Augmentative and Alternative Communication最新文献

Special education teachers support students with complex communication needs across the day. Yet, evidence suggests that these professionals are entering the field without being fully prepared to support these students by having the knowledge and skill to implement augmentative and alternative communication practices. The lack of preparedness from these professionals creates barriers for students with complex communication needs, their families, and other team members. To gather information from special education teachers' point of view, a nationwide survey was disseminated with the purpose of identifying the most beneficial component of their training to support students with complex communication needs. Five themes were identified from the views of 792 special education teachers, with the most beneficial components of their training consisting of 'access to content,' followed by 'opportunities to practice.' Recommendations, practical implications, and future research directions are discussed.

Alternative access methods accommodate an individual's specific physical disability, by adjusting the typical keyboard/mouse/touchscreen interface or using an alternative interface such as head controls, eye trackers, or switches. Ideally, they allow for efficient and comfortable use of any computing device, such as laptops, tablets, and smartphones. This paper reviews the literature to address two main questions: how well do existing access methods meet users' needs? And what is the best way to choose the "right" access method(s) for a given individual? We report on typing speeds for various access methods across 57 studies, as well as experimental multimodal access methods across 34 papers. Results support the intuitive understanding that the access method affects the end user's experience and productivity. We also reviewed 33 papers and resources related to alternative access assessment and service provision. Existing evidence remains emerging and suggests that use of a systematic, user-centered approach to alternative access assessment may reap significant benefits, including better team performance and improved user satisfaction. Yet although many alternative access assessment resources are available, providers may not always use them. While today's alternative access methods can be an impactful means of enabling participation for people with physical disabilities, there is room for improvement, both in the access methods themselves, as well as their associated service provision and support. To identify and implement these improvements, the field needs research and development that is fully inclusive of people with disabilities in all phases of the work. We list some additional priorities for future work.

Ableism is a form of oppression with pernicious consequences for people who use AAC. Historically, Ableist ideologies led to attempts to erase disability from the social fabric (e.g., the Eugenics movement). Speechism is the prejudice and discrimination of people because their language, use of language, or mode of expression is deemed inferior. Speechism and Ableism obstruct the true reality of the experiences of people who use AAC. Ableism presumes that the abled-bodied experience is the only legitimate and valid experience and does not recognize that many disabled people experience their lives very differently. This perspective makes invisible the ableist experiences that disabled people have to face in many facets of our lives. This problem is compounded for people who use AAC who may face challenges explaining the full extent and impact of these ableist experiences. As an AAC community, we must confront Ableism in our field and industry by always prioritizing the lived experiences of people who use AAC in the development of AAC technology and policy. People who use AAC must be at the decision table regarding everything that involves us as a community. We can have an anti-ableist future only if disabled people lead the way.

Society generally, and communication partners specifically, wield substantial power in determining access to augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) tools and controlling the opportunities for participation afforded to people who cannot rely on speech alone to be heard and understood. This paper integrates the lived experiences of people who need or use AAC with key research findings related to policy, practice, technology, attitude, knowledge, and skill barriers in society that limit people who need or use AAC. Future research and technology development is urgently required to dismantle societal barriers to ensure access to AAC and meaningful opportunities to participate in all aspects of society - education, employment, healthcare, leisure, family, and community.

This paper is a personal commentary about disability inclusion and representation in research that was based on remarks given in person at the Future of AAC Research Summit on May 13, 2024. Drawing upon her experiences as a Paralympic medalist, disabled woman, person of color, researcher, and activist, the author describes the critical need for (1) diverse researchers as the generators of the science; (2) diverse individuals as study participants; and (3) diverse representation in the knowledge translation materials we produce and disseminate about the research. We need all of these, and we are stronger for them. Our science is better with this intentionality; it makes people feel seen by the research we are doing and signals its relevancy.

This paper focuses on reducing social isolation for people who cannot rely on spoken words to communicate. It is based on my experiences and perspectives. Technology has made social inclusion easier and harder. Sending emails or texts has opened doors. Technology has also sped up communication. It can be hard to find space in conversations. I use different communication methods depending on the situation, my message, or the listener. Using my voice with patient, familiar communication partners is the best way to express myself. Talking to others can be a frustrating experience. Sometimes I ask others to revoice my words. Paid communication supporters are difficult to find, train, and retain. For messages to new communication partners, I pre-type my thoughts into my AAC. The robotic voice is not my voice. It is another piece of technology that highlights how differently we interact with the world. We can advocate for a world where all AAC users are valued and included by: designing technology that adapts to the needs of each user; funding qualified communication supporters; implementing stronger employment policies; creating access to AAC that goes beyond functional needs; building community; and educating communication partners to assume competence and be patient listeners.

