Mind Your Language
The language used to teach people communication skills and the manner in which it is used is very important. Almost everyone has had the experience of sitting in a lecture where the lecturer’s words have gone right over their heads. This may also be true of the language used to teach students with a learning difficulty:
The organizer pointed to the group I was in. ‘Group B will be in room 2'. A few moments later we were there, seated, expectant, notebooks ready. A small brisk man entered. He looked at us briefly, smiled and began to speak. In Urdu. It was 9.30 a.m. and coffee was not until 11. The door was shut. I suddenly realized that he was repeating something and pointing at me. Having no idea what he was saying, and fearing that he might by some oriental magic have divined my thoughts, I did the only thing possible - try to repeat what he had said. He smiled and nodded; I felt relieved and absurdly grateful. . . . . If an adult may be expected to feel exposed when placed in an alien (not necessarily a foreign) language environment, we need to ponder the thoughts and feelings, in a similarly exposed position, of a child who by comparison with the majority of his peers has suffered emotional, material, or cultural deprivation. (CREBER P. 1972 page 11)
The child selects and attends to talk that is within reach of his comprehension and ignores that which is not (WOOD D. 1988)
Why is speech comprehension an important issue for AAC system development and use? Speech comprehension provides an essential foundation upon which individuals can build productive language competence. It is developing even when an individual is not talking and can be a link across modalities when speech is not a viable productive mode. Speech comprehension, then, plays a silent, yet critical, role in the language development process and thus is essential to AAC system acquisition and use. (ROMSKI M. & SEVCIK R. 1993)
The organizer pointed to the group I was in. ‘Group B will be in room 2'. A few moments later we were there, seated, expectant, notebooks ready. A small brisk man entered. He looked at us briefly, smiled and began to speak. In Urdu. It was 9.30 a.m. and coffee was not until 11. The door was shut. I suddenly realized that he was repeating something and pointing at me. Having no idea what he was saying, and fearing that he might by some oriental magic have divined my thoughts, I did the only thing possible - try to repeat what he had said. He smiled and nodded; I felt relieved and absurdly grateful. . . . . If an adult may be expected to feel exposed when placed in an alien (not necessarily a foreign) language environment, we need to ponder the thoughts and feelings, in a similarly exposed position, of a child who by comparison with the majority of his peers has suffered emotional, material, or cultural deprivation. (CREBER P. 1972 page 11)
The child selects and attends to talk that is within reach of his comprehension and ignores that which is not (WOOD D. 1988)
Why is speech comprehension an important issue for AAC system development and use? Speech comprehension provides an essential foundation upon which individuals can build productive language competence. It is developing even when an individual is not talking and can be a link across modalities when speech is not a viable productive mode. Speech comprehension, then, plays a silent, yet critical, role in the language development process and thus is essential to AAC system acquisition and use. (ROMSKI M. & SEVCIK R. 1993)
LANGUAGE 2 - Task & Discussion Sheet
Uncover the information section. Ask the staff to say why ‘language itself’ is a problem. Give explanations and examples as necessary. Uncover the two tasks. Allow time (5 - 10 minutes is reasonable) for the staff to complete them. The discussion centres around the mythical language of Senojian. Working through each of the issues raised will, it is hoped, stimulate awareness of the problems encountered by pupils.
The Senojian phrase at number 4 is a metaphor it does not mean exactly what the words say. It means ‘This is a secret’. Think of other metaphors and what the pupils may make of them.
The six-year-old girl need not understand any of the words. She is reading the tutor’s body language and knows that he expects her to do something. She does what she has seen everyone do, place the cup on the saucer. We cannot be sure she understands any of the words spoken. We cannot be sure she can associate the words with the objects (‘cup’ and ‘saucer’) or the actions performed.
The Senojian phrase at number 4 is a metaphor it does not mean exactly what the words say. It means ‘This is a secret’. Think of other metaphors and what the pupils may make of them.
The six-year-old girl need not understand any of the words. She is reading the tutor’s body language and knows that he expects her to do something. She does what she has seen everyone do, place the cup on the saucer. We cannot be sure she understands any of the words spoken. We cannot be sure she can associate the words with the objects (‘cup’ and ‘saucer’) or the actions performed.
LANGUAGE 3 - Mind your language... There are children present
Spoken language is different from written language, which tends to be grammatical and occurs in short sentences that relate one to the other and in which embedded clauses are rare. However, spoken language is full of stops and starts and hesitations:
If you could see an exact sound-for-sound transcript of a real conversation, you would be shocked at how incomplete, sloppy and unfinished it is. Half-sentences, parts of words, interruptions: it’s almost incomprehensible ..... (INGRAM J. 1992)
A person may be side-tracked in the middle of a sentence only to return to it at some later point. We may nest embedded clauses to the nth degree:
AThat woman from the shop that the old lady with the straw hat you saw yesterday when you were out shopping for those nice biscuits you like at tea when you watch that Star Trek programme on the video you borrowed from your brother about the battle for the universe with the little sesame seeds in them owns who was wearing the blue dress is coming to dinner tomorrow.”
This can all be very confusing for the person beginning to learn a language.
The cartoon depicts some aspects of the problem. Ask the staff to suggest what mistakes the teacher is making. The teacher:
C moves from one topic to another;
C uses a long and unwieldy sentence;
C moves the focus of attention away from the topic;
C uses difficult grammatical structures;
C uses words which may not be understood by the pupils;
C falsely states that ‘talking’ is not required in biology.
The quote from Laurie Lee’s book ‘Cider with Rosie’ makes the point that children may easily misunderstand the words an adult uses. Make meaning explicit. Of course, teachers do not suffer from any of these problems - they are trained to make their language explicit and easy to comprehend - aren’t they?
The language of teachers gets more complex as the child moves up through school and also becomes less fluent as they deal with more difficult ideas. (BEVERIDGE M. & CONTI-RAMSDEN G. 1987)
As a person who trained as a teacher I admit I am guilty! When I taught language impaired students I often cringed when I reviewed the language I used in an average session. At first I did this by video-taping my teaching sessions. Later, primarily because I could not stand to watch myself on video, I turned to cassette tape (I listened in the car driving to work). I remember thinking how stupid I was when I heard myself saying (on tape) to a class of students with learning difficulties,
AThis is a generic example of fruit”
Yes, I should have known better! I did know better but that did not stop me from phrasing my spoken words in the most uncomprehensible manner from time to time. As I stated, I attempted to improve my technique by secretly recording it and listening to what I was saying in the car. No point in getting angry with myself, much better to try to improve. The use of the word ‘generic’ is an obvious example of a more subtle problem. Creber (CREBER P. 1972 page 16) recounts a story of an eight-year-old boy working hard at a reading book in which the narrative tells of a woodcutter who finds an injured bear and takes it home. He nurses it back to health whereupon it changes into a beautiful princess. Of course, they live happily ever after. However, when the boy retells this tale to the class he states that the woodcutter chops the bear into pieces when he comes across it in the woods. He goes on to tell the rest of the story which now seems even more implausible as the bear has apparently been savagely hacked into dog food. The boy’s teacher worked with the two accounts together until she came to a particular sentence, ‘the woodcutter saw the brown bear’:
All was now clear. ‘Saw’ as the past tense of the verb to see had, she realized, no place in David’s dialect: if he saw something yesterday he would repeat ‘I seen it’. In his dialect ‘saw’ would only denote an activity associated with precisely such people as woodcutters. (CREBER P. 1972)
People who use AAC may have considerable difficulties in understanding the language that facilitators use:
..... may still be in the process of developing spoken language comprehension skills. As part of their language profiles, they may evidence skills ranging from comprehension comparable to their chronological age to little or no comprehension of speech (ROMSKI M. & SEVCIK R. 1991, 1992). Like the children described by Nelson (NELSON K. 1973), individuals who comprehend speech come to the AAC acquisition task with already established spoken language knowledge (ROMSKI M. & SEVCIK R. 1992, ROMSKI M., SEVCIK R., & PATE J. 1988). Other children and adults who encounter significant difficulty comprehending speech require AAC systems to serve as both an input and an output mode (ROMSKI M. & SEVCIK R. 1993)
If some significant others use a language style which is alien and meaningless to an augmented communicator then there is a real danger of promoting passivity:
Every experience which leads him to conclude that the teacher is ‘talking in Spanish’ is in effect teaching him when listening is unnecessary and is imposing a restriction upon the range of situations in which he will be willing to trust words. Such a trust is a prerequisite of effective learning in school; the damage caused by a teacher’s incomprehensibility is to be measured not in terms of particular meaning loss, but of the cumulative effect of such experiences on the child’s attitude to learning. The real danger is that we may so condition him that he learns to accept his incomprehension. (CREBER P. 1972 page 30)
Donaldson (DONALDSON M. 1978, 1987) has suggested that one of the main problems of Piaget’s famous conservation experiments (see LEE V. & DAS GUPTA P. 1995, chapter 1 for a brief review) is that the child’s understanding of the experimenter’s requirements may be different from that of the experimenter him or herself:
..... Donaldson argued that young children might fail Piagetarian tasks because the tasks selected made little sense to them, and because they could not understand what the adult actually meant when they asked children a question. Donaldson argued that most reasoning is embedded both in a particular context and in the knowledge we have already; and that interpreting language is more than a matter of interpreting word meaning.... (DAS GUPTA P. & RICHARDSON K. 1995 page 17)
At this point, I would like to postulate at least four types of language structure which may be used by people when providing instructions to others:
C aliacentric - aliacentric language is language that requires no further explanation, that is couched in the language style and within the language level of the ‘other’. An example might be a parent asking a normally developed six-year-old child to ‘go to the kitchen and get me your Winnie the Pooh cup’. While the child may fail to find the cup in question in the kitchen and have to resort to questions to ascertain its whereabouts, the initiating remark was unambiguous.
C contextual - contextual language requires reference to the context in which it is uttered in order to further clarify its specific meaning. All language is to some extent contextual but, in this sense, the listener has to make a considered study of the environs in order to glean some meaning from another’s utterance. Contextual language may involve the understanding of an unknown word:
On the table, in front of the listener, are two objects, one unrecognised and another a saucer;
Aput the glub on the saucer”
It may also involve a situation where the child understands each word spoken but not the meaning of the phrase as a whole but gleans understanding from contextual cues.
Now suppose that I am looking at a bright red patch. I may say ‘this is my present percept’; I may also say ‘my present percept exists’; but not ‘this exists’, because the word ‘exists’ is only significant when applied to a description as opposed to a name. This disposes of existence as one of the things that the mind is aware of in objects. (RUSSELL B. 1946 page 168)
The quote from Russell above, unlike other quotations used in this text, is not used to reinforce the general line of the argument to date but is illustrative of the case in point. That is, a person may be able to understand each of the words uttered but not comprehend the meaning of the whole. I continue to struggle with philosophical ideas in this way: ‘just what did s/he mean by this’. I may refer to the context of the text in which it was uttered and retrace my footsteps in order to glean meaning. However, if, in 1946, I was sitting in a room with Russell and he was making the same point, it is likely that he would illustrate his meaning further by making use of items in the immediate environment. With reference to these, I would attempt to understand and make explicit that meaning. In some cases, my understanding of what has been said may be at odds with what was intended. I think I have understood and, if asked, I will say that I have understood but my understanding differs to that which was intended.
C accommodative - In some cases, my understanding of what has been said may be at odds with my current world knowledge and may create an imbalance which would lead me to reject the notion or to accommodate it. Thus, accommodative language requires that an individual listener adjusts or replaces an existing point of view to accommodate new information. By definition, all accommodative language must be either aliacentric or contextual but all aliacentric or contextual language is not necessarily accommodative.
C esoteric - esoteric language is language that is totally beyond the comprehension of the individual listener concerned. For example, the following phrase when use with the same six-year-old child mentioned earlier, AAn adverbially pre-modified adjectival lexical unit is a parasemantic approach to the political situation”, would probably be completely meaningless. The quote from Bertrand Russell cited earlier is also somewhat esoteric to me; the individual words themselves are not incomprehensible but, when grouped and used in this particular manner, their meaning becomes unclear. What is esoteric to one individual may be aliacentric to another.
Much of the language that is used to communicate ideas to individuals with language problems is not aliacentric and, although use may be made of context and example, not enough time is devoted to ensuring (and testing for) comprehension. In this way, much of our use of language may be perceived by others as esoteric in form. In all these senses, we must ‘watch what we are saying’ .......
If you could see an exact sound-for-sound transcript of a real conversation, you would be shocked at how incomplete, sloppy and unfinished it is. Half-sentences, parts of words, interruptions: it’s almost incomprehensible ..... (INGRAM J. 1992)
A person may be side-tracked in the middle of a sentence only to return to it at some later point. We may nest embedded clauses to the nth degree:
AThat woman from the shop that the old lady with the straw hat you saw yesterday when you were out shopping for those nice biscuits you like at tea when you watch that Star Trek programme on the video you borrowed from your brother about the battle for the universe with the little sesame seeds in them owns who was wearing the blue dress is coming to dinner tomorrow.”
This can all be very confusing for the person beginning to learn a language.
The cartoon depicts some aspects of the problem. Ask the staff to suggest what mistakes the teacher is making. The teacher:
C moves from one topic to another;
C uses a long and unwieldy sentence;
C moves the focus of attention away from the topic;
C uses difficult grammatical structures;
C uses words which may not be understood by the pupils;
C falsely states that ‘talking’ is not required in biology.
The quote from Laurie Lee’s book ‘Cider with Rosie’ makes the point that children may easily misunderstand the words an adult uses. Make meaning explicit. Of course, teachers do not suffer from any of these problems - they are trained to make their language explicit and easy to comprehend - aren’t they?
