BeukelmanD.MirendaP. (2013). Augmentative and alternative communication: Supporting children and adults with complex communication needs. Brookes.
2.
BhanaN.McNaughtonD.LightJ. (2019, January 31). Visual scene displays (VSD) to promote early literacy skills with children with complex communication needs. Poster session at the Assistive Technology Industry Association Conference, Orlando, FL, United States.
3.
BoyleS. (2018). The effects of digital texts with transition to literacy features on the sight word recognition skills of young children with disabilities (Publication No. 13803930) [Doctoral dissertation, Pennsylvania State University, University Park]. ProQuest Dissertations.
4.
BoyleS.McCoyA.McNaughtonD.LightJ. (2017). Using digital texts in interactive reading activities for children with language delays and disorders: A review of the research literature and pilot study. Seminars in Speech and Language, 38(4), 263–275. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0037-1604274
5.
BoyleS. A.McNaughtonD.ChapinS. E. (2019). Effects of shared reading on the early language and literacy skills of children with autism spectrum disorders: A systematic review. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 34(4), 205–214. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088357619838276
6.
BoyleS.McNaughtonD.LightJ.BabbS.ChapinS.E. (2020). The effects of shared e-book reading with dynamic text and speech output on the sight word recognition skills of young children with developmental disabilities. Manuscript submitted for publication.
7.
BrowderD. M.MimsP. J.SpoonerF.Ahlgrim-DelzellL.LeeA. (2008). Teaching elementary students with multiple disabilities to participate in shared stories. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 33(1/2), 3–12. https://doi.org/10.2511/rpsd.33.1-2.3
8.
CarleE. (1969). The very hungry caterpillar. Cleveland, OH: World.
9.
CaronJ.LightJ.DavidoffB. E.DragerK. D. (2017). Comparison of the effects of mobile technology AAC apps on programming visual scene displays. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 33(4), 239–248. https://doi.org/10.1080/07434618.2017.1388836
10.
CaronJ.LightJ.DragerK. (2016). Operational demands of AAC mobile technology applications on programming vocabulary and engagement during professional and child interactions. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 32(1), 12–24. https://doi.org/10.3109/07434618.2015.1126636
Dr. Seuss. (1960). Green eggs and ham. New York, NY: Random House.
13.
DragerK. D.LightJ.CurrallJ.MuttiahN.SmithV.KreisD.Nilam-HallA.ParrattD.SchuesslerK.ShermettaK.WiscountJ. (2019). AAC technologies with visual scene displays and “just in time” programming and symbolic communication turns expressed by students with severe disability. Journal of Intellectual & Developmental Disability, 44(3), 321–336. https://doi.org/10.3109/13668250.2017.1326585
14.
GanzJ. B.HongE. R.GillilandW.MorinK.SvenkerudN. (2015). Comparison between visual scene displays and exchange-based communication in augmentative and alternative communication for children with ASD. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 11, 27–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rasd.2014.11.005
15.
GevarterC.O’ReillyM. F.RojeskiL.SammarcoN.SigafoosJ.LancioniG. E.LangR. (2014). Comparing acquisition of AAC-based mands in three young children with autism spectrum disorder using iPad® applications with different display and design elements. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 44, 2464–2474. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-014-2115-9
16.
GilkersonJ.RichardsJ. A.ToppingK. J. (2017). The impact of book reading in the early years on parent–child language interaction. Journal of Early Childhood Literacy, 17(1), 92–110. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468798415608907
17.
GolloherA. N. (2018). Adapted shared storybook reading: A study of its application for children with autism spectrum disorders in home settings. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 33(1), 35–46. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088357616681281
18.
HolyfieldC.CaronJ.LightJ.McNaughtonD. (2019). Effect of video embedded with hotspots with dynamic text on single-word recognition by children with multiple disabilities. Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities, 31, 727–740. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10882-019-09673-5
19.
HolyfieldC.BrooksS.SchlutermanA. (2019). Comparative effects of high-tech visual scene displays and low-tech isolated picture symbols on engagement from students with multiple disabilities. Language, speech, and hearing services in schools, 50, 693-702. https://doi.org/10.1044/2019_LSHSS-19-0007
20.
HolyfieldC.DragerK.LightJ.CaronJ. G. (2017). Typical toddlers’ participation in “just-in-time” programming of vocabulary for visual scene display augmentative and alternative communication apps on mobile technology: A descriptive study. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 26(3), 737–749. https://doi.org/10.1044/2017_ajslp-15-0197
21.
