Jump to content

Menu

Apps for speech


Recommended Posts

Well it's exciting to be on the new boards! I'm glad they got the colors fixed. I thought I was going to fade into oblivion with those pastel easter egg colors, mercy.

Anyways, to the question! Has anybody done apps for speech? Based on some recent testing, we're wanting to see what difference speech tech (apps, I don't know what I'm talking about) will make in ds' ability to get out narratives. The person was saying the language for the model text could be preloaded so that when ds is ready to do his telling he would use the speech app to help him retrieve words. She was saying we were demonstrating fluency in routine language but struggling in non-routine and that tech might bridge that. 

Any ideas what I'm looking for? I've sorta vaguely seen apps mentioned for years but we were so all-in with motor planning that I didn't really put a lot of research into them. Anybody used anything great for this? Or just heard of something great? Or less than great but a great price? :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you think routine and non-routine language means the same thing as rote and novel speech?  Those are terms I’ve heard and I’m not sure about routine and non-routine.

I have only seen graphic organizers for this.  I know my son has used one from Learning the Ropes of Executive Functioning, but it’s just a plain graphic organizer with topic/comment/comment/comment (or one main idea, three comments).  

https://www.amazon.com/Learning-P-Improved-Executive-Function/dp/0976151707

Another poster linked to this narrative and discourse builder from Northern Speech recently, which looks excellent.

https://www.northernspeech.com/autism-asperger-syndrome/narrative-discourse-builder-tool-display/

I have not seen an app!  It sounds very cool, though, please share if you find a good one :)

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’m going to add ——— as far as I know, narrative discourse and “retell” and “recall” are the same thing.

Retell can be retelling a story.

Recall can be recalling a personal event.

Ime reading comprehension stuff will talk about story retell, and ABA therapy will talk about recalling events (and I think they use “recall” pretty broadly too).

It took me a while to realize it’s all basically the same thing, as far as I know.  

Edit:  and speech therapists say “personal

narrative” and “descriptive narrative,” I think, and I think would use “descriptive narrative” to include re-telling a story?  

It is so hard on me when they use different terminology, it is hard to understand.

 

 

 

 

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ooo, I'd forgotten about that Learning the Ropes book. It was on my radar but I haven't bought it yet. Yes, I've been looking at the narrative/discourse builder.

You are probably spot on about rote/novel speech being the correct technical terms. The person talking with me at the time was not a therapist.

I looked into the LAMP Words for Life app, because it's still on sale tonight. It is interesting, but it would be a lot of work to do the vocabulary I think. My gut is saying it will work just as well to have some kind of pages. Right now I think he's struggling partly just with getting the words out (word retrieval) and with using different words rather than having all the words be the same as the source. 

I'm working on getting SLPs to work on this, but we have funding fights. It's all going around in circles a bit. I've got a bunch of baseline testing and then I'm being told the school might want MORE. It seems totally absurd. I want to move on to working on things. Apparently even failing 2 language tests isn't significant enough in our school district. And people wonder why we homeschool. Mercy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder if the underlying issue, could be delayed development of 'inner speech'?

When I was doing research into this, a study into Autism was published. That identified about 1 in 3 children with Autism,  were unable to use inner speech.

What this effected, is the ability to 'form new scripts' when speaking.  With a script being a sentence or a statement.  So that instead of forming a Script.  They would recall a previously learned Script, that is relevant.  Which can be suitable for routine/ previously experienced situations. Where Scripts have been learned.  But may not be suitable Novel situations?  With no relevant Scripts to recall?  So perhaps this could be the issue?

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, geodob said:

I wonder if the underlying issue, could be delayed development of 'inner speech'?

When I was doing research into this, a study into Autism was published. That identified about 1 in 3 children with Autism,  were unable to use inner speech.

What this effected, is the ability to 'form new scripts' when speaking.  With a script being a sentence or a statement.  So that instead of forming a Script.  They would recall a previously learned Script, that is relevant.  Which can be suitable for routine/ previously experienced situations. Where Scripts have been learned.  But may not be suitable Novel situations?  With no relevant Scripts to recall?  So perhaps this could be the issue?

I haven't read it called that, but that's pretty much what I've concluded. I've been reading about gestalt language processing in echolalia, and he basically had very complex forms of scripting and echolalia through about 7. He would watch tv shows, listen to audiobooks, and recite whole paragraphs out of it. His brain was trying to learn whole to parts instead of the more typical parts to whole, but it hasn't gotten down to the parts. So he's failing expressive language tests focusing on morphology, even though he has a lot of language, because his brain can't break down his recorded scripts into parts to be able to use the pieces accurately when pinned down in situations where he should be able to use them. So he might use a different verb form or construction as a workaround, because he doesn't actually have the parts. That's the gramma-morphological levels. (I have no clue what I'm talking about.)