The language of teachers gets more complex as the child moves up through school and also becomes less fluent as they deal with more difficult ideas. (BEVERIDGE M. & CONTI-RAMSDEN G. 1987)
As a person who trained as a teacher I admit I am guilty! When I taught language impaired students I often cringed when I reviewed the language I used in an average session. At first I did this by video-taping my teaching sessions. Later, primarily because I could not stand to watch myself on video, I turned to cassette tape (I listened in the car driving to work). I remember thinking how stupid I was when I heard myself saying (on tape) to a class of students with learning difficulties,
AThis is a generic example of fruit”
Yes, I should have known better! I did know better but that did not stop me from phrasing my spoken words in the most uncomprehensible manner from time to time. As I stated, I attempted to improve my technique by secretly recording it and listening to what I was saying in the car. No point in getting angry with myself, much better to try to improve. The use of the word ‘generic’ is an obvious example of a more subtle problem. Creber (CREBER P. 1972 page 16) recounts a story of an eight-year-old boy working hard at a reading book in which the narrative tells of a woodcutter who finds an injured bear and takes it home. He nurses it back to health whereupon it changes into a beautiful princess. Of course, they live happily ever after. However, when the boy retells this tale to the class he states that the woodcutter chops the bear into pieces when he comes across it in the woods. He goes on to tell the rest of the story which now seems even more implausible as the bear has apparently been savagely hacked into dog food. The boy’s teacher worked with the two accounts together until she came to a particular sentence, ‘the woodcutter saw the brown bear’:
All was now clear. ‘Saw’ as the past tense of the verb to see had, she realized, no place in David’s dialect: if he saw something yesterday he would repeat ‘I seen it’. In his dialect ‘saw’ would only denote an activity associated with precisely such people as woodcutters. (CREBER P. 1972)
People who use AAC may have considerable difficulties in understanding the language that facilitators use:
..... may still be in the process of developing spoken language comprehension skills. As part of their language profiles, they may evidence skills ranging from comprehension comparable to their chronological age to little or no comprehension of speech (ROMSKI M. & SEVCIK R. 1991, 1992). Like the children described by Nelson (NELSON K. 1973), individuals who comprehend speech come to the AAC acquisition task with already established spoken language knowledge (ROMSKI M. & SEVCIK R. 1992, ROMSKI M., SEVCIK R., & PATE J. 1988). Other children and adults who encounter significant difficulty comprehending speech require AAC systems to serve as both an input and an output mode (ROMSKI M. & SEVCIK R. 1993)
If some significant others use a language style which is alien and meaningless to an augmented communicator then there is a real danger of promoting passivity:
Every experience which leads him to conclude that the teacher is ‘talking in Spanish’ is in effect teaching him when listening is unnecessary and is imposing a restriction upon the range of situations in which he will be willing to trust words. Such a trust is a prerequisite of effective learning in school; the damage caused by a teacher’s incomprehensibility is to be measured not in terms of particular meaning loss, but of the cumulative effect of such experiences on the child’s attitude to learning. The real danger is that we may so condition him that he learns to accept his incomprehension. (CREBER P. 1972 page 30)
Donaldson (DONALDSON M. 1978, 1987) has suggested that one of the main problems of Piaget’s famous conservation experiments (see LEE V. & DAS GUPTA P. 1995, chapter 1 for a brief review) is that the child’s understanding of the experimenter’s requirements may be different from that of the experimenter him or herself:
..... Donaldson argued that young children might fail Piagetarian tasks because the tasks selected made little sense to them, and because they could not understand what the adult actually meant when they asked children a question. Donaldson argued that most reasoning is embedded both in a particular context and in the knowledge we have already; and that interpreting language is more than a matter of interpreting word meaning.... (DAS GUPTA P. & RICHARDSON K. 1995 page 17)
At this point, I would like to postulate at least four types of language structure which may be used by people when providing instructions to others:
C aliacentric - aliacentric language is language that requires no further explanation, that is couched in the language style and within the language level of the ‘other’. An example might be a parent asking a normally developed six-year-old child to ‘go to the kitchen and get me your Winnie the Pooh cup’. While the child may fail to find the cup in question in the kitchen and have to resort to questions to ascertain its whereabouts, the initiating remark was unambiguous.
C contextual - contextual language requires reference to the context in which it is uttered in order to further clarify its specific meaning. All language is to some extent contextual but, in this sense, the listener has to make a considered study of the environs in order to glean some meaning from another’s utterance. Contextual language may involve the understanding of an unknown word:
On the table, in front of the listener, are two objects, one unrecognised and another a saucer;
Aput the glub on the saucer”
It may also involve a situation where the child understands each word spoken but not the meaning of the phrase as a whole but gleans understanding from contextual cues.
Now suppose that I am looking at a bright red patch. I may say ‘this is my present percept’; I may also say ‘my present percept exists’; but not ‘this exists’, because the word ‘exists’ is only significant when applied to a description as opposed to a name. This disposes of existence as one of the things that the mind is aware of in objects. (RUSSELL B. 1946 page 168)
The quote from Russell above, unlike other quotations used in this text, is not used to reinforce the general line of the argument to date but is illustrative of the case in point. That is, a person may be able to understand each of the words uttered but not comprehend the meaning of the whole. I continue to struggle with philosophical ideas in this way: ‘just what did s/he mean by this’. I may refer to the context of the text in which it was uttered and retrace my footsteps in order to glean meaning. However, if, in 1946, I was sitting in a room with Russell and he was making the same point, it is likely that he would illustrate his meaning further by making use of items in the immediate environment. With reference to these, I would attempt to understand and make explicit that meaning. In some cases, my understanding of what has been said may be at odds with what was intended. I think I have understood and, if asked, I will say that I have understood but my understanding differs to that which was intended.
C accommodative - In some cases, my understanding of what has been said may be at odds with my current world knowledge and may create an imbalance which would lead me to reject the notion or to accommodate it. Thus, accommodative language requires that an individual listener adjusts or replaces an existing point of view to accommodate new information. By definition, all accommodative language must be either aliacentric or contextual but all aliacentric or contextual language is not necessarily accommodative.
C esoteric - esoteric language is language that is totally beyond the comprehension of the individual listener concerned. For example, the following phrase when use with the same six-year-old child mentioned earlier, AAn adverbially pre-modified adjectival lexical unit is a parasemantic approach to the political situation”, would probably be completely meaningless. The quote from Bertrand Russell cited earlier is also somewhat esoteric to me; the individual words themselves are not incomprehensible but, when grouped and used in this particular manner, their meaning becomes unclear. What is esoteric to one individual may be aliacentric to another.
Much of the language that is used to communicate ideas to individuals with language problems is not aliacentric and, although use may be made of context and example, not enough time is devoted to ensuring (and testing for) comprehension. In this way, much of our use of language may be perceived by others as esoteric in form. In all these senses, we must ‘watch what we are saying’ .......
LANGUAGE 4 - Watch what you are saying!
Unintentionally we often make it difficult for the child to learn language because of the way we ourselves use it. (JEFFREE D. & McCONKEY R. 1976)
The facilitator must endeavour to make meaning explicit. In the hurly-burly that is the average classroom, it is amazing any pupil understands the meaning of what is being said. The word said, of course, conjures up the problem. How is it possible to teach language using language? If the user arrives without language knowledge or does not comprehend every nuance of the language the facilitator may use to make meaning explicit, then what may be used in its place?
Implicit in the words ‘What is being said’, is far more than speech. There are the facilitator’s tone, facial expressions, gestures, and body language, as well as cues given from contextual information. Indeed, it has been demonstrated (MEHRABIAN & FERRIS 1967) that in presentations before groups of people 55% of the impact is determined by body language, 38% by tone, and only 7% by the actual content of the presentation. As early as 1958, Bruce (BRUCE D. 1958) showed that words used in a meaningful context is better understood than language used out of context (see LANGUAGE 5 following). However, assume, for the moment, that the former have no part in teaching and the facilitator must rely on spoken language (words) alone.
The language used to convey information to users should be simple. The acronym ‘KISS’ ‑ ‘Keep It Short & Simple’ should become a facilitator’s byword. Avoid ambiguity at all costs. Users would be well served if facilitators were to use the skills used by teachers of the deaf (QUIGLEY S. & KRETCHMER R. 1982, WOOD D., WOOD H., GRIFFITHS A., & HOWARTH A. 1986):
a) use short sentences;
b) avoid unnecessary words;
c) choice of concrete rather than abstract words;
d) use of straightforward language (not ‘what purpose does it serve?’ but ‘what is the use of?’);
e) avoid words or phrases which may have a double meaning (overall, employed, I haven’t got a sausage, a close shave, .....);
f) avoid metaphors (kick the bucket, pull your socks up);
g) avoid unusual words;
h) avoid double negatives (He won’t get none);
i) avoid advanced grammatical forms. Use the active rather than the passive form;
j) slow down speech slightly, but do not highlight every word ‘A ‑ dog ‑ is ‑ a ‑ sort ‑ of ‑ animal’;
k) do not shout;
l) talk to the person using the AAC system; do not ‘dance’ around the environment whilst speaking; do not talk with your back to the user, for example, while writing or drawing on a board;
m) look at the person using the AAC system while talking; gain eye contact; wait until you have attention;
n) try to speak at the person’s own physical level; sit down opposite the person if possible - it will be much easier to follow what you are saying;
o) patience is a virtue; attempt to repeat ideas and concepts using several differing explanations and rationales; re‑phrase when you get a blank look; check the concept;
p) although a person may use deviant language forms or have a delayed language structure, do not adopt these as patterns for teaching; the facilitator should model the correct syntax;
q) do not assume comprehension; do not assume that people understand even when they say they do; do not ask the question ADo you understand?”, rather, test for comprehension.
(See also ROSENTHAL R. & ROSENTHAL K. 1989)
NOTE: Staff may wish to work through each of the points in question and make comments on their application in the AAC situation. Relevant? Not relevant? Interesting?
For some individuals, notably a few people with autism, there is evidence to suggest that the use of spoken language itself may be the cause of problems and should be replaced by an alternative signing or symbol system:
We suggest that the spoken modality itself may contribute to poor performance and increase challenging behaviours of some individuals with autism, and that some situations may require that staff use augmentative systems to communicate with such individuals, while some may require the use of alternative modalities and avoiding spoken input altogether. (PETERSON S., BONDY A., VINCENT Y., & FINNEGAN C. 1995)
While instances like this are rare, the use of signed and symbolic communication systems to augment spoken input should be encouraged from all who work with those labelled as having learning difficulties.
Spoken input, the language we use to communicate with people learning to use AAC, should not itself model an incorrect grammatical style (See REES N. 1978; BLANK M. & MARQUIS M. 1987). ‘KISS AND TELL’ is a useful acronym to remember; ‘Keep It Short, Simple Adopting Normal Discourse’ to TELL ‑ that is to teach. Blank and Marquis (op. cit.) have also shown how a facilitator’s utterances during early developmental conversation and instruction should contain a ‘considerable redundancy’:
The effect of the comments is that the adult’s utterances contain considerable redundancy. These are restatements of bits of information in slightly varying form so that each statement builds slowly on the preceding one (The orange needs to be cut; a knife is good for cutting; get a knife). (BLANK M. & MARQUIS M. 1987)
This leads to a re‑statement of the point ‘use short sentences’. This becomes ‘use short sentences but build in considerable redundancy such that each sentence builds into the next and helps to ease user comprehension’:
The alteration in the teacher’s pattern of language has definite advantages for language disabled children. As noted above, the expanded verbalization is largely redundant. As a result, if children attend, they have the opportunity to have the information reinforced. By contrast, if their attention wavers, they still have the opportunity to hear the message that might have been missed. In addition, the expanded messages provide children with more time between questions, thereby meeting their needs to have longer periods in which to process information. Finally, in making the implicit explicit, the demands for inferential reasoning on the children’s part are reduced, thereby bringing the conversation within manageable proportions (BLANK M. & MARQUIS M. 1987)
Redundancy aids interaction between the facilitator and the user. It eases the mental effort required by the user to comprehend. Consider the following two ‘discourse texts’:
AI have put lots of things on the table today. They are all sorts of fruit. As we have not done it before, that is what we are going to do today.”
ALook at the table. I have put lots of things on the table today. The things on the table are all sorts of fruit. We have not talked about fruit using our communication systems in other lessons. We are going to talk about fruit today.”
The second text holds considerable redundancy but only increases the text by about 13 words. No assumption is made of ‘carry‑over’ or inter and intra‑phrasal comprehension. The concepts are made explicit in each phrase. Each phrase builds on the next. By building redundancy into communication interactions with users, facilitators help comprehension, which should never be taken for granted.
The facilitator must endeavour to make meaning explicit. In the hurly-burly that is the average classroom, it is amazing any pupil understands the meaning of what is being said. The word said, of course, conjures up the problem. How is it possible to teach language using language? If the user arrives without language knowledge or does not comprehend every nuance of the language the facilitator may use to make meaning explicit, then what may be used in its place?
Implicit in the words ‘What is being said’, is far more than speech. There are the facilitator’s tone, facial expressions, gestures, and body language, as well as cues given from contextual information. Indeed, it has been demonstrated (MEHRABIAN & FERRIS 1967) that in presentations before groups of people 55% of the impact is determined by body language, 38% by tone, and only 7% by the actual content of the presentation. As early as 1958, Bruce (BRUCE D. 1958) showed that words used in a meaningful context is better understood than language used out of context (see LANGUAGE 5 following). However, assume, for the moment, that the former have no part in teaching and the facilitator must rely on spoken language (words) alone.
