ABCDEFGJKLMNOP
1
Timestamp
Please list the symbol picture libraries which you have heard of
Please list the symbol libraries you have seen used on a communicator's device
Please list the symbol libraries you have used when creating support materials
Please list any criteria you feel are generally important in the selection and implementation of a symbol libraryPlease share a brief analysis of each of the symbol libraries you are familiar with, pros and cons, based on your real-world experience
Are you comfortable with your answers being shared publicly as part of the results of this survey?
Anything else you think we should know about you? (won't be shared publicly)
2
11/14/2019 15:33:18
Lessonpix, boardmaker, symbolstyx, lamp
BoardmakerLessonpix, boardmakerExact representation of word when possible, simple, straight forward, understandable by all communication partners with minimal training of the symbols, appealing to the communicatorBoardmaker: Pros-well known, straightforward representations mostly variety. Cons-not always appealing to students. Lessonpix: Pros-straightforward representations, variety, editable. Cons-lacking symbols for some commonly used wordsYesNo :)
3
11/14/2019 18:06:40Yes
4
12/10/2019 12:38:26abc
5
12/10/2019 14:44:17
Pixon, symbolstix, boardmaker, lessonpix, makaton
Pixon, boardmaker, symbolstix
Boardmaker, symbolstix, lessonpix
Huge available vocab., price, familiarity to those I work with and train, cultural (representative) variety of people, ability to be understood by non readers and those unfamiliar with symbol set
Pixon: these are a theoretically fabulous idea and as a former linguists major I think they are super cool. But I rarely recommend devices with them because our alphabet is one symbol library, AAC in and of itself is another language and their lack of concrete and understandability by the average person makes them my last choice. I have only ever used them on things other than a device when I was making teaching materials for those who is the devices. Boardmaker symbols are the most widely recognized symbols, and what I have used most of my career. But once they went to having to pay a yearly fee and not making new additions districts I worked for moved away from them. I only ever use them in stuff I already have made. I now have my own practice and won’t be paying for the yearly subscription because there aren’t enough advantages to warrant the highest price for yearly subscriptions. I like Symbolstix symbols best, I find them to be representative, they make sense, updates and robust vocabulary. I see them most often on devices these days. That said, their library of shared user materials is poor and they still cost too much for a yearly subscription. Lessonpix has a robust representative vocabulary, and a large shared user set of pre-made activities. The yearly cost is affordable both for SLPs and families. I want to be using symbol sets families can afford to have access to. The only downside is they never appear on devices. They are my choice for my private practice.
YesNo!
6
12/10/2019 18:05:20
Boardmaker, symbolstix, LessonPix, CoughDrop based which pulls from multiple open sources
Symbolstix, Boardmaker PCS, some open within CoughDrop
LessonPix, used to use boardmaker, symbol search from Google, images from user
Available in multiple settings, so that it can be used to create materials, on AAC devices, and in low tech systems
Online Boardmaker is a disaster technology functioning wise and it is cost prohibitive. LessonPix is not available in AAC except low tech or CoughDrop. Symbolstix is seeming to be more universally used across apps.
Yes
7
12/13/2019 21:26:19
Boardmaker, Symbolstix, LessonPix
Symbolstix
Symbolstix and Boardmaker
Free, great versatility, black and white as well as color, not cluttered, clear simple drawings, the symbols make sense
SymbolStyx and Boardmaker are both good but sometimes the programs that you use to get the symbols isn't always quick and easy. I find that sometimes the pictures don't make sense to the students either and there are pictures that aren't always available. It is also a guessing game at times to find what the picture was called.
Yes
I am a special education teacher and mentor teacher to other special education teachers. I have always had several different AAC devices in use over the years. I used low tech boards as well as have boards posted all over the classroom. I also use the Boardmaker and occasional SymbolStyx programs to make difficult material accessible to all students.
8
12/19/2019 18:04:49
PECS, board maker, PODD, LAMP, proloquo2go, google images (lol)
LAMP, prloquo2go, board maker/PODD/PECS for low-tech systems
PECS, board maker, PODD, LAMP, prolquo2go
The user's communication needs, level of participation and skill/ability to grow skills and rate of growth, the system with which the user connects most to/can understand and use easier, how easily accessible the system is for the user/their family, the system that fits better with the user's goals
LAMP: p = wide variety of language (-ed, -ing etc.), communications are likely to make more sense e.g. "I went running" as opposed to "I run", 3 steps maximum to final destination. c = price for some families without a great deal of funding, can be harder to learn in the beginning for some clients
Proloquo2Go: p = simple pictures and easy to locate most used words on first page, great for basic communication needs, easier to learn the system for most people. c = limited language abilities (see LAMP above), images not suited as well to adults, can take more than 3 steps to final destination.
PODD: p= doesnt have 'technical difficulties', can contain the same relevant words/symbols as high-tech devices, easy to carry around, images can be personalised for the user easily. c = can be hard for an untrained/unfamiliar person to understand communication by the user, not as easily adaptable as the user grows older (needing to make new pages, print, bind, remove old pages, rebind etc)
PECS: p = doesnt have 'technical difficulties', can contain the same relevant words/symbols as high-tech devices, helps to increase initiation from users (especially if this is a goal), great for involving lots of different people in the user's communication. c = again can be harder for untrained/unfamiliar people to understand what the user is communicating, often cards get lost or damaged (especially if the user demonstrates destructive challenges e.g. ripping or biting etc), one of the harder systems for parents/carers to be consistent with.
Yes
Speechie working in Australia :)
9
9/1/2020 10:35:17
PCS, SymbolStix, Minspeak
PCS, SymbolStix, Minspeak
PCS mostly
previous experience with symbolset
I truly feel the symbols don't matter as much as the location/motor planning piece.
Yes
10
2/17/2021 19:04:56
Symbolstix, PCS, widgit, smarty symbols, mulberry, ARASAAC, METACOM, pics for PECS, blissymbols
I personally use PCS, but would like to experiment with widgit and mulberry at some point
PCS
A lot of symbols (12,000+), aesthetically pleasing, understandable, intuitive
Yes
I am a speaking autistic person who’s just starting out with using AAC
11
5/21/2021 10:27:16
Open symbols, smarty symbols, board maker, minspeak
Minspeak, board maker, smarty symbols, open symbols
Board maker, smarty symbols, open symbols
Diversity in images of people. Broad choices in symbols
Board maker is stupidly expensive, and now requires online access, which assumes everyone has the internet. Smarty symbols is my preference because of the diversity.
Yes
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100