7
11/15/18 1 Parent Instruction in Partner.Augmented Input Jill E Senner, PhD, CCC/SLP Kathleen Post, MS, CCC/SLP Matthew R. Baud, MS, CCC/SLP Brian Patterson, PhD Research Questions 1. Will training parents in PAI using the Kent9Walsh and McNaughton (2005) instructional model increase parent use of modeling on a child’s SGDs in regularly occurring home activities? 2. Can parents learn to model a variety of words on their child’s SGD following participation in PAI training? 3. Will training parents in PAI increase frequency of child SGD use at home? 4. Will training parents in PAI affect children’s language output using the SGD? Child Subjects Candidacy Criteria 5410 years of age Produced fewer than 10 intelligible words using natural speech Dynamic display SGD loaded with a commercially available core vocabulary Direct selection with a finger (i.e., physically pointed to or pressed a button on the SGD) to access the device All children lived with the parent participating in the study 100% of the time. Child Demographic Information Subject # Gender Age Diagnosis SGD Vocabulary Length of Device Use C1 M 6;5 Autism iPad 1 LAMP WFL 2 Full <6 months C2 M 9;6 Autism Dysgenesis of the Corpus Callosum Accent 1000 2 Unity 2 84 Sequenced >2 years C3 M 6;9 Tracheostomy Vocal Fold Paralysis NOVA Chat 3 10 WP 4 60 >2 years C4 F 5;0 Developmental Delay NOVA Chat 3 10 WP 4 42 Basic >2 years LAMP WFL2 – Language Acquisition through Motor Planning – Words for Life App Unity2 – Unity Language System WP4 – WordPower Parent Subjects All mothers All married. No history of hearing or learning difficulties. All had other children without disabilities living in the home. Two parents were stay>at>home mothers and two worked outside of the home. Self>selected to participate in the study and were made aware of the project via posted announcements, letters to local therapists providing services to children with disabilities, and social media. Parent Demographic Information Subject # Household Income Education Ethnicity Employed outside of the home # of other children living at home Previous PAI training P1 Under $46,960 Some College, No Degree Latino, Spanish Origin Yes 2 No P2 $46,960 to $140,900 Bachelor Degree White No 2 Yes P3 $46,960 to $140,900 Bachelor Degree White Yes 1 No P4 $46,960 to $140,900 Bachelor Degree White No 1 No

2018 asha ver 1 - Technology & Language Center, Inc. · 11/15/18 2 Data$Collection$&$$Analysis • Evaluating$Acquired$Skills$in$Communication$ –3rdEdition$(EASIC>3)$was$ administered$to$each$subject$to$determine$the

  • Upload
    others

  • View
    0

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: 2018 asha ver 1 - Technology & Language Center, Inc. · 11/15/18 2 Data$Collection$&$$Analysis • Evaluating$Acquired$Skills$in$Communication$ –3rdEdition$(EASIC>3)$was$ administered$to$each$subject$to$determine$the

11/15/18

1

Parent'Instruction'in'Partner.Augmented'Input

Jill$E$Senner,$PhD,$CCC/SLPKathleen$Post,$MS,$CCC/SLP

Matthew$R.$Baud,$MS,$CCC/SLPBrian$Patterson,$PhD

Research(Questions1. Will(training(parents(in(PAI(using(the(Kent9Walsh(

and(McNaughton((2005)(instructional(model(increase(parent(use(of(modeling(on(a(child’s(SGDs(in(regularly(occurring(home(activities?

2. Can(parents(learn(to(model(a(variety(of(words(on(their(child’s(SGD(following(participation(in(PAI(training?(

3. Will(training(parents(in(PAI(increase(frequency(of(child(SGD(use(at(home?((

4. Will(training(parents(in(PAI(affect(children’s(language(output(using(the(SGD?(

Child&Subjects• Candidacy&Criteria– 5410&years&of&age&– Produced&fewer&than&10&intelligible&words&using&natural&speech

– Dynamic&display&SGD&loaded&with&a&commercially&available&core&vocabulary

– Direct&selection&with&a&finger&(i.e.,&physically&pointed&to&or&pressed&a&button&on&the&SGD)&to&access&the&device

– All&children&lived&with&the&parent&participating&in&the&study&100%&of&the&time.&

Child&&Demographic&InformationSubject(# Gender Age Diagnosis SGD Vocabulary Length(of(