The language used to convey information to users should be simple. The acronym ‘KISS’ ‑ ‘Keep It Short & Simple’ should become a facilitator’s byword. Avoid ambiguity at all costs. Users would be well served if facilitators were to use the skills used by teachers of the deaf (QUIGLEY S. & KRETCHMER R. 1982, WOOD D., WOOD H., GRIFFITHS A., & HOWARTH A. 1986):
a) use short sentences;
b) avoid unnecessary words;
c) choice of concrete rather than abstract words;
d) use of straightforward language (not ‘what purpose does it serve?’ but ‘what is the use of?’);
e) avoid words or phrases which may have a double meaning (overall, employed, I haven’t got a sausage, a close shave, .....);
f) avoid metaphors (kick the bucket, pull your socks up);
g) avoid unusual words;
h) avoid double negatives (He won’t get none);
i) avoid advanced grammatical forms. Use the active rather than the passive form;
j) slow down speech slightly, but do not highlight every word ‘A ‑ dog ‑ is ‑ a ‑ sort ‑ of ‑ animal’;
k) do not shout;
l) talk to the person using the AAC system; do not ‘dance’ around the environment whilst speaking; do not talk with your back to the user, for example, while writing or drawing on a board;
m) look at the person using the AAC system while talking; gain eye contact; wait until you have attention;
n) try to speak at the person’s own physical level; sit down opposite the person if possible - it will be much easier to follow what you are saying;
o) patience is a virtue; attempt to repeat ideas and concepts using several differing explanations and rationales; re‑phrase when you get a blank look; check the concept;
p) although a person may use deviant language forms or have a delayed language structure, do not adopt these as patterns for teaching; the facilitator should model the correct syntax;
q) do not assume comprehension; do not assume that people understand even when they say they do; do not ask the question ADo you understand?”, rather, test for comprehension.
(See also ROSENTHAL R. & ROSENTHAL K. 1989)
NOTE: Staff may wish to work through each of the points in question and make comments on their application in the AAC situation. Relevant? Not relevant? Interesting?
For some individuals, notably a few people with autism, there is evidence to suggest that the use of spoken language itself may be the cause of problems and should be replaced by an alternative signing or symbol system:
We suggest that the spoken modality itself may contribute to poor performance and increase challenging behaviours of some individuals with autism, and that some situations may require that staff use augmentative systems to communicate with such individuals, while some may require the use of alternative modalities and avoiding spoken input altogether. (PETERSON S., BONDY A., VINCENT Y., & FINNEGAN C. 1995)
While instances like this are rare, the use of signed and symbolic communication systems to augment spoken input should be encouraged from all who work with those labelled as having learning difficulties.
Spoken input, the language we use to communicate with people learning to use AAC, should not itself model an incorrect grammatical style (See REES N. 1978; BLANK M. & MARQUIS M. 1987). ‘KISS AND TELL’ is a useful acronym to remember; ‘Keep It Short, Simple Adopting Normal Discourse’ to TELL ‑ that is to teach. Blank and Marquis (op. cit.) have also shown how a facilitator’s utterances during early developmental conversation and instruction should contain a ‘considerable redundancy’:
The effect of the comments is that the adult’s utterances contain considerable redundancy. These are restatements of bits of information in slightly varying form so that each statement builds slowly on the preceding one (The orange needs to be cut; a knife is good for cutting; get a knife). (BLANK M. & MARQUIS M. 1987)
This leads to a re‑statement of the point ‘use short sentences’. This becomes ‘use short sentences but build in considerable redundancy such that each sentence builds into the next and helps to ease user comprehension’:
The alteration in the teacher’s pattern of language has definite advantages for language disabled children. As noted above, the expanded verbalization is largely redundant. As a result, if children attend, they have the opportunity to have the information reinforced. By contrast, if their attention wavers, they still have the opportunity to hear the message that might have been missed. In addition, the expanded messages provide children with more time between questions, thereby meeting their needs to have longer periods in which to process information. Finally, in making the implicit explicit, the demands for inferential reasoning on the children’s part are reduced, thereby bringing the conversation within manageable proportions (BLANK M. & MARQUIS M. 1987)
Redundancy aids interaction between the facilitator and the user. It eases the mental effort required by the user to comprehend. Consider the following two ‘discourse texts’:
AI have put lots of things on the table today. They are all sorts of fruit. As we have not done it before, that is what we are going to do today.”
ALook at the table. I have put lots of things on the table today. The things on the table are all sorts of fruit. We have not talked about fruit using our communication systems in other lessons. We are going to talk about fruit today.”
The second text holds considerable redundancy but only increases the text by about 13 words. No assumption is made of ‘carry‑over’ or inter and intra‑phrasal comprehension. The concepts are made explicit in each phrase. Each phrase builds on the next. By building redundancy into communication interactions with users, facilitators help comprehension, which should never be taken for granted.
LANGUAGE 5 - Adopt a multi-modal input strategy
Suppose that we had no voice or tongue, and wanted to communicate with one another, should we not, like the deaf and dumb, make signs with the hands and head and the rest of the body? (PLATO 428 B.C. - 348 B.C. Dialogues of Plato, Cratylus: Socrates’ remark to Hermogenes)
Children who are presented with information in a verbal medium (that is, the spoken or written word) frequently have greater difficulty in understanding or decoding the verbal input than they would have in understanding a nonverbal input(that is, a nonverbal event that is perceived visually or tactually). (MILGRAM N. 1973 page 167)
The Atotal communication” movement, a philosophy stressing the importance of multimodal communication, began during this period (1960s) as well (DENTON D. 1970; VERNON M. 1972; GARRETSON M. 1976; EVANS L. 1982). Proponents of this approach advocated the use of all appropriate means of input and output (e.g. manual signs, speech, graphic symbols) to facilitate communication and learning. ZANGARI C., LLOYD L., & VICKER B. (1994)
Bruce has shown (BRUCE D. 1958) that words used in a meaningful context are more easily recognisable than those used out of context. To make language more meaningful, a multi-modal input strategy should be adopted. This entails focussing on the contextual aspect accompanying the vocal strategy for tuition of a particular concept. This will provide the learner with several channels of input concerning the concept. Suppose, as in the cartoon, the concept being taught is cow. There are several methods of reinforcing the spoken word. It may be possible to provide the real-life form of the concept (as the teacher has done). If not, a model, a toy, a photograph, a picture, or a drawing may suffice. Use the sign for the word cow whether in ASL, BSL, Amerind, Makaton, Paget-Gorman, or other. Signs accompanying words aid (and can improve - See SACKS O. 1989) cognition. This is true even for people that do not sign themselves providing all the signers sign in a consistent manner. Signing helps. How regrettable then that many people fail to learn even a few simple signs:
You are expected to spend fifteen years in the straightjacket of speech training ....... your parents never bother to put in an hour a day to learn sign language or some part of it. One hour of every twenty-four that can change a life time for you (JACOBS L. 1974 pp. 173-174)
A person learning a new symbol encoding system on a VOCA may use another low-tech symbol set (A dynamic display user with picsyms may also have a Bliss board, for example). The concept being introduced on the new system (dynamic display) may be represented in the already acquired form (Bliss). The already acquired form is used to teach the new symbol or symbol sequence. This is especially true if the user has developed an understanding of the spoken word in relation to symbols in use:
If the relationship between a spoken word and its referent has been established during an AAC user’s communicative interactive experience, and subsequently an AAC output mode is provided, extant receptive skills can serve as the foundation upon which individuals can build a relationship between the AAC symbols they are now using and their already established understandings of spoken words. (ROMSKI M. & SEVCIK R. 1993)
Although a person hears a spoken word, there may be associated sounds that will help to comprehend its meaning. A person who speaks no French will not understand the word ‘vache’, for example. However, if the sound ‘mooo’ is uttered by the tutor, the listener focuses on the intended meaning. If this is accompanied by a sign, a further association is made.
It may be argued that this is a simple process when the concept in question is a noun. What if it is an abstract adverbial? If an abstract adverbial is being taught to a user, it is reasonable to assume that his or her cognitive level is higher than the person learning the noun cow. That is not to duck the question. Take the word ‘gradually’. How could it be made transparent? From the learner’s perspective, the word sounds like its Senojian equivalent ‘yllaudarg’ - meaningless. Is it possible to present a ‘gradually’ to the learner? No. Then what is to be done?
C There may be alternative symbols on the learner’s present system
which could be used to describe this new concept (parasemanticity).
C The sign for ‘gradually’ could be used.
Neither of the above suggestions may be useful; neither may work. The learner is unlikely to understand if he or she has no ‘cognitive coatpegs’ on which to hang the word or the symbol. Is it possible to use other words already taught to express the new concept, for example, ‘little by little’? Is it possible to mime the word ‘gradually’? How are we going to be certain that the person is not understanding that the word is ‘slowly’? Does, it matter? If words are to be used to explain other words then the vocabulary from which the words are selected must be from the learner’s vocabulary. When the word is not a concrete noun, it is only through the use of previously acquired knowledge that it is possible to help a person understand a new word. Teaching an aspect of money when a person has not acquired the concept of number is a seemingly pointless exercise, unless the money is being used to teach the concept of number. One vocabulary item precedes both cognitively and chronologically the other. Ask the question:
AWhat vocabulary must a learner understand for
the successful presentation of a new concept?”
If this vocabulary is untaught, this issue must be addressed before the new concept is introduced.
In any spoken communication, a function of the use of language is to define and re-define the subject of the conversation. There is a continual re‑negotiation of meaning by the communication partners. Without contextual cues, the experiences communication partners bring to any conversation, and a knowledge of what has been said previously, conversation would not make sense (See WITTGENSTEIN L. 1953; HALLIDAY M. 1978; ARGYLE M., FURNHAM A., & GRAHAM J. 1981; WARDHAUGH R. 1985):
If we were to attempt to say what any utterance in a conversation meant and, in doing so ignored its context of use, we would be forced to conclude that its meaning would be vague and ambiguous. It is just impossible to say what most utterances mean, or what their intent is, without having some knowledge of the situations in which they occur (WARDHAUGH R. 1985)
Indeed, context can actually define the meaning of what is said. Mother is cooking the dinner when her son John walks in. John can see the dinner is obviously not ready but still asks AIs dinner ready yet Mum?”. The meaning of his utterance is naturally interpreted by Mother to mean, ‘How long will dinner be?’ She may perhaps answer, AIt will be about ten minutes yet”. Of course, Mum might treat the question literally and reply, ADoes it look like it is ready?” but this is less likely than the former response. The negotiation of meaning relies heavily on the contextual aspects of the situation. If the language used is alien to the context it can cause alarm or surprise. If Mum had replied ANo, but the pink flamingo has landed on the moon”, John may stop in his tracks, and think Mum has finally succumbed to the pressures of daily life.
Autistic children (WING L. 1988; ADAMS C. & BISHOP D. 1989; BISHOP D. 1989; BISHOP D. & ADAMS C. 1989; BOUCHER J. 1989; FRITH U. 1989) may not allow for the previous experience of the listener and enter a conversation using indexical forms (‘SHE went THERE and HE kicked IT’ ‑ the listener not knowing to whom or to what the pronominal forms relate, or where THERE is). CRYSTAL (1982) uses the term ‘deixis’ (non‑specificity - from the Greek verb meaning ‘to point’) for this:
As P. tries to use his limited processing abilities for more advanced syntax he ‘gives up’ on the lexical side, replacing specific items with empty ones (CRYSTAL D. 1982)
It is akin to eavesdropping on a conversation that has already started, in which the parameters have already been set, and the protagonists defined. If the conversation is taking place out of context, for example on a bus, we may never begin to understand the nature of what is being said. However, if the conversation is heavily contextual we may glean some understanding of its meaning:
These individuals, in contrast, must begin the AAC acquisition process by establishing the relationship between AAC symbols and their real-world referents, relying, perhaps almost exclusively, on contextual clues in the communicative environment to extract meaning through the visual modality (ROMSKI M. & SEVCIK R. 1993)
.... everyday interactions between adults and children are different in developmentally important ways from those in formal teaching and testing encounters. In everyday discourse ..... the situation shared by speakers and hearers provides several avenues for the achievement of mutual understanding. When we talk about ‘this’ and ‘that’ in spontaneous encounters, for example, we are likely to look at the thing being referred to. A child asked ‘Will you give me that, please?’ and presented with an outstretched hand, is likely to understand what ‘that’ is for a number of possible reasons. Non-verbal ‘cues’ to meaning plus the fact that she may, say, have something that does not belong to her, or which is in some way taboo, probably leave little room for doubt about what the speaker is referring to. (WOOD D. 1988)
As context is important to understand meaning, it is essential that explicit use of context, as well as cueing (See TURNURE J. 1986), is made in lessons. At the most basic level this would mean making concrete the word, phrase, clause, category, concept being discussed or taught.
Two criteria seemed to make the learning and retention come quicker. The first was that the new words given related to his everyday experiences and the second was that the rationale for icon sequence was logical to his concrete thinking level (TRAVIS R., TRAVIS D., & WATKINS C. 1989)
It is further necessary that the speech to which children are exposed be related to objects, events and situations in the environment and to experiences in their minds. (STEINBERG D. 1993 page 17)
The facilitator must plan the order of the words to be presented and the manner in which they are used. Armed with this sub‑vocabulary the facilitator can give examples of each of the words. For some, it will be better to have the real item present during a lesson (an apple rather than a photograph of an apple) but this is not always possible. It may be difficult, if not impossible, for example, to have animals present during a teaching session. It should be possible to acquire videos, models, or perhaps (slightly less satisfactory) photographs and pictures. Indeed, until the invention of a holospeech device which can create life size holograms, all AAC systems require that the user cope with a symbolic representation of the concept and therefore photographs, pictures, drawings, are perfectly acceptable (However, some people may need to be taught the relationship between the image and the object in order to proceed).
Vision and hearing have been discussed but there are other senses - these should not be neglected. Indeed, it is important that we ......
