What We Have Here is a Failure to Symbolate: A Comparison of K-5 Academic Vocabulary and Symbols

Abstract

The general education classroom is filled with academic vocabulary, and individuals with developmental disabilities benefit from explicit vocabulary instruction (Browder et al., 2008; Marzano, 2020; Smith et al., 2013). Picture-based alternative and augmentative communication (AAC) can encourage academic skills development (Ahlgrim-Dehzel et al., 2016; Boruta & Bidstrup, 2012; Geist & Erickson, 2021; Yorke et al., 2018). However, the corpus of picture vocabulary used in AAC devices is limited and requires educators to customize each device so that the individual can communicate effectively (Geist & Erickson, 2021). When students require extensive modifications and support in academic environments, they are, unfortunately, more likely to be segregated (Agran et al., 2020; Kleinert, 2020). Potentially, AAC device use could be more effectively implemented if the academic vocabulary available on the software aligned with the vocabulary used in the general education classroom. In this study, we compared the corpus of picture vocabulary from two commercially available and commonly used publishers. Specifically, we compared the availability of Marzano's (2020) core academic vocabulary to the symbols found in Boardmaker®7.0 and SymbolStix PrimeTM. Results showed 90% alignment with kindergarten vocabulary decreasing in all subjects beginning in Grade 2. We noted that vocabulary alignment was most significant in the mathematics and science classes, with approximately 60 to 70% of the words available by Grade 5. We also noted that the availability of vocabulary decreased to less than 50% by Grade 5 for both English language arts and social science.