Augmentative and Alternative Communication (AAC) Systems are just one of the many things that allow for people with differences to be able to communicate with others in a different way. According to ASHA, AAC is a way to "compensate for temporary or permanent impairments, activity limitations, and participation restrictions of individuals with severe disorders of speech-language production and or/comprehension, including spoken and written modes of communication" (ASHA, 2005a). While not everyone is a candidate for AAC, there is a way to decide if someone is or is not and the right device for the person too. Janice Light’s Framework for AAC (1998, 2000, 2003) is a wonderful way to assess whether someone is fit to use an augmentative and alternative
…show more content…
You can tell that her AAC, DynaVox V, was chosen specifically for her. Using Janice Light’s Framework, it is simple to see that Mary-Jane’s DynaVox V, is compliant with her linguistic, operational, social, and strategic competence.
Linguistic competence means that the user’s language skills comply with the program. Within linguistic competence, it is important for the person assessing to be aware of the patient’s receptive and expressive language skills. In Mary-Jane’s case, it is clear that she had been able to communicate for many years before her stroke so she would be able to understand what she wants to say and what another person is saying to her. This was certainly taken into account when being assessed for an AAC device.
The patient’s operational competence is one of the most important. Operational competence is the ability to use the device. If the device is high-tech, will the patient be able to turn it on? For someone with tremors or subpar fine motor skills, a high-tech device that must be turned on by a tiny button may not be the best choice. If someone is unable to move their upper body, a low-tech AAC board that requires pointing would not be the best option either. It is essential to take into account the physical abilities of the patient when choosing an AAC device. Without doing this, the AAC is …show more content…
If there is a malfunction in a high-tech ACC device, will the user have some sort of backup to be able to tell someone that something went wrong? This is so important to keep in mind because technology does not always work and for someone that cannot communicate with natural voice, it could be scary when their “voice” is taken away. This competency is not as prominent in the video of Mary-Jane, but I would like to hope that she has some sort of paper in her pocket that she may carry around that will allow her to tell someone that she is unable to communicate because her device is not
You can tell that her AAC, DynaVox V, was chosen specifically for her. Using Janice Light’s Framework, it is simple to see that Mary-Jane’s DynaVox V, is compliant with her linguistic, operational, social, and strategic competence.
Linguistic competence means that the user’s language skills comply with the program. Within linguistic competence, it is important for the person assessing to be aware of the patient’s receptive and expressive language skills. In Mary-Jane’s case, it is clear that she had been able to communicate for many years before her stroke so she would be able to understand what she wants to say and what another person is saying to her. This was certainly taken into account when being assessed for an AAC device.
The patient’s operational competence is one of the most important. Operational competence is the ability to use the device. If the device is high-tech, will the patient be able to turn it on? For someone with tremors or subpar fine motor skills, a high-tech device that must be turned on by a tiny button may not be the best choice. If someone is unable to move their upper body, a low-tech AAC board that requires pointing would not be the best option either. It is essential to take into account the physical abilities of the patient when choosing an AAC device. Without doing this, the AAC is …show more content…
If there is a malfunction in a high-tech ACC device, will the user have some sort of backup to be able to tell someone that something went wrong? This is so important to keep in mind because technology does not always work and for someone that cannot communicate with natural voice, it could be scary when their “voice” is taken away. This competency is not as prominent in the video of Mary-Jane, but I would like to hope that she has some sort of paper in her pocket that she may carry around that will allow her to tell someone that she is unable to communicate because her device is not