On the narrative level, same gig. He's taking in the whole but he can't break it into parts, can't reword it to be his own, can't retell it. So like last night again I asked him about that book he had wanted to tell me about, showed him the LAMP Words for Life app, asked if it would help. He's like oh I can get it out... So again he starts to tell me what he had wanted to say, gets out the name (good) and starts to try to say the verb. He stumbles over it 10-15 times, because his brain knew it started with a B (he was trying to use the exact word from the audiobook) but he didn't know exactly what the word was and didn't have a way to use a word of similar meaning or other strategy to work around.

So yes, we've got very complex issues that it's hard to get the ps to care about when he seems, on the surface, to have a lot of language. He uses vocabulary that is so impressive that people just assume all the other pieces of language development are there. 

I've actually got 2 SLPs preparing to work with him, so we're gonna go from 0 to 3 hours a week over the next few weeks, hehe. We're pretty determined to win on this and I've finally got people to do it. It's just that it's hard to test. Those two tests captured it really well, and now I'm being told the school might still want MORE, which is absurd. The ability to GET YOUR THOUGHTS OUT is so basic, so fundamental to verbal communication (part of the federal definition of autism), that it just seems unethical to deny him over idioms, inferences, and other things that we've worked on and that he will test well on given that the tests are, get this MULTIPLE CHOICE. For real, they test language with multiple choice tests. He can do that. He just can't get the stupid language OUT.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://www.disabilityscoop.com/2012/01/26/for-autism-inner-speech/14856/ this article is fascinating. It talks about a connection between external language and using internal language to problem solve. It suggests using verbally mediated schedules and plans that the person says to themselves, rather than only using visual schedules. That's really fascinating to me, because it might explain, in a way, why my ds rebels with schedules. It's foisted on him, but he also might not have a way to self-talk and say this is the plan, this is what I'm doing first, etc. He might need to talk through his plan for the day and tell me and tell himself what the plan is. Then the visual would actually seem like a help, rather than him feeling like it's foisted on him. I think most people would do the opposite and read their list for the day and talk through it with themselves and go yeah, like this part, don't like that part, let's rearrange, let's have coffee here. Instead he's just dragged along, not talking to himself. And that's why I wanted to pursue the list, to work on personal responsibility, but I think that inner speech *might* be the piece in personal responsibility that was lacking. Responsibility isn't quite the same thing as compliance. You have to actually talk to yourself and tell yourself to do it.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

PeterPan,  their no standardized test for inner speech so far.

Though one basic test. tests their ability to count using inner speech.  Where they have to count objects, one by one.  They need to put their hands flat on the table, so that they cant use their fingers to count.  They also need to be prevented from counting out loud,  so that they have to keep their mouth closed. As well doing it in a quiet room,  so that it can be heard if they mumbling the numbers.   

Most people who cant use inner speech, don't even know that other people can use it.   With teenagers and adults, they can be asked directly if they can use inner speech?  Where the most common reply from teeenager's is: 'Of cause I can't hear voices in my head, do you think that I'm crazy?  As they associate this with Schizophrenia.  They are surprised to find that most people use it, to talk through things in their mind. To help them understand, I often explain it as similar to the ability to picture things in our mind.   Without inner speech, they typically visualise in sort of movies.  Rather than still images. 

But the major effect that lack of inner speech has?  Is the ability to think through 'What if ?' questions. As they can't talk through different options, to arrive at different conclusions.  So that they will often not be able to recognise different consequences or courses of action.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What are people using a strategies to develop inner speech? Do you literally just get them to do it more? One thing I find with some of the SLP-developed materials now is they latch onto something and don't always go about it the smartest way. Like the Interroception book, my lands that's just crass, bludgeoning, giving them formulas and the words the way they do it. There's nothing smart about it like how to lead them into it inductively with games or tech. I know there's a game in there, but nothing inductive to the extent I mean. So like with that book Jen linked, I'm sure it will be onto something, but I'm not actually hopeful it will be this profound, researcher level examination of the thought process. But the idea seems really good to me. It might explain why I have to talk things out ALOUD to sort them out. I rework things over and over and over aloud till I get it sorted out in my mind. I may be substituting or covering for a lack of inner speech. I actually had people telling me don't talk about such and such, that's gossiping, but I was like WELL HOW am I supposed to understand what happened if I can't talk about it???

So yes, I totally agree that if other people have these strategies, the person without them wouldn't realize they were different and the people WITH them wouldn't realize why the person without that ability would be using odd, compensatory strategies. I'll have to try the counting thing on my ds. I doubt he can do it, and I would have assumed it was a math issue. It would not have occurred to me to connect it to inner speech.

