Search

Facilitated communication (FC) has been a heavily debated and documented topic across multiple disciplines, including sociology, education, psychology, pediatrics, speech-language pathology, and disability studies. Although many professionals from various disciplines and advocates have offered opinions, suggestions, and research on the topic, there has been minimal input from the occupational therapy (OT) profession. The lack of OT input is noteworthy as OTs are experts in enabling upper extremity performance and independence through a variety of training, adaptation and modification strategies, and use of external supports. Because of their professional code of ethics and a specific knowledge base, OTs are uniquely positioned to provide a host of ethical and evidence-based strategies that enable independent access to communication technology. The consideration of multiple access options is contrary to the typical facilitated encounter where facilitators exclusively choose to manipulate an upper extremity in order for letters to be selected on a display or keyboard. The purpose of this paper is threefold: (a) To offer insight into the standard of care by OTs including their ethical standards; (b) to identify varied accommodations that enable access using a feature-matching standard of care that eliminates the need for a facilitator; and (c) to highlight how to increase independent assistive technology/augmentative and alternative communication access, thus dissuading the need or use of facilitated access to letters. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In recent years, networking and collaboration have become increasingly popular in education. However, there is at present a lack of attention to the theoretical basis of networking, which could illuminate when and when not to network and under what conditions networks are likely to be successful. In this paper, we will attempt to sketch the theoretical background to networking drawing on work in sociology, psychology, and business studies and looking at 4 main theoretical frameworks: constructivism, social capital theory, Durkheimian network theory, and the concept of New Social Movements. We will also explore differences between networks on a number of factors such as goals, activities, density, spread, and power relations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In order to teach on the basis of the genetic approach. one should undertake an analysis consisting of the following two stages: (I) a genetic elaboration of the subject matter and (2) an analysis of the arrangement of the material. including a consideration of various ways of representing it and its effect on students. The genetic elaboration of subject mailer consists of the analysis of the subject From tour points of view: historical, logical. psychological, and socio-cultural. Also important is the epistemological analysis of the subject. This paper describes the design of the system of study of the concepts of Euclidean ring and equivalence relation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper is a response to Harker & May 1987 which rejects as inaccurate and misleading their 'exposition' of the theory, the analysis of the place of rules in the theory, the analysis of what is taken to be its structuralist base, and shows how forms of the practical sense may be realised in, and described by, the theory. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]