Specificul activităților de terapia limbajului și a comunicării în contextul dizabilității multiple: strategii și resurse personalizate

Specificul activităților de terapia limbajului și a comunicării în contextul dizabilității multiple: strategii și resurse personalizate

The SLT specificity in multiple disabilities: personalized strategies and resources

Ioana ȘERBAN, Andreea HATHAZI
Abstract

Students with multiple disabilities may present many challenges regarding their development in areas such as cognition, language and communication, social interaction, emotional abilities, literacy, or behaviour. The speech and language therapist is a member of the multidisciplinary team which assesses, plans, and implements specific intervention programs for children with multiple disabilities. Most of these children are strongly dependent on their parents, teachers, or therapists for every activity they carry out through the day. Depending on their communication behaviour or patterns with a certain partner, children with multiple disabilities require individualized and/or personalized programmes of communication which may include specific strategies. This paper will present the differences between individualised and personalized approaches and will propose a reflective-based tool for assessment and intervention centred on developing communication abilities for children with multiple disabilities.

Keywords: communication, speech and language therapy, multiple disabilities, reflection journal, individualised approaches

 

Published on line: 03/31/2022

Reference
Bruce, S.M, Janssen, M.J., & Bashinski, S.M. (2016). Individualizing and Personalizing Communication and Literacy Instruction for Children who are Deafblind. Journal of Deafblind Studies on Communication. 2:73-87.
Desch LW, & Gaebler-Spira, D. (2008). Council on Children with Disabilities. Prescribing assistive-technology systems: focus on children with impaired communication. Pediatrics.121(6):1271–1280
Düzkantar, A., Öğülmüş, K., Altın, D., & Görgün, B. (2020). Review of International Studies on Multiple Disabilities, Sakarya University Journal of Education, 10(3), 532-559. doi: https://doi.org/10.19126/suje.670873.
Fogel, A. (1993). Developing through relationships. Origins of communication, self, and culture. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Grove, N., Bunning, K., Porter, J., & Olsson, C. (1999). See What I Mean: Interpreting the Meaning of Communication by People with Severe and Profound Intellectual Disabilities. Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities, 12(3): 190-203.
Hathazi, A. (2015). Dizabilitățile multiple. În A.Roșan (coord.), Psihopedagogie specială. Modele de evaluare și intervenție, (187-211). Iași: Polirom.
Hostyn, I., & Maes, B. (2009). Interaction between persons with profound intellectual and multiple disabilities and their partners: A literature review. Journal of Intellectual & Developmental Disability, 34(4), 296–312.
Houtrow, A., & Murphy, N. (2019); AAP COUNCIL ON CHILDREN WITH DISABILITIES. Prescribing Physical, Occupational, and Speech Therapy Services for Children with Disabilities. Pediatrics. 143(4): e20190285.
Janney, R. E. & Snell, M. E. (2011). Designing and implementing instruction of inclusive classes. In M. E. Snell and F. Brown (Eds.). Instruction of students with severe disabilities. 7th Edition. ( 224-256). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education, Inc.