Children who are presented with information in a verbal medium (that is, the spoken or written word) frequently have greater difficulty in understanding or decoding the verbal input than they would have in understanding a nonverbal input(that is, a nonverbal event that is perceived visually or tactually). (MILGRAM N. 1973 page 167)
The Atotal communication” movement, a philosophy stressing the importance of multimodal communication, began during this period (1960s) as well (DENTON D. 1970; VERNON M. 1972; GARRETSON M. 1976; EVANS L. 1982). Proponents of this approach advocated the use of all appropriate means of input and output (e.g. manual signs, speech, graphic symbols) to facilitate communication and learning. ZANGARI C., LLOYD L., & VICKER B. (1994)
Bruce has shown (BRUCE D. 1958) that words used in a meaningful context are more easily recognisable than those used out of context. To make language more meaningful, a multi-modal input strategy should be adopted. This entails focussing on the contextual aspect accompanying the vocal strategy for tuition of a particular concept. This will provide the learner with several channels of input concerning the concept. Suppose, as in the cartoon, the concept being taught is cow. There are several methods of reinforcing the spoken word. It may be possible to provide the real-life form of the concept (as the teacher has done). If not, a model, a toy, a photograph, a picture, or a drawing may suffice. Use the sign for the word cow whether in ASL, BSL, Amerind, Makaton, Paget-Gorman, or other. Signs accompanying words aid (and can improve - See SACKS O. 1989) cognition. This is true even for people that do not sign themselves providing all the signers sign in a consistent manner. Signing helps. How regrettable then that many people fail to learn even a few simple signs:
You are expected to spend fifteen years in the straightjacket of speech training ....... your parents never bother to put in an hour a day to learn sign language or some part of it. One hour of every twenty-four that can change a life time for you (JACOBS L. 1974 pp. 173-174)
A person learning a new symbol encoding system on a VOCA may use another low-tech symbol set (A dynamic display user with picsyms may also have a Bliss board, for example). The concept being introduced on the new system (dynamic display) may be represented in the already acquired form (Bliss). The already acquired form is used to teach the new symbol or symbol sequence. This is especially true if the user has developed an understanding of the spoken word in relation to symbols in use:
If the relationship between a spoken word and its referent has been established during an AAC user’s communicative interactive experience, and subsequently an AAC output mode is provided, extant receptive skills can serve as the foundation upon which individuals can build a relationship between the AAC symbols they are now using and their already established understandings of spoken words. (ROMSKI M. & SEVCIK R. 1993)
Although a person hears a spoken word, there may be associated sounds that will help to comprehend its meaning. A person who speaks no French will not understand the word ‘vache’, for example. However, if the sound ‘mooo’ is uttered by the tutor, the listener focuses on the intended meaning. If this is accompanied by a sign, a further association is made.
It may be argued that this is a simple process when the concept in question is a noun. What if it is an abstract adverbial? If an abstract adverbial is being taught to a user, it is reasonable to assume that his or her cognitive level is higher than the person learning the noun cow. That is not to duck the question. Take the word ‘gradually’. How could it be made transparent? From the learner’s perspective, the word sounds like its Senojian equivalent ‘yllaudarg’ - meaningless. Is it possible to present a ‘gradually’ to the learner? No. Then what is to be done?
C There may be alternative symbols on the learner’s present system
which could be used to describe this new concept (parasemanticity).
C The sign for ‘gradually’ could be used.
Neither of the above suggestions may be useful; neither may work. The learner is unlikely to understand if he or she has no ‘cognitive coatpegs’ on which to hang the word or the symbol. Is it possible to use other words already taught to express the new concept, for example, ‘little by little’? Is it possible to mime the word ‘gradually’? How are we going to be certain that the person is not understanding that the word is ‘slowly’? Does, it matter? If words are to be used to explain other words then the vocabulary from which the words are selected must be from the learner’s vocabulary. When the word is not a concrete noun, it is only through the use of previously acquired knowledge that it is possible to help a person understand a new word. Teaching an aspect of money when a person has not acquired the concept of number is a seemingly pointless exercise, unless the money is being used to teach the concept of number. One vocabulary item precedes both cognitively and chronologically the other. Ask the question:
AWhat vocabulary must a learner understand for
the successful presentation of a new concept?”
If this vocabulary is untaught, this issue must be addressed before the new concept is introduced.
In any spoken communication, a function of the use of language is to define and re-define the subject of the conversation. There is a continual re‑negotiation of meaning by the communication partners. Without contextual cues, the experiences communication partners bring to any conversation, and a knowledge of what has been said previously, conversation would not make sense (See WITTGENSTEIN L. 1953; HALLIDAY M. 1978; ARGYLE M., FURNHAM A., & GRAHAM J. 1981; WARDHAUGH R. 1985):
If we were to attempt to say what any utterance in a conversation meant and, in doing so ignored its context of use, we would be forced to conclude that its meaning would be vague and ambiguous. It is just impossible to say what most utterances mean, or what their intent is, without having some knowledge of the situations in which they occur (WARDHAUGH R. 1985)
Indeed, context can actually define the meaning of what is said. Mother is cooking the dinner when her son John walks in. John can see the dinner is obviously not ready but still asks AIs dinner ready yet Mum?”. The meaning of his utterance is naturally interpreted by Mother to mean, ‘How long will dinner be?’ She may perhaps answer, AIt will be about ten minutes yet”. Of course, Mum might treat the question literally and reply, ADoes it look like it is ready?” but this is less likely than the former response. The negotiation of meaning relies heavily on the contextual aspects of the situation. If the language used is alien to the context it can cause alarm or surprise. If Mum had replied ANo, but the pink flamingo has landed on the moon”, John may stop in his tracks, and think Mum has finally succumbed to the pressures of daily life.
Autistic children (WING L. 1988; ADAMS C. & BISHOP D. 1989; BISHOP D. 1989; BISHOP D. & ADAMS C. 1989; BOUCHER J. 1989; FRITH U. 1989) may not allow for the previous experience of the listener and enter a conversation using indexical forms (‘SHE went THERE and HE kicked IT’ ‑ the listener not knowing to whom or to what the pronominal forms relate, or where THERE is). CRYSTAL (1982) uses the term ‘deixis’ (non‑specificity - from the Greek verb meaning ‘to point’) for this:
As P. tries to use his limited processing abilities for more advanced syntax he ‘gives up’ on the lexical side, replacing specific items with empty ones (CRYSTAL D. 1982)
It is akin to eavesdropping on a conversation that has already started, in which the parameters have already been set, and the protagonists defined. If the conversation is taking place out of context, for example on a bus, we may never begin to understand the nature of what is being said. However, if the conversation is heavily contextual we may glean some understanding of its meaning:
These individuals, in contrast, must begin the AAC acquisition process by establishing the relationship between AAC symbols and their real-world referents, relying, perhaps almost exclusively, on contextual clues in the communicative environment to extract meaning through the visual modality (ROMSKI M. & SEVCIK R. 1993)
.... everyday interactions between adults and children are different in developmentally important ways from those in formal teaching and testing encounters. In everyday discourse ..... the situation shared by speakers and hearers provides several avenues for the achievement of mutual understanding. When we talk about ‘this’ and ‘that’ in spontaneous encounters, for example, we are likely to look at the thing being referred to. A child asked ‘Will you give me that, please?’ and presented with an outstretched hand, is likely to understand what ‘that’ is for a number of possible reasons. Non-verbal ‘cues’ to meaning plus the fact that she may, say, have something that does not belong to her, or which is in some way taboo, probably leave little room for doubt about what the speaker is referring to. (WOOD D. 1988)
As context is important to understand meaning, it is essential that explicit use of context, as well as cueing (See TURNURE J. 1986), is made in lessons. At the most basic level this would mean making concrete the word, phrase, clause, category, concept being discussed or taught.
Two criteria seemed to make the learning and retention come quicker. The first was that the new words given related to his everyday experiences and the second was that the rationale for icon sequence was logical to his concrete thinking level (TRAVIS R., TRAVIS D., & WATKINS C. 1989)
It is further necessary that the speech to which children are exposed be related to objects, events and situations in the environment and to experiences in their minds. (STEINBERG D. 1993 page 17)
The facilitator must plan the order of the words to be presented and the manner in which they are used. Armed with this sub‑vocabulary the facilitator can give examples of each of the words. For some, it will be better to have the real item present during a lesson (an apple rather than a photograph of an apple) but this is not always possible. It may be difficult, if not impossible, for example, to have animals present during a teaching session. It should be possible to acquire videos, models, or perhaps (slightly less satisfactory) photographs and pictures. Indeed, until the invention of a holospeech device which can create life size holograms, all AAC systems require that the user cope with a symbolic representation of the concept and therefore photographs, pictures, drawings, are perfectly acceptable (However, some people may need to be taught the relationship between the image and the object in order to proceed).
Vision and hearing have been discussed but there are other senses - these should not be neglected. Indeed, it is important that we ......
LANGUAGE 6 - Give users experience of vocabulary items
Children have to be active and constructive in order to develop their understanding of the world (WOOD D. 1988)
There is an acute need for teachers / therapists / care-givers to develop tools and strategies to use in developing young nonverbal children’s experiential knowledge, ..... and to develop a way of transitioning classroom learning to home and community situations that facilitate experiential and world knowledge development. (KOVACH T. & SEMENTELLI C. 1990, page 81)
Children will not learn speech, if they are exposed only to speech sounds. Even if the child hears a spoken word a thousand times, e.g. ‘dog’, there is no way for the child to discover the meaning of the word unless some environmental clue is provided - in this example, a dog or a picture of a dog. Even abstract words must be learned in some such way. (STEINBERG D. 1993 page 17)
At the bottom of the previous overhead there are two phrases arranged in a semi-circle and a circle - ‘over the bridge’ and ‘around the roundabout’. These illustrate an idea for working with new words. While it is possible to illustrate new concepts in the classroom it will be more effective if all significant others are encouraged to help illustrate the individual concepts. This provides the learner with many experiences of an individual word or concept. For example, suppose the vocabulary concerns the prepositional concepts ‘over’, ‘under’, ‘around’. Significant others can be encouraged to emphasise these words when the learner is involved in some activity concerning them. Thus, while driving with their son or daughter parents may point out they are going over a bridge or around a roundabout. Placing the emphasis on the salient word in each phrase as the action is performed:
‘Putting your socks on your feet’;
‘Putting the plate on the table’;
‘Sitting on the chair’;
‘Getting on the bus’;
‘On the bridge’;
‘Mum is putting her hat on her head’.
Certain types of language, such as labelling circumscribed objects (e.g. bottle, table, ball), can be grasped easily through illustrations and or imitation. Therefore, no great effort is required to learn these words. By contrast words referring to properties which are not immediately evident require much elaboration for understanding. For example, a word such as ‘top’ is much more abstract than a word such as ‘book’. The word ‘top’ can refer to such physically different things as the ‘top’ of one’s head, the ‘top’ of one’s desk, and the ‘top’ of a building. The word unites these instances only when there is an understanding that ‘top’ refers to the highest point on anything, regardless of how different the ‘anything’ looks. Other examples requiring a similar level of abstraction are time (before, after), direction (underneath, between), relative judgements (warmer, heavier). It is here that an articulate person, be it mother, teacher, or sibling, is required to offer the necessary corroboration or negation of the child’s emerging ideas. (BLANK M. & SOLOMON F. 1968)
Significant others should not be encouraged physically to do other than they are already doing (do not drive 200 miles out of the way to cross over more bridges). Rather, they are encouraged to change their verbal behaviour, to emphasise particular concepts when they are encountered in everyday events. Keep the number of words involved at any one time below ten. This does not make the task a chore, the words are more likely to be remembered and the task is therefore more likely to be undertaken.
The facilitator who is teaching new concepts cannot assume that the learner will already have a set of ‘conceptual coathangers’ on which to peg out a hierarchical structure of words and phrases. Thus, the facilitator should take nothing for granted, or assume anything is so obvious that is not worthy of consideration:
Never make assumptions (EDSER 1990)
Each concept taught and each symbol used should be checked. Do not assume a common understanding between yourself and the user. Each concept will need to be checked, taught if not understood, and then re-checked. If symbols or symbol sequences are involved, the symbol sequence must be taught and checked. The wealth of experience and cognitive imagery that accompanies the majority of the words that make up our vocabulary (which can easily exceed 100,000 words (See CRYSTAL D. 1987)) is not likely to be available to many people with learning difficulties who are beginning to use AAC. The child who thinks milk comes from a bottle and the bottle comes from a milkman, and laughs when you point out some connection to a cow (a genuine case), is an example of the lack of experience of the world:
...mind boggles similarly at the idea of living to the same ripe old age in a city like Birmingham without knowing what a railway station is, or is like - let alone a farm. It is even harder to conceive of learning to read in the face of such impoverished experience - to read correctly words which remain mysteries. (CREBER P. 1972 p. 74)(Author’s note - for ‘read’ try reading ‘say’)
Impoverished experience of language and linguistic concepts is commonplace among many would-be augmented communicators who have the additional problems resulting from cognitive impairment. The facilitator should not endeavour to fill in the gaps in the eclectic vocabulary of each user but build anew on new foundations. Existing concepts will be reinforced and symbol associations made. Shaky or missing concepts will be discovered and can be taught.
Although this process is difficult and time consuming, it is essential in teaching any AAC system to any person with learning difficulties. The best time to do this is while the user is young; the younger the better. It is never too late but it is far more difficult in adulthood when resources are scarce and time is short (See LARCHER J. 1990).