Visualization is a strategy for improving comprehension and recall. Is inner speech also a strategy for this? Nobody talks about it. Ds has been masking for years anyway, with his astonishing ability to recall precise text from audiobooks and tv. He was just memorizing everything for years and years, never putting it into his own words. Now he's to the point where it's just too much. But that's an interesting point, what role inner speech has in narrative development in the typical person. Dunno. I assumed we would go through a visualization process, but you're right that it's sort of contradictory to tell someone to jump through so many hoops if NT people listen, rephrase it with their inner speech, and then summarize and kick out. Dunno.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Total aside, but what role does inner speech play in the social thinking process? And I was thinking about this software I got a year ago. Ds is now ready for it and we could do it during school time. It's social thinking software, and you raise dragons and train them to be social or something, I don't know. But think about it. Even with something like that, if he's not using his inner speech AND not talking and doing it with someone, then he's just randomly doing things based on antecedent/behavior/consequence, rather than being able to do the more complex social mapping, kwim? So even therapy stuff would be more effective with an inner speech development component.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Nathan article was very interesting, with its focus on inner speech.

Though that is suitable for someone that has developed the basic ability to use inner speech.

With my study and research, the children and adults that I worked with.  Had no inner speech at all.  They were unable to even recall or imagine a sound in their mind.  Let alone words.  So that my research focused on identifying ways to help them to develop it.   Which began with single sounds. Such as hearing a bell gong, and then trying to immediately recall the sound of the bell.   This starts with the ability to capture and retain a sound, in auditory working memory.   Which is normally erased within a fraction of a second.  So that they briefly hear the sound repeated in their mind. Which will then disappear.   The next step, is to repeat the captured sound in their mind, once, twice, 3 times.   Rather than letting it disappear.

Then, they try to introduce a slight delay between the repeated sounds.  Starting with just a half a second.  Which is gradually extended.  Though this requires the sound to be saved and retrieved from short term memory.  Which can hold it for a few seconds.  So that they practice capturing and recalling sounds.  This then gradually extends further,  to recalling it minutes later.  From this,  the next stage is to save and recall sounds from long term memory.  Such as the next day. 

So that this is the basic introduction, to being able to capture and save sounds, and then recall them from memory.   While this has used single sounds, multiple sounds can then be used. A number of stages then follow this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting! The Verbal Behavior text I'm reading right now mentions inner speech as a step in language development. One step was very early in the developmental list, near naming things, , while using it to self regulate was much later. Also using lists was later. 

It struck me that if SLOs latch onto this as the new fad and don't realize WHY it didn't develop, they'll go for high goals with it (IEP goals) and have it be a splinter skill, not natural, not generalized or pervasive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do they mention it as an echoic skill?

My son did some early echoic programs where he would practice repeating a word after a pause, and they did say it is supposed to help them learn to repeat a word to themselves.

I’m curious if that is what they are talking about?

I like Geodob’s method because it is very directly teaching the skill and practicing the skill!

But for my son at the time, it would have been too abstract and complicated, and would have required him to already have a lot of language and communication ability.  

Where if repeating after a pause is similar enough, it’s a lot more practical with a little kid.  But with an older child or adult they would be able to understand and communicate about repeating silently inside their head.

If it’s an early skill for VB it is probably in the VB-MAPP, though.  

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm coming at this from a completely different angle:  my husband has aphasia.  But some of the symptoms and treatments coincide with autism.

As far as inner-speech.  This has been a big deal for my husband, because as his specialized speech therapist has said many times, 90% of language happens before you even open your mouth.  A lot of that is inner-speech.  

What he has done is focus on brain flexibility.  Flexibility helps the brain broaden its scope when it's trying to come up with words in the moment during the inner-speech phase.  So, my husband does a lot of language flexibility exercises.  It is all done mentally before he opens his mouth.

Otherwise, as far as apps that might help bring to mind words that would work in a sentence, my husband has used the app Verbally.

http://verballyapp.com

These might not have any overlap with what you're trying to do, but thought I'd throw it out there, just in case!

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh that is FASCINATING... Thanks!! 

Adding: Can you tell us more about the flexibility exercises? Because my ds has memorized so much language (and is rigid from his ASD to start with), he doesn't have a lot of that. Like I think I know what it would mean, but I'm really interested to hear what your SLP is doing.

And yes, absolutely tons of overlap.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ooo, that app looks really good. Not sure if ds can spell well enough yet to use it. It's just interesting, because there a lot of (superbright, gifted, minimally verbal) kids on the spectrum using letterboards. This would basically be a letterboard on steroids, wow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Anna Stebeulfield case is back in the news and I’m watching a 1993 Frontline about facilitated communication on YouTube with my husband.

There’s reason to be skeptical of things with letterboards where someone else is holding the letter board or where there could be physical prompting.  

This Frontline seems like it is giving a fair hearing to both sides to me, I’m not at the end yet lol.

The Anna Stebeulfield case is horrifying.  

http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/medical_examiner/2015/11/facilitated_communication_pseudoscience_harms_people_with_disabilities.html 

The Frontline is called Prisoners of Silence.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

13 hours ago, Lecka said:

Do they mention it as an echoic skill?

My son did some early echoic programs where he would practice repeating a word after a pause, and they did say it is supposed to help them learn to repeat a word to themselves.

