I personally prefer LAMP over Proloquo but of course what is best for our clients is not always what we're comfortable with. Please, AAC gurus and those with experience with both software, what are your pros and cons of both PLQ2G and LAMP with Accent 1000?Īlso, I know an iPad isn’t considered a “medically durable device”- any comments (or rebuttals) on this? However, this is an “older” student, not an early literacy learner. I have another student currently using PLQ2G, and honestly I’m not overly impressed. Another option (which my Special Ed Director bought up) is ProLoQuo2Go. I completed a (free) device feature matching questionnaire, and my first choice is the Accent 1000 with LAMP (which I admittedly do not know much about).
She can work an iPad, but she struggles with spelling. She has (comparatively) good receptive language. Since she is doing a work-based program out of our district, and continues to qualify for services on her IEP, the team’s main concern is safety in situations where she doesn’t know her communication partner/environment, and any of the above situations where she cannot communicate effectively.
She has high palatial arch, non-phoneme specific nasal emissions, and just general low speech intelligibility. This student doesn’t have a solid dx it doesn’t fall into any known syndromes but doctors report it does have a genetic basis. My student is 19, severe-profound DCD, some verbal speech which is often severely negated when she is with unfamiliar speakers/environments, low motivation to communicate, and overall low speech intelligibility due to anatomical and functional differences. I’m going into a meeting this week to discuss AAC needs with one of my students.
0 kommentar(er)