People who are severely physically challenged may not attain certain concepts in the course of their physical and mental development. Many are unintentionally denied the experience of some concepts (BOWLEY A. & GARDNER L. 1980; LEVITT S. 1982; MALE J. & THOMPSON C. 1985; LIGHT J., McNAUGHTON D., & PARNES P. 1986; HARRIS S. 1987):
A distinction must be made here between sensation - the mere recognition of the arrival of a sensory impulse, and perception - the integration of sensations into something meaningful, and there is no doubt that although sensation as such is rarely disturbed in cerebral palsy, perception is often imperfect and the child must therefore be taught to feel intelligently, in other words he must be helped to palpate or to scan and to integrate his sensations into something meaningful (FOLEY J. 1969b)
A child, deprived by his motor handicap of touching and feeling his own body, of getting his hands or fingers to his mouth, of acquiring eye‑hand coordination and the ability to grasp and manipulate objects, will not be able to develop a proper concept of his body, nor be able to physically explore his environment. His physical handicap alone may, therefore, result in a profound retardation of his mental and intellectual development (BOBATH K. & BOBATH B. 1972)
His handicap prevents him from learning through play in a natural way, so, unless he has help and encouragement, he will not be able to learn as he plays or to reach his potential (FINNIE N. 1974)
The quality of one’s social interactions have a powerful effect on social emotional development and influence the child’s cognitive functioning (McDONALD E. 1980)
A child who is left sitting all day will not have his natural curiosity stimulated or have the first hand experience upon which cognitive and language development is based (COOKE J. & WILLIAMS D. 1985)
Children with limited mobility, particularly those in wheelchairs, may lack tactile experience and therefore have limited sensory experience which may in turn affect their learning (MALE J. & THOMPSON C. 1985)
Her hands would seem to have the potential of being perfectly good ... and yet they are not. Can it be they are .... useless because she has never used them? Had being protected, looked after, babied since birth prevented the normal exploratory use of her hands which all infants learn in the first months of life (SACKS O. 1985)
Often, persons without functional communication skills are deprived of sufficient and adequate opportunities to initiate and participate in communicative interactions; as a result they may face a lifetime of substantial limitations and dependency (LIGHT J., McNAUGHTON D., & PARNES P. 1986)
Children with cerebral palsy may have difficulty in giving their parents the cues that normally facilitate development in a reciprocal way. If a child is unable to put out the communication which sparks off the necessary adult response, her development could be impeded.......Lots of stimulation from very early on will aid your child’s development. This doesn’t necessarily mean that you have to be attending to your child every second of the day but it does mean that you will need to provide opportunities......A running commentary on what you are doing will help your child to develop understanding, keep her amused and get her involved in family life (STANTON M. 1992)
Language comprehension may also be reduced, even though the neurological basis for language acquisition has not been affected. Children with extensive motor disorders will lose a significant part of the natural language teaching that other children have. Children in the pre-lingual period, cry, laugh, take hold of and reach out for objects, make gurgling noises that may resemble words, etc. These are activities that make parents and other adults react and speak to the children, which indirectly leads to language learning. After the children have begun to speak, they develop their language in a similar way by taking part in conversations. They receive comments about what they themselves say and do, and answers to questions about objects and activities they are interested in or wonder about. Children with motor disorders lose out on many of these experiences, and this may lead to reduced language comprehension and less knowledge about the environment. (VON TETZCHNER S. & MARTINSEN H. 1992)
Some people may find concepts concerning the relationships of objects in space (especially the prepositional vocabulary used to talk about such concepts) difficult to understand. The child who cannot crawl under tables and into cupboards and has never had the ability to manipulate objects in space may never develop a real understanding of concepts such as ‘on’, ‘in’, ‘up’, ‘down’, ‘behind’, ‘under’, ‘through’, and ‘between’. It is not enough to tell the person the meaning of a word (such as ‘in’). It is not sufficient to show the person a picture in which the word ‘in’ is illustrated, for example, ‘a cat in a box’, the person needs to experience the word. There is an old Chinese proverb which states:
ATell me and I’ll probably forget, show me and I might remember,
involve me and I’ll understand.”
The experiments by KRECH D., ROSENZWEIG M., & BENNETT E. (1960,1963,1964) & ROSENZWEIG D., LOVE W., & BENNETT E. (1965) in which three groups of infant rats (from the same litter) were raised in different environments, illustrates the point further. The first group was raised with the minimum of stimulation, little light, and no play things. The second group was given maximum stimulation, the Disney Land of rat cages. The third group were raised in conditions similar to the first except that they had a window into the rat cage with maximum stimulation so, although they could not participate in the fun and games, they could watch. Later the brain chemistry of the three groups of rats was examined. The rats raised in the impoverished conditions had 15% fewer glia cells, 15% smaller neurons, impoverished neural fibre structures but, more importantly, each neuron made less interconnections with other neurons than their ‘stimulated’ siblings (GREENOUGH W. in a later experiment concluded that the ‘stimulated’ rats may have as many as 2000 extra synapses per neuron ‑ see BLAKEMORE C. 1988 p. 216). The third group, with the window, did not significantly differ from the impoverished group in their neural structure:
seeing is not the same as experiencing
Consider your own experiences in learning skills (for example, learning computer skills). Would watching someone else demonstrate a program be sufficient? It would be helpful, no doubt, but without experience retention of what was demonstrated would probably be short-lived. Allow the user to experience any problematic concepts in as many ways as possible to avoid ambiguity and to reinforce the concept.
Links may be made to the other vocabulary items taught to help the learner to generalise information (both intra and inter category generalisation). For example, if the vocabulary is a range of drinks, questions may be put which encourage the learner to vocalise experiences of drinks and to ensure that the drink concept has been understood by reference to its attributes:
AWhich drink(s) is(are) brown?”
AWhich drink(s) is(are) fizzy?”
AWhich drink(s) is(are) hot?”
AWhich drink(s) come(s) in a can?”
The learner is using the AAC system to answer the questions directly. Positive results from this session suggest:
C the learner comprehends the words taught;
C the learner knows the symbol (sequence) involved;
C the teaching strategy has been effective;
C learning has taken place ‑ future progress is possible.
When the facilitator asks a learner the name of a drink (undertake this blind - see the section on monitoring progress) and the learner is able to respond correctly, then it is a reasonable assumption that the concept is sound. Further, from this point the ‘twenty questions routine’ is redundant and communication is enhanced. It is not possible to claim that every aspect of the concept is understood. Milk, comes from a cow, cows eat grass, a cow is a mammal ...... There are many biological facts about cows that I do not know and probably never will know. How much information must a person have about a particular concept before cognition? Isn’t it sufficient, for the moment, that the person is:
C able to select the item from a group by name (‘Show me the milk’);
C able to name the item (‘It is milk’);
C cognizant that it is an element of a set (‘Milk is a drink’).
All the senses should be brought into play to promote a concept. Vision and hearing are commonly utilised but others often neglected. Allow users to touch, feel, smell, and taste items. If users are unable to touch then rub the item gently on their skin. Make a point of discussing texture, springiness, squashiness, smelliness, flavour or any other relevant attribute. So many people have missed out on these experiences:
Helping people to experience
Helps people to understand
Helps people to learn
Helps people to communicate
ASHWORTH S. & JONES A.P. (1989) have argued that ‘handicap’ is a social construct whose aetiology is the result of the perseverance of negative interactions between person and environment. Thereby, we may be guilty of ‘handicapping’ an individual through a careless attitude in designing buildings, college courses, curricula, language use, and by failure to provide appropriate experiences during the formative years and in classroom interactions.
The facilitator should seek to make context explicit through the use of visual cues (models, photographs, etc). When the facilitator is ready to teach superordinate concepts (for example fruit is the superordinate concept for the range of fruits we label cherry, apple, plum, etc.) examples of items that are not part of the category should be provided:
Have many non‑relevant materials available to help the child focus and recognise the distinction between relevant and non‑relevant materials and ideas (BLANK M. & MARQUIS M. 1987)
Through the intention to develop the conceptual ability of a user, the commitment to the team approach is reaffirmed. No one person alone can hope to provide the wealth of experience that constitutes any specific concept. Parents are especially important (See author list in section TEAM 4) because they are most likely to provide experience of the outside world. If properly structured, trips to the seaside, the zoo, or a restaurant, for example, can provide a wealth of information that will support the development of a cognitive map (See DE BONO E. 1977 pp. 25‑36; RUSSELL P. 1979 pp. 65‑78; BLAKEMORE C. 1988 pp. 223 ‑ 256; ROSENFIELD I. 1988). That is not say that the facilitator should not (or may not) also engage in this sort of activity. Indeed, building specific contextual environments into the programme of study is highly desirable:
A popular vehicle for introducing new material to an ESL student is the dialogue. The richness of context provided by the dialogue allows for the simultaneous presentation of new semantic items and their appropriate uses in discourse. Thus, students are exposed to new language while experiencing its meaning and use in a typical context (SALTER W. & CLEMENTS N. 1988)
Without carryover activities, truly functional usage of a communication system does not occur. Once weekly the focus of the group was placed on play and recreationally orientated activities, integrating all previous vocabulary and communications. Activities included a trip to the zoo, appropriate stories, and an animal dress up party for which the children chose costumes, not only for themselves, but also for each staff member. This whole process required group interaction and compromise. Imagine the satisfaction they felt when staff appeared dressed as alligators, monkeys, and flamingos, as per their instructions! (ANDERSEN P. & KIERNAN S. 1987)
The curriculum for the severely disabled is often subtly modified to reflect perceived needs in highly specific ways. It may be felt, for example, that a child lacking functional motor skills in all limbs may never be able to cook and a lesser priority is placed on this area of the curriculum. Certain concepts may be best developed however specifically through experience in the kitchen. It does not matter whether a person will ever be able to perform the tasks modelled by the parent or teacher, it is the experience that is invaluable. The word ‘experience’ has been highlighted to differentiate it from mere observation (See the work of ROSENZWEIG M., LOVE W., & BENNETT E. 1965). It is not enough to show a prepositional concept (showing a picture of a cat under a table for example) the user must experience it. Likewise, it is not enough to show a picture of a potato. User experience is essential if the concept has not already been formed (physically putting it in the hand, rubbing it against the skin, tasting a little raw, smelling it, cutting it in half, chipping, boiling, and mashing it .....). We know that when we stab a fork into a chip on a plate this was once a potato growing in the ground which has been picked, washed, peeled, cut into lengths, and finally deep fried in hot vegetable oil until golden brown but some people with learning difficulties may not. Teaching concepts is a time consuming process (again reaffirming the need for team effort). A life time of inexperience is not replaced overnight. Feuerstein (1985) has argued that the adult’s role in the organisation of learning between a learner and the environment is crucial. It cannot be left to chance and self-discovery. Thus we should endeavour to organise a user’s environment to help to make each concept taught explicit.
CASE STUDY: A student stated that he did not eat bread. This led to the discovery that he ate toast but had no concept that toast is bread in a different form. The teacher immediately sprang to his feet to give the student the experience of bread turning into toast. However, he burnt the toast. He then asked ‘What is the colour of burnt toast?’ The student did not know. He had never seen burnt toast. All his life the toast had been discarded before it reached him if it was burnt.
CASE STUDY: A student was asked where chips (French fries) come from. She replied that they come from plastic bags kept in the freezer in supermarkets. She did not know that the chip comes from a potato.
CASE STUDY: A student was unaware that milk came from a cow. He stated that it came from a bottle, which came from a milkman, who got it from a bottle, which came from a milkman ....... He laughed and laughed when his tutor tried to tell him that it came from a cow. He thought the idea was disgusting.
CASE STUDY: A speech professional I met on a course was surprised to see a live chicken running around on the grass outside. She said she had never seen a real chicken before only pictures.
It is insufficient to let students learn by discovery (See FEUERSTEIN R. 1985). Material has to be carefully prepared, organised, presented, experienced, discussed, and finally, evaluated with the learner, for concepts to be taught.
The teaching of abstract vocabulary presents problems for many facilitators. Verbs and prepositions, for example, can not be brought into the classroom to be put on display, or can they? The more concrete the verb form, the more likely it is to be included in the fundamental levels of tuition. Lexical verbs, such as ‘eat’, ‘see’, ‘go’, ‘talk’, etc, can all be modelled by the facilitator and experienced by the user. The facilitator must ensure the user forms an association between nomenclature and action. Less concrete verbs, which the facilitator may also wish to be included in early lessons (for example ‑ ‘want’, ‘like’, ‘help’, etc) need careful consideration and thought. Intervention strategies need to be ongoing and regular to allow the user to form an association between the language used and the subsequent actions of others in response. This process may be aided if the alternatives experienced by the user are restricted. For example, if you wish to teach the verb ‘want’, initially you may expect the user only to use the root form (‘want’) or the first person singular form (‘I want’) in association with a choice between alternatives:
Alternative ‑ Ball or Hat
Initiation ‑ What do you want? (SPOKEN & SIGNED)
Desired response ‑ Want ... ball (please)
Possible response 1 - No response.
Possible response 2 - Reaches out and takes desired item
Possible response 3 - Points to desired item
Possible response 4 - Attempts to vocalise. Vocalisation is unrecognisable
Possible response 5 - Ball
Possible response 6 - Want
Possible response 7 - Want ball
Alternative ‑ Tea or Coffee
Initiation ‑ What do you want?
Desired response ‑ Want ... tea (please)
Alternative ‑ Skirt or Jeans
Initiation ‑ What do you want?
Desired response ‑ I want ... jeans (please)
Alternative ‑ Book or Game
Initiation ‑ What do you want?
Desired response ‑ I want ... (a) game (please)
If no response is forthcoming (Possible response 1), then the facilitator should further cue the user, AWhich one do you want? Do you want the ball (point to ball) or, do you want the hat?” (point to hat)
If the user reaches and takes the desired item (Possible response 2) then the items are too near and should be moved further away. Alternatively, the user’s hand could be directed to make the appropriate symbol choice before being allowed to take the object (physical cueing). A prompt-free strategy(See MIRENDA P. & SANTOGROSSI J. 1985; MIRENDA P. & DATTILO J. 1987) may also be used. This involves waiting for a user to make a deliberate or accidental touch of a symbol before responding accompanied by further feedback:
Whenever an accidental or deliberate touch occurred, the instructor provided contingent feedback in the form of a 15-second activation of the leisure item represented by the photographed touched. In addition, both spoken and motoric feedback were provided in the form of a confirming statement (AOh you want the _; Okay, I’ll turn it on”) accompanied by hand-over-hand assistance to touch the photograph again. This second touch was not a prompt: it occurred for feedback purposes only after the subject had touched the photograph spontaneously. (MIRENDA P. & DATTILO J. 1987)
The user could point to the desired item and not select any symbol (Possible response 3). For some, this action, in itself , may be a major step forward. If this is the case it should not be negated. Again, the user could be directed to make the symbol selection before the desired item is presented:
User points to desired item.
Facilitator holds up symbol on card such that user is now pointing/touching the ‘want’ symbol.
AYou want it? Here it is”
However, assuming that pointing is not the required mode of communication, the facilitator must creatively negate this channel in favour of the desired mode:
AIt’s rude to point Sam. Ask politely please.”
or
AWhat? I do not understand.”
