This study investigated current trends in communication intervention and augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) in southern India through a mixed-methods design. Study participants (N = 18) were special educators, speech-language pathologists, and behavior therapists. Responses from the questionnaire were quantitatively analyzed. Open-ended interview questions were recorded and qualitatively analyzed for emergent themes. The results are presented as descriptive statistics and insights. Some prevalent perspectives conveyed by the participants include that (a) communication intervention should be a structured, child-centric process, using a collaborative team model; (b) parents play an integral role in decision making and intervention; (c) because of the diversity that exists in India, cultural and linguistic issues are imperative in decision making and intervention; (d) use of better materials and technology can improve intervention; (e) better training programs are needed; and (f) more conference, workshops, seminars are required as a common platform for professionals to learn and interact.
AnnamalaiE. (2004). Medium of power: The question of English in education in India. In TollefsonJ. W.TsuiA. B. M. (Eds.), Medium of instruction policies. Which agenda? Whose agenda? (pp. 177–194). London: Lawrence Erlbaum.
2.
AppletonJ. V. (1995). Analyzing qualitative interview data: Addressing issues of validity and reliability. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 22(5), 993–997.
3.
BabingtonC. (2000, March25). Clinton urges India high-tech leaders to help poor. Washington Post, p. A17.
4.
BridgesS. J. (2004). Multicultural issues in augmentative and alternative communication and language: Research to practice. Topics in Language Disorders, 24, 62–75.
ChoudhuryR. A.GamkharS.GhoseA. (1990). The Indian economy and its performance since independence. Delhi: Oxford University Press.
7.
FrostL.BondyA. (1992). PECS: The Picture Exchange Communication System training manual. Cherry Hill, NJ: Pyramid Educational Consultants.
8.
Giffard-LindsayK (Ed.). (2007). Inclusive education in India: Interpretation, implementation, and issues (Consortium for Research on Educational Access, Transitions and Equity, Pathways to Access Series Monograph No. 15). Sussex, UK: University of Sussex, Centre for International Education.
9.
Government of India. (1998). Guidelines for funding projects. Haryana, India: Ministry of Welfare, National Handicapped Finance and Development Corporation.
10.
HuerM. B.SaenzT. I. (2003). Challenges and strategies for conducting survey and focus group research with culturally diverse groups. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 12(2), 209–220.
11.
HuerM. B.SotoG. (1996, August). Critical emerging issues in AAC across cultures. Paper presented at the 7th biennial conference of the International Society for Augmentative and Alternative Communication, Vancouver, Canada.
12.
JangiraN. K. (1995). Rethinking teacher education. Prospects, 25(2), 261–272.
13.
JangiraN. K. (1997). Special education: Fifth survey of educational research 1988–1992. New Delhi: National Council of Educational Research and Training.
14.
JohnsonR. (1981). The Picture Communication System. Solana Beach, CA: Mayer-Johnson.
15.
JulkaA. (2005, August). Educational provisions and practices for learners with disabilities in India. Paper presented at the Inclusive and Supportive Education Congress, Glasgow, UK.
16.
KumarS. (1999). Understanding India. India Perspectives, 8(4), 25–42.
17.
LeCompteM. D. (2000). Analyzing qualitative data. Theory Into Practice, 39(3), 146–154.
18.
LeCompteM. D.GoetzJ. P. (1982). Problems of reliability and validity in ethnographic research. Review of Educational Research, 52(1), 31.
19.
LloydL. L.FullerD. R.ArvidsonH. H. (1997). Augmentative and alternative communication: A handbook of principles and practices. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
20.
MazumdarJ. (1998). Towards mainstreaming the disabled. Connects, 18(18), 4–7.
Ministry of Law, Justice and Company Affairs. (1995). The Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act (DL 33004/96). New Delhi: Government of India.
National Council of Educational Research and Training. (1999). Sixth All India Educational Survey. New Delhi: Author.
27.
PandaK. C. (1996). Research in special education: A perspective. Indian Educational Review, 31(2), 1–16.
28.
RaoL. G. (2008). Education of persons with intellectual disabilities in India. Salud pública de México, 50(2), S205–S212.
29.
SingalN. (2005). Mapping the field of inclusive education: A review of the Indian literature. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 9(4), 331–350.
30.
SrinivasanB.KarlanG. R. (1997). Culturally responsive early intervention programs: Issues in India. International Journal of Disability, Development, and Education, 44, 367–385.
31.
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. (1994). The Salamanca Statement and framework for action on special needs education, 2008. Retrieved from http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0009/000984/098427eo.pdf
32.
WolpertS. A. (1991). India. Berkeley: University of California Press.
