Communication Training Supporting an AAC User with Severe Intellectual Disability: Application of the Communication Partner Instruction Model

This investigation employed the Communication Partner Instruction (CPI) training model in a large North Carolina residential facility for persons with significant intellectual disabilities. A single-subject multiple baseline study design was employed by researchers. Four adult women (staff participants) were trained to support the expressive communicative abilities of one individual with severe intellectual disabilities (resident) who used AAC (a static book of approximately 100 symbols). Staff participants varied with respect to their daily contact and interaction with the resident. Two participants were staff trainers, one was a chaplain, and one was a teacher. Staff participants experienced demonstrable gains with two of three trained dependent variables: providing communication opportunities and modeling AAC system use. Results of training for a third variable, assuring AAC system access, were inconclusive. Training effects were not maintained post intervention. The resident, though not a focus of training efforts, initiated communication with her system more frequently with all staff participants after training. Findings provide preliminary support for CPI training as a means of teaching communication partners strategies to support AAC use; although, additional research is needed. Future directions for CPI training and study are proposed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save

• Get 10 units per month
• Download Article/Chapter or eBook
• 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
• Cancel anytime

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (France)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Similar content being viewed by others

Augmentative and Alternative Communication Applications for Persons with ASD and Complex Communication Needs

Children, Young People and Adults Who Use AAC

Naturalistic Aided AAC Instruction

References

• Beukelman, D., & Mirenda, P. (2005). Augmentative and alternative communication: Supporting children and adults with complex needs (3rd ed.). Baltimore: Brookes. Google Scholar
• Beukelman, D., & Mirenda, P. (2013). Augmentative and alternative communication: Supporting children and adults with complex needs (4th ed.). Baltimore: Brookes. Google Scholar
• Binger, C., Kent-Walsh, J., Ewing, C., & Taylor, S. (2010). Teaching educational assistants to facilitate the multi-symbol message productions of young students who require AAC. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 19(2), 108–120. doi:10.1044/1058-0360(2009/09-0015). ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
• Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development: Experiments by nature and design. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Google Scholar
• Collier, B., McGhie-Richmond, D., & Self, H. (2010). Exploring communication assistants as an option for increasing communication access to communities for people who use augmentative communication. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 26(1), 48–59. doi:10.3109/07434610903561498. ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
• Deshler, D. D., Alley, G. R., Warner, M. M., & Schumaker, J. B. (1981). Instructional practices for promoting skill acquisition and generalization in severely learning disabled adolescents. Learning Disability Quarterly, 4(4), 415–421. doi:10.2307/1510744. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Douglas, S. N. (2012). Teaching paraeducators to support communication of individuals who use augmentative and alternative communication: a literature review. Current Issues in Education, 15(1), 1–12. Google Scholar
• Douglas, S. N., McNaughton, D., & Light, J. (2014). Online training for paraeducators to support the communication of young children. Journal of Early Intervention, 35(3), 223–242. doi:10.1177/1053815114526782. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Ellis, E., Deshler, D., Lenz, B., Schumaker, J., & Clark, F. (1991). An instructional model for teaching learning strategies. Focus on Exceptional Children, 23, 1–24. Google Scholar
• Glennen, S. L., & DeCoste, D. (1997). The handbook of augmentative and alternative communication. San Diego: Singular. Google Scholar
• Harrison, S. (2003). Creating a successful learning environment for postsecondary students with learning disabilities: policy and practice. Journal of College Reading and Learning, 33(2), 131–145. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Kent-Walsh, J., & McNaughton, D. (2005). Communication partner instruction in AAC: present practices and future directions. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 21(3), 195–204. doi:10.1080/07434610400006646. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Kent-Walsh, J., & Rosa-Lugo, L. (2006). Communication partner interventions for children who use AAC: storybook reading across culture and language. The ASHA Leader, 11(3), 6–29. doi:10.1044/leader.FTR2.11032006.6. Google Scholar
• Kent-Walsh, J., Binger, C., & Hasham, Z. (2010). Effects of parent instruction on the symbolic communication of children using AAC during storybook reading. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 19(2), 97–107. ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kirkpatrick, D. (1996). Great ideas revisited. Techniques for evaluating training programs. Revisiting Kirkpatrick’s four level model. Training and Development, 50, 54–59. Google Scholar
• Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33, 159–174. ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
• Light, J., Collier, B., & Parnes, P. (1985). Communication interaction between young nonspeaking physically disabled children and their primary caregivers: Part I discourse patterns. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 1(2), 74–83. doi:10.1080/07434618512331273561. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Light, J., Binger, C., & Kelford Smith, A. (1994). Story reading interactions between preschoolers who use AAC and their mothers. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 10(4), 255–268. doi:10.1080/07434619412331276960. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• McCarthy, J., & Light, J. (2005). Attitudes toward individuals who use augmentative and alternative communication: research review. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 21, 41–55. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Mirenda, P., Iacono, T., & Williams, R. (1990). Communication options for persons with severe and profound disabilities: state of the art and future directions. Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 15, 3–21. Google Scholar
• Ogletree, B. T. (2012). Stakeholders as partners: making AAC work better. Perspectives on Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 4, 151–157. doi:10.1044/aac21.4.151. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Ogletree, B. T., Wetherby, A. M., & Westling, D. L. (1992). Profile of the prelinguistic intentional communicative behaviors of children with profound mental retardation. American Journal of Mental Retardation, 97(2), 186–196. PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ogletree, B. T., Oren, T., & Fischer, M. (2007). Examining effective intervention practices for communication impairment in autism spectrum disorders. Exceptionality, 15(4), 233–248. doi:10.1080/09362830701655782. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Pennington, L., Goldbart, J., & Marshall, J. (2004). Interaction training for conversational partners of children with cerebral palsy: a systematic review. International Journal of Language and Communication Disabilities, 39(2), 151–170. doi:10.1080/13682820310001625598. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Schlosser, R. W. (2003). Roles of speech output in augmentative and alternative communication: narrative review. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 19, 5–27. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Sigafoos, J. (1999). Creating opportunities for augmentative and alternative communication: strategies for involving people with developmental disabilities. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 15(3), 183–190. doi:10.1080/07434619912331278715. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Simmons-Mackie, N., Raymer, A., Armstrong, E., Holland, A., & Cherney, L. R. (2010). Communication partner training in aphasia: a systematic review. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 91(12), 1814–1837. doi:10.1016/j.apmr.2010.08.026. ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
• Smidt, A., Balandin, S., Sigafoos, J., & Reed, V. A. (2009). The Kirkpatrick model: a useful tool for evaluating training outcomes. Journal of Intellectual and Developmental Disability, 34(3), 266–274. doi:10.1080/13668250903093125. ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
• Snell, M. E., Brady, N., McLean, L., Ogletree, B. T., Siegel, E., Sylvester, L., & Sevcik, R. (2010). Twenty years of communication research with individuals who have severe intellectual disabilities. American Journal on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, 115(5), 364–380. doi:10.1352/1944-7558-115-5.364. ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
• Wilkinson, K. M., & Hennig, S. (2007). The state of research and practice in augmentative and alternative communication for children with developmental/intellectual disabilities. Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities Research Reviews, 13, 58–69. ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in the studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

1. Western Carolina University, Cullowhee, NC, USA Billy Townsend Ogletree, Patrick Bartholomew, Mary Linda Kirksey, Abigail Guenigsman, Georgia Hambrecht, Johanna Price & Mary Claire Wofford

1. Billy Townsend Ogletree