The facilitator’s responses given, however, seem a little inappropriate. After all, Sam has pointed before and been rewarded with his choice of item. Mum allows Sam to point at home. When Sam has pointed in class before his intention has been perfectly clear. Why should it suddenly become difficult to understand? He is virtually touching the object he wants. If Sam is able to understand, explain why you want a symbol selection in this instance:
AI know what you want Sam but I want you to tell me first. There are two reasons for this. First is, not everybody will understand what you want as well as I do. Second, you will be able to ask for something even when you can’t see it.”
If Sam cannot understand, then it may be necessary to require he selects the symbol before the desired item is offered. Once a cognitive link has been established, Sam will be able to request an item even though it is not present. An alternative technique is to present the items visually for few seconds and then remove them from sight so that direct pointing at an object is not an option:
Facilitator presents ball and a toy. Then puts them into a box.
Sam points at the box and vocalises ‘arrr’.
AYes, I’ve put them in the box. Do you want to tell me something?”
The user may attempt to vocalise (Possible response 4). If the vocalisation is clear to the facilitator but would be unclear to a stranger, the situation is further complicated. The purpose of the exercise is not to prevent a person vocalising or to prevent use of this form of communication. The objective is to provide a choice of communication strategy such that, should a vocal initiation fail, there is an alternative symbolic means of representing the desire to the ‘listener’. Thus, like pointing, the vocal channel has to be creatively negated:
AUmmm! Sam I don’t know what you’re trying to say. I know I’m being a bit stupid today. Can you tell me another way.”
Alternatively, a person who is not used to Sam’s vocalisation could act as facilitator for this lesson. The use of role play is another option. The situation may be a ‘role play shop’ in which the user has to request an item. In this case, other users (who can use the ‘want’ phrase) might model the desired initiation:
AWant coke please”
Since a shop keeper is unlikely to understand Sam’s idiosyncratic vocalisations, the facilitator can tell Sam this. Sam may be more willing to accept the facilitator’s lack of recognition of speech in this instance.
If the user responds with the name of the desired object alone Aball”(Possible response 5) and not with A(I) want ball”, it will be necessary to be a little creative to develop this response:
Aball”
AWhat shall I do with the ball?”
Again, the user may need to be prompted to make the ‘want’ choice.
The expectation of a specific request (Awant ball”) must come developmentally after the user can demonstrate the use of a single word utterance. For some users, an utterance of the single word ball may be a major step forward and should not be invalidated. A speech professional will be able to advise you if you are uncertain.
The user may respond with want (Possible response 6) and not name the desired item. The facilitator should prompt for further information:
AYou want something. What do you want?”
The request want may need to be taught separately before a second word is added(want before want ball). There are a number of techniques for teaching general requests (See REICHLE J. & SIGAFOOS J. 1991). If the symbol (sign or other) for want is available to the user when an item is desired, the user can be prompted to touch, point to, or select it before the item is given. Prompting may initially involve physically directing the user’s hand to touch the symbol or placing the symbol (on a card?) between the user and the desired item.
Further, as a team, situations will naturally occur in which a user wants an object. The user is prompted to touch, point, or select the want symbol, on each occurrence, before it is presented. This is a team effort . It will not be adequately reinforced if some members of the team do not follow the designated procedure. It is hoped a user will form a connection between a desire, the selection of a symbol (sequence)(or other), and the fulfilment of the wish. The user then has the potential to request an item which is not present:
AWant”
AYou want something? What do you want?”
AWant”
AIs it something in this room?”
Person uses ‘no’ response.
AOh! Well then, can you tell me what it is?”
If consistent use of requesting and describing are objectives for an augmented communicator then equally there must be consistency of approach. It will be confusing if at one place and time the user is required to use the word ‘ball’ is used to mean ‘want ball’ whereas at another time and place the user is required to use it to describe a ball or to point out that there is a ball. All significant others should consistently require the use of the word ‘want’ (either on its own while indicating the desired item, in this case a ball, or, at a more advanced stage, using ‘want’ with the object label) when the user is making a request (mand - see SKINNER B. F. 1957), otherwise it should be assumed that the user is describing or pointing out an event (tact) (See LaMARRE J. & HOLLAND J. 1985; REICHLE J., BARRETT C., RICE TETLIE R., & McQUARTER R. 1987):
... if the child says, signs, or uses a graphic symbol for Asoda”, the teacher will interpret it as a description. If, on the other hand, the child says AWant” while pointing at a soda, the teacher will realize that a request has been emitted. (REICHLE J., BARRETT C., RICE TETLIE R., & McQUARTER R. 1987)
The choice of items presented to a user in any tuition session should be carefully considered. They should be preferred items the learner genuinely wants:
Initially, the learner was physically prompted to sign Awant” when offered a tray of preferred items, and then allowed to select one item from the tray. Over successive opportunities, prompts were faded until the generalised request occurred independently each time the tray was offered. (REICHLE J. & SIGAFOOS J. 1991)
People with learning difficulties using AAC systems do not readily initiate a communicative exchange. Spontaneous communication is poor or lacking altogether (See author list in section PASSIVE 8). There is a real danger a user being taught to request will learn only to do so in response to an initiating question, thus reinforcing passivity. This is not the object of the exercise:
In initiating instructional opportunities with such questions there is a danger that requests may fail to occur spontaneously. That is, the learner may learn to make requests only when instructed or otherwise prompted to do so. ( REICHLE J. & SIGAFOOS J. 1991)
The initiating prompt should be dropped occasionally and the choice of items presented to the learner without comment. It is hoped the earlier tuition will now lead to the learner requesting the desired item without any initiating prompt.
After success, it is possible to engineer the situation to encourage the use of ‘I want’. By adding a second person a choice is provided. The second person can also act as a role model. If the user gives an incorrect response we can give the ball to someone else:
AWho wants one of these?”
ABall”
AYes it’s a ball - I’ll give it to [other’s name]”
The user may not be happy with this, may point to him or herself and say ‘I’, ‘me’, etc:
AOh sorry, you want it! You did not say so. If you had said ‘I want ...’ (modelled on AAC system) I would know to give it to you”
The other person can also act as a model (preferably using the same AAC system) for the learner to follow:
AWho wants one of these?”
AI want the ball”
AYou want the ball Susan? OK. Here you are.
Now, what do you want Sammy?”
Another strategy is to provide an alternative verb option such that the use of a single noun in isolation is unclear:
AHere is biscuit and some chocolate. Do you want one or shall I put them back on the shelf?”
Achocolate”
ADo you want the chocolate or shall I put the chocolate on the shelf?
I’m not sure.”
user points to her or himself.
AYes it’s your turn to speak. Do you ......”
The user may be sent on an errand to another staff member:
ATell Mrs. Gudcare that you want a ball”
Mrs. Gudcare has been primed. If the student only says ‘ball’ she is creative in her response:
ABall Jimmy? What about a ball?”
Preliminary work on ‘I want’ can be undertaken in a small group where only the response ‘I want’ gets the goods:
AWho wants this big red hat?”
Not all of the methods outlined above will be suitable for every user. They should be adopted, adapted, or rejected by the facilitator as necessary.
While the section above is concerned with requesting through the use of ‘want’ similar methods may be used to teach the language involved in rejecting. While rejection may be seen by staff negatively, why should a vocal peer be able to reject and an augmented communicator unable? Without the ability to make rejections of items and events explicit, an individual might resort to undesirable or socially unacceptable behaviours:
Many such learners have instead learned other, often socially inappropriate (e.g., aggressive acts, self-injurious behaviour, tantrums) methods of rejecting (SIGAFOOS J. & REICHLE J. 1991)
Staff should not be too concerned about a user rejecting or refusing to do something that previously was ‘trouble free’. First, a rejection in this instance demonstrates a movement away from passivity. Second, there are techniques which should be used in such circumstances if the refusal is inappropriate. Responding appropriately is one of several strategies that may be used with an individual who rejects a compulsory event. This is dealt with in ‘Language 7' in the next section.
Prepositions (for example On, In, Out, Under, Over, In front of ...) may be acted out by the facilitator. Crawling under tables, jumping over chairs, and climbing on tables is all part of the job. No matter to what lengths you are personally prepared to go, ensure that a user has multiple experiences of the word or concept in question (Putting the user under a blanket and under a box, for example). Avoid giving one experience, as it may be assumed that under should only be used in the specific context of that experience, or that some attribute of the experience is the concept being taught (under means blanket, or fun, or darkness). The facilitator needs to ensure that there will be transference of knowledge and thus as many experiences of under as is possible are recommended. Parents and carers (indeed all significant others) should be told of and involved in current areas of development. They should be encouraged to say when the user is going under, over, getting in or out, and so on:
ALook Sally we are going under a bridge”
ASnuggle down under the quilt”
AWhere is it? Look - it’s under the table”
ALet’s get under this umbrella and keep dry”
Language is for the whole of life, and should not be confined to exercises within the communication classroom or the speech professional’s department.
There is an acute need for teachers / therapists / care-givers to develop tools and strategies to use in developing young nonverbal children’s experiential knowledge, ..... and to develop a way of transitioning classroom learning to home and community situations that facilitate experiential and world knowledge development. (KOVACH T. & SEMENTELLI C. 1990, page 81)
Children will not learn speech, if they are exposed only to speech sounds. Even if the child hears a spoken word a thousand times, e.g. ‘dog’, there is no way for the child to discover the meaning of the word unless some environmental clue is provided - in this example, a dog or a picture of a dog. Even abstract words must be learned in some such way. (STEINBERG D. 1993 page 17)
At the bottom of the previous overhead there are two phrases arranged in a semi-circle and a circle - ‘over the bridge’ and ‘around the roundabout’. These illustrate an idea for working with new words. While it is possible to illustrate new concepts in the classroom it will be more effective if all significant others are encouraged to help illustrate the individual concepts. This provides the learner with many experiences of an individual word or concept. For example, suppose the vocabulary concerns the prepositional concepts ‘over’, ‘under’, ‘around’. Significant others can be encouraged to emphasise these words when the learner is involved in some activity concerning them. Thus, while driving with their son or daughter parents may point out they are going over a bridge or around a roundabout. Placing the emphasis on the salient word in each phrase as the action is performed:
‘Putting your socks on your feet’;
‘Putting the plate on the table’;
‘Sitting on the chair’;
‘Getting on the bus’;
‘On the bridge’;
‘Mum is putting her hat on her head’.
Certain types of language, such as labelling circumscribed objects (e.g. bottle, table, ball), can be grasped easily through illustrations and or imitation. Therefore, no great effort is required to learn these words. By contrast words referring to properties which are not immediately evident require much elaboration for understanding. For example, a word such as ‘top’ is much more abstract than a word such as ‘book’. The word ‘top’ can refer to such physically different things as the ‘top’ of one’s head, the ‘top’ of one’s desk, and the ‘top’ of a building. The word unites these instances only when there is an understanding that ‘top’ refers to the highest point on anything, regardless of how different the ‘anything’ looks. Other examples requiring a similar level of abstraction are time (before, after), direction (underneath, between), relative judgements (warmer, heavier). It is here that an articulate person, be it mother, teacher, or sibling, is required to offer the necessary corroboration or negation of the child’s emerging ideas. (BLANK M. & SOLOMON F. 1968)
Significant others should not be encouraged physically to do other than they are already doing (do not drive 200 miles out of the way to cross over more bridges). Rather, they are encouraged to change their verbal behaviour, to emphasise particular concepts when they are encountered in everyday events. Keep the number of words involved at any one time below ten. This does not make the task a chore, the words are more likely to be remembered and the task is therefore more likely to be undertaken.
The facilitator who is teaching new concepts cannot assume that the learner will already have a set of ‘conceptual coathangers’ on which to peg out a hierarchical structure of words and phrases. Thus, the facilitator should take nothing for granted, or assume anything is so obvious that is not worthy of consideration:
Never make assumptions (EDSER 1990)
Each concept taught and each symbol used should be checked. Do not assume a common understanding between yourself and the user. Each concept will need to be checked, taught if not understood, and then re-checked. If symbols or symbol sequences are involved, the symbol sequence must be taught and checked. The wealth of experience and cognitive imagery that accompanies the majority of the words that make up our vocabulary (which can easily exceed 100,000 words (See CRYSTAL D. 1987)) is not likely to be available to many people with learning difficulties who are beginning to use AAC. The child who thinks milk comes from a bottle and the bottle comes from a milkman, and laughs when you point out some connection to a cow (a genuine case), is an example of the lack of experience of the world:
...mind boggles similarly at the idea of living to the same ripe old age in a city like Birmingham without knowing what a railway station is, or is like - let alone a farm. It is even harder to conceive of learning to read in the face of such impoverished experience - to read correctly words which remain mysteries. (CREBER P. 1972 p. 74)(Author’s note - for ‘read’ try reading ‘say’)
Impoverished experience of language and linguistic concepts is commonplace among many would-be augmented communicators who have the additional problems resulting from cognitive impairment. The facilitator should not endeavour to fill in the gaps in the eclectic vocabulary of each user but build anew on new foundations. Existing concepts will be reinforced and symbol associations made. Shaky or missing concepts will be discovered and can be taught.
Although this process is difficult and time consuming, it is essential in teaching any AAC system to any person with learning difficulties. The best time to do this is while the user is young; the younger the better. It is never too late but it is far more difficult in adulthood when resources are scarce and time is short (See LARCHER J. 1990).
