Implementing Evidence-Based Instruction: Talking the Talk and Walking the Walk Evidence-based practice (EBP) has been described as “the integration of best and current research evidence with clinical/educational expertise and relevant stakeholder perspectives, in order to facilitate decisions about assessment and intervention that are deemed effective and efficient for a given stakeholder” (Schlosser & Raghavendra, 2003). As a field, the ... Article
Article  |   September 01, 2006
Implementing Evidence-Based Instruction: Talking the Talk and Walking the Walk
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Joe Reichle
    Department of Speech-Language-Hearing Sciences, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN
Article Information
Augmentative & Alternative Communication / Research Issues, Methods & Evidence-Based Practice / Professional Issues & Training / Evidence-Based Practice
Article   |   September 01, 2006
Implementing Evidence-Based Instruction: Talking the Talk and Walking the Walk
SIG 12 Perspectives on Augmentative and Alternative Communication, September 2006, Vol. 15, 11-15. doi:10.1044/aac15.3.11
SIG 12 Perspectives on Augmentative and Alternative Communication, September 2006, Vol. 15, 11-15. doi:10.1044/aac15.3.11
Evidence-based practice (EBP) has been described as “the integration of best and current research evidence with clinical/educational expertise and relevant stakeholder perspectives, in order to facilitate decisions about assessment and intervention that are deemed effective and efficient for a given stakeholder” (Schlosser & Raghavendra, 2003). As a field, the AAC community has had a firm commitment to address practical problems. Sometimes this created an enthusiasm that has given practitioners and parents the impression that certain practices have been validated when, in fact, they have not been validated (Mirenda, 2005). For example, in a segment of the autism community, there has been encouragement to implement gestural communication systems rather than graphic applications (Shafer, 1993; Sundberg, 1993). More recent literature (summarized by Mirenda) suggests that, for many learners, there is sufficient variation in the most efficient communicative modes that are available to supplement speech that an individual appraisal of each one is the better practice. In other instances, wishful thinking led to acceptance that AAC applications typically resulted in vocal/verbal advancement. For example, we now have an increasing evidentiary base suggesting that with simultaneous pairing of AAC and spoken language, learners who are able to vocally imitate are more apt to make vocal/verbal mode gains compared to children who are not proficient at imitating vocally modeled behavior. Fortunately, AAC, stakeholders have appropriately demanded that the field attend to the scientific tradition of “following the data” to dictate best practice.
First Page Preview
First page PDF preview
First page PDF preview ×
View Large
Become a SIG Affiliate
Pay Per View
Entire SIG 12 Perspectives on Augmentative and Alternative Communication content & archive
24-hour access
This Issue
24-hour access
This Article
24-hour access
We've Changed Our Publication Model...
The 19 individual SIG Perspectives publications have been relaunched as the new, all-in-one Perspectives of the ASHA Special Interest Groups.