scholarly journals Model for Vocabulary Selection of Sensitive Topics: An Example from Pain-Related Vocabulary

2017 ◽  
Vol 38 (04) ◽  
pp. 276-285
Author(s):  
Juan Bornman ◽  
Kerstin Tönsing ◽  
Ensa Johnson
Keyword(s):  
Augmentative And Alternative Communication ◽  
Communication Systems ◽  
Alternative Communication ◽  
Sensitive Topics ◽  
Communication Difficulties ◽  
Graphic Symbol ◽  
Children's Pain ◽  
Core Vocabulary ◽  
Sensitive Issues ◽  
Selection Of

AbstractVocabulary selection for graphic symbol-based augmentative and alternative communication systems is important to enable persons with significant communication difficulties to express a variety of communication functions to indicate needs and wants, to develop social closeness, and to fulfill social etiquette. For persons who experience pain, abuse, bullying, or neglect, it is essential to be able to communicate about sensitive issues. However, published core vocabulary lists allow limited scope for communicating about sensitive topics, due mainly to the techniques employed to determine such lists (e.g., observations or recording of communication patterns of peers with typical development during fun-based or daily activities). This article is based on the outcome of a study of children's pain-related vocabulary. Based on the study, we propose a model for selecting vocabulary on sensitive topics. The model consists of four phases: (1) using hypothetical scenarios; (2) considering different perspectives that may affect vocabulary selection; (3) involving direct stakeholders, and (4) customizing vocabulary.

Production and comprehension of graphic symbol utterances expressing complex propositions by adults who use augmentative and alternative communication systems

2004 ◽  
Vol 25 (3) ◽  
pp. 349-371 ◽  
Author(s):  
ANN SUTTON ◽  
JILL P. MORFORD ◽  
TANYA M. GALLAGHER
Keyword(s):  
Word Order ◽  
Relative Clause ◽  
Augmentative And Alternative Communication ◽  
Communication Systems ◽  
Alternative Communication ◽  
Complex Sentences ◽  
Graphic Symbol ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Symbol Display ◽  
Voice Output

We explored production and comprehension of complex sentences constructed using a limited vocabulary on a graphic symbol display with voice output by 25 adults who use augmentative and alternative communication. When asked to construct subject (SS) and object (OS) relative clause sentences, only a minority of participants encoded SS and OS relative clause sentences using different word orders. When asked to interpret graphic symbol utterances, most participants chose an SS interpretation. Thus, the word order used most frequently in production appeared to have a single preferred interpretation. The relationship between the word orders produced in graphic symbol utterances and the way the same word orders are interpreted is not necessarily straightforward.

scholarly journals Early Sentence Productions of 3- and 4-Year-Old Children Who Use Augmentative and Alternative Communication

2017 ◽  
Vol 60 (7) ◽  
pp. 1930-1945 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cathy Binger ◽  
Jennifer Kent-Walsh ◽  
Marika King ◽  
Lindsay Mansfield
Keyword(s):  
Augmentative And Alternative Communication ◽  
Communication Systems ◽  
Single Case ◽  
Receptive Language ◽  
Speech Disorders ◽  
Alternative Communication ◽  
Baseline Phase ◽  
Rule Based ◽  
Graphic Symbols ◽  
Graphic Symbol

Purpose This study investigated the early rule-based sentence productions of 3- and 4-year-old children with severe speech disorders who used single-meaning graphic symbols to communicate. Method Ten 3- and 4-year-olds requiring the use of augmentative and alternative communication, who had largely intact receptive language skills, received instruction in producing up to four different semantic–syntactic targets using an Apple iPad with a communication app. A single-case, multiple-probe, across-targets design was used to assess the progress of each participant and target. Generalization to new vocabulary was assessed, and a subgroup also was taught to produce sentences using grammatical markers. Results Some targets (primarily possessor-entity) were mastered in the baseline phase, and the majority of the remaining targets were mastered during intervention. All four children who completed intervention for grammatical markers quickly learned to use the markers accurately. Conclusions Expressive language potential for preschoolers using graphic symbol–based augmentative and alternative communication systems should not be underestimated. With appropriate presentation and intervention techniques, some preschoolers with profound speech disorders can readily learn to produce rule-based messages via graphic symbols.

Implementing Aided Augmentative Communication Systems With Persons Having Complex Communicative Needs

2019 ◽  
Vol 43 (6) ◽  
pp. 841-878 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joe Reichle ◽  
Jessica Simacek ◽  
Sanikan Wattanawongwan ◽  
Jennifer Ganz
Keyword(s):  
Best Practices ◽  
Communication Skills ◽  
Augmentative And Alternative Communication ◽  
Communication Systems ◽  
Alternative Communication ◽  
Limited Evidence ◽  
Communication Mode ◽  
Complex Communication Needs ◽  
Communication Needs ◽  
Selection Of

Augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) systems can support communication skills for people with significant developmental disabilities who experience complex communication needs (CCNs). There is a need to tailor best practices in AAC assessment and intervention to create individualized communication systems with this population. In this article, we outline the important components of AAC systems that can be implemented in authentic settings. However, given the limited evidence on AAC interventions specific to people with CCNs, we also identify some priority areas for future inquiry. Among these involve strategies to enhance decision making regarding (a) matching communication mode(s) to learner skills and contextual demands, (b) identifying communicative opportunities and obligations, (c) individualizing aided communication display features, (d) selection of vocabulary specificity, and (e) considering dosage parameters needed to acquire and maintain a communicative repertoire. In addition, we briefly discuss the use of telehealth to enhance intervention capability.

Construction of graphic symbol sequences by preschool-aged children: Learning, training, and maintenance

2011 ◽  
Vol 34 (1) ◽  
pp. 91-109 ◽  
Author(s):  
ANNICK POUPART ◽  
NATACHA TRUDEAU ◽  
ANN SUTTON
Keyword(s):  
Augmentative And Alternative Communication ◽  
Communication Systems ◽  
Age Groups ◽  
Alternative Communication ◽  
Simple Sentence ◽  
Symbol Sequence ◽  
Initial Testing ◽  
Graphic Symbol ◽  
Symbol Sequences ◽  
Sentence Subject

ABSTRACTThe use of augmentative and alternative communication systems based on graphic symbols requires children to learn to combine symbols to convey utterances. The current study investigated how children without disabilities aged 4 to 6 years (n = 74) performed on a simple sentence (subject–verb and subject–verb–object) transposition task (i.e., spoken model into graphic symbol sequence). Scores were obtained on initial testing, after training, and 1 month later. Error patterns were examined. Four-year-olds obtained significantly lower initial scores and were the only ones showing training effects and lower performance a month later. The distribution of error types was similar across age groups. These results suggest that the age of 4 may represent an important stage in the use of graphic symbol communication.

Instruction Using Augmentative and Alternative Communication Supports: Description of Current Practices by Speech-Language Pathologists Who Work With Children With Autism Spectrum Disorder

2020 ◽  
Vol 29 (2) ◽  
pp. 586-596 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kaitlyn A. Clarke ◽  
Diane L. Williams
Keyword(s):  
Autism Spectrum Disorder ◽  
Augmentative And Alternative Communication ◽  
Communication Systems ◽  
Diagnostic Category ◽  
Children With Autism ◽  
Autism Spectrum ◽  
Spectrum Disorder ◽  
Alternative Communication ◽  
Speech Language Pathologists ◽  
Processing Differences

Purpose The aim of this research study was to examine common practices of speech-language pathologists (SLPs) who work with children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) with respect to whether or not SLPs consider processing differences in ASD or the effects of input during their instruction. Method Following a qualitative research method, how SLPs instruct and present augmentative and alternative communication systems to individuals with ASD, their rationale for method selection, and their perception of the efficacy of selected interventions were probed. Semistructured interviews were conducted as part of an in-depth case report with content analysis. Results Based on completed interviews, 4 primary themes were identified: (a) instructional method , (b) input provided , (c) decision-making process , and (d) perceived efficacy of treatment . Additionally, one secondary theme, training and education received , was identified . Conclusions Clinicians reported making decisions based on the needs of the child; however, they also reported making decisions based on the diagnostic category that characterized the child (i.e., ASD). The use of modeling when teaching augmentative and alternative communication to individuals with ASD emerged as a theme, but variations in the method of modeling were noted. SLPs did not report regularly considering processing differences in ASD, nor did they consider the effects of input during instruction.

Thoughts on Grammar Intervention in AAC

2008 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 43-49 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marc Fey
Keyword(s):  
Language Impairment ◽  
Specific Language Impairment ◽  
Augmentative And Alternative Communication ◽  
Communication Systems ◽  
Target Language ◽  
Alternative Communication ◽  
Physical Limitations ◽  
Communication Needs ◽  
Communication Interventions ◽  
Planning Intervention

Abstract In this article, I propose that, for several reasons, grammar should be an early focus of communication interventions for young children using augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) systems. The basic goals for such programs should be to facilitate the child's comprehension of the language of the community, or the target language, thus leading the way to literacy, and to foster the child's use of symbol combinations that mirror the grammatical patterns of speaking children acquiring the target language, even if they cannot be fully grammatically complete. I introduce five principles that underlie most successful approaches to grammar interventions with children with specific language impairment. My initial attempts to apply these principles to interventions with children with complex communication needs indicate that they may be of considerable value to clinicians planning intervention programs. On the other hand, the challenges posed by the intellectual and physical limitations of many AAC users and their communication systems make it necessary to modify at least Principle 5 if the basic goals of intervention are to be met.

Guidelines for Teaching Speech-Language Pathologists About the AAC Assessment Process

2011 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 82-86
Author(s):  
Iris Fishman
Keyword(s):  
Augmentative And Alternative Communication ◽  
Communication Systems ◽  
Feature Matching ◽  
Assessment Process ◽  
High Tech ◽  
Alternative Communication ◽  
Team Process ◽  
Basic Principles ◽  
Communication Needs ◽  
The Individual

Abstract Although students may not become augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) clinical specialists, they often will work with individuals demonstrating complex communication needs who benefit from AAC. This necessitates knowledge of some basic principles of assessment including AAC assessment as a team process involving planning and implementing interventions for current and future communication needs; the inclusion of no-tech, low-tech, and high-tech communication systems; and assessing communication needs with partners in the individual's social network. The assessment also must include a capability profile and feature matching to select the appropriate components of the AAC system. Because the system we provide for today will become the system we use tomorrow, assessment must be considered an ongoing process throughout the lifespan of the individual.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document