I’m curious if that is what they are talking about?

I like Geodob’s method because it is very directly teaching the skill and practicing the skill!

But for my son at the time, it would have been too abstract and complicated, and would have required him to already have a lot of language and communication ability.  

Where if repeating after a pause is similar enough, it’s a lot more practical with a little kid.  But with an older child or adult they would be able to understand and communicate about repeating silently inside their head.

If it’s an early skill for VB it is probably in the VB-MAPP, though.  

 

 

 I've got the book in front of me and the table 1.3 gives 9 steps, each with a name. The pages after that expand the implications of each stage, so that's what I'm reading next. The book has been taking me a while, because I've been trying to think hard. Each "verbal milestone" is loaded with a bunch of things and the dominos it sets in motion. It's really tidy. No, VB-MAPP can't go through all these steps, because 6-9 involve reading, writing, editing, and verbal mediation for solving problems. That's why I was saying the Nathan book is at the end of a process that began way before. And the skills it's using there (milestone 9, verbal mediation for problem solving) required the self-talk from step 5, and even that seemed to go back to earlier steps. 

I picked this particular text (Greer) because it was said to explain more advanced VB concepts. Like in chapter 5 it hits things like "fixing impropery learned control of echolic responses"...  Maybe the table in chapter 1 will be expanded by these other chapters? Dunno. I'm just trying to make sure I understand what I'm reading, lol. Yeah, I'm flipping through and a lot is spelled out, stuff I suspicioned by wasn't sure about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I meant, I think the earlier steps are probably in the VB-MAPP.  

There are different things that can be going on with rote responding, and then different strategies.  

There’s stuff with flexible responding and asking for more than one response.

There’s stuff with teaching more language so there’s more the child can say with novel language.  

We do a lot with making predictions because it’s easy to do with reading and easy to ask easy questions.  “What do you think this book is about?”  based on the front cover.  Then if he says one thing and you say something else, that is showing there isn’t only one answer.  Anything with “what do you think will happen next” and give a silly answer.

There is a lot of overlap with reading comprehension if it’s something where kids give rote responses when they are supposed to summarize or make and inference, and the answer isn’t directly stated in the text.

That’s really different from an example we have had where my son would give a rote response about what he ate for lunch.  It’s a common kind of recall question to ask kids.  He would just say macaroni and cheese no matter what he ate.  So that’s a rote response, but for him two things going on.  One, major lack of motivation and interest in answering this question, no personal

meaning for him.  Two, it’s asking him to remember something from earlier in the day and he will have no visual cues to help him answer.  That’s different from rote responding like “what are some things that are red?” and always saying “fire truck.”  And they are both different than if it’s giving a rote answer for a reading comprehension question (like repeating a line from the book) because of not knowing how to summarize.

Ime a lot of people will assume you mean “what things are red” “a fire truck” for rote responding, and if you mean something else you have to point it out and make sure people know about it.  They might not realize someone is rote responding.

Like with my son and asking what is for lunch — is someone doesn’t know what he had for lunch, they will think he did eat macaroni and cheese.  And then maybe after several times they might think “hmmm, maybe this is a rote response.”  Or maybe they won’t because it’s not on their radar.  It’s not always obvious to people when and why kids are making rote responses.  

Edit:  I think the thing is, a lot of times memorize language is functional and appropriate.  It’s just not novel language.  So then there are things where you probably will have to formulate a novel response.  You probably don’t have a memorized response available.  So then making predictions is likely to need novel language, and summarizing is likely to need novel language.  

It’s different if the memorized language is off-topic, or tangential, or not really answering the question or making an appropriate response.  It depends on the situation.  

It seems like it really depends and different kids have different strategies, though.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't recall ds ever doing rote (inappropriate) responses like that. And yes, I think that's what the SLPs are wanting to do is take the memorized language and help his brain organize it and break it down into parts so he can use it for novel speech. And yes, there could also be retrieval issues. He couldn't even get out a narrative with picture prompts like a flannelgraph or little clothespin figures. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can he describe a picture?  That is a good building block.  

I have seen two ways.  One, a picture that tells a story where there is enough there that kids don’t have to also make up a story.  A picture can show enough to get something like “the boy was playing with his friends, then someone hit the ball through the window, then the woman came outside and asked who broke her window.”  There are pictures like that with a lot of detail so kids don’t have to do as much to make up the story on their own.

And then there are simple pictures where you can describe one clear main thing on the picture, and then string it together, like with sequence cards.  

Another thing is, if you start a story can he say something that might happen next.  Then it’s just working on one step.

I am interested in the Nurturing Narratives book, I bet it has a lot of ideas.

