Re: cued speech vs. Cued Speech

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 10/24/2000 9:19:26 PM Central Daylight Time,

tlvail@... writes:

<< I also suggest that the method of having a child repeat a word 3 times then

reinforcing even if the production doesn't improve may not be a good idea

for all children. In the same manner that the " no, no, prompt " procedure is

in essence allowing children to " practice " incorrect responses, having a

child repeat a word incorrectly is having him/her " practice " saying the word

incorrectly >>

The idea with running three trials with a mand is to differentially reinforce

accurate responses vs. those that are unclear. If the EO is high for a

reinforcer, then having to say the word three times delays reinforcement. It

isn't run 3 times every time, and the child figures out that with better

responding they get things more quickly. The reason you reinforce on the

third trial regardless of it's improvement is that otherwise you would kill

the value of the reinforcer and negate the idea that using language produces

reinforcement. Articulation is not something that can be physically prompted

therefore the manipulation of an EO and the use of contingent reinforcement

is used to elicit more accurate responding.

Steph

[Guest guest]

Along this line, I have a couple of behavior specialist that work with me

working on pairing the sound in drills or even manding for an item with

the letter. For example, if hte family is having he child saying the

" m " sound, having the letter " m " present on a card. We are trying to

establish the card as a descriminative stimuli to get the sound. It is

hoped that after sufficient reinforcement trials in the presence of the

letter the child will utter the sound in the presence of the letter. The

hope (and I don't have the data yet to say it works or not) is to get teh

child to consistently make the sound in the presence of the letter tehn

string together gradually different letter combinations for word

building. We are hoping that this technique will be helpful on more

severely impaired children. Again I stress that we have no data at this

point, so don't just go running off and trying wtih your children. It is

just to state that the science is still developing.

Joe

On Tue, 24 Oct 2000, Vail wrote:

> Re: 's post on motor planning and echoic drills- I just wanted to

> clarify that the hand and finger cues we are using are not those taught by

> the " Cued Speech Center " . We are using finger cues to prompt placement and

> manner of production of sounds. The finger cues we use are those in the

> " Easy Does It for Apraxia " program. When the child learns them, they can be

> very good visual prompts to use when teaching new words.

>

> I also wanted to mention that it's important to work at the right level with

> regards to sound production, syllable combinations, word production etc..

> Just like any other skill, you have to teach speech sounds systematically

> and only increase the complexity when the previous levels have been

> mastered. Of course I would not presume to know what anyone is doing in

> their home program but it may be that the reason some children " hate "

> echoics is because they are asked to repeat things that are too difficult.

> If you move at the correct pace and combine appropriately, speech should not

> be any more difficult that teaching any other skill. I personally think

> it's important to separate the " speech " from the " language " and not do too

> many artic. drills when a child is trying to communicate with you. When a

> child is manding, you really should be attending to the function of his

> request, not how he/she is saying it. I've seen many children decrease in

> their attempts to verbally communicate because of too many " corrections " to

> their verbal attempts. If a child signs or uses PECS to mand, requiring a

> verbal production and then trying to correct that production may also

> decrease manding of any sort. The response has to be kept in line with the

> value of the reinforcement. Of course if your child does not clearly

> articulate a word you know he/she is able to say correctly, ( " I didn't

> understand you " ) requiring a repetition before the reinforcer is delivered

> would be appropriate.

>

> I also suggest that the method of having a child repeat a word 3 times then

> reinforcing even if the production doesn't improve may not be a good idea

> for all children. In the same manner that the " no, no, prompt " procedure is

> in essence allowing children to " practice " incorrect responses, having a

> child repeat a word incorrectly is having him/her " practice " saying the word

> incorrectly. In my opinion, if you must do articulation drills during

> language activities, it would be better to have the child repeat a part of

> the word that they can say correctly or break the word down and say the

> sounds separately then rebuild the word. For example, let's say a child can

> produce " k " sounds in isolation and in the final position of syllables. The

> child mands for a cookie by saying " tootie " ; You might have him say the 'k'

> in isolation before giving the cookie or have him say " ook " . If the

> reinforcement value of that cookie is REALLY high, you might try " k " " ook "

> " e " . If he is not yet able to produce the K sound in the initial position

> of syllables, having him repeat the entire word 3 times would not be

> beneficial and would probably be quite frustrating for both of you. Again,

> I think you'll get more mands by separating the act of manding from the

> practicing of the sound productions unless the child's articulation

> difficulties are very minor and easily correctable.

> Vail

>

>

>

> VISIT www./community/ for informative FILES, LINKS page, and

ARCHIVE searches. You will need your password for egroups to use these

services.

>

>

[Guest guest]

At 08:19 PM 10/24/00 -0400, Vail wrote:

>Re: 's post on motor planning and echoic drills- I just wanted to

>clarify that the hand and finger cues we are using are not those taught by

>the " Cued Speech Center " . We are using finger cues to prompt placement and

>manner of production of sounds. The finger cues we use are those in the

> " Easy Does It for Apraxia " program. When the child learns them, they can be

>very good visual prompts to use when teaching new words.

>

Hi

I am glad you explained this. I remember describing some of the work

she was doing with Kenny, but I had recently also read about cued speech,

which does not seem like it would help children with autism, at least most

of them.

Cued Speech seemed like it might help children with ONLY apraxia or hearing

impaired kids, etc. who understood, but had some deficit preventing

acquisition of language by more typical means. I need to go through my EASY

DOES IT book again. I think Ize would do better now.

>I also wanted to mention that it's important to work at the right level with

>regards to sound production, syllable combinations, word production etc..

>Just like any other skill, you have to teach speech sounds systematically

>and only increase the complexity when the previous levels have been

>mastered. Of course I would not presume to know what anyone is doing in

>their home program but it may be that the reason some children " hate "

>echoics is because they are asked to repeat things that are too difficult.

My son does not appear to hate echoics at all, but is hard pressed to make

certain sounds still, especially in isolation. Right now we have no SLP.

The last two were total duds, no offense. We now are on our own, but I have

nearly as much speech stuff here as a clinic, lol, books, materials, etc.

And we're on an APRAXIA list and have gotten some very useful ideas. One

thing we've done is make a list of sounds and words Isaac can say, and then

come up with a few more that sound very similiar that he might be motivated

to say. For instance he said COME pretty well, go we taught GUM which he

could mand for and tact in a very short time, because he learned the echoic

so fast due the words sounding so similar. People without good SLP support

may want to try this. You're working with their strengths instead of trying

for sounds they are not ready for. (Isaac also says GO, and so we were

pretty sure he would get GUM for that reason too.) They sound a lot a like

and sometimes each are clear and sometimes I have a hard time telling if he

said GUM or COME but if in context, we can.

It is a good start. He had a pretty good, AWWW sound, so we are working on

ON and OFF, and he now has a hint of F. Sometimes it is AWW still, but we

turn if OFF as if he had manded well and are shaping it.

>If you move at the correct pace and combine appropriately, speech should not

>be any more difficult that teaching any other skill. I personally think

>it's important to separate the " speech " from the " language " and not do too

>many artic. drills when a child is trying to communicate with you.

Thanks for saying this. For a kid who has not had communication for years,

I think fussing about articulation too early is a crime. Ok, maybe not a

crime, but we want them to WANT to talk to us. Over time, with heavy

reinforcement you can work on articulation. I do need to do short

articulation echoic type sessions though. I need to come here and

show me. are you coming to MA soon???? ';-) Aren't you dying to see

your mother?

I've seen many children decrease in

>their attempts to verbally communicate because of too many " corrections " to

>their verbal attempts. If a child signs or uses PECS to mand, requiring a

>verbal production and then trying to correct that production may also

>decrease manding of any sort.

We use PECS to help, especially for words he has nothing close to

approximate with. SANDWICH for instance. And do not ask him to say that

word. However, he might mand for something else with an icon using PECS and

he is asked to say it apon recieving perhpas the first bite or maybe a

second piece we hold up before going back to the PECS book. He has to say

it to get the second piece IF it is in his repetoire, because we was making

a choice before and now he has the item in front of him. He is not asked to

say it perfectly. He does get bigger pieces of something if it's food for

saying it clearer, etc.

So, you want to come with when she visits family near me???

;-)

Jennie

[Guest guest]

At 02:06 AM 10/25/00 -0400, ph Cautilli wrote:

>Along this line, I have a couple of behavior specialist that work with me

>working on pairing the sound in drills or even manding for an item with

>the letter. For example, if hte family is having he child saying the

> " m " sound, having the letter " m " present on a card. We are trying to

>establish the card as a descriminative stimuli to get the sound. It is

>hoped that after sufficient reinforcement trials in the presence of the

>letter the child will utter the sound in the presence of the letter. The

>hope (and I don't have the data yet to say it works or not) is to get teh

>child to consistently make the sound in the presence of the letter tehn

>string together gradually different letter combinations for word

>building. We are hoping that this technique will be helpful on more

>severely impaired children. Again I stress that we have no data at this

>point, so don't just go running off and trying wtih your children. It is

>just to state that the science is still developing.

>

>Joe

We had a consultant with a PROMPT SLP and she helped us more in one long

day than five SLP's put together in a four year period. Partly because you

do physically cue the mouth, etc., as was talking about the SAME way

each time using support, etc., so everyone is on the same page, and also

because Ize is " reminded " what to do. She wanted us to use a clipboard with

three examples of the letter, sound or word, and point to the letter, sound

or word and then cross it off when we were done, so he had the visual cue

and then knew how many were left to do. I need to go back and do that part.

We also use alphabet letter cards to remind him, like using M for money or

milk, and having the M sound there as a cue really helps him remember and

push his lips together for instance. I am not sure why. But this does help

him and a couple other kids I know.

Jennie

[Guest guest]

Interesting. Thanks for the information. It is always good to hear when

others are working on the same areas. Did you find that the physical

prompts were hard to fade?

Joe

On Wed, 25 Oct 2000, Jennie Ladew wrote:

> At 02:06 AM 10/25/00 -0400, ph Cautilli wrote:

> >Along this line, I have a couple of behavior specialist that work with me

> >working on pairing the sound in drills or even manding for an item with

> >the letter. For example, if hte family is having he child saying the

> > " m " sound, having the letter " m " present on a card. We are trying to

> >establish the card as a descriminative stimuli to get the sound. It is

> >hoped that after sufficient reinforcement trials in the presence of the

> >letter the child will utter the sound in the presence of the letter. The

> >hope (and I don't have the data yet to say it works or not) is to get teh

> >child to consistently make the sound in the presence of the letter tehn

> >string together gradually different letter combinations for word

> >building. We are hoping that this technique will be helpful on more

> >severely impaired children. Again I stress that we have no data at this

> >point, so don't just go running off and trying wtih your children. It is

> >just to state that the science is still developing.

> >

> >Joe

>

> We had a consultant with a PROMPT SLP and she helped us more in one long

> day than five SLP's put together in a four year period. Partly because you

> do physically cue the mouth, etc., as was talking about the SAME way

> each time using support, etc., so everyone is on the same page, and also

> because Ize is " reminded " what to do. She wanted us to use a clipboard with

> three examples of the letter, sound or word, and point to the letter, sound

> or word and then cross it off when we were done, so he had the visual cue

> and then knew how many were left to do. I need to go back and do that part.

> We also use alphabet letter cards to remind him, like using M for money or

> milk, and having the M sound there as a cue really helps him remember and

> push his lips together for instance. I am not sure why. But this does help

> him and a couple other kids I know.

>

> Jennie

>

>

>

>

> VISIT www./community/ for informative FILES, LINKS page, and

ARCHIVE searches. You will need your password for egroups to use these

services.

>

>