Kucirkova, N., Messer, D., & Whitelock, D. (2010). Shared personalised books: A practical solution to the challenges posed by home book reading interventions. Literacy Information and Computer Education Journal, 1(3), 186-19.
Martens, M. A. W., Janssen, M. J., Ruijssenaars, W. A. J. J. M., Huisman, M. & Riksen- Walraven, J. M. (2014). Intervening on affective involvement and expression of emotions in an adult with congenital deafblindness. Communication Disorders Quarterly, 36, 12- 20.
Miles, B. (2005). Literacy for persons who are deaf-blind. https://nationaldb.org/library/page/1935.
Miles, B. & Riggio. M. (Eds.). (1999). Remarkable conversations: A guide to developing meaningful communication with children and young adults who are deafblind, Watertown, MA: Perkins School for the Blind.
Nelson, C., van Dijk, J., McDonnell, A. P., & Thompson, K. (2002). A framework for understanding children with severe multiple disabilities. The van Dijk approach to assessment. Research & Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 37 (2), 97-111.
Ostrosky, M.M., Donegan, M.M., & Fowler, S.A. (1998). Facilitating transitions across home, community, work, and school. In A. M. Wetherby, S. F. Warren, & J. Reichle (Eds.), Transitions in prelinguistic communication (437-470). Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.
Rensfeldt Flink, A., Åsberg Johnels, J., Broberg, M. & Thunberg, G. (2020): Examining perceptions of a communication course for parents of children with profound intellectual and multiple disabilities, International Journal of Developmental Disabilities, DOI: 10.1080/20473869.2020.1721160
Roche, L.; Sigafoos, J.; Lancioni, G. E.; O’Reilly, M. F.; Green, V. A. (2015). Microswitch Technology for Enabling Self-Determined Responding in Children with Profound and Multiple Disabilities: A Systematic Review. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 1–13. doi:10.3109/07434618.2015.1024888
Roche, L. (2017). Evaluating and Enhancing Communication Skills in Four Adolescents with Profound and Multiple Disabilities. Doctoral Thesis. Victoria University of Wellington.
Romski, M., Sevcik, R.A., Adamson, L.B., Smith, A., Cheslock, M., & Bakeman, R. (2011). Parent Perceptions of the Language Development of Toddlers with Developmental Delays Before and After Participation in Parent-Coached Language Interventions. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 20, 111–118.
Ruppar, A. L., Gaffney, J. S., & Dymond, S. K. (2015). Influences on teachers’ decisions about literacy for secondary students with severe disabilities. Exceptional Children, 81(2), 209-226.
Van Keer, I., Colla, S., Van Leeuwen, K., Vlaskamp, C., Ceulemans, E., Hoppenbrouwers, K., Desoete, A., & Maes, B. (2017). Exploring parental behavior and child interactive engagement: A study on children with a significant cognitive and motor developmental delay. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 64, 131–142.
Warren, S., Brady, N. (2007). The role of maternal responsivity in the development of children with intellectual disabilities. Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities Research Reviews 13(4):330-338.
Wilder J, Granlund M. (2003). Behaviour style and interaction between seven children with multiple disabilities and their caregivers. Child Care Health Dev. 29:559–67.
Wilder, J. (2014). Communication with children and adolescents with multiple disabilities: A systematic review. Kalmar: Nationellt Kompetenscentrum Anhoeriga (NKA).
*** American Speech Language Hearing Association. (2016) – ASHA practice policy: scope of practice in speech-language pathology.