I bet he will improve with speech therapy, I think he probably already has a lot of building blocks and then he can put them together.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nope, that's the stuff that's missing. And I let it slide because I thought it was developmental and was dealing with so much else. Now we're trying to move it up. His narratives are extremely basic. He had a scaled score of 3 on the TNL for his narrative productions. That's a mean of 10, standard deviation of 3. So very, very rough, no connectors, yuck. And it's not just one day. The psych doing the ADOS commented on it too.

I'm reading the VB book, because I don't think describing pictures is the first place we need to start. I really don't think it's the first place. I'm really concerned about SLPs, who don't really seem to know much about ASD or VB, just picking up some curriculum book and using it on him, rather than thinking through the developmental foundation that needs to be built. There's sort of a turf war, best I can tell.

Well I'm kinda psyched. I rearranged and tidied our office, and it's working really nicely for us. It's funny how a small bedroom can have so much function and be so spacious. We have 3 large tables in it, 2 rugs, a big moon chair. It just works. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you’re wanting to include Verbal Behavior approach, I think maybe look for an ABA therapist who will assess with ABLLS.  

I think speech therapists come at things differently and have different priorities.

But I don’t think it is exactly turf wars.

It’s more that they often don’t totally understand what the other ones do because they use different terminology!  

I don’t exactly think the ABLLS is necessary,  but if they use it they are probably doing VB things.  Or they might not use it with your son after they met him.  But it would mean they do address the languagey things if they use it in the practice.  I think anyway.  I’m not sure but it’s a thought.  

Or at least if someone said “well we don’t use ABLLS and here’s why” would be showing they were knowledgable about it if you liked their answer.  

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think there are very good speech therapists for autism out there, too.

You can ask if they have experience with Verbal Behavior if you want, if they have ever worked with the VB-MAPP or the ABLLS.  Or if they have coordinated with kids who are using them.  

There is a lot of overlap, though, in a lot of areas.

If you have had evals recently maybe they have an opinion on what to look for for speech therapy.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Once you're talking about a behaviorist, they have to have availability. Ours is booked solid, and in the big city near us I've heard of people waiting 9 months for a behaviorist to open up. That's ASTONISHING. The need is greater than the availability, and ds' needs are not cookie cutter. He has a lot of language, so he needs customized targeting to find the holes. I'm going to end up doing a chunk of it myself. I'm hoping what happens is the SLP turns out to be a good resource and we all work together. I have two SLPs for language scheduled and a 3rd one in the wings starting in June. Between that, hopefully at least one will be a keeper, lol. What we were actually thinking is that each of the SLPs at this particular practice have specialties, so he could work with a variety of people. So we're just gonna roll with it.

I had to custom teach his learning to read, because there was nothing that fit him exactly. I think that's what is going to happen with this expressive language stuff too. I'll wrap my brain around it and I'll fill in the chinks myself. We'll get there. I just have this IEP fight coming up while I'm trying to sort through all this and ramp stuff up. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just as mom to mom, my advice is to get a therapy that targets where he is right now, something he's ready for, something that will unlock capabilities that he was on the cusp of and didn't know he could have. 

I've had good therapists and bad therapists, even in the same field. Between my two kids, I've used no less than 6 OTs, I kid you not. I've been through 7+ SLPs if you count all the evals, all the people we've tried, people we've rejected. Our last OT was really special to us, because she seemed to be ready to meet ds right where he was and open up capabilities he didn't know he had. He's now doing things he literally just flat couldn't do, wouldn't do 6 months ago. I've seldom had an OT worth a plug nickel, honestly. There are SLPs doing Social Thinking who can hit a kid like that. You get a high schooler, someone who is really ready to think, and you come at them with this stuff, and it might come together and blossom in his mind and be this WOW of analysis and understanding and lightbulbs turning on and things clicking.

Don't be satisfied with vague, crappy, voodoo answers. You might pay the same amount of money to a different therapist doing something different and they unlock the world for him. Seriously. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For people without inner speech, they make regular use of Echolia.  As they can't restate the question in their mind, so that they will say it out loud. Before it disappears from their mind. But they may need to repeat it multiple times.  Where the response is retrieved as they repeat it.

Though what they take from the question, are the words that have an associated visual image.  So that the question is represented in their mind, as a stream of visual images.  But this is very limiting, as most words don't have a visual image. Other than as a printed word.  Their is no visual image for the word: 'but'. 

Without inner speech,  people still think.  But instead, they think in a series of mental images.  Rather like a 'slide-show'.  With verbal scripts attached to each slide. 

Yet it does raise the question, of whether images could be developed. For words that don't have a visual image? For example, an image that represents: 'if' ?

Though an alternative, could be to learn the sign language for these particular words?   So that they can also think in sign language.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, my ds had both brief and more extensive echolalia. He says himself that he memorizes audiobooks and can tell you about them, meaning recite. Now though it's getting to the point where it's too much language, where he can't. But that's what he's doing, memorizing language. Does it with tv shows too. 

