures would be most useful to identify whether a child has a motor planning disorder versus a phonological planning disorder?

• A. Oral Mechanism Examination, Goldman‐Fristoe Test of Articulation
• B. Syllable Repetition Task, Maximum Performance Test (especially trisyllable repetition)
• C. Electropalatography, measures of tongue strength
• D. Word Inconsistency Test, Comprehensive Test of Phonological Processing

Answer: (B)

Testing motor planning versus phonological planning relies on tasks that separate planning of speech movement from planning of phonological representations. The syllable repetition task requires the child to plan and sequence a series of motor gestures to produce multisyllabic strings, a demand that grows with trisyllables. Pairing this with a maximum performance test pushes speed and accuracy to the limit, revealing whether rapid, sequential motor programming breaks down. If a child shows relatively good performance on simple, single-syllable productions but struggles on longer, faster sequences, this pattern points to a motor planning (apraxia-like) issue. In contrast, difficulties that reflect problems with representing or manipulating sounds—phonological planning—would show up more in tasks that target phonological processing rather than the motor sequencing demands of multisyllabic production. The other options focus on structural checks or phonological processing measures that don’t directly probe the motor sequencing abilities that distinguish motor planning from phonological planning.