Device(UseC1 M 6;5 Autism iPad1 LAMP1WFL2

Full<61months

C2 M 9;6 AutismDysgenesis1of1the1Corpus1Callosum

Accent 10002 Unity2 841Sequenced

>21years

C3 M 6;9 TracheostomyVocal1Fold1Paralysis

NOVA1Chat3

10

WP4 60 >21years

C4 F 5;0 DevelopmentalDelay

NOVA1Chat3

10WP4 42 Basic >21years

LAMP(WFL2 – Language(Acquisition(through(Motor(Planning(–Words(for(Life(AppUnity2 – Unity(Language(SystemWP4–WordPower(

Parent'Subjects• All'mothers'• All'married.''• No'history'of'hearing'or'learning'difficulties.''• All'had'other'children'without'disabilities'living'in'the'

home.''• Two'parents'were'stay>at>home'mothers'and'two'

worked'outside'of'the'home.''• Self>selected'to'participate'in'the'study'and'were'made'

aware'of'the'project'via'posted'announcements,'letters'to'local'therapists'providing'services'to'children'with'disabilities,'and'social'media.'

Parent'Demographic'InformationSubject(# Household(

IncomeEducation Ethnicity Employed(

outside(of(the(home

#(of(other(children(living(

at(home

Previous(PAI(training

P1 Under($46,960(

Some(College,(No(Degree

Latino,(Spanish(Origin

Yes 2 No

P2 $46,960(to($140,900(

Bachelor(Degree

White No 2 Yes

P3 $46,960(to($140,900(

Bachelor(Degree

White Yes 1 No

P4 $46,960(to($140,900(

Bachelor(Degree

White No 1 No

Page 2: 2018 asha ver 1 - Technology & Language Center, Inc. · 11/15/18 2 Data$Collection$&$$Analysis • Evaluating$Acquired$Skills$in$Communication$ –3rdEdition$(EASIC>3)$was$ administered$to$each$subject$to$determine$the

11/15/18

2

Data$Collection$&$$Analysis• Evaluating$Acquired$Skills$in$Communication$– 3rd Edition$(EASIC>3)$was$

administered$to$each$subject$to$determine$the$child’s$functional$level$of$language$comprehension.$

• Language$activity$monitoring$was$activated$on$the$subjects’$SGD$at$either$the$time$of$language$testing$or$at$the$time$of$the$first$pretest$videotape,$whichever$occurred$first.$

• Prior$to$training,$pretest$data$were$collected.$$Families$were$asked$to$participate$in$three$of$the$activities$they$had$listed$as$always$or$almost$always$occurring$at$home$on$two$separate$dates$within$two$weeks$apart.$$The$sessions$were$videotaped$and$both$parent$and$child$device$use$were$analyzed$using$Communication$Sampling$Analysis$(CSA,$Buzolich,$2009).$

• Parent$models$were$transcribed$and$independent$child$utterances$were$noted.• An$implementation$fidelity$checklist$was$used$to$ensure$that$parents$complete$

each$step$of$the$training$as$designed.$• Intervention$fidelity$was$measured$via$an$observation$checklist$completed$by$a$

student$clinician.$

1.#Pretest#&#Commitment• In0home#pretest#videotapes#were#made#of#parents#interacting#with#

their#children#at#home#prior#to#intervention:– 3#activities#rated#as#“Always”#occurring#at#home– 203#pretest#sessions#per#family

• During#the#home0based#videotaping#sessions,#the#parents#were#instructed#to#play/interact#with#child#as#they#typically#would#(Woods,#Kashinath,#&#Goldstein,#2004).##The#researcher#did#not#attempt#to#influence#caregiver#behavior#in#any#way.#The#evaluator#remained#behind#the#camera#and#avoided#interaction#with#caregiver#and#child.

• Parents#were#sent#links#to#videos#to#watch#on#their#own.• Student#clinicians#discussed#the#videos#with#parents#and#provided#

feedback#regarding#strengths#and#weaknesses.• Parents#signed#a#written#commitment#to#the#training#program#at#an#

initial#in0service#training.##

2.#Strategy#Description

• All#parents#participated#in#a#live,#38hour#group#instruction#session.##

3.#Strategy#Demonstration

• Strategy#Demonstration#was#conducted#using#videotaped#samples#of#PAI#being#used#by#families#at#home.#

• Live#strategy#modeling#was#also#later#provided#in#the#clinic#by#the#student#clinicians#during#coaching#sessions.##

4.#Verbal#PracticeS Slow%Rate%. Speak#in#a#slow,#clearly#

articulated#mannerMo Model% . Point#to#the#symbol#on#the#

child’s#device#while#simultaneously#providing#parallel.talk#or#self.talk

R Respect%&%Reflect%%. When#the#child#communicates#something#through#gesture#or#word##approximation,#respect#the#communication#and#model#a#word#or#phrase#to#communicate#the#same#thought#or#feeling

