Communication system identification for individuals with complex communication needs: the need for effective feature matching

Fonte, M. Alexandra Da; Boesch, Miriam C.; Young, Rachel D.; Wolfe, Nicole P.

doi:10.1016/bs.irrdd.2019.07.002

Cited by 6 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 61 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The content of the Communication System Identification Screening Checklist (i.e., screening checklist) was based on a systematic review of the literature conducted by Da Fonte et al, 2019b. The screening checklist consisted of two sections.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The screening checklist consisted of two sections. Section 1 included three questions about the target student’s present levels of performance, including (a) cognitive abilities such as critical thinking and communication skills, including expressive and receptive; (b) adaptive behaviors, which were categorized into three subdomains: independent, referring to target students who did not need any support related to adaptive behavior; behavior challenges, defined as a target student who required supports related to challenging behaviors to successfully use a communication system (Da Fonte et al, 2019b); and motor challenges, which referred to target students who required supports related to fine and gross motor skills, and who may require specific access methods or mounting systems to successfully use a communication system (Da Fonte et al, 2019b); and (c) sensory needs, such as visual or hearing capabilities. Based on information from the target student’s present level of performance (Section 1), the student was identified as either non-symbolic communicators or symbolic communicators.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Informal feature-matching assessment tools with empirical support are important, particularly those that consider the student as a whole, support feature matching, and can be completed by the educational team in a feasible amount of time (e.g., Marfilius & Fonner, 2012; Ohio Center for Autism and Low Incidence, 2012). Yet, a systematic review of the literature conducted by the research team revealed a scarcity in these assessment tools (see Da Fonte et al, 2019b), uncovering three feature-matching checklists: Brady (n.d.), Marfilius and Fonner (2012), and Senner (n.d.). The three checklists were designed to evaluate the features of both low and high technology communication systems.…”

Section: Informal Feature-matching Assessment Toolsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The process of conducting a capability assessment (Beukelman & Light, 2020) or feature matching (Da Fonte et al, 2019b) emphasizes the importance of identifying a communication system that “best fits” the needs of the student while simultaneously maximizing their strengths (Da Fonte et al, 2019b; Da Fonte & Boesch, 2019a). To effectively and accurately identify a communication system, the student’s cognitive functioning, communication skills, adaptive behavior, and motor skills should be considered during the assessment (Beukelman & Light, 2020; Da Fonte & Boesch, 2019a; DiStefano et al, 2020).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Reliability among School-Based Professionals: Using a Feature-Matching Screening Checklist to Identify Communication Systems

DeLuca

Fonte

Boesch

2022

J Spec Educ Technol

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Students with complex communication needs may require augmentative and alternative communication systems to supplement or replace their speech abilities. To effectively identify a communication system, a feature-matching process should be implemented as it considers the student’s present levels of performance. Due to the unique communication characteristics of students with complex communication needs, informal assessment tools are often used to help determine the students’ skills in natural contexts. A challenge often faced with informal assessment tools is the reliability among evaluators. As such, this pilot study attempted to evaluate the reliability of a feature-matching screening checklist and its corresponding matrices among potential professionals who would be part of the educational team. Results indicated that (a) pre-service and in-service special education teachers were the most reliable combination when completing the screening checklist, (b) exposure to the screening checklist was an influencing factor on reliability, and (c) in-service speech-language pathologists made the most errors while completing the screening checklist. Implications for practices and future research directions are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Informal Feature-matching Assessment Toolsmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Reliability among School-Based Professionals: Using a Feature-Matching Screening Checklist to Identify Communication Systems

DeLuca

Fonte

Boesch

2022

J Spec Educ Technol

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The rapid growth in technology may positively impact intervention by increasing the number of options for communication systems, advancing the sophistication of device features, making mobile technologies and applications ubiquitous, and decreasing cost to make technologies available to a broader population of students. However, these changes only make it even more important for students to have access to quality AAC evaluations that match device characteristics with the unique characteristics of students, their communication partners, and their environments (Da Fonte et al, 2019). Doing this requires that professionals collaborate well and have the knowledge and skills needed to both identify appropriate AAC systems and integrate them into students' day-to-day lives.…”

Section: Aac Accessmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ecological Systems for Students Who Use AAC: Stakeholders’ Views on Factors Impacting Intervention and Outcomes

Biggs

Hacker

2021

Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although substantial evidence demonstrates the effectiveness of augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) intervention for students with severe disabilities who have complex communication needs, increasing importance is being placed on understanding how to move research into practice. This descriptive qualitative study focused on understanding the views of 19 parents and professionals (i.e., special education teachers, paraeducators, and speech-language pathologists) related to factors impacting intervention and outcomes for students with complex communication needs. Within an implementation science perspective, analysis involved applying ecological systems theory to understand factors across systems acting as challenges or facilitators to effective AAC intervention and to outcomes more broadly for students with complex communication needs. Findings produce insight into the ways student-related and micro-, meso-, macro-, and exosystem factors impact intervention implementation and outcomes, highlighting the importance of cross-cutting factors associated with AAC access, family–school partnerships and supports, and inclusive education. Implications for research and practice are discussed related to how these findings can be used to bridge the gap between research and practice for students with complex communication needs.

show abstract

School-Based Speech-Language Pathologists: Confidence in Augmentative and Alternative Communication Assessment

Sanders

Page

Lesher

2021

LSHSS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The purpose of this study was to examine confidence levels and identify predictors of increased confidence of school-based speech-language pathologists (SLPs) relative to different aspects of the augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) assessment process. Method Surveys were completed by 272 school-based SLPs. Questions were designed to capture demographic information and confidence in areas of assessment such as student capabilities, participation, and feature matching. Results There were variable levels of confidence across aspects of assessment. Respondents were less confident in tasks related to assessing students with severe physical impairments and incorporating aspects related to cultural and linguistic diversity in their assessment. SLPs were more confident assessing student participation and unaided communication. Additionally, respondents had less confidence in matching the features of high-tech speech-generating devices to their students. Self-identification as an AAC specialist, years of experience, percentage of caseload of students with complex communication needs, and length of longest continuing education experiences all contributed to predicting confidence in most areas of assessment. However, years of experience did not contribute to predicting confidence in feature matching. Conclusions Results from this study acknowledge that SLPs are likely to have varied degrees of confidence in aspects of assessment related to preparation, clinical experience, and self-identification of specialty. Findings from this study support increasing training opportunities in AAC assessment. As specialization was the strongest predictor of confidence, further research should investigate the characteristics and preparation of self-identified AAC specialists. This is an important first step in pinpointing ways to increase confidence in school-based SLPs.

show abstract

Communication system identification for individuals with complex communication needs: the need for effective feature matching

Cited by 6 publications

References 61 publications

Reliability among School-Based Professionals: Using a Feature-Matching Screening Checklist to Identify Communication Systems

Reliability among School-Based Professionals: Using a Feature-Matching Screening Checklist to Identify Communication Systems

Ecological Systems for Students Who Use AAC: Stakeholders’ Views on Factors Impacting Intervention and Outcomes

School-Based Speech-Language Pathologists: Confidence in Augmentative and Alternative Communication Assessment

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About