Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
Before undertaking the Augmentative and Alternative Communication (AAC) appraisal speech pathologists
should have read the Augmentative and Alternative Communication Guideline and undertaken any relevant
further study.
It is important that the person wanting to be assessed arranges a time with the WPSP and use this as part
of their professional supervision and mentoring sessions. This appraisal consists of three sections – theory
(question / answers), discussion regarding application of the principles to work practice, and direct
observation of the skills. There is not a scoring system in this appraisal. All questions are to be answered to
a satisfactory level, and there must be satisfactory demonstration of application to the speech pathologist’s
work in the areas outlined.
Question / answer
• the information under each question is intended to provide the key points each speech pathologist
should address. A speech pathologist can provide more than is itemised. The WPSP will sign off
each question when they are satisfied the required information has been presented
• questions may be answered verbally or in writing
• questions may be answered in the context of a group discussion as long as the WPSP is present
and satisfied with the speech pathologist’s response.
• case discussion / examples must have been completed within the previous 12 months
• case discussion / examples are acceptable if completed in collaboration with another practitioner as
long as the WPSP can identify the practitioner’s level of contribution and is satisfied that the
requirements are met
• all cases discussed must have consent from all persons’ concerned, including the person with a
disability, any family members or carers and other professionals.
Observation: With the consent of the person with a disability and / or their person responsible, the
assessor must observe the speech pathologist demonstrating the requirements.
WPSP Name:
Position:
DEFINITIONS:
Work Practice Support Person (WPSP):
As this is a speech pathology core standard the WPSP must be a speech pathologist. This person supports
the speech pathologist and can be a professional supervisor or other speech pathologist with appropriate
skills and experience. An alternative WPSP may be identified if the current supervisor/s believe another
person may be better suited to reviewing a speech pathologist’s knowledge.
Service Delivery Approaches Appraisal. Developed by Clinical Innovation and Governance, ADHC, Family and
Community Service. Version 1. 2014
GUIDELINES:
The WPSP will sign below when they are satisfied the requirements for each section below have been met.
• the information under each question is intended to provide the key points each speech pathologist should
address. Speech pathologists can provide more than is itemised
• questions may be answered verbally or in writing
• questions may be answered in the context of a group discussion as long as the WPSP is present and
satisfied with the speech pathologist’s response
• case discussion / examples are acceptable if completed in collaboration with another practitioner as long
as the WPSP can identify the speech pathologist’s level of contribution and is satisfied that the
requirements are met
• case discussion / examples/observations must have been completed within the previous 12 months.
There are three sections to the appraisal which follow. They are:
1. Questions
2. Workplace Examples
3. Workplace Observations
The person
• immediate or extended family
• paid or voluntary carers
• teachers and teachers aids
• speech-language pathologist
• physician
• occupational therapist
• physiotherapist
• social worker
• education specialist
• psychologist
• rehabilitation engineer
• vision specialist
• others
• scaffolding
• direct instruction
• least-to-most prompting with time delay.
• ICF codes
• COPM
• GAS
• specialist tools as per appendix 2 in
guideline
Observation
Observations must have been conducted within the previous 12 months.
Signed:
Name:
Position:
Date:
Disclaimer:
This appraisal was developed by the Clinical Innovation and Governance Directorate of Ageing, Disability
and Home Care in the Department of Family and Community Services, New South Wales, Australia
(ADHC).
This appraisal has been developed to indicate whether a practitioner 1 has increased their knowledge
through the completion of the core standard. It has been designed to promote consistent and efficient best
practice. It forms part of the supporting resource material for the Core Standards Program developed by
ADHC. Access to this document by practitioners working outside of ADHC has been provided in the
interests of sharing resources. Reproduction of this document is subject to copyright and permission.
Please refer to the website disclaimer for more details.
