Content area
Full Text
Traditionally, the field of augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) has focused on enhancing the expressive communication of users. However, a number of authors have also described strategies to augment the input provided to AAC users during communication interaction or during instruction in AAC use. The AAC Input Framework (AACIF) described in this paper represents an attempt to clarify the processes of input that occur in AAC by exploring how existing techniques are relevant to AAC users and their partners. Four components-augmenting the message, mapping language and symbols, augmenting retention, and developing a pool of response options-are described. Connections to existing augmented input literature are presented, and clinical examples are provided.
KEY WORDS: augmentative and alternative communication (AAC), comprehension
Traditionally, the field of augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) has focused on enhancing the expressive communication of users. However, a number of authors have also described ways to augment the input provided to AAC users during communication interaction or during instruction in AAC use. Augmented input has been implemented with adolescents with developmental delays who receive spoken and lexigram input and use lexigrams to make requests (Romski & Sevcik, 1992). Garrett and Beukelman (1992) described augmented input using gestures and written words to enhance the comprehensibility of spoken communication messages for adults with aphasia. Goossens' (1989) used a method of augmented input, "aided language stimulation," with a child who was unable to speak because of cerebral palsy.
AAC INPUT FRAMEWORK
The presence of augmented input techniques in research and clinical practice inspired the development of the "AAC Input Framework" (AACIF) described in this paper. This paper describes several augmented comprehension techniques and integrates them into the broad AACIF consisting of four components. The four components are as follows: (1 ) augmenting the message, (2) mapping language and symbols, (3) augmenting message retention, and (4) developing a pool of response options using objects and symbols. Included in this article are descriptions and illustrations of the four components with references to existing augmented input literature and clinical examples with specific populations. These specific populations include both individuals with developmental disabilities and those with acquired disabilities. Table 1 provides an overview of the scope of the framework and serves as a reference throughout this paper. It includes definitions, purposes,...