Betsy, You and the other responses have hit on so many of the issues/frustrations that I care about so deeply in AAC. 1) the overuse or misuse of AAC strategies; 2) underestimation of children's communication potential; 3) choosing a tool based upon a child's label versus what's needed in that individual child's environment, their unique, natural communication abilities and what is truly needed to be supplemented or augmented through AAC.
It is so easy for people, whether that is professional staff or family members, to look at AAC as a very medical or clinical science model type of prescribing an item. You have this (insert label/diagnosis here), so you get this (insert name of device/app/printed book here). Oh how easy it would all be. And there are people that look at it that way, and will tell you that it is just that easy. There are also those that want it all to be in the hands of the clinician with complicated formulas and a mystery of complex decision making. That there is an "art" if you will, to AAC. Well, I've been a part of that for a long time too. And unfortunately, as we look so much at it as just an "art" to the feature matching part, this has often left out the consumer and the people closest to the consumer.
So quite possibly can a better marrying of choosing AAC systems be closer to more of a mixture of art and science? The iPad has led us in that direction, There's much that families have found out that their child with complex communication needs can do and can "say" with that iPad - even if "saying" is telling people what their favorite parts of movies are by skipping through the fastforward sequence of a movie to get to that good part. So, isn't that communication? when a little boy can make his grandpa laugh and laugh at the same parts in a cartoon that he does?
Now, don't think I'm the first person to come up with this idea. A whole group of people got together and look at the influence of what iPads and other mobile technologies have done to AAC and wrote a White Paper about it a couple of years ago. And it has made some impact upon how and who and what the decision making process looks like for many of the teams that I'm involved with now.
We all have to be better observers of how people with complex communication needs communicate. We also have to look at practices that we use to get people started, such as PECS, which can be really effective at getting someone connected to a request for an item - but once that starts happening - you need to move on. And that's what we don't do, especially in schools. We tend to underestimate and over-test abilities and we don't realize that we've satiated a kid to boredom with certain items that they don't want to ask for that "blue dog" anymore, they don't care if you every "pop" another bubble every again, so they don't ask for "more". And what do we do? We say, "oh, she forgot". "He doesn't have it at 80% 3 times a week... blah, blah, blah. and really, the kid doesn't care about "more" of that item. He really wants to say "throw that thing away!" and "get me something different".
This is why it is so important to have more vocabulary that one or two items, Vocabulary that provides options for children to tell you what they really do want to say, such as adding a "something different" to every set of choices, if you must have a predetermined, limited set of choices; when asking instructional questions, add an "I don't know", to their set of responses; and some other option to a "yes", "no", such as a "maybe". Or "ask me later" or "you choose".
Of course, now I've gone way past your discussion points and on to my own frustrations....
Kelly Fonner - 6/8/2016
Kelly,
Thank you for your comments! Yes, we certainly do need to observe and honor the unique ways in which people with complex communication needs communicate. We tend to be far too data driven and task oriented while ignoring essential communication needs when serving this population. I appreciate you including the White Paper; well worth reading!
Betsy
betsy@augcomsolutions.com - 6/13/2016