Whilst the information contained in this appraisal has been compiled and presented with all due care,
ADHC gives no assurance or warranty nor makes any representation as to the accuracy or completeness
or legitimacy of its content. ADHC does not accept any liability to any person for the information (or the use
of such information) which is provided in this practice package or incorporated into it by reference. ADHC
does not intend nor guarantee the use of the appraisal as assessing a level of competence by practitioners
working outside of ADHC.
CORE STANDARDS AUGMENTATIVE AND ALTERNATIVE COMMUNICATION APPRAISAL | 10
Augmentative and alternative communication appraisal. Developed by Clinical Innovation and Governance, ADHC,
Family and Community Service. Version 1. 2014
References
Bech, A., Bain, A., & Vass, A (Producer). (2008). Training of the Communication Partner provides positive
outcomes in facilitating communication of children with Cerebral Palsy who use Speech Generating
Devices Retrieved from http://www.agosci.org.au/docs/trainingcatsp.pdf
Beukelman, D.R., & Mirenda, P. (2013). Augmentative and Alternative Communication: Supporting
Children and Adults with Complex Communication Needs: Paul H. Brookes Pub.
Caulfield, F, & Carillo, D. (2010). 200 A Day the Easy Way, Putting it in Practice.
http://www.idahoat.org/Portals/0/Documents/200%20a%20Day%20the%20Easy%20Way.pdf:
WWW.closingthegap.com.
Light, J C., & McNaughton, D. (2014). Communicative Competence for Individuals who require
Augmentative and Alternative Communication: A New Definition for a New Era of
Communication? Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 30(1), pp.1-18. doi:
10.3109/07434618.2014.885080
Light, J. C. (1989). Toward a Definition of Communicative Competence for Individuals Using Augmentative
and Alternative Communication Systems: Williams & Wilkins.
Light, J. C., Beukelman, D. R., & Reichle, J. . (2003). Communicative Competence For
Individuals Who Use AAC: From Research To Effective Practice. . Baltimore:: Paul H. Brookes.
Lund, S.K., & Light, J C. (2006). Long-Term Outcomes for Individuals Who Use Augmentative and
Alternative Communication: Part I – What is a ‘‘Good’’ Outcome? Augmentative and Alternative
Communication, 22(December, 4), pp. 284 - 299.
Lund, S.K., & Light, J C. (2007). Long-term Outcomes for Individuals Who UseAugmentative and
Alternative Communication: Part II – Communicative Interaction. Augmentative and Alternative
Communication, 23(march, 1), pp. 1 - 15.
Michalicek, W, Sanford, A, Lang, R, Rispoli, M, Molfenter, N, & Mbeseha, M. (2010). Literacy
Interventions for Students with Physical and Developmental Disabilities who use Aided AAC
Devices: A Systematic Review. Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities, 22, 219-240.
Pless, M, & Granlund, M. (2012). Implementation of the International Classification of Functioning,
Disability and Health (ICF) and the ICF Children and Youth Version (ICF-CY) Within the Context
of Augmentative and Alternative Communication. 28 , 11–20
Rowland, C., Fried-Oken, M., Steiner, S. A. M., Lollar, D., Phelps, R., Simeonsson, R. J., & Granlund, M. .
(2012). Developing the ICF-CY for AAC Profile and Code Set for Children Who Rely on AAC.
Augmentative and Alternative Communication,, 28, 21-32.
Simeonsson, R, Bjork-Akesson, E, & Lollar, D. J. (2012). Communication Disability and the ICF-CY.
Augmentative And Alternative Communication 28(1), pp.3-10.
Speech Pathology Australia. (2012). Augmentative and Alternative Communication Clinical Guideline In
The Speech Pathology Association of Australia Ltd (Ed.), Clinical Guidelines.
http://www.speechpathologyaustralia.org.au/.
The Centre for AAC and Autism. (2009). Points to Include in an AAC Evaluation for Individuals with
Autism, from http://www.aacandautism.com/therapists/evaluation-points
World Health Organisation. (2001). International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and
Health (ICF)