R Repeat%. Frequently#repeat#targeted#vocabulary#words

E Expand . Build#up#utterances#by#adding#elements#to#provide#a#more#complete#expression#of#intended#meaning

S Stop . Pause#to#allow#the#child#time#to#respond

5.#Controlled#Practice• Each#parent#had#a#device#and#the#child’s#page#set.• Parents#were#asked#to#generate#a#variety#of#practice#phrases#on#the#devices#as#well#as#to#generate#phrases#to#model#based#on#scenarios#provided.#– The#scenarios#related#to#activities#at#home#and#required#parents#to#think#about#what#types#of#models#they#might#provide#in#the#situations#described#(e.g.,#“Your#child#pushes#away#a#game#you#are#playing.#What#could#you#model#on#your#child’s#device#to#reflect#his#or#her#intent?”)

Page 3: 2018 asha ver 1 - Technology & Language Center, Inc. · 11/15/18 2 Data$Collection$&$$Analysis • Evaluating$Acquired$Skills$in$Communication$ –3rdEdition$(EASIC>3)$was$ administered$to$each$subject$to$determine$the

11/15/18

3

5.#Controlled#Practice• Parents#also#had#the#opportunity#to#practice#in#the#clinic#with#the#student#clinician#present.

• All#sessions#were#supervised#by#a#principal#investigator.

• Dyads#attended#8#or#9#sessions.

5.#Controlled#Practice• An#observation#checklist#was#used#to#note#performance#of#each#ingredient#to#successful#modeling.

6.#Advanced#Practice

• Parents#continued#to#practice#use#of#strategy#within#the#clinic#with#students#clinicians#present#for#coaching.##

• Verbal#feedback#was#immediately#provided.##

7.#Post(Test

• Post(test#videotapes#were#made#of#parents#interacting#with#their#children#at#home#during#the#same#three#activities#as#pretest#over#the#course#of#two#separate#days.

8.#Generalization

• An#additional#activity#was#introduced#during#the#last#weeks#of#the#study.##

Percentage)of)utterances)modeled)by)parents)on)children’s)SGDs

6.3700 5.7850

49.8250

38.5725

0.0 0

5.0 0

10 .00

15 .00

20 .00

25 .00

30 .00

35 .00

40 .00

45 .00

50 .00

Pre test)1 Pre test)2 Po stEtest)1 Po stEtest)2

Percen

tage)of)))Utteran

ces)M

odeled

Parent)Utterances)Modeled

Page 4: 2018 asha ver 1 - Technology & Language Center, Inc. · 11/15/18 2 Data$Collection$&$$Analysis • Evaluating$Acquired$Skills$in$Communication$ –3rdEdition$(EASIC>3)$was$ administered$to$each$subject$to$determine$the

11/15/18

4

Parents’)Modeled)Words

• Parent)models)produced)at)post3test)were)analyzed)to)determine)percentage)of)unique)words)modeled)(i.e.,)type3token)ratio).))Unique)words)modeled)varied)by)activity)and)ranged)from)37.04%)to)74.51%)(M"=)55.91,)SD"=)13.35).

Words/Phrases+Modeled+(P1+Book)• it+is• it+is+time+for• Game• Book• I+feel• Max+is+sad+go+home• Okay• Plumber• he+is• fixing+the+sink• he+has• green+snake• I+see+a• Fish• Turn• Page• The• Toys• oh+my+gosh+no+way• Is• uh+oh

• they+need+to+call+the• he+has• Toolbox• turn+the• Page

• they+went+to+the• Basement• he+is• turning+off• turn+the

• Page• they+found• Down• I+don't+see+the

• uh+oh• it+is+got• don't+go+in• look+more• turn+the+turn

• that's+cool• I+see• came+out• Water

• uh+oh• Again• oh+my+gosh

Frequency)of)SGD)Use)at)Home

• Device)use)at)home)could)only)be)calculated)

using)three)of)the)four)subjects)due)to)data)

loss)secondary)to)device)malfunction.))

• A)paired@samples)t@test)was)conducted)to)

compare)frequency)of)device)use)at)home)

before)and)after)the)intervention.))

– This)difference)was)not)statistically)significant)(M=3.60,)SD=3.8108))and)post@test)(M=7.28,)

SD=2.01))conditions;)t(2)=2.1246,)p)=)1.731.

