Using Evidence-Based-Practice to Guide Decision Making in AAC

Abstract

No AccessPerspectives on Augmentative and Alternative CommunicationArticle1 Nov 2002Using Evidence-Based-Practice to Guide Decision Making in AAC Elizabeth G. Clark, and Elizabeth A. Clark Elizabeth G. Clark Montgomery County Intermediate Unit Norristown, PA Google Scholar More articles by this author and Elizabeth A. Clark Lower Merion School District Ardmore, PA Google Scholar More articles by this author https://doi.org/10.1044/aac11.3.6 SectionsAboutFull TextPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationTrack Citations ShareFacebookTwitterLinked In References ASHA. (2002). Augmentative and alternative communication: Knowledge and skills for service delivery.ASHA Supplement 22. Rockville, MD: Author. Google Scholar Apel, K. (1999). Checks and balances: Keeping the science in our profession.Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 30, 98–107. ASHAWireGoogle Scholar Bedrosian, J. (1999). AAC efficacy research: Challenges for the new century.Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 15, 2–3. Google Scholar Beukelman, D., McGinnis, J., & Morrow, D. (1991). Vocabulary selection in augmentative and alternative communication.Augmentative and Alternative Communication,, 7, 171–185. Google Scholar Beukelman, D., & Mirenda, P. (1998). Augmentative and alternative communication: Management of severe communication disorders in children and adults (2nd ed.). Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co., Inc. Google Scholar Blackstone, S. (1988). Vocabulary selection: Issues, techniques, and tips.Augmentative and Communication News, 1, 1–5. Google Scholar Blackstone, S. (1993). Low tech communication displays: Are we considering everything?.Augmentative Communication News, 6, 1–3. Google Scholar Blau, A. (1983). Vocabulary selection in augmentative communication: Where do we begin?.H. Winitz (Ed.), Treating language disorders: For clinicians by clinicians (pp. 205– 234). Baltimore, MD: University Park Press. Google Scholar Calculator, S. (1999). AAC outcomes for children and youths with severe disabilities: When seeing is believing.Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 15, 4–12. Google Scholar Creaghead, N. (1999). Evaluating language intervention approaches: Contrasting perspectives.Language, Speech, and Hearing in Schools,, 30, 335–338. Google Scholar Dunchan, J. F., Calculator, S., Sonnenmeier, R., Diehl, S., & Cumley, G. (2001). A framework for managing controversial practices.Language, Speech, and Hearing in Schools, 32, 133–141. Google Scholar Glennen, S., & DeCoste, D. (1997). Handbook of augmentative and alternative communication.: San Diego, CA: Singular Press. Google Scholar Kamhi, A. (1999). To use or not to use: Factors that influence the selection of new treatment approaches.Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 30, 92–98. ASHAWireGoogle Scholar Lahey, M., & Bloom, L. (1977). Planning a first lexicon: Which words to teach first.Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 42, 340–350. ASHAWireGoogle Scholar Light, J. (1989). Toward a definition of communicative competence for individuals using augmentative and alternative communication systems.Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 5, 137–144. CrossrefGoogle Scholar Light, J. (1999). Do augmentative and alternative communication interventions really make a difference? The challenges of efficacy research.Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 15, 13–24. Google Scholar Light, J., & Binger, C. (1998). Building communicative competence with individuals who use augmentative and alternative communication.: Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co. Google Scholar Light, J., McNaughton, D., & Parnes, P. (1994). A protocol for the assessment of the communicative interaction skills of non-speaking severely handicapped adults and their facilitators.: Toronto, Canada: Augmentative Communication Service. Google Scholar Lloyd, L., Fuller, D., & Arvidson, H. (1997). Augmentative and alternative communication: A handbook of principles and practices.: Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon. Google Scholar Logemann, J. (1998). Treatment outcomes and efficacy in the schools.Language, Speech, and Hearing in Schools, 29, 243–244. ASHAWireGoogle Scholar McKibbon, K. A., Wilczynski, N., Hayward, R. S., Walker-Dilks, C., & Haynes, R. B. (1995). The medical literature as a resource for evidence based care., Working Paper from the Health Information Research Unit, McMaster University, Ontario, Canada Google Scholar Zabala, J. (1995). The SETT framework: Choosing and using tools that promote inclusion through communication participation, and productivity.ASHA Special Interest Division 12, Augmentative and Alternative Communication Newsletter, 5 (4), 6–8. Google Scholar Additional Resources FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 11Issue 3November 2002Pages: 6-9 Get Permissions Add to your Mendeley library History Published in issue: Nov 1, 2002 Metrics Topicsasha-topicsasha-sigsasha-article-typesCopyright & Permissions© 2002 American Speech-Language-Hearing AssociationPDF downloadLoading ...