Faculty of Humanities
School of Professional Social Sciences
Centre for Augmentative and Alternative Communication (CAAC)
Selected Highlights from Research Findings
When people cannot express themselves through speaking or writing, alternative means of expression have to be explored. Such augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) systems typically require the pre-selection of vocabulary items that will allow the user to compose relevant messages for communication.
Three projects were conducted concerning the selection of relevant vocabulary for persons with little or no functional speech (LNFS) The first concerned vocabulary that would allow persons LNFS to report abuse and/or neglect. Focus groups of adults with LNFS and service providers from four official South African language groups suggested relevant vocabulary, that was used to produce graphic symbol based communication boards. In a continuation of the project, the vocabulary is undergoing a social validation process by individuals with LNFS who use AAC.
The second project concerned the selection of relevant topics of communication for adults with expressive aphasia. Both the adults themselves and their partners selected topics, with relatively good overlap between choices of the person and the partner. These topics can be used as a basis for relevant vocabulary selection.
The third project aimed at verifying a parent report measure of expressive vocabulary of toddlers. The measure was found appropriate for use in an ethnoliguistically diverse South African population, suggesting that it can be used to determine the expressive vocabulary of typically-developing South African toddlers. This information can in turn be used as a point of reference when selecting vocabulary for toddlers with LNFS.
Contact person: Prof J Bornman.
Contact person: Prof J Bornman.
Picture symbols are often used to aid the expression of non- or preliterate individuals with little or no functional speech (LNFS). Symbols are easier to learn and use if the user perceives a relationship between the picture symbol and the concept which the symbols stands for. Picture Communication Symbols (PCS) is a symbol library developed in America, yet used widely across the world to aid the expression of persons with LNFS. Two studies were conducted to determine the how South African children perceive PCS.
The first study compared Afrikaans and Sepedi speaking Grade R children’s choice of PCS when describing basic emotions. Statistically significant differences were found between the two groups as Afrikaans speaking children chose expected symbols more frequently than Sepedi speaking children. This underlines the importance of taking language and culture into consideration when choosing picture symbols for persons with LNFS.
The second study sought to determine how easy it is for South African children with English Additional Language (EAL) and intellectual disability to recognise 16 theme-related PCS. It was found that children recognised the PCS relatively easily, suggesting that these symbols are appropriate for use with this population.
Contact person: Dr S Dada.
The social model of disability emphasizes a human rights approach to disability, and the importance of addressing environmental barriers such as the attitudes of community members and service providers.
Two projects were conducted to better understand childhood disability within a social framework. The first concerned the perception of children with intellectual disabilities and their care givers about the adequacy of the child’s home environment to meet the child’s rights. Results suggest that the rights of Afrikaans-speaking children with intellectual disabilities are perceived to be largely fulfilled within their home environments, although rights to development and participation were met to a slightly lesser extent than rights to survival and protection. Data on Xitsonga- and English-speaking children is still being processed.
The second project concerned the attitudes of teachers towards learners with little or no functional speech (LNFS) as compared to learners with attention deficit hyperactivity (ADHD). Results showed that teachers had less positive attitudes towards inclusion of learners with LNFS in their class, emanating from concerns about the academic and social participation of such learners. However, having received special education training was found to be a mediating factor, with such teachers displaying more positive attitudes towards the inclusion of learners with LNFS in their class.
Contact person: Prof J Bornman.
|
