Addressing the Content Vocabulary with Core: Theory and Practice for Non- Literate or Emerging Literate Students

This article is the original, accepted version of the article as submitted by the authors to The American Speech- Language- Hearing Association for publication. The citation for the final published version of this article is as follows: Witkowski, D. & Baker, B. (2012). Addressing the content vocabulary with core: Theory and practice for non- literate or emerging literate students. Perspectives on Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 21:74-81. The article is available at: http://div12perspectives.asha.org/content/21/3.toc Addressing the Content Vocabulary with Core: Theory and Practice for Non- Literate or Emerging Literate Students Debbie Witkowski Bruce Baker Semantic Compaction Systems Pittsburgh, PA Abstract In the early elementary grades, the primary emphasis is on developing skills crucial to future academic and personal success - - specifically oral and written communication skills. These skills are vital to student success as well as to meaningful participation in the classroom and interaction with peers. Children with complex communication needs (CCN) may require the use of high- performance speech generating devices (SGD). The challenges for these students are further complicated by the task of learning language at a time when they are expected to apply their linguistic skills to academic tasks. However, by focusing on core vocabulary as a primary vehicle for instruction, educators can equip students who use SGDs to develop language skills and be competitive in the classroom. The purpose of this article is to define core vocabulary and to provide theoretical and practical insights into integrating it into the classroom routine for developing oral and written communication skills. In the early elementary grades, the primary emphasis is on developing skills crucial to future academic and personal success, specifically listening, speaking, reading, and writing. Oral and written communication skills are vital to student success as well as to meaningful participation in the classroom and interaction with peers. Often, students with speech and language disorders do not achieve maximum potential in the classroom. They lack language and communication skills needed to be successful in the school curriculum (Ehren, Blosser, Roth, Paul, & Nelson, 2012). Children with complex communication needs (CCN) may require the use of high- performance speech generating devices (SGD). The challenges for these students are further complicated by 1

the task of learning language at a time when they are expected to apply their linguistic skills to academic tasks. Enabling students who use AAC devices to develop oral and written communication skills while trying to compete in the classroom environment presents a significant challenge to teachers and clinicians alike. Often, the focus of speech- language therapy is to ensure students have the necessary content vocabulary in their devices to participate in the classroom curriculum (Beukelman & Mirenda, 2005). The result is frequently a device filled with vocabulary that has limited utility outside of the classroom and words that are only relevant for a short period of time. Given this emphasis on curriculum vocabulary, there may be little time for speech- language pathologists (SLPs) to address the other components of language, specifically syntax, morphology, phonology, and pragmatics. The focus of this article is to provide strategies to promote classroom participation and the development of oral and written communication skills for students with CCN through the use of core vocabulary. Core Vocabulary Core vocabulary is the relatively small set words with the highest frequency of use in both in conversation and in written text. A number of research articles have been written, demonstrating the consistency of this vocabulary across geographic regions and demographic populations, ranging from toddlers in Louisiana to adults in Sydney, Australia (Banajee, Dicarlo, & Sticklin, 2003; Beukelman, Jones, & Rowan, 1989; Balandin & Iacono, 1999; Stuart, Beukelman, & King, 1997; Hill, 2001). Across various studies, these core words consistently make up approximately 80% of the words in collected samples. In contrast, the vocabulary comprising the remaining 20% has been termed extended or fringe vocabulary. While core vocabulary consists primarily of pronouns, verbs, auxiliary verbs, prepositions, adjectives and determiners, extended vocabulary is made up primarily of nouns. Most high- performance SGDs contain pre- stored core vocabulary. Students, for the purpose of this article, are those who can access a symbol- based core vocabulary represented with multiple meaning pictures and organized with semantic encoding, (e.g., the Unity Minspeak Application Programs), or with single meaning pictures organized in page- based systems (e.g., Gateway, SonoFlex, or Word Power ). Most pre- stored vocabulary programs in high- performance SGDs also include vocabulary considered useful in the academic setting, such as Language Arts words (e.g., author, character, plot) or Science words (e.g., ocean, island, planet, earth). Most of these words are subject specific (e.g., character), not lesson specific (e.g., names of characters) and useful from kindergarten to high school (Van Tatenhove, 2010). If the emphasis for students using SGDs is to develop oral and written communication skills, it is crucial for them to be able to develop strong language skills with a foundation in core vocabulary. When discussing the importance of focusing on core words, it is 2