Well I'm waiting nervously for the SLPs to finish the new report, sigh. It's one thing after another, killing me. We'll see what they come up with in their recommendations and how strong it is. Language is the hill the school wants to die on in fighting changing his disabling condition to autism for his IEP. Without that change, I don't have the funding tier to make the intervention happen. So it's all just sorta sick. For the school possibly to say that my ds being unable to get out narrative thoughts is NOT SIGNIFICANT is just so astonishing to me, so repugnant, I don't know how I can deal with them. It just seems unethical and unreasonable. But we'll see. It's the weeds I'm lost in.

Oh, I went through that Nathan powerpoint. As I thought, she's just super shallow. She has no vision for where this is going, no clue about development or how it connects to the stages of language development. She was just talking about piddling stuff like growth mindset and mantras. My lands. Maybe the book is more thorough, but I'm not hopeful. I canceled my order of it. We don't even yet have a toc on amazon to know if she's going to go deeper. If all she hits is the superficial level, that's not worth more money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, geodob said:

For people without inner speech, they make regular use of Echolia.  As they can't restate the question in their mind, so that they will say it out loud. Before it disappears from their mind. But they may need to repeat it multiple times.  Where the response is retrieved as they repeat it.

Though what they take from the question, are the words that have an associated visual image.  So that the question is represented in their mind, as a stream of visual images.  But this is very limiting, as most words don't have a visual image. Other than as a printed word.  Their is no visual image for the word: 'but'. 

Without inner speech,  people still think.  But instead, they think in a series of mental images.  Rather like a 'slide-show'.  With verbal scripts attached to each slide. 

Yet it does raise the question, of whether images could be developed. For words that don't have a visual image? For example, an image that represents: 'if' ?

Though an alternative, could be to learn the sign language for these particular words?   So that they can also think in sign language.

 

Just realized I didn't ask the more fundamental question. When a typically developing person has inner speech, are they visualizing or rephrasing into auditory or both? It seems the more natural thing would be to teach the step the typical people use. Visualization can be glitched by separate visual processing problems, even if in theory it should have been a strength. So I agree with it as a strategy, but I think that idea of being able to use the auditory path is important too, because it has implications for summarizing, getting language out, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is very interesting!!!!!!!! 

Just a comment on the sign language idea.  I don’t think it would be better or worse than teaching a written word or a PECS card if there is one.

Because, I think it is conceptual.  I don’t think the concept of “if, then, but,” words that aren’t labeling objects, are conceptually understood, and that’s the problem.

Kids who do understand them conceptually and use AAC can show they can understand and communicate with those words that aren’t object labels.  That is possible.

So I think it is a need to teach the concept, that may not be well understood.  

And then — there are choices to make, and different options.

But I think the main point is constructing the understanding of those concepts, not of expressing them in one form or another.

First, then, is taught early sometimes, it was taught very early to my son.  Well — there’s no way to label an object as “first” and “then.”  But there are ways to show a visual representation and then use that visual representation to teach the concept.  

And then it is known, that using visuals to teach concepts like this is helpful to some kids.

That’s just a comment, though, I don’t know that much about it!  And my son did not really use PECS.  He was taught with visuals though.  There are ways to teach “not” which is a common thing to say and also there’s no way to label a specific object as “not.”  

But I see it as a process where he didn’t understood “not,” then they taught it to him, and then he did understand it.  It’s not that he understood it but couldn’t express it.  

So it is understanding the concept; not being able to read a word or link a sign to a word.  

I think it could be that way for people who do have that conceptual understanding, though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know this is not what you are specifically talking about but there are Mad Libs apps and wordadventure apps and There is also an app called MES Speech Therapy app that works on sentences and conversation builders( A friend told me about it but I haven't used it). I  also wondered if Grammerly would be worth a try for my son because it can suggest ways for him to better build sentences.  I haven't tried any of these as that is something I am working towards for a summer camp.  There are also probably Build a story apps and worksheets. I had an idea of using magnetic poetry with some added nouns and verbs to practace. I even bought the magnetic roll of tape to write on but got caught up in other areas. 

If Dysgraphia is an issue using printed strips on a cookie sheet to assemble sentences out of nouns verbs etc might help. He could slide them into place and then take a picture of the sentence. or speak it into the IPAD once it is formed. 

Choose your own adventures are great ideas for reading and maybe what he could do is the beginning of a paragraph and he finishes it.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought of one other idea  I started having him record his voice on the ipad and play it back for speech therapy. Sometimes I have him read aoutloud and record it and then play it back. This helped a lot I really like the app Voice Record for that.  THIS is the microphone I use that has a headphone jack attached it picks up a lot of surrounding noise but I haven't been able to find another mic/headphone combo that works well with the IPAD. It is a good interface and easy to use with good sound quality. At one time I had thought of looking up conversation recordings on the sights for english as a second language learners and having my son listen to those and watch those. I remember when I was learning french they had this video immersion series of conversations and interactions maybe they have something like that in English. Infact I had an ASD coach recommend some sites I will go find that email and post them here in this post when I get back to my desktop.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have been thinking about this, and I think there are a lot of things that can be meant by a lack of narrative skills.  It is a higher level skill in a lot of ways.  So the skill level could be ready for it, or it could be lower and not ready to work on it or to focus on it.  It just depends.