Eficientizarea comunicării dintre cadrele didactice și părinți prin intermediul aplicației ClassDojo

Eficientizarea comunicării dintre cadrele didactice și părinți prin intermediul aplicației ClassDojo

Increasing communication efficiency among teachers and parents by using ClassDojo

Dorina Anca TALAȘ, Carolina BODEA-HAȚEGAN, Crina Maria IANCU, Renata ORBAN
Abstract

The development of communication abilities at children with hearing impairment and multisensory disabilities has to be approached within a complex and holistic program that takes into consideration the importance of symbolic communication. Widgit Symbols represent an efficient visual and multimodal modality that supports the development of intention in communication, facilitates comprehension, develops language for individuals with disabilities who have difficulties in producing or understanding language. The present case study ilustrates the modality in which a developed and implement program based on Widgit symbols determins progress in the development of communication abilities.

Keywords: communication, hearing impairment, multisensory disabilities, Widgit, symbolic communication.
pdf

DOI: 10.26744/rrttlc.2020.6.1.02
References:
Biemiller, A. (2011).Vocabulary development and implications for reading problems. În:A.McGill-Franzen, R.L. Allington.Handbook of reading disability research. New York: Routledge: 208-218.
Blideanu, E., Şerdean, I. (1981). Orientări noi în metodologia studierii limbii române în ciclul primar. Citit-scris, compunere. Bucureşti: EDP.
Brown, S. (2007). La lecture partagée. Montréal, QC: Chenelière Éducation.
Chiss, J-L. (2008). Littératie et didactique de la culture écrite. Pratiques, nr. 137-138, Metz : 165-178.
Compétences clés. https://ec.europa.eu…Education (vizitată în 15.08.2019).
Donohue, L. (2012). La lecture autonome. Gérer et évaluer la comprehension en lecture. Montréal.QC: Chenelière Éducation.
Glasson, J. (2007). La compréhension en lecture. Bruelles: De Boeck
Glasson, J. (2013). La lecture. Apprentissage et dificultés. Montreal, QC : Gaëtan Monrin éditeur.
Godbout, Turcotte, Giguère (2016). 8 stratégies pour comprendre les textes courants. Guide Pédagogique. Comission scolaire des Patriotes. ADEL.
Goigoux, R., Cèbe, S. (2006). Apprendre à lire à lécole : tout ce qui’l faut savoir pour accompagner lénfant. Paris : Retz.
Grossmann, F. (2011). Didactique du lexique: état des lieux et nouvelles orientations. Pratiques, 149/150 :103-108
Irwin, J. (2007). Teaching reading comprehension processes. Boston, MA: Allyn&Bacon.
Lasnier, F. (2001). Un modèle intégré pour l’apprentissage d’une competence. Pedagogie collégiale, vol. 15, nr. 1, pag. 28-33, la adresa https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/52977894.pdf (vizitată în 13.07.2019).
Ministerul Educaţiei Naţionale (2013). Programa şcolară pentru disciplina Comunicare în limba română, clasa pregătitoare, clasa I şi clasa a II-a, Anexa nr. 2 la ordinul ministrului Educaţiei Naţionale nr. 3418/19.03.2013,
la adresa http://edums.ro/invprimar/Lb%20romana%20P%20I%20II.pdf (vizitată în 22.08.2019).
McEwan-Adkins, E. (2016). 40 interventions en lecture. Montréal, QC: Chenelière Education.
Mândruţ, O., Ardelean, A. (2012). Didactica formării competenţelor – elemente de legitimitate. În Ardelean, A., Măndruţ, O. (coord.) Didactica formării competenţelor. Arad, Universitatea “Vasile Goldiş, Centrul de Didactică şi Educaţie Permanentă, p. 11-24).
Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA), 2000: OECD Publishing and UNESCO Publishing.
Therrien, W.J. (2004). Fluency and comprehension gains as a result of repeated readings: A meta-analysis. Remedial and Special Education, 25: 252 – 261.
Thompson, L. (2008). La lecture ghidée. Montréal,QC: Chenelière Éducation.

Utilizarea simbolurilor WIDGIT în dezvoltarea comunicării la copiii cu dizabilități de auz și dizabilități senzoriale multiple

Utilizarea simbolurilor WIDGIT în dezvoltarea comunicării la copiii cu dizabilități de auz și dizabilități senzoriale multiple

The use of WIDGIT symbols in the development of communication at children with hearing impairment and multisensory disabilities

Ioana-Letiția ȘERBAN, Andrea HATHAZI
Abstract

The development of communication abilities at children with hearing impairment and multisensory disabilities has to be approached within a complex and holistic program that takes into consideration the importance of symbolic communication. Widgit Symbols represent an efficient visual and multimodal modality that supports the development of intention in communication, facilitates comprehension, develops language for individuals with disabilities who have difficulties in producing or understanding language. The present case study ilustrates the modality in which a developed and implement program based on Widgit symbols determins progress in the development of communication abilities.

Keywords:communication, hearing impairment, multisensory disabilities, Widgit, symbolic communication.