JusticeL. M.KaderavekJ. (2002). Using shared storybook reading to promote emergent literacy. TEACHING Exceptional Children, 34(4), 8–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/004005990203400401
22.
JusticeL. M.KaderavekJ.BowlesR.GrimmK. (2005). Language impairment, parent—child shared reading, and phonological awareness: a feasibility study. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 25(3), 143–156. https://doi.org/10.1177/02711214050250030201
23.
JohnstonS. S.O’KeeffeB. V.StokesK. (2018). Early literacy support for students with physical disabilities and complex communication needs. TEACHING Exceptional Children, 51(2), 91–99. https://doi.org/10.1177/0040059918802808
24.
Kent-WalshJ.BingerC.HashamZ. (2010). Effects of parent instruction on the symbolic communication of children using augmentative and alternative communication during storybook reading. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 19(2), 97–107. https://doi.org/10.1044/1058-0360(2010/09-0014)
25.
KulkofskyS.KohJ. B. K. (2009). Why they reminisce: Caregiver reports of the functions of joint reminiscence in early childhood. Memory, 17(4), 458–470. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658210902729509
26.
LightJ.BingerC.SmithA. K. (1994). Story reading interactions between preschoolers who use AAC and their mothers. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 10(4), 255–268. https://doi.org/10.1080/07434619412331276960
27.
LightJ.McNaughtonD. (2012). Literacy intervention for individuals with complex communication needs. In BeukelmanD.MirendaP. (Eds.) Augmentative and alternative communication: Supporting children and adults with complex communication needs. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co.
28.
LightJ.McNaughtonD. (2012). Supporting the communication, language, and literacy development of children with complex communication needs: State of the science and future research priorities. Assistive Technology, 24(1), 34–44. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400435.2011.648717
29.
LightJ.McNaughtonD.CaronJ. (2019). New and emerging AAC technology supports for children with complex communication needs and their communication partners: State of the science and future research directions. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 35(1), 26–41. https://doi.org/10.1080/07434618.2018.1557251
MandakK.LightJ.McNaughtonD. (2019). Digital books with dynamic text and speech output: Effects on sight word reading for preschoolers with autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 49, 1193–1204. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-018-3817-1
32.
McCarthyJ. W.BroachJ. A.BenignoJ. P. (2016). Joint attention profiles for children with Autism in interactions with augmentative and alternative communication systems. Clinical Archives of Communication Disorders, 1(1), 69–76. https://doi.org/10.21849/cacd.2016.00024
33.
MoorcroftA.ScarinciN.MeyerC. (2019). “I’ve had a love–hate, I mean mostly hate relationship with these PODD books”: Parent perceptions of how they and their child contributed to AAC rejection and abandonment. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/17483107.2019.1632944.
National Institute for Literacy. (2008). Developing early literacy: Report of the national early literacy panel: Executive summary. A scientific synthesis of early literacy development and implications for intervention. https://lincs.ed.gov/publications/pdf/NELPSummary.pdf
36.
OlinA. R.ReichleJ.JohnsonL.MonnE. (2010). Examining dynamic visual scene displays: Implications for arranging and teaching symbol selection. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 19(4), 284–297. https://doi.org/10.1044/1058-0360(2010/09-0001)
37.
RobertsM. Y.KaiserA. P. (2011). The effectiveness of parent-implemented language interventions: A meta-analysis. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 20, 180-199. https://doi.org/10.1044/1058-0360(2011/10-0055)
38.
SpectorJ. E. (2011). Sight word instruction for students with autism: An evaluation of the evidence base. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 41, 14111422. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-010-1165-x
39.
StoneJ. P.RiveraC. J.WeissS. L. (2018). Literacy-rich environments for young students with significant developmental disabilities. Young Exceptional Children, 21(4), 191–203. https://doi.org/10.1177/1096250616674330
40.
TherrienM. C.LightJ. (2016). Using the iPad to facilitate interaction between preschool children who use AAC and their peers. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 32(3), 163–174. https://doi.org/10.1080/07434618.2016.1205133
41.
von TetzchnerS.BrekkeK. M.SjøthunB.GrindheimE. (2005). Constructing preschool communities of learners that afford alternative language development. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 21(2), 82–100. https://doi.org/10.1080/07434610500103541
42.
Wood JacksonC.WahlquistJ.MarquisC. (2011). Visual supports for shared reading with young children: The effect of static overlay design. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 27(2), 91–102. https://doi.org/10.3109/07434618.2011.576700