Raw$Data$Child$Unique$WordsSubject(# Pretest Post.Test Percentage(

Increase

C1 10 37 270%

C2 20 46 125%

C3 31 78 152%

C4 38 42 11%

ResultsPretest Post'Testbathroom,)eat,)finish,)go,)good,)help,)more,)need,)yellow,)yes

big,)blue,)bubbles,)bus,)cheese,)chips,)cold,)come,)fast,)fun,)go,)good,)guitar,)happy,)hot,)iPad,)like,)little,)more,)mom,)most,)my,)no,)open,)please,)pop,)puzzle,)red,)see,)then,)trash,)turn,)water,)yes,)you,)yum

ResultsPretest Post'Testall#done,#eat,#funny,#fruit,#Goldfish,#help,#hungry,#I,#pretty,#reading,#snack,#surprise,#taste,#thirsty,#think,#want,#water,#were,#what,#yes

all#done,#book,#can,#do,#drink,#eat,#go,#goodbye,#happy,#have,#help,#hungry,#hurt,#I,#in,#it,#juice,#mad,#Mater,#more,#mouse,#nail,#off,#oh#no,#on,#oops,#open,#out,#page,#Phineas#and#Ferb,#please,#popcorn,#put,#read,#reading,#sad,#see,#snack,#some,#stop,#take,#turn,#up,#want,#watch

Page 5: 2018 asha ver 1 - Technology & Language Center, Inc. · 11/15/18 2 Data$Collection$&$$Analysis • Evaluating$Acquired$Skills$in$Communication$ –3rdEdition$(EASIC>3)$was$ administered$to$each$subject$to$determine$the

11/15/18

5

ResultsPretest Post'Testand,%banana,%book,%brachiosaurus,%chicken,%dinosaur,%Diplosaurus,%favorite,%fire%engine,%French%fries,%game,%good,%happy,%hear,%help,%hungry,%job,%my,%of,%please,%raptor,%red,%rooster,%she,%thank,%think,%train,%turn,%up,%vegetables,%you

a,%aquarium,%balloon,%bathroom,%battery,%birthday,%box,%bug,%caterpillar,%December,%different,%dog,%don’t,%down,%duck,%finish,%five,%fix,%four,%fox,%friend,%game,%give,%go,%good,%Halloween,%happy,%I,%jackAoAlantern,%July,%know,%look,%of,%maintenance%worker,%Max,%mom,%monkey,%mouse,%my,%no,%November,%now,%one,%outside,%page,%pig,%play,%plumber,%read,%red,%sad,%scared,%September,%six,%snack,%snake,%squirrel,%stop,%submarine,%Thanksgiving,%the,%three,%time,%telescope,%tools,%toy,%tractor,%turkey,%turn,%two,%yellow,%your,%uncomfortable,%upstairs,%watch,%water,%zero,%zoo

ResultsPretest Post'Testanimal&cracker,&animal&home,&apple,&baby&dolls,&bacon,&ball&ramp,&ball,&butter,&cage,&dr.&pepper,&eggs,&goldfish,&green,&hippo,&house,&juice&box,&like,&M&&&M,&muffin,&outside,&orange,&pie,&pig,&pink,&play,&purple,&purple&pillow,&read,&skunk,&three,&tiger,&tomato,&two,&Tyrannosaurus&rex,&vegetable,&waffles,&white,&Writing&center

all&done,&ambulance,&animal&crackers,&bad,&don’t,&black,&blue,&brown,&car,&finish,&fire&engine,&Five,&four,&garbage,&garbage&truck,&go,&green,&I&am&___&years&old,&I&like&to,&I&love&you,&juice&box,&like,&mail&truck,&more,&My&name&is&___,&oh&my&gosh,&one,&orange,&pink,&polar&bear,&purple,&red,&soccer,&three,&tractor,&triangle,&truck,&two,&van,&yellow,&wheel,&white

Social'Validity• 7'Questions'

– Overall,'I'believe'that'PAI'has'been'effective'in'supporting'my'child's'communication.

– I'better'understand'how'to'provide'PAI'during'regularly'occurring'activities'at'home.

– I'am'more'familiar'with'the'language'on'my'child's'device.

– I'found'this'training'useful.– I'will'continue'using'PAI'at'

home.– I'think'it'would'be'helpful'for'

other'family'members'to'attend'this'training.

– I'used'my'child's'SGD'more'frequently'at'home.

• LikertGType'Scale'– 1'='Strongly'Disagree– 2'='Somewhat'Disagree– 3='Neutral– 4'='Agree'Somewhat– 5'='Strongly'Agree

• Mean'='5.0,'SD'='0'for'all'questions.

Changes(in(Self

Using(the(respect(and(reflect(option(more.((I(believe(I(communicated(better(with(my(child(when(I(took(that(into(consideration.((We(had(great(language(exchanges(then(and(often(lead(back(to(the(task(we(were(targeting.((But(sometimes(it(didn't(but(if(it(didn't((the('conversations'(that(were(had(on(were(very(informative(and(covered(ideas/topics(that(hadn't(been(talked(about(in(the(past.Much(better(proficiency(using(the([device].

