Go to previous article
Go to next article
Return to 2001 Table of Contents
Sara Gage, B.S.
Graduate Student
Department of Special Education
East Carolina University
Greenville, North Carolina 27858
Melissa Engleman, Ed.D.
Associate Professor
Department of Special Education
East Carolina University
Greenville, North Carolina 27858
Harold C. Griffin, Ph.D.
Associate Professor
Department of Special Education
East Carolina University
Greenville, North Carolina 27858
This presentation will focus on those individuals within the
population who have the most significant levels of both hearing
and vision loss. Specific areas of emphasis will include
discussions concerning co-active movement, communication
structures of calendars and communication shelves, movement from
motor based cues to traditional visual and print communication
modes, and strategies to increase structure and engagement levels
for children. Children in the low incidence areas of autism,
deafblindness, physical disorders, and severe/profound mental
retardation will be the focus of the presentation.
Improved communication can enable all students to make choices,
participate in school, make friends, participate in transition
planning, and gain family acceptance. Most importantly, good
communication skills enable students to live independently after
they leave high school (Engleman, Griffin, Griffin, Maddox,
1999).
Engleman, Griffin, Griffin, Maddox (1999) point out that the
development of an alternative assessment system depends on the
use of various types of intervention. The first of these is
multiple assessments over time and in varied contexts. Team
planning with the family and student concerning appropriate
communication strategies also is vital. A third area in the
development of communication skills is the development of
receptive communication skills. The growth of communication
skills also requires a motivation for communication as well as
the use of a variety of consistent communication cues which can
be generalized to a variety of people and environments (Engleman,
Griffin, Griffin, & Maddox, 1999; Hodgdon, 1999).
Frequently augmentative communication can be divided into
nonlinguistic and linguistic communication modes. The
nonlinguistic communication modes may consist of intentional
behavior, touch cues, object cues, calendars/communication
shelves, signals/gestures, other functional behavior, and
co-active movement. Linguistic communication modes often include
sign language, tactile sign language, tangible symbols and
alphabet systems, and Tadoma (Engleman, Griffin, Griffin, &
Maddox, 1999).
This presentation will focus on the development of nonlinguistic
communication modes. Frequently the development of nonlinguistic
communication skills depends on an organized environment. VanDijk
(1986) notes that a delicate balance exists between children with
sensory impairments and their environments. When this balance is
changed through environmental disruptions or unexpected
occurrences, these children become upset. Their anxiety is often
demonstrated through head banging, self-biting, or other
stereotypic behaviors.
The environment can be organized by alerting children to the
structure of the day as well as any possible changes. Various
systems can be utilized to assist children in being aware of
coming events. A communication shelf system is an organization
system where objects are used to represent activities used
throughout the day (Wheeler, & Griffin, 1997). Children take
an object (e. spoon) to their activity (e.g. eating). When the
activity is over, children return the object to a finished box
located near the communication shelf. Bennett, K., Griffin, H.,
Powers, J., Williford, K., Young, C., Jensema, C., Kane, K., and
Jones, C (1995) point out that, through the use of communication
shelves, children learn to sequence daily activities as well as
acquire the concepts of beginning, middle, and end.
Another organizational tool is the use of schedules. Schedules
along with physical organization of the classroom, visual
structure, routines, and individual work systems are used by the
Division TEACCH, University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill program
as part of their structured teaching intervention for children
with autism. Mesibov, Schopler, and Hearsey (1994) point out that
structure is essential to children with autism. Visually clear
schedules seem to help children in the areas of sequencing,
organization of time, understanding oral language and attending
Hodgdon, 1996). Usually there are two types of schedules. The
first is the general classroom schedule which provides the flow
of events for classroom activities. A second type of schedule is
the individual schedule. This helps students understand what to
do during the activities listed on the general classroom schedule
(Mesibov, Schopler, & Hearsey, 1994).
The development of receptive language through various
structures, including both visual and tactual modalities is
critical for children with multiple disabilities. Early
intervention, consistency and the assessment of individual needs
help in the development of a meaning communication system for
children and adults.
Bennett, K., Griffin,
H.., Powers, J., Williford, K., Young, C., Jensema, C., Kane, K.
& Jones, C. (1995). Delivering effective instruction to
students with deaf-blindness and/or other severe
disabilities. Raleigh, NC: State Department of Public
Instruction.
Engleman, M. Griffin,
H., Griffin, L., & Maddox, J. (1999). A teacher’s guide
to communicating with students with deaf-blindness. Teaching
Exceptional Children, 31, 64-70.
Hodgdon, L. (1996).
Visual strategies for improving communication: Practical
supports for school and home. Troy, MI: QuirkRoberts
Publishing.
Hodgdon, L. (1999).
Solving behavior problems in autism: Improving communication
with visual strategies. Troy, MI: QuirkRoberts
Publishing.
Mesibov, G, Schopler,
E., & Hearsey, K. (1994). Structured teaching. In E.
Schopler, & G. Mesibov, (Eds.). Behavioral Issues in
Autism. New York, NY: Plenum Press.
Van Dijk, J. (1986). An
educational curriculum for deaf-blind multihandicapped persons.
In D. Ellis (Ed.). Sensory impairments in mentally handicapped
people (pp. 374-382). London: Croom-Helm.
Wheeler, L., &
Griffin, H. (1997). A movement-based approach to language
development in children who are deaf-blind. American Annals of
the Deaf, 142, 387-390.
Go to previous article
Go to next article
Return to 2001 Table of Contents
Return to Table of
Proceedings