Communication intervention for persons with severe and profound disabilities.

Clinics in communication disorders Pub Date : 1993-01-01
J Reichle, K Feeley, S Johnston
{"title":"Communication intervention for persons with severe and profound disabilities.","authors":"J Reichle,&nbsp;K Feeley,&nbsp;S Johnston","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Traditionally, communication interventionists focused on teaching a beginning repertoire of communicative behavior, once learners with severe to profound disabilities had emitted intentional behavior. Increasingly, interventionists are recognizing that valuable opportunities may be lost if intervention does not begin at an earlier point. In part, intervention strategies at increasingly earlier points have resulted from a prevailing change from semantically-focused intervention logic to pragmatic, interaction-focused intervention logic. At the same time that intervention content has increasingly focused on pragmatics, there has been a wealth of information addressing the social functions served by repertoires of simple idiosyncratic (as well as socially unacceptable) behavior. The increasing availability of augmentative and alternative communicative options has provided an extensive array of motorically simple strategies to exert significant control and influence over one's environment. We have long since passed the need to demonstrate that persons with severe disabilities can be taught a repertoire of communicative functions. However, we have not been as successful in demonstrating that the communicative behavior taught is well maintained solely in the presence of natural maintaining contingencies. Nor have we adequately demonstrated that established repertoires are sufficiently generalized. Most recently, interventionists have begun to focus on more efficient strategies to use in the selection of the most critical teaching instances to teach a new communicative response. Additionally, interventionists are considering response efficiency as an important variable in determining the likelihood that a learner will choose to emit members of his or her communicative repertoire. There appears to be a consensus among those who currently serve individuals with severe disabilities that inclusion represents an attainable objective for students with even the most severe disabilities. Unfortunately, it is not clear that either special or regular educators are being adequately prepared to accomplish included placements. There remains a significant need to recognize those aspects of best practice which must be further explored in regular education settings. What once were considered best practice methods may not meet the test of social validity and be considered best practices in regular classrooms. The vast majority of intervention research has selected a fairly narrow communicative form or function to teach. Increasingly, information on maintenance and generalization is considered. However, often the periods sampled postacquisition are very modest. Among the plethora of available communication intervention curricula, there are virtually none that have taken a learner from a point of engaging in no intentional communicative behavior to the establishment of an effusive repertoire of communicative functions and corresponding vocabulary.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)</p>","PeriodicalId":77075,"journal":{"name":"Clinics in communication disorders","volume":"3 2","pages":"7-30"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1993-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinics in communication disorders","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Traditionally, communication interventionists focused on teaching a beginning repertoire of communicative behavior, once learners with severe to profound disabilities had emitted intentional behavior. Increasingly, interventionists are recognizing that valuable opportunities may be lost if intervention does not begin at an earlier point. In part, intervention strategies at increasingly earlier points have resulted from a prevailing change from semantically-focused intervention logic to pragmatic, interaction-focused intervention logic. At the same time that intervention content has increasingly focused on pragmatics, there has been a wealth of information addressing the social functions served by repertoires of simple idiosyncratic (as well as socially unacceptable) behavior. The increasing availability of augmentative and alternative communicative options has provided an extensive array of motorically simple strategies to exert significant control and influence over one's environment. We have long since passed the need to demonstrate that persons with severe disabilities can be taught a repertoire of communicative functions. However, we have not been as successful in demonstrating that the communicative behavior taught is well maintained solely in the presence of natural maintaining contingencies. Nor have we adequately demonstrated that established repertoires are sufficiently generalized. Most recently, interventionists have begun to focus on more efficient strategies to use in the selection of the most critical teaching instances to teach a new communicative response. Additionally, interventionists are considering response efficiency as an important variable in determining the likelihood that a learner will choose to emit members of his or her communicative repertoire. There appears to be a consensus among those who currently serve individuals with severe disabilities that inclusion represents an attainable objective for students with even the most severe disabilities. Unfortunately, it is not clear that either special or regular educators are being adequately prepared to accomplish included placements. There remains a significant need to recognize those aspects of best practice which must be further explored in regular education settings. What once were considered best practice methods may not meet the test of social validity and be considered best practices in regular classrooms. The vast majority of intervention research has selected a fairly narrow communicative form or function to teach. Increasingly, information on maintenance and generalization is considered. However, often the periods sampled postacquisition are very modest. Among the plethora of available communication intervention curricula, there are virtually none that have taken a learner from a point of engaging in no intentional communicative behavior to the establishment of an effusive repertoire of communicative functions and corresponding vocabulary.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)

对严重和深度残疾者进行沟通干预。
传统上,交际干预主义者专注于教授交际行为的初始曲目,一旦严重到深度残疾的学习者发出有意行为。越来越多的干预主义者认识到,如果不及早开始干预,可能会失去宝贵的机会。在某种程度上,越来越早的干预策略是由以语义为中心的干预逻辑向以实用、互动为中心的干预逻辑的普遍变化造成的。与此同时,干预内容越来越关注语用学,有大量的信息解决了简单的特殊(以及社会上不可接受的)行为所提供的社会功能。越来越多的辅助和替代交流选择提供了一系列广泛的运动简单策略,以对一个人的环境施加重大控制和影响。我们早就没有必要证明严重残疾者可以被教授一整套交际功能。然而,我们并没有成功地证明,仅仅在自然维持偶然事件的存在下,所教授的交际行为就能很好地维持。我们也没有充分证明既定的曲目是足够普遍的。最近,干预主义者开始关注更有效的策略,以选择最关键的教学实例来教授新的交际反应。此外,干预主义者认为反应效率是决定学习者选择释放其交际技能的可能性的一个重要变量。在目前为严重残疾学生提供服务的人员中,似乎有一种共识,即包容对于即使是最严重残疾的学生来说也是可以实现的目标。不幸的是,目前尚不清楚特殊或普通教育工作者是否做好了充分的准备来完成包括实习。仍然非常需要认识到在正规教育环境中必须进一步探索的最佳做法的那些方面。曾经被认为是最佳实践的方法可能不符合社会有效性的测试,在常规课堂上被认为是最佳实践。绝大多数干预研究都选择了一种相当狭隘的交际形式或功能来进行教学。越来越多地考虑到维护和泛化的信息。然而,通常采集后采样的周期非常有限。在众多可用的交流干预课程中,几乎没有一门课程能让学习者从没有有意识的交际行为到建立一套热情洋溢的交际功能和相应的词汇。(摘要删节为400字)
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信