Journal of Speech Pathology & Therapy
Open Access

Augmentative Methods; Children; Speech; Language; Communication Needs; Empowerment; Nonverbal Expression

Introduction

For children facing challenges in speech, language, and communication, the ability to express themselves effectively can be a daunting task. Augmentative methods offer invaluable support, enabling these children to communicate, interact, and engage with the world around them [1,2]. In this article, we delve into the diverse landscape of augmentative methods tailored to meet the unique needs of children with speech, language, and communication difficulties. By exploring the principles, techniques, and benefits of augmentative communication, we aim to shed light on the transformative power of these approaches in facilitating meaningful communication and enhancing quality of life for children with diverse communication needs [3,4].

Understanding augmentative methods

Augmentative methods encompass a range of strategies and tools designed to supplement or replace traditional verbal communication [5]. These methods serve as alternative means of expression for individuals who may have limited speech intelligibility, vocabulary, or language comprehension. Augmentative methods leverage various modalities, including gestures, symbols, pictures, electronic devices, and communication apps, to facilitate communication and language development [6].

Key components of augmentative methods

Symbols and visual supports

Symbols, such as pictures, icons, or tangible objects, play a central role in augmentative communication. These visual supports provide concrete representations of concepts, actions, or objects, making communication more accessible and comprehensible for children with diverse communication needs. Symbol-based communication systems, such as Picture Exchange Communication System (PECS) or Boardmaker, enable children to express themselves effectively by selecting or pointing to symbols to convey their messages [7,8].

Communication devices and apps

Technological advancements have revolutionized augmentative communication through the development of specialized communication devices and apps. Augmentative and Alternative Communication (AAC) devices, such as speech-generating devices (SGDs) or tablet-based apps (e.g., Proloquo2Go, TouchChat), offer customizable communication solutions tailored to the unique needs and abilities of children with speech, language, and communication difficulties [9]. These devices enable children to generate spoken or written messages using pre-programmed vocabulary, text-to-speech capabilities, or customizable communication grids.

Sign language and gesture

Sign language and gesture-based communication represent alternative modalities for children with limited verbal communication abilities. American Sign Language (ASL), British Sign Language (BSL), or other manual communication systems provide a rich and expressive means of communication for children who are deaf, hard of hearing, or have difficulty with speech production. Additionally, gestures and body language serve as powerful tools for augmenting verbal communication, enhancing comprehension, and conveying meaning in context [10].

Benefits of augmentative methods

The adoption of augmentative methods offers numerous benefits for children with speech, language, and communication needs, as well as their families and caregivers. Some key advantages include:

Enhanced communication skills: Augmentative methods empower children to express themselves more effectively, build vocabulary, and develop their language skills. By providing alternative means of communication, these methods facilitate greater participation in social interactions, academic activities, and daily routines.

Improved social engagement: Augmentative communication fosters social connections and meaningful interactions by enabling children to initiate conversations, share their thoughts and feelings, and engage with peers and caregivers. By promoting inclusivity and reducing communication barriers, augmentative methods enhance social integration and participation in various settings.

Increased independence and autonomy: Augmentative methods promote independence and autonomy by giving children greater control over their communication and decision-making processes. By providing tools and strategies for self-expression, these methods empower children to advocate for their needs, make choices, and navigate their environment more effectively.

Support for language development: Augmentative methods complement traditional speech and language therapy by providing additional opportunities for language exposure, practice, and reinforcement. By incorporating visual supports, auditory feedback, and interactive learning experiences, these methods support language development and comprehension in children with diverse communication needs.

Conclusion

In conclusion, augmentative methods represent invaluable resources for children with speech, language, and communication needs, offering a diverse array of tools and strategies to support their communication and language development. By leveraging symbols, visual supports, communication devices, sign language, and gestures, augmentative methods empower children to communicate effectively, engage meaningfully with others, and participate fully in everyday activities. As advocates for inclusive communication practices, it is essential for educators, therapists, and caregivers to recognize the transformative potential of augmentative methods and ensure equitable access to communication supports for all children, regardless of their communication abilities or challenges. By embracing augmentative communication as a fundamental human right, we can create a more inclusive and communicatively accessible world for children of all abilities.

References

1. Ali S, Elliott L, Biss RK, Abumeeiz M, Brantuo M et al. (2022)The BNT-15 provides an accurate measure of English proficiency in cognitively intact bilinguals - a study in cross-cultural assessment.Appl Neuropsychol Adult 29: 351-363.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

2. Cohen M, Town P Buff A (1988)Neurodevelopmental differences in confrontational naming in children. Developmental Neuropsychology 4: 75-81.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

3. Guilford AM, Nawojczyk D C (1988)Standardization of the Boston Naming Test at the kindergarten and elementary school levels. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools 19: 395-400.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

4. Hamberger MJ, Seidel WT, MacAllister WS, Smith ML (2018)Auditory and visual naming tests for children. Child Neuropsychology, 24: 903-922.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

5. Kindlon D, Garrison W (1984)The Boston Naming Test: Norm data and cue utilization in a sample of normal 6-and 7-year-old children. Brain and Language 21: 255-259.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

6. Lansing A E, Ivnik R J, CullumC M, Randolph C (1999)An empirically derived short form of the Boston naming test. Arch Clin Neuropsychol 14: 481-487.

Indexed at, Google Scholarq Crossref

7. Martielli T M, Blackburn L B (2016)when a funnel becomes a martini glass: Adolescent performance on the Boston Naming Test.Child Neuropsycho 22: 381-393.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

8. Nicholas LE, Brookshire R H, Maclennan DL, SchumacherJ G , PorrazzoS (1989)Revised administration and scoring procedures for the Boston Naming Test and norms for non-brain-damaged adults. Aphasiology 3: 569-580.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

9. Riva D, Nichelli F , Devoti M (2000)Developmental aspects of verbal fluency and confrontation naming in children. Brain Lang 71: 267-284.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

10. Rosselli M, Ardila A, Jurado MB, Salvatierra JL (2014)Cognate facilitation effect in balancedand non-balanced Spanish–English bilinguals using the Boston Naming Test. Int J Biling 18: 649-662.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref