Formal and non-formal education for individuals with vision impairment or multiple disabilities and vision impairment

Purpose Augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) is an intervention approach that can promote communication and language in children with multiple disabilities who are beginning communicators. While a wide range of AAC technologies are available, little is known about the comparative effects of specific technology options. Given that engagement can be low for beginning communicators with multiple disabilities, the current study provides initial information about the comparative effects of 2 AAC technology options—high-tech visual scene displays (VSDs) and low-tech isolated picture symbols—on engagement. Method Three elementary-age beginning communicators with multiple disabilities participated. The study used a single-subject, alternating treatment design with each technology serving as a condition. Participants interacted with their school speech-language pathologists using each of the 2 technologies across 5 sessions in a block randomized order. Results According to visual analysis and nonoverlap of all pairs calculations, all 3 participants demonstrated more engagement with the high-tech VSDs than the low-tech isolated picture symbols as measured by their seconds of gaze toward each technology option. Despite the difference in engagement observed, there was no clear difference across the 2 conditions in engagement toward the communication partner or use of the AAC. Conclusions Clinicians can consider measuring engagement when evaluating AAC technology options for children with multiple disabilities and should consider evaluating high-tech VSDs as 1 technology option for them. Future research must explore the extent to which differences in engagement to particular AAC technologies result in differences in communication and language learning over time as might be expected.

Download Full-text

Classification of Infant Vocalizations by Untrained Listeners

Journal of Speech Language and Hearing Research ◽

10.1044/2019_jslhr-s-18-0494 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 62 (9) ◽

pp. 3265-3275

Author(s):

Heather L. Ramsdell-Hudock ◽

Anne S. Warlaumont ◽

Lindsey E. Foss ◽

Candice Perry

Keyword(s):

Formal Education ◽

Additional Insight ◽

Listener Responses ◽

Infant Vocalization ◽

Early Infant ◽

Infant Vocalizations ◽

Audio Recordings ◽

Speech And Language Development ◽

Insight Into

Purpose To better enable communication among researchers, clinicians, and caregivers, we aimed to assess how untrained listeners classify early infant vocalization types in comparison to terms currently used by researchers and clinicians. Method Listeners were caregivers with no prior formal education in speech and language development. A 1st group of listeners reported on clinician/researcher-classified vowel, squeal, growl, raspberry, whisper, laugh, and cry vocalizations obtained from archived video/audio recordings of 10 infants from 4 through 12 months of age. A list of commonly used terms was generated based on listener responses and the standard research terminology. A 2nd group of listeners was presented with the same vocalizations and asked to select terms from the list that they thought best described the sounds. Results Classifications of the vocalizations by listeners largely overlapped with published categorical descriptors and yielded additional insight into alternate terms commonly used. The biggest discrepancies were found for the vowel category. Conclusion Prior research has shown that caregivers are accurate in identifying canonical babbling, a major prelinguistic vocalization milestone occurring at about 6–7 months of age. This indicates that caregivers are also well attuned to even earlier emerging vocalization types. This supports the value of continuing basic and clinical research on the vocal types infants produce in the 1st months of life and on their potential diagnostic utility, and may also help improve communication between speech-language pathologists and families.

Download Full-text