di: RPM

Mon Sep 17 17:56:02 PDT 2018

I think you should consider reading Soma's book (
https://www.amazon.com/Understanding-Autism-through-Prompting-Method/dp/1432729284/ref=sr_1_5?ie=UTF8&qid=1537231858&sr=8-5&keywords=soma+rpm).
It really clarifies the approach and challenges some of the assumptions I
had about autism.  I would not believe that RPM works if I had not seen it
work first hand.

The original purpose of my email was to see if any other people on here had
also had success using RPM.   Is there anyone else?

On Mon, Sep 17, 2018 at 1:11 PM <beals at autism-language-therapies.com> wrote:

> Hi!
>
> I am a long-time subscriber and "lurker"--a linguist with a college-aged
> son on the autism spectrum.
>
> I have recently become concerned by the resurgence of facilitated
> communication as a treatment for autism, so I've been following this
> thread with interest.
>
> RPM concerns me not only for its lack of efficacy studies, but for its
> subtle use of questionable facilitated communication methods. These
> include:
>
> (1) presenting kids with a small set of pre-selected choices, often as
> few as 2
>
> (2) holding up the choice cards or alphabet/number boards rather than
> placing them on a stationary surface or stand, which can result in
> (conscious or subconscious) signaling through positioning and movement.
>
> In a widely circulating 2012 Youtube video featuring the person credited
> with originating RMP, Soma Mukhopadhyay, along with scenes from the
> Carousel School in LA, where a study of RPM is claimed to be taking
> place, we see both of these factors at work. In addition, we see kids
> pointing at the cards or letters without actually looking at them (See,
> for example, 4:50). We see kids being asked sophisticated questions
> about American history (At 5:02, "Who were the Native Americans there at
> the time?) and being given just two cards to choose from (e.g., each
> displaying a name of a Native American tribe).
>
> Here's the link to the video:
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nfiap3a7Tuo&t=25s (especially starting
> at 4:37)
>
> We're told that these nonverbal ASD kids are being taught all core
> subjects at a 4th grade level--and the language used by their teacher
> seems consistent with that.
>
> Coincidentally, on my blog with Catherine Johnson, I've just been
> writing about the importance of Joint Attention (specifically receptive
> Joint Attention) in language learning:
>
> https://catherineandkatharine.wordpress.com/2018/09/13/autism-neurodiversity-and-language-learning-part-i/
>
> https://catherineandkatharine.wordpress.com/2018/09/17/autism-neurodiversity-and-language-learning-part-ii/
>
> (I cite this meta-analysis:
> https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/aur.1624)
>
> The premise of the RMP showcased in the Youtube video is that these
> nonverbal children, few (if any) of whom show clear signs here of
> receptive Joint Attention, have somehow learned language (and how to
> read and write it) on their own. The job of the rapid prompter appears
> to be to "unlock" them so that the pre-existing skills come to light.
>
> The danger is that many (if not all) of these kids may not be at the
> level that these RMP "results" suggest (some 6 years later, no official
> results of the Carousel study have been published in any peer-reviewed
> journals), and that they are missing out/have missed out on on much more
> promising, developmentally appropriate interventions.
>
> Perhaps there are version of RPM that differ substantially from what we
> see here (e.g., minus the facilitated communication factors and the
> limited choices for answering sophisticated history questions). If so,
> I'm curious to read more about them--really!
>
> Katharine Beals
> https://catherineandkatharine.wordpress.com
>
>
> On 2018-09-15 16:29, Jeff Galfond wrote:
> > Thanks for sharing.  I'm well aware that research for RPM is lacking.
> > However, I do think there are a lot of misconceptions.  Much like how
> > guided practice in DI is extended for several days (far past a typical
> > lesson structure) and then slowly faded, so too are prompts in RPM.
> > Students eventually are able to communicate without any prompts.
> > Prompting serves primarily to compete with self stimulation urges and
> > to help initiate actions, not to hint at what to do.
> >
> > I have used RPM successfully with a few students.  I've seen much more
> > significant results than I used to using discreet trials.  I learned
> > about RPM from a friend who was taught through this approach.  His
> > name is Ido Kedar (http://idoinautismland.com).  He communicates
> > independently without any prompts.  One of my older students is
> > nonverbal as well.  He writes poetry almost entirely independently
> > (http://samikadah.weebly.com). Over the course of four years I have
> > faded all prompts except the prompts "what do you want to say next" to
> > urge him to continue expressing himself and gestural prompts to urge
> > him to face his iPad and begin writing.  Based on my experience, I
> > believe this prompt will be no longer needed within 1 - 2 years.
> >
> > I did not mean to suggest that RPM is a research validated method.
> > However, I think given the right teacher it's an approach worth more
> > serious consideration.  We all know about the bias and unreliability
> > of most commonly excepted education "research."
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Jeff
> >
> > On Fri, Sep 14, 2018 at 11:33 AM Emily Kearney
> > <emilyrkearney at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Hi everyone,
> >>
> >> I'm a new-ish list subscriber. I'm a BCBA using Direct Instruction
> >> with many of my clients. I've been a big fan for many years and am
> >> working to learn more.
> >>
> >> Sorry for the late response to an August 17th post, but I wanted to
> >> quote ASHA's position statement on RPM: "
> >>
> >> * The scientific validity and reliability of RPM have not been
> >> demonstrated.
> >> * There is no scientific evidence supporting the assertion that
> >> messages produced using RPM reflect the communication of the person
> >> with a disability."
> >>
> >> While FC and RPM appear to be different topographically, the effect
> >> of the prompting on the person with disabilities is the same. There
> >> are many formats of AAC with a clear research history of
> >> effectiveness and no abuse or author credibility issues for people
> >> with intellectual disabilities and vocal-verbal speech challenges.
> >> Of course people can learn to type independently, but when they do,
> >> it's other aspects of the training that taught the skill, not the
> >> FC/RPM. And independent typing means being able to do it without the
> >> facilitator present in the room. I would avoid both at all costs
> >> while still providing my clients with evidence-based interventions
> >> to teach communication.
> >>
> >> http://mtb.msu.domains/facilitated-communication/
> >>
> >> http://www.baam.emich.edu/baamsciencewatch/baamfcresolutions.htm
> >>
> >> https://www.asha.org/policy/ps2018-00351/
> >>
> >> https://www.asha.org/policy/ps2018-00352/
> >>
> >> Emily Kearney, BCBA, LBA
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> di mailing list
> >> di at lists.uoregon.edu
> >> https://lists-prod.uoregon.edu/mailman/listinfo/di
> > _______________________________________________
> > di mailing list
> > di at lists.uoregon.edu
> > https://lists-prod.uoregon.edu/mailman/listinfo/di
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists-prod.uoregon.edu/pipermail/di/attachments/20180917/1bf50ee6/attachment-0001.html>