So for describing a picture, to describe a picture with a gestalt description can be a really easy sentence.

For example — a picture of kids trick or treating. A gestalt sentence could be as simple as “they’re trick or treating.” A longer sentence with more details and a made-up story could be a nice long narrative description.  But as simple as “trick or treating” could show understanding of the gestalt of the picture.

So what are responses that don’t show understanding of the gestalt for that picture?  Either details or a related tangent could show it.... a related tangent could show understanding but not being able to just say “trick or treating.”  

So — naming details could be “I see some children.”  “It’s night.”  “They are wearing costumes.”  Okay — for costumes, that’s good, that’s getting there — but if the picture really shows trick or treating, then noticing costumes is noticing a relevant detail, but it’s not describing the activity in this particular picture.  

Then for a tangent — a child who has good language might say a long thing about “one time  in Halloween I did this and we saw this” or “on Mickey Mouse Clubhouse Mickey did this and Minnie did this.”  

Those things are showing good language and that they are noticing something relevant and saying something relevant.

But it’s not saying what is happening in the picture.  It’s not saying “they’re trick or treating” and adding any details about *what is in the picture.*  It’s not giving an *appropriate response* to the question that was asked about “what’s happening in this picture.”

This is my impression from where I have lived and people we have seen....... if a child can say something gestalt-related, even if it is very simple, and what they need is to develop more of a narrative instead of giving a very short and undetailed answer, I think a speech therapist can do that.  A good speech therapist and everything, but I think that is definitely something where a speech therapist is going to be able to do speech therapy things.

If the child is doing more of saying correct details but not saying what the gestalt is, I think there is a need for autism specialty (if the child has autism) and where I have lived ABA has been best for this level.  

If a child is responding with a tangent that doesn’t actually respond to the question, I think it depends.  I think it depends if it’s more languagey or more conceptual.  If it’s more languagey I think ABA has been better where I have lived.  They build language better at that kind of level ime.  If it’s more conceptual like they have the language but it’s not clear what to say to describe the gestalt, I think speech therapy can be very good with that.  

So if a child was to launch into a script from the Mickey Mouse Clubhouse Halloween episode, and had very little novel speech, I would think ABA.

If a child did have a decent level of novel speech but needed to build on their level, I would say speech therapy.  

I do think there is a lot of overlap, too, and it depends a lot on the whole child and on who is available locally and who has openings.  And it will depend on who they work with, too.  A speech therapist who really works with the earlier levels I think would be good.  But many work more with intermediate levels and advanced levels, and don’t have as much experience with earlier levels, so I would be weary of that.

And then with ABA I think it’s the opposite, there’s need to make sure they are experienced with higher levels, because some (many) will be but some will mainly work with younger kids or earlier levels.  

What can be confusing is one parent might say “he did horrible he only said two words” but they are two words that show an understanding of the gestalt of the picture.  

Another parent might say “he told a nice story” but not realize it was a script or near a script or that it was tangential or off-topic and didn’t describe the picture in the way that would show being able to notice and describe the gestalt.

Or they just don’t realize that is what they are looking for in responses for some things, so even if what is said is good, it isn’t the response they are looking for.

And really what I think is — unless they have autism or something similar, most kids even with a major language delay would have the understanding of gestalt to say “trick or treating.”  

But then for the kids who don’t, then that is going to take someone who can really work on that, and it’s not necessarily going to be the same way of working on things as building language with a child who needs to develop more skills but can say “trick or treating.”  

I have only lived in small towns, though, and there are not that many options.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lecka, with 'understanding the gestalt of the picture'?

What I would raise, is the difference between only one possible conclusion. When the elements are combined.  As opposed to different possible conclusions?  But even if their is only one possible conclusion, other possibilities need to be explored.  Which comes back to my topic of inner speech.  Which provides a way to think through different possibilities, and rule them out. Until a conclusion can be proved. 

But without inner speech, their is no way to go through the process of exploring different possibilities?   

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's what we do when we work on sequencing, etc. He gives a telling using the prompts and I give a totally different telling, showing how I rearranged them and why it works. 

I need to read more about it, but apparently episodic memory is key to developing narratives. The RDI people were looking for it when we did our intake. They didn't give a rip about language or how it connected to that (because RDI people have very limited training to put it politely), but obviously the nurturing of episodic memory can lead to intermediate steps that can be developed to make narratives develop more naturally.

I remain concerned that SLPs know basically NOTHING about the actual development of language through function (Skinner, Verbal Behavior) and are basically just pedaling programs, floundering. They are going for end products, splinter skills, rather than realizing the glitches along the watch that caused the end steps not to develop. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree!