I(noticed(that(I(am(more(confident(in(using(the(device(and(getting(used(to(using(it(in(general(not(just(for(helping([child](request(but(also(in(initiating(conversations.

Changes(that(I(started(to(make(and(need(to(continue(working(on(is(providing(my(son(with(more(opportunities(to(communicate.((Over(the(years(I(have(gotten(so(used(to(speaking(for(him,(asking(yes/no(questions(and(figuring(out(what(he(needs(without(talking(that(it(is(a(change(of(mind(set(that(I(need(to(work(on.((He(has(so(much(he(can(say,(and(knows(he(can(use(his(device(it's(about(breaking(that(barrier(to(actually(have(him(use(it.

Changes(in(ChildMy(child(is(taking(in(the(modeling(in(his(own(way...it(might(not(look(like(he(is(watching(or(learning.((But(he(is...and(it(may(just(take(some(time(for(it(to(show(itself.[Child](feels(way(more(comfortable(using(the([device].That([child](is(getting(more(comfortable(using(the(talker(and([child](is(using(it(more(and(more(as(time(goes(on.(When([child](has(moments(of(frustration(because(he(is(having(a(hard(time(communicating(his(needs,(he(will(independently(reach(or(search(for(his(talker.(At(times(when(I(am(not(getting(his(attention(when(I(am(speaking(or(I(feel(he(is(not(fully(understanding,(I(will(use(the(talker(to(repeat(what(I(am(saying(and(I(will(get(a(reaction(such(as(eye(contact(so(I(feel(it(helps(him(comprehend(better.I(have(noticed(that(if(I(give(my(son(the(opportunity(with(longer(pauses(and(not(providing(yes/no(questions(he(tends(to(use(his(device(more.

Parent'LikesPositive'environment'for'learning'the'process.''I'appreciated'the'hands'on'approach'88getting'the'chance'to'see'it'and'then'jump'in'and'try'it'yourself.''I'was'able'to'learn'more'about'my'child'88 his'interests'and'dislikes.Very'thorough,'gave'everyone'a'better'understanding'on'how'to'communicate'effectively.The'breakdown'of'different'steps'in'using'my'son's'device'for'more'than'just'requesting.I'liked'the'feedback'from'sessions'that'I'have'received.''The'training'was'very'good'as'before'the'study'I'knew'we'need'to'model'the'use'of'AAC'for'my'son'but'we'focused'so'much'on'modeling'and'using'the'device'ourselves'that'we'didn't'give'him'many'opportunities'to'use'it.

Page 6: 2018 asha ver 1 - Technology & Language Center, Inc. · 11/15/18 2 Data$Collection$&$$Analysis • Evaluating$Acquired$Skills$in$Communication$ –3rdEdition$(EASIC>3)$was$ administered$to$each$subject$to$determine$the

11/15/18

6

Acknowledgements

• This1project1was1partially1funded1by1a1Midwestern1University=College1of1Health1Sciences1Research1and1Facilitation1Grant,12017

• Special1thanks1to1the1graduate1students1who1participated1in1this1project:– Brianne1Bolin,1M.A.– Jazmyn1Lopez,1B.S.– Emma1Williams,1B.S.

Summary• An)eight/step)instruction)model)was)used)to)teach)four)parents)of)children)

who)use)augmentative)and)alternative)communication)(AAC))to)provide)partner/augmented)input)(PAI))on)the)core)vocabularies)on)their)children’s)speech/generating)devices)(SGDs))during)activities)frequently)occurring)at)home:)– All)parents)demonstrated)the)ability)to)perform)all)of)the)components)of)

successful)PAI)(slow)rate,)model,)respect)and)reflect,)repeat,)expand,)stop))as)determined)by)review)of)the)observation)checklists)completed)during)coaching)sessions.)

– All)parents)significantly)increased)percentage)of)utterances)modeled)on)their)children’s)speech/generating)devices)between)pretest)and)post/test)measures.)

– The)percentage)of)unique)word)modeled)(i.e.,)type/token)ratios))of)each)parent)suggests)variety)in)words,)phrases,)and)sentences)modeled)at)post/test.)

– 3)of)4)children)appeared)to)increase)the)number)of)unique)words)independently)produced)on)the)SGD)between)pretest)and)post/test.)

– Parents)perceived)the)program)as)beneficial.))

