Face-to-face testing procedures, or conventional administration, have been the mainstay of language assessment for children. However, automated administration has the potential to improve clinician efficiency, accessibility to resources, administration standardization, and even child engagement. There is little evidence for score equivalency for this new assessment approach, despite potential benefits from automated evaluation. In this project, we evaluate the equivalence of scores across conditions for four expressive subtests of a modified common language assessment: Expressive Vocabulary (EV), Recalling Sentences (RS), Word Structure (WS), and Formulated Sentences (FS).