Literacy supports participation in education, employment, healthcare, and community living, and enhances communication for individuals who need or use augmentative and alternative communication (AAC). Research has demonstrated that individuals with developmental disabilities who need or use AAC can successfully acquire a wide range of literacy skills when provided with effective tools and evidence-based, adapted instruction delivered by trained professionals. Unfortunately, individuals who need or use AAC typically face significant barriers to literacy learning: (1) They may be excluded from literacy instruction or only have access to instruction that requires spoken responses severely limiting their participation; (2) Their service providers may not be trained to provide effective instruction; and (3) They may not have access to AAC that supports the transition to literacy. Future research is urgently required to: develop and evaluate adapted assessment and instruction; improve professional training; and ensure uptake of evidence-based literacy instruction in schools. Future technology development is required to: support the transition from graphic symbols to literacy; build a text-rich environment to support literacy learning; and assist service providers in instructional decision making and material adaptation. Future research and development must prioritize inclusion of individuals who use AAC in meaningful roles to maximize relevancy and impact.

Sharing personal stories with others is essential to human interaction and language development. To communicate, individuals use a variety of semiotic resources, including images, symbols, and written and spoken language. These modes are deployed in the co-construction of a daily face-to-face conversation. A self-created film can serve as a valuable resource to facilitate a deeper understanding of a personal experience, especially where spoken or written language may present a challenge, for example, for people who rely on augmentative and alternative communication (AAC). Although the AAC literature indicates that using videos delivers benefits for aided communicators, guidelines on how to self-create, use, and transcribe them are rare. The present paper, a tutorial, describes how people who use AAC can develop a personal-video-scene (PVS) via the Film as Observable Communication (FaOC) method to utilize self-created films in sharing their stories. The first part of this paper, the theoretical framework, describes theories, methods, and practices from the fields of AAC, social semiotics, and visual anthropology, on which the FaOC method is based. The second part provides a step-by-step tutorial delivering practical guidance on how to create, use, and transcribe the PVS as a resource in conversations.

This paper explores the intricate relationship between people who use Augmentative and Alternative Communication (AAC) and their AAC devices. Drawing upon insights from phenomenology, I conducted a modified systematic review to explore the enduring phenomenon of low AAC device adoption and as a means to unravel the moments of embodiment and disembodiment experienced by people who use AAC with their devices. The discussion begins with an introduction to phenomenology as a philosophical inquiry and the guiding principles I employed to explore the phenomenon, namely, parte extra parte and object embodiment. Subsequently, I analyze the hegemony of a device-centric approach within the AAC landscape and delve into the first-person experiences of people who use AAC in living with their devices. Lastly, I discuss the embodiment and disembodiment of people who use AAC with their devices, conceptualize the interrelationship between them, and provide future directions for a more holistic and participatory AAC development and investigation that centers on the lived experiences of people who use AAC.

The purpose of this study was to explore what speech-language pathologists (SLPs) who are AAC specialists see as advantages and disadvantages of providing AAC services via telehealth, how well tele-AAC assessments align with guidelines for in-person assessments, and how SLPs' perspectives of tele-AAC services changed post-COVID. Fifteen SLPs who are AAC specialists and experienced working with people with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis watched videos of speech generating device (SGD) assessments conducted via telehealth for eight people with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Using a checklist based on the AAC Clinical Assessment Project (AAC-CAP), the SLPs rated how comparable remote assessment was to in-person assessment, and described advantages and challenges. Across checklist elements, most participants rated AAC assessment via telemedicine as "same/comparable" to in-person assessment. The most common advantages of tele-AAC assessment were that tele-AAC was more functional, increased care partner availability, and increased clients' comfort at home. The most common challenges were technical difficulties and a limited comprehensive assessment due to the remote modality. Tele-AAC should be considered a viable assessment option as it may increase equitable access to care for more people with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Tools such as the AAC-CAP may help generalist SLPs increase their comfort and proficiency providing AAC services.