@JillESenner

@mbaud121

https://www.pinterest.com/talcaac/

https://www.facebook.com/TechnologyLanguageCenterInc/

[email protected]

[email protected]

[email protected]

http://www.talcaac.com/

http://bit.ly/NEDSEAT

https://www.mwuclinics.com/illinois/services/specialty/speechHlanguage

References• Alant, E., Alshubrumi, A., & Sun, L. (2017). Use of an eight-step instructional model to train school staff in partner-augmented input

shows potential. Evidence-Based Communication Assessment and Intervention, 11(1-2), 9-13. doi.org/10.1080/17489539.2017.1317100

• Allen, A. A., Schlosser R. W ., Brock, K. L., & Shane, H. C. (2017). The effectiveness of aided augmented input techniques for persons with developmental disabilities: a systematic review, Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 33, 149-159. doi: 10.1080/07434618.2017.1338752

• Angelo, D. H., Jones, S. D., & Kokoska, S. M . (1996). Family perspectives on augmentative and alternative communication: Families of young children. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 11, 193-201. doi: 10.1080/07434619512331277319

• Angelo, D. H., Kokoska, S. M ., & Jones, S. D. (1996). Family perspectives on augmentative and alternative communication: Families of adolescents and young adults. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 12, 13-20. doi: 10.1080/07434619612331277438

• Barr, J., M cLeod, S., & Graham, D. (2008). Siblings of children with speech impairment: Cavalry on the hill. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 29, 21-32. doi:10.1044/0161-1461

• Barton, E. E., & Fettig, A. (2013). Interventions for young children with disabilities. Journal of Early Intervention, 35, 194-219. doi: 10.1177/1053815113504625

• Berry, J. O. (1987). Strategies for involving parents in programs for young children using augmentative and alternative

communication. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 3, 90-93. doi: 10.1080/07434618712331274319• Binger, C., & Light, J. (2007). The effect of aided AAC modeling on the expression of multi-symbol messages by preschoolers who

use AAC. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 23, 30-43. Doi: 10.1080/07434610600807470• Binger, C., Kent-W alsh, J., Ewing, C., & Taylor, S. (2010). Teaching educational assistants to facilitate the multisymbol message

productions of young students who require augmentative and alternative communication. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 19, 108-120. doi: 10.1044/1058-0360

• Binger, C., M aguire-M arshall, M ., & Kent-W alsh, J. (2011). Using aided AAC models, recasts, and contrastive targets to teach grammatical morphemes to children who use AAC. Journal of Speech-Language and Hearing Research, 54, 160-176. doi: 10.1044/1092-4388.

• Blackstone, S. (2006). Training partners: Learning more about what to do. Augmentative Communication News, 18, 12-16. Retrieved from http://www.augcominc.com/index.cfm/acn.htm

• Bruno, J., & Dribbon, M . (1998). Outcomes in AAC: Evaluating the effectiveness of a parent training program. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 14, 59-70. doi: 10.1080/07434619812331278216

• Bruno, J., & Trembath, D. (2006). Use of aided language stimulation to improve syntactic performance during a weeklong intervention

program. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 22, 300-313. doi: 10.1080/07434610600768318

References,)cont’d.• Buzolich, M . J. (2009). Communication sampling and analysis. Perspectives on Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 18, 88-

95. Retrieved from https://sig12perspectives.pubs.asha.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/ashaaac/928552/ashaaac_18_3_88.pdf• Dada, S., & Alant, E. (2009). The effect of aided language stimulation on vocabulary acquisition in children with little or no functional

speech. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 18, 50-64. doi: 10.1044/1058-0360• Douglas, S. N. (2012). Teaching paraeducators to support the communication of individuals who use augmentative and alternative

communication: a literature review. Current Issues in Education, 15, 1-13. Retrieved from https://cie.asu.edu/ojs/index.php/cieatasu/article/view/906

• Douglas, S. N., M cNaughton, D., & Light, J. (2013). Online training for paraeducators to support the communication of young children. Journal of Early Intervention, 35, 223-242. doi:10.1177/1053815114526782

• Douglas, S. N., Nordquist, E., Kammes, R., & Gerde, H. (2017). Online parent training to support children with complex communication needs. Infants & Young Children, 30(4), 288-303. doi:10.1097/Iyc.0000000000000101Drager, K. D. R., Postal, V. J., Carrolus, L., Castellano, M ., Gagliano, C., & Glynn, J. (2006). The effect of aided language modeling on symbol comprehension and production in two preschoolers with autism. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 15, 112-125. doi: 10.1044/1058-0360

• Dunst, C. J., Trivette, C. M ., & Hamby, D. W . (2007). M eta-analysis of family-centered helpgiving practices research. Developmental Disabilities Research Review, 13 , 370-378. doi: 10.1002/mrdd.20176