I was thinking about how my son has been learning this.  

If they go from simpler to harder, then being able to say one conclusion when it just IS what most people would describe as the “main idea” of a picture ———— that is something, to be able to do it.

That is noticing various details and their relevance and putting them together to come up with one main idea.

But then any “why” or “what will they do next” or “wondering” or “imagining” or “noticing more significant details” ————— those are all harder things to do.  

With his program, one of the earliest, easiest possible steps is matching like objects, then matching an object to a picture (though I don’t know if everybody thinks that is good or if it is old fashioned now).

Anyway, my son started, not quite that basic, but he started with learning 50 words with 4 (or maybe 5) different examples.  So for “chair” he had to be able to call 4 different chairs a “chair” by noticing the gestalt details of a chair.  (I don’t know if this is the exact same use of the word gestalt).  It took about 3 months, it was hard for him.  He was making (I was told) more of 1:1 labels where a word meant a specific item, not just that item in general (like “cup” might mean one specific cup, not any particular cup).  He got  20-30 words like this very easily/quickly, and then learning new ones he didn’t already know was very hard.  “Book” was hard for him because books really do not look that much alike, they can be different sizes and colors and things like that.

Anyway I do think of gestalt for that level of knowing what different items have in common to all be a fork, and know in what ways a fork is different from a spoon, to be able to label them correctly.  

But it is a lot simpler level, much much simpler.  

But there is some process of identifying the shared/defining characteristics.

I don’t know if that is just the same kind of thing or not.  

But I do agree, I think I was thinking of a more simple, basic level.

But I don’t know at what level inner speech would become *necessary.*  Because I think st a certain point kids (like kids with major language delays) are just beginning to even use words, and then if they are below the level where typical children use inner speech, it might not be expected.

But then when there is the point where inner speech is needed, or is being used by typical children at that level of speech, and then it’s needed.

We have a big transition for my son with going from picture supports to taking away the picture supports and expecting him to just remember.  

I think he has to be doing it with inner speech, I think he has to be repeating things to himself as they happen, and even giving words to things that he is doing, and then be able to remember.  I’m not sure but I think so.

He is working on remembering things that happened earlier in the day right now.  

I think there are two steps though, with noticing and identifying what is going on, and then thinking of it and naming it with words.  I don’t know if they are so close they are one step though?

I think it may be two steps though, because one prompt is if someone helps him to notice and identify but doesn’t help him as much with putting it into words.

And then another prompt is someone puts it into words for him, but then he is asked to remember.  

But it could be almost the same thing.

He seems like he forgets things that he has done, if he doesn’t have it verbalized for him, or if he doesn’t verbalize it himself (and maybe he does verbalize internally too).  But I am not sure if that is how he is remembering.  It does seem like it.

It has been a long time to develop and I am told it requires him developing abstract thought.

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We are doing episodic memory too, it is supposed to help give a framework for recalling events.

I have an opinion about the Verbal Behavior.  I think it is special through the level of VB-MAPP and most of ABLLS.

I think it is special and it is better than other approaches.

But after that point, I think it is getting very very similar to speech therapy and fitting into language development stuff.  It’s my impression.

Then, the second thing is that there is theory and practice for Verbal Behavior.

It starts as a theory, and then people find ways to put it into practice and design programs to teach kids.  And then — that is happening for a lot of things.  

But there are some things with Verbal Behavior that aren’t necessarily practical, and they aren’t necessarily going to matter with actually putting things into practice.

So for some things that are getting more theoretical, there may not be a practical application that is being used.  Maybe because it hasn’t been developed or gotten popular.  Or maybe because there are already ways to do it and it isn’t filling a need.

I think VB-MAPP and ABLLS fill a need that was unmet before they came out.

But my son did VB-MAPP and ABLLS so of course I think they are good!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Or another way to say it — if you are looking at Verbal Behabior stuff right now, and you are at a describing a picture kind of level, then in my opinion you need to make sure gaps are filled up to that level and that things at that level are done well by the speech therapist.

But does a speech therapist need to know the theory of Verbal Behavior and really advanced technical or theoretical stuff?  I don’t think it is necessary at all.  

I think understanding the lower levels is important if someone is in those levels or has gaps, I think it’s really important.

But higher, and gaps addressed or no gaps?  I don’t think it matters.  

That is to be practical.

To someone whose job is to think deep thoughts about Verbal Behavior and move it forward, it matters a lot.  But those aren’t the same people who are working day-to-day with children with practical applications, I think.

Anyway though, overall, if what you want is Verbal Behavior, then you want someone who is familiar with VB-MAPP and ABLLS.  Or at least VB-MAPP.  Even if you are past that, understanding how that fits together is the framework that matters, I think, not the advanced stuff.

That’s all just my impression/opinion, but it is what I think.  

We are at a point right now where all my son’s goals merge together with speech therapy goals and they’re not identical or done identically, but I think it is so close it doesn’t matter.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...