helpful to describe these words in terms familiar to the general education teacher. Core words are flexible, simple, often monosyllabic words as found in the Dolch list (Dolch, 1948) and other high frequency word lists used by teachers. General education teachers are intimately familiar with the concept of high frequency words and a commonly seen resource in the general education classroom is the Word Wall (see Figure 1). The purpose of the Word Wall is to provide students with a resource that supports their reading and writing. The foundation for this bank of words is core vocabulary. Figure 1 Two Examples of Word Walls According to Van Tatenhove (2010), it is helpful to explain to the general education teacher that the core words displayed around the classroom are words that every other student in the classroom learned to say and use in sentences before coming to school. But for the student using the SGD, he/she is still in the process of learning to say the words and use them in sentences, and will join the other students is also learning to read and write them. Referential and Descriptive Teaching Methods Once the general education teacher understands the necessary to focus on core vocabulary before extended vocabulary, the teacher needs strategies for applying this new knowledge to daily lessons. Generally, when a teacher is introducing a new lesson (e.g., dinosaurs) to the students, the key vocabulary of the lesson is identified (e.g., extinct, herbivore, carnivore). When considering how the student using the SGD is going to participate in this lesson, the first two questions asked by teachers committed to teaching core words are (Van Tatenhove, 2010): 1. How can I measure what the student has learned if these words are NOT in the SGD? 2. How do I emphasize the core vocabulary that my student needs to learn while participating in this lesson? All teachers use a combination of referential and descriptive teaching methods when working with the students in their class. The referential teaching method emphasizes having the student participate and demonstrate learning using curriculum content words (e.g., herbivore), while the descriptive teaching method has the student participate and demonstrate learning using common words to describe (e.g., green things), define (e.g., eat plants), or predict (e.g., not eat me). 3

Too often, the practice in the classroom is to involve students who use AAC by emphasizing the use of the referential teaching method. Reasons that this might occur include the perception that it is more efficient for a student using AAC to provide a one- word response. In addition, if the content words have been programmed in advance, teachers know that these words are in the device and that the student has the resource with which to answer this close- ended question (Baker and Witkowski, 2012). A third possibility is that students using AAC have limited command over the language skills required to define, describe, or predict and thus are not asked to do so. However, the referential model of participation for AAC students requires a significant amount of staff and student time and leaves the student with vocabulary that has little utility outside of the classroom or once a curriculum unit is finished. In addition, this vocabulary can be used for little more than labeling or responding to questions. Students have lost vital opportunities to develop and practice language skills in the classroom environment. In contrast to a referential teaching method, the primary emphasis in the descriptive teaching method is on modeling the definitions, or descriptions, of key vocabulary and engaging student participation through open- ended questions. Definitions are comprised of core vocabulary. Applying the descriptive teaching method to students who use AAC results in a focus on language and enables them to participate regardless of their level of language development. For example, in a lesson on Native American life, the word tepee can be described using core words: house, their house, where they lived or that is where they lived. Tepees were made from animals and were easy to put up and take down. When tepees are introduced in the lesson, rather than having the student learn to say the word tepee, more frequent everyday vocabulary can be used instead. With the descriptive teaching method, students are given the tools needed to describe, define, predict, explain, and compare. These are complex communication skills needed to be competitive in school and communicative in life. In addition, consider the vocabulary used above to describe the word tepee. All of these words are useful beyond a lesson on Native American life. The result of using a descriptive teaching method is that students who are using AAC receive constant models of language structure and core vocabulary use. They are given many opportunities to practice using these structures and words throughout the day. In addition to learning curriculum content, they have the benefit of learning the components of language including syntax, morphology, and pragmatics. Perhaps more significant, from the academic perspective, the student has the opportunity to reflect a higher level of mastery of the material than what would be required to respond to a referential question using pre- programmed vocabulary. With a referential teaching style, staff time is taxed by the need to generate a list of vocabulary, locate symbols to represent the words, create pages, and program the words. Incorporating the descriptive teaching method into the classroom routine 4