"/pdf

DOI: 10.26744/rrttlc.2020.6.1.03

Published on line: 15/03/2020

References:
Abbott, C. (2000). Symbols Now, Widgit, Leamington Spa.
Abbott, C.; Lucey, H. (2005). Symbol communication in special schools in England: the current position and some key issues, British Journal of Special Education, Vol. 32, No. 4, pp. 196-201.
Anca, M. (2003). Metode și tehnici de evaluare a copiilor cu CES, Cluj-Napoca: Presa Universitară Clujeană.
Chen, D; DeJaco, J; Maley, V. (1997). Lesson from Project CRAFT: Culturally responsive and family focused training; The Individual in a changing society: The proceedings of the National Conference on Deafblindness, June 6-9 (pp. 146-163); Reno, NV: Hilton Perkins Program in cooperation with the Conrad Hilton Foundation.
Chetwynd, J. (2008). Communication with symbols: from the web to the internet and beyond, Journal of Assistive Technologies, Vol. 2 No. 3, pp. 32-6.
Coca, M. (2019). Despre SymWriter sau „scrierea cu simboluri” în terapia specifică de compensare a auzului și limbajului; în I. Șerban (coord.) – Strategii educaționale specifice în contextul dizabilității de auz, Cluj-Napoca: editura ASCR; pp. 87-111.
Coupe O’Kane, J.; Goldbart, J. (1998). Communication Before Speech, London, david Fulton Publishers.
Detheridge, M. and Detheridge, T. (2002). Literacy Through Symbols: Improving Access for Children and Adults, 2nd ed., David Fulton Publishers, London.
Hathazi, A. (2012). Comunicare și intervenție în deficiența multiplă; în A. Hathazi (coord.) – Comunicare în contextual deficienței multiple; Cluj-Napoca: Presa Universitară Clujeană; pp. 1-24.
Light, J. and Drager, L. (2007). ‘‘AAC technologies for young children with complex communication needs: state of the science and future research directions’’, Augmentative and Alternative Communication, Vol. 23 No. 3, pp. 204-16.
Mavrou, K.; Charalampous, E.; Michaelides, M. (2013). Graphic symbols for all: using symbols in developing the ability of questioning in young children; Journal of Assistive Technologies, Vol.7, No.1, pp. 22-33; DOI: 10.1108/17549451311313192
Pampoulou, E. and Detheridge, C. (2007). The role of symbols in the mainstream to access literacy, Journal of Assistive Technologies, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 15-21.
Rowland, C.; Schweigert, P. (2003). Cognitive skills and AAC in G.C. Light; D.R. Beukelman; J. Reichle (Eds.) – Communicative competence for individuals who use AAC: From research to effective practice; pp 241-275; Baltimore: Brookes.
Rowland, C; Stremell-Campbell, K. (1987). Share and share alike: conventional gestures to emergent language for learners with sensory impairments; Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 6/4, pp. 226-234.
Sheehy, K. and Howe, M. (2001). Teaching non-readers with severe learning difficulties to recognize words: the effective use of symbols in a new technique, Westminster Studies in Education, Vol. 24 No. 1, pp. 61-71.
Tufar, I. (2015). Sisteme de comunicare alternative și augmentative în A. Roșan, (2015), Psihopedagogie specială. Modele de evaluare și intervenție, Iași: Editura Polirom, pp.457- 474
Widgit Guide to Good Symbol Content (2018) – Best Practice Guide to Symbols, Widgit Software 2002 – 2018, Leamington Spa, UK; Widgit Symbols © Widgit Software 2002-2020; www.widgit.com
Wilkinson, K.M.; Jagaroo, V. (2004). Contributions of principles of visual cognitive science to AAC system display design; Augmentative and Alternative Communication; 20, pp. 123-136.

Strategii de dezvoltare a comprehensiunii verbale la copiii cu dizabilitate intelectuală

Strategii de dezvoltare a comprehensiunii verbale la copiii cu dizabilitate intelectuală

Verbal comprehension development strategies for children with intellectual disabilities

Anca PĂȘCUȚĂ
Abstract

This article studies the verbal comprehension on children with intellectual disability and the ways speech therapy can influence its development, as well as verbal memory and semantic lexical abilities.
A well-defined intervention program speech and language therapy, adapted to the particularities of the child with intellectual disability focused on clear and well-structured objectives, can have quicker results and can be obtained in a much more enjoyable way for children.

Keywords: communication, intellectual disability, verbal comprehension, lexical representations, speech and language therapy
pdf

DOI: 10.26744/rrttlc.2017.3.2.12

Published on line: 31/10/2017

References:

Anca, M. (2002). Logopedie, Cluj Napoca: Presa Universitară Clujeană.