People who are severely physically challenged may not attain certain concepts in the course of their physical and mental development. Many are unintentionally denied the experience of some concepts (BOWLEY A. & GARDNER L. 1980; LEVITT S. 1982; MALE J. & THOMPSON C. 1985; LIGHT J., McNAUGHTON D., & PARNES P. 1986; HARRIS S. 1987):
A distinction must be made here between sensation - the mere recognition of the arrival of a sensory impulse, and perception - the integration of sensations into something meaningful, and there is no doubt that although sensation as such is rarely disturbed in cerebral palsy, perception is often imperfect and the child must therefore be taught to feel intelligently, in other words he must be helped to palpate or to scan and to integrate his sensations into something meaningful (FOLEY J. 1969b)
A child, deprived by his motor handicap of touching and feeling his own body, of getting his hands or fingers to his mouth, of acquiring eye‑hand coordination and the ability to grasp and manipulate objects, will not be able to develop a proper concept of his body, nor be able to physically explore his environment. His physical handicap alone may, therefore, result in a profound retardation of his mental and intellectual development (BOBATH K. & BOBATH B. 1972)
His handicap prevents him from learning through play in a natural way, so, unless he has help and encouragement, he will not be able to learn as he plays or to reach his potential (FINNIE N. 1974)
The quality of one’s social interactions have a powerful effect on social emotional development and influence the child’s cognitive functioning (McDONALD E. 1980)
A child who is left sitting all day will not have his natural curiosity stimulated or have the first hand experience upon which cognitive and language development is based (COOKE J. & WILLIAMS D. 1985)
Children with limited mobility, particularly those in wheelchairs, may lack tactile experience and therefore have limited sensory experience which may in turn affect their learning (MALE J. & THOMPSON C. 1985)
Her hands would seem to have the potential of being perfectly good ... and yet they are not. Can it be they are .... useless because she has never used them? Had being protected, looked after, babied since birth prevented the normal exploratory use of her hands which all infants learn in the first months of life (SACKS O. 1985)
Often, persons without functional communication skills are deprived of sufficient and adequate opportunities to initiate and participate in communicative interactions; as a result they may face a lifetime of substantial limitations and dependency (LIGHT J., McNAUGHTON D., & PARNES P. 1986)
Children with cerebral palsy may have difficulty in giving their parents the cues that normally facilitate development in a reciprocal way. If a child is unable to put out the communication which sparks off the necessary adult response, her development could be impeded.......Lots of stimulation from very early on will aid your child’s development. This doesn’t necessarily mean that you have to be attending to your child every second of the day but it does mean that you will need to provide opportunities......A running commentary on what you are doing will help your child to develop understanding, keep her amused and get her involved in family life (STANTON M. 1992)
Language comprehension may also be reduced, even though the neurological basis for language acquisition has not been affected. Children with extensive motor disorders will lose a significant part of the natural language teaching that other children have. Children in the pre-lingual period, cry, laugh, take hold of and reach out for objects, make gurgling noises that may resemble words, etc. These are activities that make parents and other adults react and speak to the children, which indirectly leads to language learning. After the children have begun to speak, they develop their language in a similar way by taking part in conversations. They receive comments about what they themselves say and do, and answers to questions about objects and activities they are interested in or wonder about. Children with motor disorders lose out on many of these experiences, and this may lead to reduced language comprehension and less knowledge about the environment. (VON TETZCHNER S. & MARTINSEN H. 1992)
Some people may find concepts concerning the relationships of objects in space (especially the prepositional vocabulary used to talk about such concepts) difficult to understand. The child who cannot crawl under tables and into cupboards and has never had the ability to manipulate objects in space may never develop a real understanding of concepts such as ‘on’, ‘in’, ‘up’, ‘down’, ‘behind’, ‘under’, ‘through’, and ‘between’. It is not enough to tell the person the meaning of a word (such as ‘in’). It is not sufficient to show the person a picture in which the word ‘in’ is illustrated, for example, ‘a cat in a box’, the person needs to experience the word. There is an old Chinese proverb which states:
ATell me and I’ll probably forget, show me and I might remember,
involve me and I’ll understand.”
The experiments by KRECH D., ROSENZWEIG M., & BENNETT E. (1960,1963,1964) & ROSENZWEIG D., LOVE W., & BENNETT E. (1965) in which three groups of infant rats (from the same litter) were raised in different environments, illustrates the point further. The first group was raised with the minimum of stimulation, little light, and no play things. The second group was given maximum stimulation, the Disney Land of rat cages. The third group were raised in conditions similar to the first except that they had a window into the rat cage with maximum stimulation so, although they could not participate in the fun and games, they could watch. Later the brain chemistry of the three groups of rats was examined. The rats raised in the impoverished conditions had 15% fewer glia cells, 15% smaller neurons, impoverished neural fibre structures but, more importantly, each neuron made less interconnections with other neurons than their ‘stimulated’ siblings (GREENOUGH W. in a later experiment concluded that the ‘stimulated’ rats may have as many as 2000 extra synapses per neuron ‑ see BLAKEMORE C. 1988 p. 216). The third group, with the window, did not significantly differ from the impoverished group in their neural structure:
seeing is not the same as experiencing
Consider your own experiences in learning skills (for example, learning computer skills). Would watching someone else demonstrate a program be sufficient? It would be helpful, no doubt, but without experience retention of what was demonstrated would probably be short-lived. Allow the user to experience any problematic concepts in as many ways as possible to avoid ambiguity and to reinforce the concept.
Links may be made to the other vocabulary items taught to help the learner to generalise information (both intra and inter category generalisation). For example, if the vocabulary is a range of drinks, questions may be put which encourage the learner to vocalise experiences of drinks and to ensure that the drink concept has been understood by reference to its attributes:
AWhich drink(s) is(are) brown?”
AWhich drink(s) is(are) fizzy?”
AWhich drink(s) is(are) hot?”
AWhich drink(s) come(s) in a can?”
The learner is using the AAC system to answer the questions directly. Positive results from this session suggest:
C the learner comprehends the words taught;
C the learner knows the symbol (sequence) involved;
C the teaching strategy has been effective;
C learning has taken place ‑ future progress is possible.
When the facilitator asks a learner the name of a drink (undertake this blind - see the section on monitoring progress) and the learner is able to respond correctly, then it is a reasonable assumption that the concept is sound. Further, from this point the ‘twenty questions routine’ is redundant and communication is enhanced. It is not possible to claim that every aspect of the concept is understood. Milk, comes from a cow, cows eat grass, a cow is a mammal ...... There are many biological facts about cows that I do not know and probably never will know. How much information must a person have about a particular concept before cognition? Isn’t it sufficient, for the moment, that the person is:
C able to select the item from a group by name (‘Show me the milk’);
C able to name the item (‘It is milk’);
C cognizant that it is an element of a set (‘Milk is a drink’).
All the senses should be brought into play to promote a concept. Vision and hearing are commonly utilised but others often neglected. Allow users to touch, feel, smell, and taste items. If users are unable to touch then rub the item gently on their skin. Make a point of discussing texture, springiness, squashiness, smelliness, flavour or any other relevant attribute. So many people have missed out on these experiences:
Helping people to experience
Helps people to understand
Helps people to learn
Helps people to communicate
ASHWORTH S. & JONES A.P. (1989) have argued that ‘handicap’ is a social construct whose aetiology is the result of the perseverance of negative interactions between person and environment. Thereby, we may be guilty of ‘handicapping’ an individual through a careless attitude in designing buildings, college courses, curricula, language use, and by failure to provide appropriate experiences during the formative years and in classroom interactions.
The facilitator should seek to make context explicit through the use of visual cues (models, photographs, etc). When the facilitator is ready to teach superordinate concepts (for example fruit is the superordinate concept for the range of fruits we label cherry, apple, plum, etc.) examples of items that are not part of the category should be provided:
Have many non‑relevant materials available to help the child focus and recognise the distinction between relevant and non‑relevant materials and ideas (BLANK M. & MARQUIS M. 1987)
Through the intention to develop the conceptual ability of a user, the commitment to the team approach is reaffirmed. No one person alone can hope to provide the wealth of experience that constitutes any specific concept. Parents are especially important (See author list in section TEAM 4) because they are most likely to provide experience of the outside world. If properly structured, trips to the seaside, the zoo, or a restaurant, for example, can provide a wealth of information that will support the development of a cognitive map (See DE BONO E. 1977 pp. 25‑36; RUSSELL P. 1979 pp. 65‑78; BLAKEMORE C. 1988 pp. 223 ‑ 256; ROSENFIELD I. 1988). That is not say that the facilitator should not (or may not) also engage in this sort of activity. Indeed, building specific contextual environments into the programme of study is highly desirable:
A popular vehicle for introducing new material to an ESL student is the dialogue. The richness of context provided by the dialogue allows for the simultaneous presentation of new semantic items and their appropriate uses in discourse. Thus, students are exposed to new language while experiencing its meaning and use in a typical context (SALTER W. & CLEMENTS N. 1988)
Without carryover activities, truly functional usage of a communication system does not occur. Once weekly the focus of the group was placed on play and recreationally orientated activities, integrating all previous vocabulary and communications. Activities included a trip to the zoo, appropriate stories, and an animal dress up party for which the children chose costumes, not only for themselves, but also for each staff member. This whole process required group interaction and compromise. Imagine the satisfaction they felt when staff appeared dressed as alligators, monkeys, and flamingos, as per their instructions! (ANDERSEN P. & KIERNAN S. 1987)
The curriculum for the severely disabled is often subtly modified to reflect perceived needs in highly specific ways. It may be felt, for example, that a child lacking functional motor skills in all limbs may never be able to cook and a lesser priority is placed on this area of the curriculum. Certain concepts may be best developed however specifically through experience in the kitchen. It does not matter whether a person will ever be able to perform the tasks modelled by the parent or teacher, it is the experience that is invaluable. The word ‘experience’ has been highlighted to differentiate it from mere observation (See the work of ROSENZWEIG M., LOVE W., & BENNETT E. 1965). It is not enough to show a prepositional concept (showing a picture of a cat under a table for example) the user must experience it. Likewise, it is not enough to show a picture of a potato. User experience is essential if the concept has not already been formed (physically putting it in the hand, rubbing it against the skin, tasting a little raw, smelling it, cutting it in half, chipping, boiling, and mashing it .....). We know that when we stab a fork into a chip on a plate this was once a potato growing in the ground which has been picked, washed, peeled, cut into lengths, and finally deep fried in hot vegetable oil until golden brown but some people with learning difficulties may not. Teaching concepts is a time consuming process (again reaffirming the need for team effort). A life time of inexperience is not replaced overnight. Feuerstein (1985) has argued that the adult’s role in the organisation of learning between a learner and the environment is crucial. It cannot be left to chance and self-discovery. Thus we should endeavour to organise a user’s environment to help to make each concept taught explicit.
CASE STUDY: A student stated that he did not eat bread. This led to the discovery that he ate toast but had no concept that toast is bread in a different form. The teacher immediately sprang to his feet to give the student the experience of bread turning into toast. However, he burnt the toast. He then asked ‘What is the colour of burnt toast?’ The student did not know. He had never seen burnt toast. All his life the toast had been discarded before it reached him if it was burnt.
CASE STUDY: A student was asked where chips (French fries) come from. She replied that they come from plastic bags kept in the freezer in supermarkets. She did not know that the chip comes from a potato.
CASE STUDY: A student was unaware that milk came from a cow. He stated that it came from a bottle, which came from a milkman, who got it from a bottle, which came from a milkman ....... He laughed and laughed when his tutor tried to tell him that it came from a cow. He thought the idea was disgusting.
CASE STUDY: A speech professional I met on a course was surprised to see a live chicken running around on the grass outside. She said she had never seen a real chicken before only pictures.
It is insufficient to let students learn by discovery (See FEUERSTEIN R. 1985). Material has to be carefully prepared, organised, presented, experienced, discussed, and finally, evaluated with the learner, for concepts to be taught.
The teaching of abstract vocabulary presents problems for many facilitators. Verbs and prepositions, for example, can not be brought into the classroom to be put on display, or can they? The more concrete the verb form, the more likely it is to be included in the fundamental levels of tuition. Lexical verbs, such as ‘eat’, ‘see’, ‘go’, ‘talk’, etc, can all be modelled by the facilitator and experienced by the user. The facilitator must ensure the user forms an association between nomenclature and action. Less concrete verbs, which the facilitator may also wish to be included in early lessons (for example ‑ ‘want’, ‘like’, ‘help’, etc) need careful consideration and thought. Intervention strategies need to be ongoing and regular to allow the user to form an association between the language used and the subsequent actions of others in response. This process may be aided if the alternatives experienced by the user are restricted. For example, if you wish to teach the verb ‘want’, initially you may expect the user only to use the root form (‘want’) or the first person singular form (‘I want’) in association with a choice between alternatives:
Alternative ‑ Ball or Hat
Initiation ‑ What do you want? (SPOKEN & SIGNED)
Desired response ‑ Want ... ball (please)
Possible response 1 - No response.
Possible response 2 - Reaches out and takes desired item
Possible response 3 - Points to desired item
Possible response 4 - Attempts to vocalise. Vocalisation is unrecognisable
Possible response 5 - Ball
Possible response 6 - Want
Possible response 7 - Want ball
Alternative ‑ Tea or Coffee
Initiation ‑ What do you want?
Desired response ‑ Want ... tea (please)
Alternative ‑ Skirt or Jeans
Initiation ‑ What do you want?
Desired response ‑ I want ... jeans (please)
Alternative ‑ Book or Game
Initiation ‑ What do you want?
Desired response ‑ I want ... (a) game (please)
If no response is forthcoming (Possible response 1), then the facilitator should further cue the user, AWhich one do you want? Do you want the ball (point to ball) or, do you want the hat?” (point to hat)
If the user reaches and takes the desired item (Possible response 2) then the items are too near and should be moved further away. Alternatively, the user’s hand could be directed to make the appropriate symbol choice before being allowed to take the object (physical cueing). A prompt-free strategy(See MIRENDA P. & SANTOGROSSI J. 1985; MIRENDA P. & DATTILO J. 1987) may also be used. This involves waiting for a user to make a deliberate or accidental touch of a symbol before responding accompanied by further feedback:
Whenever an accidental or deliberate touch occurred, the instructor provided contingent feedback in the form of a 15-second activation of the leisure item represented by the photographed touched. In addition, both spoken and motoric feedback were provided in the form of a confirming statement (AOh you want the _; Okay, I’ll turn it on”) accompanied by hand-over-hand assistance to touch the photograph again. This second touch was not a prompt: it occurred for feedback purposes only after the subject had touched the photograph spontaneously. (MIRENDA P. & DATTILO J. 1987)
The user could point to the desired item and not select any symbol (Possible response 3). For some, this action, in itself , may be a major step forward. If this is the case it should not be negated. Again, the user could be directed to make the symbol selection before the desired item is presented:
User points to desired item.
