no questions, frequently interrupt, focus on the technology, and provide limited opportunities (Kent-Walsh & McKnaugh- ton, 2005). These characteristics are not conducive to providing natural opportunities for spontaneous communication, and in- hibit expressive communication for AAC users. We focused on building partner characteristics that were identified as having a positive impact on spontaneous communication, such as pro- viding wait time, incorporating expectant looks, asking open ended questions, providing active feedback, focusing on the person and not the AAC device, and as previously emphasized, providing opportunities for practice and modeling without ex- pectation. This helped us to remember that a communication device is a tool. The tool does not create opportunities, but in- stead people create the opportunities. No matter what tool our students have in front of them, we as educators have the power to create opportunities for practice and learning. The other idea we reflected on was that communication is about more than just academic learning and building language skills. Communication is about relationships! We as educators need to focus on the person first, think about their likes/dis- likes, and engage with them in a fun and exciting way. Commu- nication is about connection, talking about things that interest us or things that don’t, and providing limitless opportunities. It should be fun and intrinsically motivating, not task oriented or compliance driven. Along those lines, we supported teachers in incorporating motivating choice activities, materials, etc. that would spark communication and engage our students, as well as help them to develop their skills at expressing interests and preferences. We also realized that teachers needed more support in tar- geting core vocabulary across their day, as well as more ideas for how to create opportunities to practice core words to meet their regulation and social needs. As a result, we created a core communication curriculum. The scope and sequence for this curriculum maintained a core word focus throughout the year, as well as structured teaching and activities related to social language and behavioral regulation. Having a strong core vo- cabulary benefits all students, not just AAC users; as a result, this “Core Communication” class was implemented building wide from 6th grade to 12th grade. This class provided oppor- tunities for staff and students to build connections and engage in activities that promoted modeling without expectation, so- cial interactions, and opportunities to practice a variety of func- tional communication skills that could generalize throughout their day at school. IN CONCLUSION: Moving from a compliance based approach to AAC, espe- cially within the context of the classroom where so many aca- demic demands exist, was not an easy process. To truly address the issue, we had to approach things from a systems stand-
point, ensuring that both our students and staff had access to the tools, devices and support they needed to be successful, as well as providing targeted professional development to under- stand the reasoning behind the recommended changes. Our growth, as an organization, is apparent when you walk through our halls or sit in our classrooms; while we are still learning and growing professionally, it is clear that our staff are exemplifying presumed competence in the work they do with our early com- municators every single day. We continue to remain dedicated to ongoing learning and doing what is best for our students. As they say, when you know better - do better! And that’s what we strive to do everyday! REFERENCES: Biederman, G, Fairhall, Raven, and Davey, V. (1998) Teaching basic skills to children with Down Syndrome and develop- mental delays: The relative efficacy of interactive modeling with social rewards for benchmark achievements and pas- sive observation. Down Syndrome Research and Practice, 5(1), 26-33. doi:10.3104/reports.72 Van Tatenhove. G. (2009). Building Language Competence with Students Using AAC Devices: Six Challenges. Perspec- tives on Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 18(2), 38-47 Kent-Walsh, J., & Mcnaughton, D. (2005). Communication Partner Instruction in AAC: Present Practices and Future Directions. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 21(3), 195-204. doi:10.1080/07434610400006646 Beukelman, D. (1991). Magic and cost of communicative com- petence. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 7, 2-10. doi: 10.1080/07434619112331275633
February / March, 2024 | https://www.closingthegap.com/benefits-of-membership/ 27 Closing The Gap © 2024 Closing The Gap, Inc. All rights reserved.
BACK TO CONTENTS
Made with FlippingBook Ebook Creator