A proposed framework for decision‐making for assistive communication technology support: many perspectives, but one common goal

TY - JOUR

T1 - A proposed framework for decision‐making for assistive communication technology support: many perspectives, but one common goal

AU - Griffiths, Tom

AU - Price, Katie

N1 - Copyright: © 2011, Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

PY - 2011/12/9

Y1 - 2011/12/9

N2 - Purpose: Some children with severe speech, language and communication needs (SLCN) can make use of assistive communication technology (ACT) to support and augment their speaking and writing. Different stakeholders may place emphasis on specific areas for ACT use, and this paper, therefore, proposes a framework for discussing and clarifying these varied expectations, using the ICF/ICF‐CY domains as a basis. Design/methodology/approach: The authors discuss how the goal of increased participation for children helps all involved to keep in mind that, despite varying focuses for the use of ACT, it is the move towards increased involvement in life situations that will best drive our joint decisions and target‐setting. Findings: Multi‐functional PC devices can support a range of communicative functions, including “chat”, curriculum support, play and leisure. Provision and use of ACT can, in consequence, have different focuses for different stakeholders (child, family, health and education staff), which can lead to disparate expectations around implementation of such technology. Originality: A framework is proposed in this paper for an approach that hopes to offer a common understanding from which to discuss potential applications for ACT. This approach encourages equal value or weighting to each of the supports for inclusion and, therefore, encourages stakeholders to value their own priorities whilst considering others'.

AB - Purpose: Some children with severe speech, language and communication needs (SLCN) can make use of assistive communication technology (ACT) to support and augment their speaking and writing. Different stakeholders may place emphasis on specific areas for ACT use, and this paper, therefore, proposes a framework for discussing and clarifying these varied expectations, using the ICF/ICF‐CY domains as a basis. Design/methodology/approach: The authors discuss how the goal of increased participation for children helps all involved to keep in mind that, despite varying focuses for the use of ACT, it is the move towards increased involvement in life situations that will best drive our joint decisions and target‐setting. Findings: Multi‐functional PC devices can support a range of communicative functions, including “chat”, curriculum support, play and leisure. Provision and use of ACT can, in consequence, have different focuses for different stakeholders (child, family, health and education staff), which can lead to disparate expectations around implementation of such technology. Originality: A framework is proposed in this paper for an approach that hopes to offer a common understanding from which to discuss potential applications for ACT. This approach encourages equal value or weighting to each of the supports for inclusion and, therefore, encourages stakeholders to value their own priorities whilst considering others'.

KW - Augmentative and alternative communication

KW - ICF

KW - Multi-agency working

KW - Participation

KW - Children (age groups)

KW - Communication aids

KW - Communication technologies

UR - http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/17549451111190641

U2 - 10.1108/17549451111190641

DO - 10.1108/17549451111190641

M3 - Article

SN - 1754-9450

VL - 5

SP - 242

EP - 248

JO - Journal of Assistive Technologies

JF - Journal of Assistive Technologies

IS - 4

ER -