Facilitator holds up symbol on card such that user is now pointing/touching the ‘want’ symbol.
AYou want it? Here it is”
However, assuming that pointing is not the required mode of communication, the facilitator must creatively negate this channel in favour of the desired mode:
AIt’s rude to point Sam. Ask politely please.”
or
AWhat? I do not understand.”
The facilitator’s responses given, however, seem a little inappropriate. After all, Sam has pointed before and been rewarded with his choice of item. Mum allows Sam to point at home. When Sam has pointed in class before his intention has been perfectly clear. Why should it suddenly become difficult to understand? He is virtually touching the object he wants. If Sam is able to understand, explain why you want a symbol selection in this instance:
AI know what you want Sam but I want you to tell me first. There are two reasons for this. First is, not everybody will understand what you want as well as I do. Second, you will be able to ask for something even when you can’t see it.”
If Sam cannot understand, then it may be necessary to require he selects the symbol before the desired item is offered. Once a cognitive link has been established, Sam will be able to request an item even though it is not present. An alternative technique is to present the items visually for few seconds and then remove them from sight so that direct pointing at an object is not an option:
Facilitator presents ball and a toy. Then puts them into a box.
Sam points at the box and vocalises ‘arrr’.
AYes, I’ve put them in the box. Do you want to tell me something?”
The user may attempt to vocalise (Possible response 4). If the vocalisation is clear to the facilitator but would be unclear to a stranger, the situation is further complicated. The purpose of the exercise is not to prevent a person vocalising or to prevent use of this form of communication. The objective is to provide a choice of communication strategy such that, should a vocal initiation fail, there is an alternative symbolic means of representing the desire to the ‘listener’. Thus, like pointing, the vocal channel has to be creatively negated:
AUmmm! Sam I don’t know what you’re trying to say. I know I’m being a bit stupid today. Can you tell me another way.”
Alternatively, a person who is not used to Sam’s vocalisation could act as facilitator for this lesson. The use of role play is another option. The situation may be a ‘role play shop’ in which the user has to request an item. In this case, other users (who can use the ‘want’ phrase) might model the desired initiation:
AWant coke please”
Since a shop keeper is unlikely to understand Sam’s idiosyncratic vocalisations, the facilitator can tell Sam this. Sam may be more willing to accept the facilitator’s lack of recognition of speech in this instance.
If the user responds with the name of the desired object alone Aball”(Possible response 5) and not with A(I) want ball”, it will be necessary to be a little creative to develop this response:
Aball”
AWhat shall I do with the ball?”
Again, the user may need to be prompted to make the ‘want’ choice.
The expectation of a specific request (Awant ball”) must come developmentally after the user can demonstrate the use of a single word utterance. For some users, an utterance of the single word ball may be a major step forward and should not be invalidated. A speech professional will be able to advise you if you are uncertain.
The user may respond with want (Possible response 6) and not name the desired item. The facilitator should prompt for further information:
AYou want something. What do you want?”
The request want may need to be taught separately before a second word is added(want before want ball). There are a number of techniques for teaching general requests (See REICHLE J. & SIGAFOOS J. 1991). If the symbol (sign or other) for want is available to the user when an item is desired, the user can be prompted to touch, point to, or select it before the item is given. Prompting may initially involve physically directing the user’s hand to touch the symbol or placing the symbol (on a card?) between the user and the desired item.
Further, as a team, situations will naturally occur in which a user wants an object. The user is prompted to touch, point, or select the want symbol, on each occurrence, before it is presented. This is a team effort . It will not be adequately reinforced if some members of the team do not follow the designated procedure. It is hoped a user will form a connection between a desire, the selection of a symbol (sequence)(or other), and the fulfilment of the wish. The user then has the potential to request an item which is not present:
AWant”
AYou want something? What do you want?”
AWant”
AIs it something in this room?”
Person uses ‘no’ response.
AOh! Well then, can you tell me what it is?”
If consistent use of requesting and describing are objectives for an augmented communicator then equally there must be consistency of approach. It will be confusing if at one place and time the user is required to use the word ‘ball’ is used to mean ‘want ball’ whereas at another time and place the user is required to use it to describe a ball or to point out that there is a ball. All significant others should consistently require the use of the word ‘want’ (either on its own while indicating the desired item, in this case a ball, or, at a more advanced stage, using ‘want’ with the object label) when the user is making a request (mand - see SKINNER B. F. 1957), otherwise it should be assumed that the user is describing or pointing out an event (tact) (See LaMARRE J. & HOLLAND J. 1985; REICHLE J., BARRETT C., RICE TETLIE R., & McQUARTER R. 1987):
... if the child says, signs, or uses a graphic symbol for Asoda”, the teacher will interpret it as a description. If, on the other hand, the child says AWant” while pointing at a soda, the teacher will realize that a request has been emitted. (REICHLE J., BARRETT C., RICE TETLIE R., & McQUARTER R. 1987)
The choice of items presented to a user in any tuition session should be carefully considered. They should be preferred items the learner genuinely wants:
Initially, the learner was physically prompted to sign Awant” when offered a tray of preferred items, and then allowed to select one item from the tray. Over successive opportunities, prompts were faded until the generalised request occurred independently each time the tray was offered. (REICHLE J. & SIGAFOOS J. 1991)
People with learning difficulties using AAC systems do not readily initiate a communicative exchange. Spontaneous communication is poor or lacking altogether (See author list in section PASSIVE 8). There is a real danger a user being taught to request will learn only to do so in response to an initiating question, thus reinforcing passivity. This is not the object of the exercise:
In initiating instructional opportunities with such questions there is a danger that requests may fail to occur spontaneously. That is, the learner may learn to make requests only when instructed or otherwise prompted to do so. ( REICHLE J. & SIGAFOOS J. 1991)
The initiating prompt should be dropped occasionally and the choice of items presented to the learner without comment. It is hoped the earlier tuition will now lead to the learner requesting the desired item without any initiating prompt.
After success, it is possible to engineer the situation to encourage the use of ‘I want’. By adding a second person a choice is provided. The second person can also act as a role model. If the user gives an incorrect response we can give the ball to someone else:
AWho wants one of these?”
ABall”
AYes it’s a ball - I’ll give it to [other’s name]”
The user may not be happy with this, may point to him or herself and say ‘I’, ‘me’, etc:
AOh sorry, you want it! You did not say so. If you had said ‘I want ...’ (modelled on AAC system) I would know to give it to you”
The other person can also act as a model (preferably using the same AAC system) for the learner to follow:
AWho wants one of these?”
AI want the ball”
AYou want the ball Susan? OK. Here you are.
Now, what do you want Sammy?”
Another strategy is to provide an alternative verb option such that the use of a single noun in isolation is unclear:
AHere is biscuit and some chocolate. Do you want one or shall I put them back on the shelf?”
Achocolate”
ADo you want the chocolate or shall I put the chocolate on the shelf?
I’m not sure.”
user points to her or himself.
AYes it’s your turn to speak. Do you ......”
The user may be sent on an errand to another staff member:
ATell Mrs. Gudcare that you want a ball”
Mrs. Gudcare has been primed. If the student only says ‘ball’ she is creative in her response:
ABall Jimmy? What about a ball?”
Preliminary work on ‘I want’ can be undertaken in a small group where only the response ‘I want’ gets the goods:
AWho wants this big red hat?”
Not all of the methods outlined above will be suitable for every user. They should be adopted, adapted, or rejected by the facilitator as necessary.
While the section above is concerned with requesting through the use of ‘want’ similar methods may be used to teach the language involved in rejecting. While rejection may be seen by staff negatively, why should a vocal peer be able to reject and an augmented communicator unable? Without the ability to make rejections of items and events explicit, an individual might resort to undesirable or socially unacceptable behaviours:
Many such learners have instead learned other, often socially inappropriate (e.g., aggressive acts, self-injurious behaviour, tantrums) methods of rejecting (SIGAFOOS J. & REICHLE J. 1991)
Staff should not be too concerned about a user rejecting or refusing to do something that previously was ‘trouble free’. First, a rejection in this instance demonstrates a movement away from passivity. Second, there are techniques which should be used in such circumstances if the refusal is inappropriate. Responding appropriately is one of several strategies that may be used with an individual who rejects a compulsory event. This is dealt with in ‘Language 7' in the next section.
Prepositions (for example On, In, Out, Under, Over, In front of ...) may be acted out by the facilitator. Crawling under tables, jumping over chairs, and climbing on tables is all part of the job. No matter to what lengths you are personally prepared to go, ensure that a user has multiple experiences of the word or concept in question (Putting the user under a blanket and under a box, for example). Avoid giving one experience, as it may be assumed that under should only be used in the specific context of that experience, or that some attribute of the experience is the concept being taught (under means blanket, or fun, or darkness). The facilitator needs to ensure that there will be transference of knowledge and thus as many experiences of under as is possible are recommended. Parents and carers (indeed all significant others) should be told of and involved in current areas of development. They should be encouraged to say when the user is going under, over, getting in or out, and so on:
ALook Sally we are going under a bridge”
ASnuggle down under the quilt”
AWhere is it? Look - it’s under the table”
ALet’s get under this umbrella and keep dry”
Language is for the whole of life, and should not be confined to exercises within the communication classroom or the speech professional’s department.
LANGUAGE 7 - Respond appropriately
In the cartoon Sam has openly called the head teacher a plonker. Staff reactions vary. Some agree and some disagree. Some laugh and others are stony faced. The head takes a rather more enlightened line (demonstrating he isn’t such a plonker). He calmly informs Sam that he does not think he should be using such language in school. There is no anger - Sam is not expelled - Sam is informed that his linguistic behaviour is inappropriate. Of course, if Sam were to continue to make this comment then the message that this is inappropriate would have to be made more forcibly.
Children are not born knowing when it is right and wrong to perform certain linguistic actions. If they were they would not make the mistakes they do. They learn through experience. If that experience is inappropriate:
C Jimmy utters an expletive - teacher smiles and ignores it;
C Jimmy utters an expletive - the staff all laugh;
C Jimmy utters an expletive - it is deleted from his vocabulary;
C Jimmy utters an expletive - Jimmy is shouted at until he begins to cry;
C Jimmy utters an expletive - Jimmy is expelled.
All the above are inappropriate because Jimmy learns the wrong lesson. Consider what Jimmy would learn from each of the above examples.
People may decide not to give a user access to negative statements and comments. People remove words from a user’s vocabulary. Consider for a moment what these actions mean to a person who is able to speak. Censorship? Big brother? Certain language may not be taught nor uttered on pain of ... neuro-surgery to remove sections of the brain that are thought to contain words that are not in political favour.
There is a better way. Respond appropriately. The person will learn that in some situations some language forms are inappropriate. Ask yourself:
‘What would I do if she or he were able to speak and had said that?’
Why should our reactions differ because a person is using a form of AAC?
CASE STUDY: Student X was 36 and had a head injury. He always said ‘testicles’ when a visitor entered the classroom. The visitor’s reaction was usually either shock or horror or laughter. In any event, they usually walked over and began to chat with him. His tutor said that this behaviour was ignored because the result was people would chat to X who otherwise might have passed him by. The college was to have a Royal visitor. The head of education asked that testicles be removed from X’s system so that he would not say it to this important person. The tutor refused. Instead, he finally dealt with X’s behavioural problem and discussed the pragmatics of using such words in front of strangers. X agreed not to say testicles to the Royal visitor. On the big day he was a perfect gentleman. He was great and so was she!
CASE STUDY: A facilitator rang to say that a student kept saying sausage over and over again much to the annoyance of everyone. They had decided to remove the word from the vocabulary.
CASE STUDY: A female student of 19 accompanied her mother to church every Sunday. Mother reported that X loved going to church and had a crush on the young preacher. However, when X had her VOCA she would often say things during the service when people were talking to the congregation. Mother found this embarrassing and said that she now left the VOCA at home to silence her daughter at church on a Sunday.
Children are not born knowing when it is right and wrong to perform certain linguistic actions. If they were they would not make the mistakes they do. They learn through experience. If that experience is inappropriate:
C Jimmy utters an expletive - teacher smiles and ignores it;
C Jimmy utters an expletive - the staff all laugh;
C Jimmy utters an expletive - it is deleted from his vocabulary;
C Jimmy utters an expletive - Jimmy is shouted at until he begins to cry;
C Jimmy utters an expletive - Jimmy is expelled.
All the above are inappropriate because Jimmy learns the wrong lesson. Consider what Jimmy would learn from each of the above examples.
People may decide not to give a user access to negative statements and comments. People remove words from a user’s vocabulary. Consider for a moment what these actions mean to a person who is able to speak. Censorship? Big brother? Certain language may not be taught nor uttered on pain of ... neuro-surgery to remove sections of the brain that are thought to contain words that are not in political favour.
There is a better way. Respond appropriately. The person will learn that in some situations some language forms are inappropriate. Ask yourself:
‘What would I do if she or he were able to speak and had said that?’
Why should our reactions differ because a person is using a form of AAC?
CASE STUDY: Student X was 36 and had a head injury. He always said ‘testicles’ when a visitor entered the classroom. The visitor’s reaction was usually either shock or horror or laughter. In any event, they usually walked over and began to chat with him. His tutor said that this behaviour was ignored because the result was people would chat to X who otherwise might have passed him by. The college was to have a Royal visitor. The head of education asked that testicles be removed from X’s system so that he would not say it to this important person. The tutor refused. Instead, he finally dealt with X’s behavioural problem and discussed the pragmatics of using such words in front of strangers. X agreed not to say testicles to the Royal visitor. On the big day he was a perfect gentleman. He was great and so was she!
CASE STUDY: A facilitator rang to say that a student kept saying sausage over and over again much to the annoyance of everyone. They had decided to remove the word from the vocabulary.
CASE STUDY: A female student of 19 accompanied her mother to church every Sunday. Mother reported that X loved going to church and had a crush on the young preacher. However, when X had her VOCA she would often say things during the service when people were talking to the congregation. Mother found this embarrassing and said that she now left the VOCA at home to silence her daughter at church on a Sunday.