Tangible symbols, tangible outcomes

Rowland, Charity; Schweigert, Philip

doi:10.1080/07434610012331278914

Cited by 108 publications

(74 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Such symbols have immediate meaning to the user and provide a viable means of symbolic communication in the absence of speech. For many individuals, the use of symbols with a concrete relationship to referents seems to constitute a distinct and critical stage of communication (Rowland & Schweigert, 2000). Furthermore, for some individuals, tangible symbols may bridge the gap to the later acquisition of some form of abstract symbol.…”

Section: Implications For Children With Complex Communication Needsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Using the Communication Matrix to Assess Expressive Skills in Early Communicators

Rowland

2011

Communication Disorders Quarterly

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many children born with severe and multiple disabilities have complex communication needs and may use no speech or only minimal speech to communicate. Meaningful assessment of their expressive skills to identify communication strengths along a developmental trajectory is an essential first step toward appropriate intervention. This article describes the foundations, structure, properties, and use of the Communication Matrix, an assessment instrument developed specifically to address the challenges of describing the expressive communication skills of children with severe and multiple disabilities. The widely used online version of this assessment tool collects data in an associated database. Sample data on children with specific disabilities generated by this database are presented to illustrate the clinical and research potential of this free assessment service.

show abstract

Section: Implications For Children With Complex Communication Needsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Using the Communication Matrix to Assess Expressive Skills in Early Communicators

Rowland

2011

Communication Disorders Quarterly

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In line with this suggestion, Rowland and Schweigert (2000) argued that tangible symbols place relatively low demands on learners ' memory and representational skills, compared to other AAC options, such as manual signs or abstract graphic symbols. The possibility of lessening such demands could be an important consideration, in light of evidence suggesting that many individuals with developmental disabilities, with and without visual impairments, have signifi cant memory and representational skill defi cits (O ' Reilly & Carr, 2007).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 89%

“…Tangible symbol systems used in AAC interventions have included the use of real objects, miniature objects, and partial objects (Beukelman & Mirenda, 2013). Examples of tangible symbols include (a) a real toothbrush to represent brushing one ' s teeth, (b) a plastic fork to represent food/eating, (c) a toy school bus to represent the end of the school day, (d) a small piece of yarn to represent hat or mittens, and (e) a short section of a drinking straw used for requesting drinks (Rowland & Schweigert, 2000;Trief, 2007).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Tangible Symbols as an AAC Option for Individuals with Developmental Disabilities: A Systematic Review of Intervention Studies

Roche

Sigafoos

Lancioni

et al. 2014

Augmentative and Alternative Communication

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We reviewed nine studies evaluating the use of tangible symbols in AAC interventions for 129 individuals with developmental disabilities. Studies were summarized in terms of participants, tangible symbols used, communication functions/skills targeted for intervention, intervention procedures, evaluation designs, and main findings. Tangible symbols mainly consisted of three-dimensional whole objects or partial objects. Symbols were taught as requests for preferred objects/activities in five studies with additional communication functions (e.g., naming, choice making, protesting) also taught in three studies. One study focused on naming activities. With intervention, 54% (n = 70) of the participants, who ranged from 3 to 20 years of age, learned to use tangible symbols to communicate. However, these findings must be interpreted with caution due to pre-experimental or quasi-experimental designs in five of the nine studies. Overall, tangible symbols appear promising, but additional studies are needed to establish their relative merits as a communication mode for people with developmental disabilities.

show abstract

“…Rowland and Schweigert (2000) encouraged teaching choice making with symbols through a comprehension check procedure. Roland and Schweigert and Beukelman and Mirenda (2005) described this procedure as involving a facilitator who first offers preferred and nonpreferred items followed by the verbal prompt "What do you want?"…”

Section: Intervention Targeting the Illocutionary And Locutionary Leamentioning

confidence: 99%

Recommended Communication-Based Interventions for Individuals With Severe Intellectual Disabilities

Ogletree

Bruce

Finch

et al. 2010

Communication Disorders Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Providing effective interventions for individuals with severe intellectual disabilities (ID) continues to challenge educators, speech-language pathologists, and other allied health professionals. This article reviews recommended intervention practices that have emerged over the past 30 years and illustrates their use through an evidenced-based case example. The article concludes with remarks specific to the case and a charge to those involved with communication interventions for this population.

show abstract

Tangible symbols, tangible outcomes

Cited by 108 publications

References 17 publications

Using the Communication Matrix to Assess Expressive Skills in Early Communicators

Using the Communication Matrix to Assess Expressive Skills in Early Communicators

Tangible Symbols as an AAC Option for Individuals with Developmental Disabilities: A Systematic Review of Intervention Studies

Recommended Communication-Based Interventions for Individuals With Severe Intellectual Disabilities

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About