requires advanced planning as well. Once key content vocabulary is identified, staff time is devoted to creating core vocabulary definitions of these words, which reflect the language abilities of the student. For example, Table 1 reflects very simple descriptions of vocabulary for a language arts lesson as well as more complex definitions of those same terms. Table 1: Content Words with Core Definitions at Emergent and Advanced Levels Content Word Core Vocabulary Description Emergent Language Core Vocabulary Description More Advanced Language Compare (what is) same Talk about what is the same between two things. Contrast (what is) different Talk about what is different between two things. Author (he/she) writes The person who writes the story. Setting Place (for) story The place where the story happens. Plot What (story) about What the story is about. Character Person (in story) The person or people in a story. Once the vocabulary is identified and defined, modeling the language inherent in these definitions is essential to student success. As the concept is introduced, the definition should be modeled for the student using the SGD. The classroom teacher, educational assistant, or SLP can do this. Optimally, the description should be modeled on the student s SGD. However, the classroom teacher does not always have that luxury when presenting a lesson to the entire class. In that case, it may be preferable use a wall chart or word wall containing the core vocabulary. Figure 2 Natural Aided Language Board In order to help teachers know what core words are in a student s SGD and to assist the teacher in modeling the words for students, Van Tatenhove (2006) developed a series of Natural Aided Language Boards (see Figure 2). These boards, in the form of wall charts, contain core vocabulary and the icon sequences from the Unity MAPs, along with a version that shows printed words only with space to add pictures from other vocabulary programs. This resource can be used by the teacher as a reference tool, like a visual dictionary, and to model vocabulary while teaching the lesson. Other types of visual 5

support materials can be created and posted throughout the classroom as reminders of how content vocabulary is defined and accessed on the SGD. Core Vocabulary and Literacy Students who use AAC often lack the literacy skills that they need to succeed academically. Most students in third grade classrooms can read longer and more advanced material. Therefore, the emphasis is no longer on emergent literacy skills. However, many students who use AAC have not developed sophisticated word attack skills by that time (Sturm et al, 2006). They are often still learning to read while their classmates are reading to learn, however, they need consistent opportunities to solidify their literacy skills through emergent literacy activities even though their grade level peers have moved beyond these activities. Core vocabulary is essential to components of reading instruction, including automatic word recognition, phonological and phonemic awareness skills, shared reading and text- related discussions, and reading comprehension. Automatic word recognition is the ability to look at a word and know what it is without having to decode it. Often, high frequency words are the first sight words that students are taught. The Dolch word list is frequently the benchmark for introduction of sight words. The 220 words on the original Dolch word list are all core words. Dolch (1948) claimed that students able to read all of the words on the Dolch List would be able to read at the third grade level. It is critical for students who use AAC to have immediate access to high frequency, or core, vocabulary within their SGDs to participate more fully in automatic word recognition activities, as well as phonological and phonemic activities that lead to decoding. Classroom Word Walls are a natural way to combine language and vocabulary learning with literacy instruction. Generally, word walls are organized alphabetically, although they can also be organized by placing related words together (e.g., word families). As a form of literacy instruction, they are a prominent display of printed words accessible to all students. Words are often added to the wall gradually with intentional instruction. For example, teachers may choose a word of the day. Before it is added, the teacher is likely to point out the phonemes that comprise the word, identify rhyming words, discuss various definitions, and have the student use the word in a meaningful way. Students who use SGDs can access these words using their core vocabulary to participate actively in this classroom activity. With the appropriate level of instructional support, they can engage in all of the tasks listed above using core vocabulary. A second area of skill development in written communication is decoding, which requires phonological and phonemic awareness skills. One strategy used to teach these skills is the use of onset and rime activities for monosyllabic words. The onset of a word is the initial phoneme or phoneme string, up to the first vowel. The rime component is the remainder of that word. For example, in the word stripe, str represents the onset and ipe represents the rime. Children in early grades participate in multiple learning 6

