The influence of classroom context on AAC device use for nonspeaking school-aged autistic children

Purpose: Language learning, including on a speech-generating device (SGD), relies on having communication opportunities to use language. Yet, children who use SGDs do not consistently use their devices throughout the day. As a first step towards increasing device use, it is important to determine ho...

Full description

Saved in:

Bibliographic Details
Published in:	International journal of speech language pathology Vol. ahead-of-print; no. ahead-of-print; pp. 1 - 11
Main Authors:	Suhr, Meredith, Bean, Allison, Rolniak, Jordyn, Paden Cargill, Lindsey, Lyle, Samantha
Format:	Journal Article
Language:	English
Published:	England Taylor & Francis 01-06-2024 Taylor & Francis Ltd
Subjects:	Augmentative and alternative communication Autism Autistic children Autistic Disorder Child Children Classroom communication Classrooms Communication Communication Aids for Disabled context Female Humans Imitation language Learning environment Male Native language acquisition school-age children Schools speech generating device System theory context Autism speech generating device language augmentative and alternative communication school-age children
Online Access:	Get full text
Tags:	Add Tag No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!

Description
Summary:	Purpose: Language learning, including on a speech-generating device (SGD), relies on having communication opportunities to use language. Yet, children who use SGDs do not consistently use their devices throughout the day. As a first step towards increasing device use, it is important to determine how the numerous contexts (e.g. recess, lunch, academic) that exist throughout the school day impact the frequency and type of communication opportunities that children have. Within this study, we used complex adaptive systems theory to investigate whether there were differences in how frequently nonspeaking autistic children classified as emerging communicators (i.e. children who do not consistently produce two-word utterances independently and do not communicate for a variety of communicative functions) used their SGDs to communicate and the type of communication they produced (i.e. spontaneous, prompted, or imitation) across different classroom contexts. Method: Fourteen autistic children who use an SGD as their primary mode of communication were videotaped up to nine times throughout different school days. The videos were coded for the type of device use (i.e. whether the child's use of the device was spontaneous, prompted, or imitation) and classroom context, which were categorised by the inherent level of support and directiveness. Result: There was a significant difference in SGD use across classroom contexts. Overall, the children communicated more and engaged in more spontaneous, prompted, and imitated communication in classroom contexts with high levels of structure (e.g. tabletop work) compared to contexts with low levels of structure and directiveness (e.g. free play). Conclusion: This study highlights the need to increase communication opportunities across all school contexts. Creating appropriate communication opportunities in all contexts, especially those with less structure, will help ensure that communication does not become context-bound.
Bibliography:	ObjectType-Article-1 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-2 content type line 23
ISSN:	1754-9507 1754-9515 1754-9515
DOI:	10.1080/17549507.2023.2220992