Browsing by Subject "Language intervention"
Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
Results Per Page
Sort Options
Item Phonological intervention as a means for word learning : a cross-modal case study(2015-05) Adell, Julia; Bedore, Lisa M.; Quinto-Pozos, David; Nericcio, Mary APurpose: This study examined the efficacy of a phonological intervention that utilized the core vocabulary approach with a deaf, signing, late first language (L1) learner. The primary emphasis of this project was to attempt to demonstrate comparable success in word learning resulting from a sign language intervention modeled after a spoken language phonological intervention with a deaf adult sign language user. Method: Participant is a 32-year-old deaf female who had not been exposed to any formal sign language until age 31. Treatment utilized a core vocabulary approach that targeted phonological awareness tasks of increasing complexity. Independent and unique real-word productions were coded to track the participant's growing lexicon. Results: Accuracy within each treatment probe indicates improved word-knowledge and remediation of consistent phonological errors. Overall cumulative lexical growth exhibits efficacy of the phonological treatment approach as a means for word learning. Post-treatment baseline cognitive and linguistic measurements indicate valid experimental control as they remained at pre-treatment baseline levels. Conclusions: A phonological intervention in the signed modality is efficacious with an adult, deaf, late first-language learner as a means for word learning.Item Pilot study of multimodal communication treatment in children with autism spectrum disorder(2014-05) Rogers, Rebecca Marie; Davis, Barbara L. (Barbara Lockett)In this study, a promising new intervention implemented for adults with aphasia due to stroke, Multimodal Communication Treatment, was modified for its use with one child with autism spectrum disorder to identify if the child could learn and communicate new words through learning multiple modalities. Data was collected on the child’s communicative output as well to assess the frequency and types of his communication attempts. The child presented with challenging behaviors throughout the intervention period, and its potential impact on the execution of the intervention was studied. The study found that Multimodal Communication Treatment was not an effective intervention approach for this child. The majority of his output was not communicative in nature and challenging behaviors impacted the effectiveness of implementing the approach. Further research is needed to identify whether Multimodal Communication Treatment could be an effective intervention for children with more communicative intent and increased attention.