Long-term outcomes for individuals who use augmentative and alternative communication: Part I – what is a “good” outcome?

References

• Allaire J. H., Gressard R. P., Blackman J. A., Hostler S. L. Children with severe speech impairments: Caregiver survey of AAC use. Augmentative and Alternative Communication 1991; 7: 248–255
   Google Scholar
• Beukelman D. R. Evaluating the effectiveness of intervention programs. Augmentative communication: An introduction, S. Blackstone. American Speech-Language Hearing Association, Rockville, MD 1986
   Google Scholar
• Beukelman D. R., Ansel B. M. Research priorities in augmentative and alternative communication. Augmentative and Alternative Communication 1995; 11: 131–134
   Google Scholar
• Blackstone S. AAC outcomes. Augmentative Communication News 1995; 8(1)
   Google Scholar
• Calculator S. N. Evaluating the effectiveness of AAC programs for persons with severe handicaps. Augmentative and Alternative Communication 1988; 4: 177–179
   Google Scholar
• Carrow-Woolfolk E. Test for Auditory Comprehension of Language, Revised Edition. Pro-Ed, Austin, TX 1985
   Google Scholar
• Cieza A., Brockow T., Ewert T., Amman E., Kollerits B., Chatterji S., et al. Linking health-status measurements to the international classification of functioning, disability and health. Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine 2002; 34: 205–210
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cohen S. G., McDonnell G., Osborn B. Self-perception of “at risk” and high achieving readers: Beyond reading recovery data. Cognitive and social perspectives for literacy research and instruction. Thirty-eighth yearbook of the National Reading Conference, S. McCormick, J. Zutell. The National Reading Conference, Inc., Chicago, IL 1989
   Google Scholar
• Cole D. A., Meyer L. H. Social integration and severe disabilities: A longitudinal analysis of child outcomes. The Journal of Special Education 1991; 25: 340–351
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Culp D. M., Ambrosi D. M., Berniger T. M., Mitchell J. O. Augmentative communication aide use – A follow-up study. Augmentative and Alternative Communication 1986; 2: 19–24
   Google Scholar
• Dunn L. M., Dunn L. M. Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test – Revised. American Guidance Service, Circle Pines, MN 1981
   Google Scholar
• Erickson K. A. Informal reading assessment. Center for Literacy and Disability Studies, Chapel Hill, NC 1995, Unpublished manuscript
   Google Scholar
• Frattali C. M. Outcomes measurement: Definitions, dimensions, and perspectives. Measuring outcomes in speech-language pathology, C. M. Frattali. Theime, New York 1998; 1–27
   Google Scholar
• Frattali C. M., Thompson C., Holland A., Wohl C., Ferketic M. Functional assessment of communication skills for adults. American Speech Language and Hearing Association, Rockville, MD 1995
   Google Scholar
• Goossens' C. Aided communication intervention before assessment: A case study of a child with cerebral palsy. Augmentative and Alternative Communication 1989; 5: 14–26
   Google Scholar
• Granlund M., Blackstone S. Outcomes measurement in AAC. Augmentative and alternative communication: New directions in research and practice, F. T. Loncke, J. Clibbens, H. H. Arvidson, L. L. Lloyd. Whurr, London 1999; 207–227
   Google Scholar
• Granlund M., Eriksson L., Ylvén R. Utility of international classification of functioning, disability and health's participation dimension in assigning ICF codes to items from extant rating instruments. Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine 2004; 36: 130–137
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harris L., Doyle E. S., Haaf R. G. Language treatment approach for users of AAC: Experimental single-subject investigation. Augmentative and Alternative Communication 1996; 12: 230–244
   Google Scholar
• Holburn S., Jacobson J. W., Vietze P. M., Schwartz A. A., Sersen E. Quantifying the process and outcomes of person-centered planning. American Journal on Mental Retardation 2000; 105: 402–416
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Huer M. B., Lloyd L. L. AAC user's perspectives on augmentative and alternative communication. Augmentative and Alternative Communication 1990; 242–249
   Google Scholar
• Hunt P., Staub D., Alwell M., Goetz L. Achievement by all students within the context of cooperative learning groups. Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps 1994; 19: 290–301
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jinks A., Sinteff B. Consumer response to AAC devices: Acquisition, training, use, and satisfaction. Augmentative and Alternative Communication 1994; 10: 184–190
   Google Scholar
• Kelford Smith A., Thurston S., Light J., Parnes P., O'Keefe B. The form and use of written communication produced by physically disabled individuals using microcomputers. Augmentative and Alternative Communication 1989; 5: 115–124
   Google Scholar
• Kennedy C. H., Shukla S., Fryxell D. Comparing the effects of educational placement on the social relationships of intermediate school students with severe disabilities. Exceptional Children 1997; 64: 31–47
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koppenhaver D. A., Evans D. A., Yoder D. E. Childhood reading and writing experiences of literate adults with severe speech and motor impairments. Augmentative and Alternative Communication 1991; 7: 20–33
   Google Scholar
• Kraat A., Brune P. Getting from here to there: Lessons from ‘Miles’. Paper presented at the American Speech Language Hearing Association, Boston, MA, November, 1997
   Google Scholar
• Light J. “Let's go star fishing”: Reflections on the contexts of language learning for children who use aided AAC. Augmentative and Alternative Communication 1997; 13: 158–171
   Google Scholar
• Light J. Do augmentative and alternative communication interventions really make a difference? The challenges of efficacy research. Augmentative and Alternative Communication 1999; 15: 13–24
   Google Scholar
• Light J. What is a “good” outcome?. Paper presented at the Annual Convention of the American Speech Language Hearing Association, Atlanta, GA, November, 2002
   Google Scholar
• Light J., Binger C., Agate T. L., Ramsay K. N. Teaching partner-focused questions to individuals who use augmentative and alternative communication to enhance their communicative competence. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research 1999; 42: 241–255
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Light J., Collier B., Parnes P. Communicative interaction between young nonspeaking physically disabled children and their primary caregivers: Part I –discourse patterns. Augmentative and Alternative Communication 1985a; 1: 74–83
   Google Scholar
• Light J., Collier B., Parnes P. Communicative interaction between young nonspeaking physically disabled children and their primary caregivers: Part II –communicative function. Augmentative and Alternative Communication 1985b; 1: 98–106
   Google Scholar
• Light J., Collier B., Parnes P. Communicative interaction between young nonspeaking physically disabled children and their primary caregivers: Part III –modes of communication. Augmentative and Alternative Communication 1985c; 1: 125–133
   Google Scholar
• Light J., McNaughton D. Literacy and augmentative and alternative communication (AAC): The expectations and priorities of parents and teachers. Topics in Language Disorders 1993; 13(2)33–46
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Light J., Stoltz B., McNaughton D. Community-based employment: Experiences of adults who use AAC. Augmentative and Alternative Communication 1996; 12: 215–228
   Google Scholar
• Lund N. J., Duchan J. F. Assessing children's language in naturalistic contexts (2nd ed.). Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ 1988
   Google Scholar
• Lund S. K., Light J. Long-term outcomes for individuals who use AAC: Part II – Expressive Communication, (in press)
   Google Scholar
• Lund S. K., Light J. Long-term outcomes for individuals who use AAC: Part III – Contextual factors. University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee (submitted). 2006
   Google Scholar
• McLeod S., Bleile K. The ICF: A framework for setting goals for children with speech impairment. Child Language Teaching and Therapy 2004; 20(3)199–219
   Google Scholar
• McNaughton D., Light J., Arnold K. “Getting your wheel in the door”: Successful full-time employment experiences of individuals with cerebral palsy who use augmentative and alternative communication. Augmentative and Alternative Communication 2002; 18: 59–76
   Google Scholar
• NIDDR. Augmentative and alternative communication intervention consensus validation conference program and abstracts. NIDRR, Washington, DC 1992
   Google Scholar
• Parsons J. E., Adler T. F., Kaczala C. M. Socialization of achievement attitudes and beliefs: Parental influences. Child Development 1982; 53: 310–321
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Perenboom R. J., Chorus A. M. J. Measuring participation according to the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF). Disability and Rehabilitation 2003; 25: 577–587
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Renwick R., Brown I. The centre for health promotion's conceptual approach to quality of life: Being, belonging, and becoming. Quality of life in health promotion and rehabilitation: Conceptual approaches, issues, and applications, R. Renwick, I. Brown, M. Nagler. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA 1996; 75–86
   Google Scholar
• Renwick R., Brown I., Raphael D. The quality of life profile: People with physical and sensory disabilities. University of Toronto, Centre for Health Promotion, Toronto 1998
   Google Scholar
• Simeonsson R. J. Classification of communication disabilities in children: Contribution of the International Classification on Functioning, Disability and Health. International Journal of Audiology 2003; 42: S2–S8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Simmons-Mackie N. Cautiously embracing the ICF. Advances in Speech-Language Pathology 2004; 6: 67–70
   Google Scholar
• Smith-Lewis M. R., Ford A. A user's perspective on augmentative communication. Augmentative and Alternative Communication 1987; 3: 12–17
   Google Scholar
• Threats T. T., Worrall L. Classifying communication disability using the ICF. Advances in Speech-Language Pathology 2004; 6: 53–62
   Google Scholar
• Ueda S., Okawa Y. The subjective dimension of functioning and disability: What is it and what is it for?. Disability and Rehabilitation 2003; 25: 596–601
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Waldron N. L., McLeskey J. The effects of an inclusive school program on students with mild and severe learning disabilities. Exceptional Children 1998; 64: 395–405
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wehmeyer M. L. Self-determination as an educational outcome: Why is it important to children, youth, and adults with disabilities?. Self-determination across the life span: Independence and choice for people with disabilities, D. J. Sands, M. L. Wehmeyer. Paul H. Brookes Publishing, Baltimore, MD 1996; 17–36
   Google Scholar
• Wehmeyer M. L., Kelchner K. The Arc's self-determination scale. The Arc National Headquarters, Arlington, TX 1995
   Google Scholar
• WHO. International classification of functioning, disability and health. World Health Organization, Geneva 2001
   Google Scholar
• Wiederholt J. L., Blalock G. Gray Silent Reading Test. Pro-Ed, Austin, TX 2000
   Google Scholar
• York J., Tundidor H. Issues raised in the name of inclusion: Perspectives of educators, parents, and students. Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps 1995; 20: 31–44
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ysseldyke J. E., Thurlow M. L., Bruininks R. H. Expected educational outcomes for students with disabilities. Remedial and Special Education 1992; 13: 19–30
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar