Communication Board Use in Severely Handicapped Learners Four severely retarded preschool children were taught to label four objects using a manual, direct select communication board. After acquisition, learners failed to generalize to either commenting or requesting using the trained vocabulary. It was hypothesized that learners failed because (a) they had never learned to request using their newly ... Research Article
Research Article  |   July 01, 1985
Communication Board Use in Severely Handicapped Learners
 
Author Notes
  • Joe Reichle is affiliated with the Department of Communication Disorders, University of Minnesota, 164 Pillsbury Drive, SE, Minneapolis, MN 55455. Requests for reprints may be sent to him at this address. David E. Yoder is affiliated with the Department of Communication Disorders, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI 53711.
    Joe Reichle is affiliated with the Department of Communication Disorders, University of Minnesota, 164 Pillsbury Drive, SE, Minneapolis, MN 55455. Requests for reprints may be sent to him at this address. David E. Yoder is affiliated with the Department of Communication Disorders, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI 53711.×
Article Information
Research Articles
Research Article   |   July 01, 1985
Communication Board Use in Severely Handicapped Learners
Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, July 1985, Vol. 16, 146-157. doi:10.1044/0161-1461.1603.146
History: Received August 11, 1983 , Accepted August 1, 1984
 
Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, July 1985, Vol. 16, 146-157. doi:10.1044/0161-1461.1603.146
History: Received August 11, 1983; Accepted August 1, 1984

Four severely retarded preschool children were taught to label four objects using a manual, direct select communication board. After acquisition, learners failed to generalize to either commenting or requesting using the trained vocabulary. It was hypothesized that learners failed because (a) they had never learned to request using their newly acquired vocabulary or (b) because the production of object labels was only under control of the verbal stimulus "What's this?" A second experiment, designed to test these hypotheses, suggested that teaching a pragmatic discrimination between requesting and object labeling resulted in improved performance for two learners. A procedure to shift stimulus control from a verbal cue ("What's this? ") to the presence of the object improved performance on spontaneous probes for a third learner. The remaining learner failed to acquire the spontaneous use of the acquired vocabulary.

Order a Subscription
Pay Per View
Entire Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools content & archive
24-hour access
This Article
24-hour access