activities involving onset and rimes and in manipulating these components to incorporate additional words. These types of activities help students decode unfamiliar words by developing knowledge of phonemes and sound patterns. Students using SGDS can participate through the use of core vocabulary. For example, if looking at the rime - an, students using SGDs can contribute the words an, can, ran and man. For the - ot, core vocabulary includes got, hot, lot and not. These words are readily available and do not require a special - an or - ot page to be programmed. Accessing the student s core vocabulary in this way enables the student to maintain flexibility during the lesson. For example, if the discussion suddenly turns to antonyms, the student can readily say cold as the antonym of hot and little as an antonym for lot. This can be done within the current vocabulary without requiring the student to navigate from a word family s page to other pages in the SGD. It should be noted that most high- performance devices contain a phonetic keyboard that enables students to manipulate the word segments and explore sound patterns, another activity inherent in learning to decode and spell. Shared reading is also integral to developing literacy skills. Goals of shared reading activities include making predictions, discussing new vocabulary, connecting the content to personal experiences, and expressing thoughts, ideas, and opinions about the book. Knowledge and integration of core vocabulary into shared reading activities eliminates the need to program text- specific vocabulary into the SGD and enables students to participate in these book- related discussions. Erickson (2003) reported a case in which programming text- specific vocabulary resulted in limited success in participating in shared reading discussions. However, when the descriptive teaching method was applied (referred to as an alternative strategy), the student participated more fully by defining text- specific vocabulary using core words already in his SGD. In addition, she reports that students using such an approach have seen improvements in the ability to use their existing vocabularies for oral communication. Reading comprehension tasks are an important means of assessing what a student has understood. By integrating a descriptive teaching strategy into reading comprehension tasks, educators can identify what the student has understood from the text without the need to refer to text- specific vocabulary. For example, in the book Horton Hatches the Egg by Dr. Seuss, rather than asking, where does Lazy Mayzie? (Palm Springs), ask why does Horton sit on the egg for lazy Mayzie? (she goes away). During reading comprehension activities or shared reading, model core vocabulary so the student is prepared to generate a response in turn. Students can also practice writing using their SGD as their pencil. One vital tool is the phonetic keyboard that allows the student the opportunity for invented spelling tasks with the benefit of auditory feedback as phonemes are selected. When writing using pre- stored core vocabulary, the language generated can be converted to text by saving it in a file or transmitting it to a computer document. The example in Figure 3 shows 7

writing by a 4th grade student who initially developed a list of ideas, then converted those ideas into written text, and finally edited that initial text into more grammatically complete sentences. His writing includes 16 unique words, 13 that are core words representing 81% of his writing. Figure 3: Writing Sample Given that core vocabulary represents 80% of the words used in spoken and written communication, knowledge of core is essential to students who use AAC if they are to learn to write. Students who are provided with language models through a descriptive teaching method and who are able to participate in content- based instruction as well as reading activities using core vocabulary can proceed to writing activities as a natural progression. They are already learning to combine words into longer utterances to participate meaningfully in curriculum- related activities. All aspects of learning the writing process can be effectively addressed using core vocabulary as the foundation. Conclusion The fundamental academic tasks for pre- literate or emergent- literate students who use AAC are to develop oral and written communication skills so that they can be successful in learning, participating in the classroom, and interacting with their peers. This requires them to go beyond learning curriculum content vocabulary to learning and practicing core vocabulary, syntax, morphology and pragmatics skills. The descriptive teaching method enables educational teams to promote the development of language skills while teaching content and assessing student learning. In addition, a focus on core vocabulary available in high- performance SGDs is critical for tasks involved in teaching literacy. Finally, these strategies provide a natural progression to writing. With appropriate planning, modeling, resources and student support, students who use AAC are given the optimal opportunity to develop these critical skills. References Baker, B., & Witkowski, D. (2012). Meeting state standards with students using AAC, Paper presented at the CSUN Conference on Disabilities, San Diego, CA. Balandin, S. & Iacono, T. (1999). A few well- chosen words. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 14, 147-161. 8

Banajee, M., Dicarlo, C., & Stricklin, S. B. (2003). Core vocabulary determination for toddlers. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 19, 67-73. Beukelman, D., Jones, R., & Rowan, M. (1989). Frequency of word usage by non- disabled peers in integrated preschool classrooms. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 5, 243-248. Beukelman, D. R., & Mirenda, P. (2005). Augmentative and alternative communication: Management of severe communication disorders in children and adults (3rd ed.). Baltimore, MD: Brookes Dolch, E. (1948). Problems in reading. Portland, OR: Garrard Press. Ehren, B. J., Blosser, J., Roth, F. P., Paul, D. R., & Nelson, N. W. (2012, April 03). Core commitment. The ASHA Leader. Erickson, K., (2003, June 24. Reading comprehension in AAC, The ASHA Leader. Hill, K. (2001). The development of a model for automated performance measurements, Doctoral Dissertation, Speech- Language Pathology, University of Pittsburgh. Stuart, S., Beukelman, D., & King, J. (1997). Most frequently occurring words of older adults. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 13, 40-47. Sturm, J., Spadorcia, S., Cunningham, J., Cali, K., Staples, A., Erickson, K., Yoder, D., & Koppenhaver, D. (2006). What happens to reading between first and third grade? Implications for students who use AAC. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 22, 21-36. Van Tatenhove, G. (2006). Natural aided language boards. Orlando, FL: AACell, Inc. Van Tatenhove, G. (2010). Supporting students using robust AAC devices in general education classrooms. Webinar presented by the Assistive Technology Education Association. Orlando, FL. 9