Anca, M. (2003). Metode şi tehnici de evaluare a copiilor cu CES, Cluj-Napoca: Presa Universitară Clujeană.

Bodea Hațegan, C. (2013). Tulburările de voce și vorbire. Evaluare și intervenție, Cluj-Napoca: Presa Universitară Clujeană.

Bodea Hațegan, C. (2014). Proba de evaluare a abilităților morfologice în limba română. Aplicații psiholigvistice, Cluj-Napoca: Editura Argonaut.

Bodea Haţegan, C. (2016). Logopedia. Terapia tulburărilor de limbaj. Structuri deschise, București: Editura Trei.

Bodea Haţegan, C. (2015). Tulburările de limbaj şi comunicare, în Roşan, A. (2015). Psihopedagogia specială, Modele de evaluare şi intervenţie, Iaşi: Polirom.

Haţegan, C. (2009). Modalităţi de evaluare şi dezvoltare a competenţei morfologice, Teză de doctorat, nepublicată, Cluj-Napoca: Universitatea Babeș-Bolyai.

Hărdălău, L. (2011). Culegere de jocuri logopedice, Oradea: Editura Primus.

Stackhouse, J., Pascoe, M., Gardner, H. (2006). Intervention for a child with persisting speech and literacy difficulties: A psycholinguistic approach, Advances in Speech–Language Pathology, 8(3): 231 – 244,

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/232035870_Intervention_for_a_child_with_persisting_speech_and_literacydifficulties_A_psycholinguistic_approach

Verza, E. (1983). Disgrafia și terapia ei, București: Editura Didactică și Pedagogică.

Vlad, E. (1999). Evaluarea în actul educațional terapeutic, București: Editura Prohumanitate.

Contrastive analysis of French and English speech sounds with educational implications in the context of visual disability. Psycholinguistic directions

Analiză contrastivă a sunetelor limbii franceze şi engleze cu implicații educaționale în contextul dizabilității vizuale.Repere psiholingvistice

Contrastive analysis of French and English speech sounds with educational implications in the context of visual disability. Psycholinguistic directions


Daniela BARTHA
Abstract

In this paper we will try to make a comparative analysis concerning the sound systems of French and English language. In the first section, a short definition of language as means of communication is given and the development of foreign languages is approached. The next two sections treat some aspects of teaching foreign languages to visually impaired children, and difficulties children may have during learning. In the fourth section the main problem of the article, namely the comparative analysis between French and English sounds is brought into light with educational implications, respectively in teaching foreign languages. The aim of the last section is that of giving some conclusions about the study.

Keywords terms: language, communication, foreign languages, visual impairment, representation, attention, memoir, thinking, sounds, vowels, consonants.
pdf

DOI:10.26744/rrttlc.2017.3.1.04

Published on line: 15/03/2017

References:

Coşeriu, E. (2000). Lecţii de lingvistică generală, Cluj-Napoca: Editura Arc.

Gherguț, A. (2007). Sinteze de psihopedagogie specială. Ghid pentru concursuri şi ecxamene de obţinere a gradelor didactice. Editura Polirom. Iași.

Graur, E., (2001). Tehnici de comunicare.Cluj-Napoca:Editura Mediamira.

Makarenko, T. (1998). Contemporary English Phonetics. Cluj-Napoca: Editura Echinox.

Marek, B. (2005). Telling the future: effective support of blind children in (not just) a foreign language. Catholic University of Lublin. Poland.

Preda, V., Cziker, R. (2004). Explorarea tactil-kinestezică in perceperea obiectelor, a imaginilor tactile si in lectura Braille. Cluj-Napoca:  Presa Universitara Clujeana.

Scholl, G.T. (1986). Foundations of education for blind and visually handicapped children and youth. Theory and practice. New York: American Foundation for the Blind.

Slama-Cazacu, T. (1999). Psiholingvistica – o ştiinţă a comunicării. Bucureşti: ALL.

Vanthier, H. (2009). L’enseignement aux enfants en classe de langue. Paris: Clé International.