• Dunst, C. J., & Trivette, C. M . (2012). M oderators of the effectiveness of adult learning method practices. Journal of Social Sciences, 8, 143-148. doi: 10.3844/jssp.2012.143.148

• Edgar, D. L., & Rosa-Lugo, L. I. (2007). The critical shortage of speech-language pathologists in the public school setting: Features of the work environment that affect recruitment and retention. Language, Speech and Hearing Services in Schools, 38, 31-46. doi:10.1044/0161-1461

• Goldbart, J., & M arshall, J. (2004). " Pushes and pulls" on the parents of children who use AAC. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 20, 194-208. doi: 10.1080/07434610400010960

• Gona, J. K., Newton, C. R., Hartley, S., & Bunning, K. (2014). A home-based intervention using augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) techniques in rural Kenya: W hat are the caregivers' experiences? Child: Care, Health & Development, 40, 29-41. doi:10.1111/cch.12031

• Granlund, M ., Bjorck-Akesson, E., W ilder, J., & Ylven, R. (2008). AAC interventions for children in a family environment: Implementing evidence in practice. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 24, 207-219. doi: 10.1080/08990220802387935

• Harris, M ., & Reichle, J. (2004). The impact of aided language stimulation on symbol comprehension and production in children with moderate cognitive disabilities. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 13, 155-167. doi: 10.1044/1058-0360

• Kaiser, A., & W right, C. (2013). Enhanced milieu teaching: Incorporating AAC into naturalistic teaching with young children and their partners. SIG 12 Perspectives on Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 22, 37-50. doi:10.1044/aac22.1.37

• Kaminski, J. W ., Valle, L. A., Filene, J. H., & Boyle, C. L. (2008). A meta-analytic review of components associated with parent training program effectiveness. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 36, 567-589. doi: 10.1007/s10802-007-9201-9

References,)cont’d.• Kasari, C., Kaiser, A., Goods, K., Neitfeld, J., M athy, P., Landa, R., M urphy, S., & Almirall, D. (2014). Communication interventions

for minimally verbal children with autism: A sequential multiple assignment randomized trial. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 53, 635-646. doi: 10.1016/j.jaac.2014.01.019

• Kent-W alsh, J., Binger, C., & Hasham, Z. (2010). Effects of parent instruction on the symbolic communication of children using augmentative and alternative communication during storybook reading. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 19, 97-107. doi: 10.1044/1058-0360

• Kent-W alsh, J. Binger, C., & M alani, M . (2010). Teaching partners to support the communication skills of young children who use AAC: Lessons from the ImPAACT program. Early Childhood Services, 4, 155-170.

• Kent-W alsh, J., & M cNaughton, D. (2005). Communication partner instruction in AAC: Present practices and future directions. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 21, 195-204. doi: 10.1080/07434610400006646

• Kent-W alsh, J., M urza, K. A., M alani, M . D., & Binger, C. (2015). Effects of communication partner instruction on the communication of individuals using AAC: A meta-analysis. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 31, 271-284. doi: 10.3109/07434618.2015.1052153

• Lang, R., M achalicek, W ., Rispoli, M ., & Regester, A. (2009). Training parents to implement communication interventions for children with autism spectrum disorders (ASD): A systematic review. Evidence-Based Communication Assessment and Intervention, 3, 174-190. doi: 10.1080/17489530903338861

• Lesar, S. (1998). Use of assistive technology with young children with disabilities: Current status and training needs. Journal of Early Intervention, 21, 146-159. doi: 10.1177/105381519802100207

• Light, J., Collier, B., & Parnes, P. (1985). Communicative interaction between young nonspeaking physically disabled children and their primary caregivers: Part III— modes of communication. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 1(4), 125-133. doi:10.1080/07434618512331273621

• Light, J.,Dattilo, J., English, J., Gutierrez, L., & Hartz, J. (1992). Instructing facilitators who support the communication of people who use augmentative communication systems. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 35, 865-875. doi: 10.1044/jshr.3504.865

• Lund, S. & Light, J. (2007). Long-term outcomes for individuals who use augmentative and alternative communication: Part III –contributing factors. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 23, 323-335. doi: doi.org/10.1080/02656730701189123

• Lloyd, L. L., Fuller, D. R., & Arvidson, H. H. (1997). Augmentative and alternative communication: A handbook of principles and practices.

• Lynch, Y., M cCleary, M ., & Smith, M . (2018). Instructional strategies used in direct AAC interventions with children to support graphic symbol learning: A systematic review. Child Language Teaching and Therapy, 34, 23-36. doi/10.1177/0265659018755524

• M cNaughton, D., Rackensperger, T., Benedek-W ood, E., Krezman, C., W illiams, M . B., & Light, J. (2008). “A child needs to be given a chance to succeed”: Parents of individuals who use AAC describe the benefits and challenges of learning AAC technologies. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 24, 43-55. doi: 10.1080/07434610701421007

Page 7: 2018 asha ver 1 - Technology & Language Center, Inc. · 11/15/18 2 Data$Collection$&$$Analysis • Evaluating$Acquired$Skills$in$Communication$ –3rdEdition$(EASIC>3)$was$ administered$to$each$subject$to$determine$the

11/15/18

7

References,)cont’d.• M eadan, H., Snodgrass, M . R., M eyer, L. E., Fisher, K. W ., Chung, M . Y., & Halle, J. W . (2016). Internet-based parent-implemented

intervention for young children with autism a pilot study. Journal of Early Intervention, 38, 3-23. doi: 10.1177/1053815116630327• O’Neill, T., Light, J., & Pope, L. (2018). Effects of interventions that include aided augmentative and alternative communication input

on the communication of individuals with complex communication needs: A meta-analysis. Journal of Speech, Language, and hearing research. doi:10.1044/2018_JSLHR-L-17-0132

• Pennington, L., & M cConachie, H. (1999). M other-child interaction revisited: communication with non-speaking physically disabledchildren. International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders, 34(4), 391-416. doi.org/10.1080/13682820310001625598

• Riley, A. M ., & Pro-Ed (Firm). (2009). EASIC-3: Evaluating acquired skills in communication. Austin, Tex: Pro-Ed.• Roberts, M . Y., & Kaiser, A. P. (2011). The effectiveness of parent-implemented language interventions: A meta-analysis. American

Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 20, 180-199. doi:10.1044/1058-0360(2011/10-0055)

• Romski, M ., Sevcik, R. A., Adamson, L. B., Cheslock, M ., Smith, A., Barker, R. M ., & Bakerman, R. (2010). Randomized comparison of augmented and nonaugmented language interventions for toddlers with developmental delays and their parents. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 53, 350-364. doi:10.1044/1092-4388(2009/08-0156)

• Schultz, T. R., Schmidt, C. T., & Stichter, J. P. (2011). A review of parent education programs for parents of children with autism spectrum disorders. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 26, 96-104. doi.org/10.1177/2F1088357610397346

• Senner, J. E., & Baud, M . R. (2016). The use of an eight-step instructional model to train school staff in partner-augmented input. Communication Disorders Quarterly, 38, 89-95. doi.org/10.1177/2F1525740116651251

• Sennott, S. C, & M ason, L. H. (2016). AAC modeling with the iPad during shared storybook reading pilot study. Communication Disorders Quarterly, 37, 242-254. doi.org/10.1177/2F1525740115601643

• Sennott, S. C., Light, J. C., & M cNaughton, D. (2016). AAC modeling intervention research review. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 41, 101-115. doi.org/10.1177/2F1540796916638822

• Shire, S. Y., & Jones, N. (2015). Communication partners supporting children with complex communication needs who use AAC: Asystematic review. Communication Disorders Quarterly, 37, 3-15. doi.org/10.1177/2F1525740114558254

• Symon, J. B. (2001). Parent education for autism: Issues in providing services at a distance. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 3(3), 160-174. doi.org/10.1177%2F109830070100300304

• Solomon-Rice, P.L., & Soto, G. (2014). Facilitating vocabulary in toddlers using AAC: A preliminary study comparing focused stimulation and augmented input. Communication Disorders Quarterly, 35, 204-215. doi.org/10.1177/2F1525740114522856

• Squires, K. (2013). Addressing the Shortage of Speech-Language Pathologists in School Settings. Journal of the American Academy of Special Education Professionals(W inter), 131-137.

References,)cont’d.• Starble, A., Hutchins, T., Favro, M . A., Prelock, P., & Birnter, B. (2005). Family-centered intervention and satisfaction with AAC device

training. Communication Disorders Quarterly, 27, 47-54. doi.org/10.1177/2F15257401050270010501• W oods, J., Kashinath, S., & Goldstein, H. (2004). Effects of embedding caregiver-implemented teaching strategies in daily routines on

children's communication outcomes. Journal of Early Intervention, 26, 175-193. doi.org/10.1177/105381510402600302

• Yoder, P. J., & W arren, S. F. (1998). M aternal responsivity predicts the prelinguistic communication intervention that facilitates generalized intentional communication. Journal of Speech, Language, And Hearing Research: JSLHR, 41(5), 1207-1219.