Philip Schweigert

Philip Schweigert, M.Ed.  began working with children with sensory and multiple disabilities in 1977 in Portland, Oregon. After serving as both a classroom teacher and later, program chair, he spent 22 years as project coordinator on numerous research and demonstration efforts to investigate assessment and intervention  strategies in communication and cognitive  skill development in individuals with severe disabilities. Philip has authored and co-authored articles for refereed journals  as well as curriculum materials through the Design to Learn  project of Oregon Health & Sciences University. He subsequently served as a consultant, lead teacher,  deaf-blind project consultant,  and affiliate university instructor.  He is recently  retired from the University of New Mexico where he  worked as a consultant for the state’s deaf-blind project.  Philip continues to  provide  consultations and trainings nationally in the area of communication strategies for learners with significant disabilities .

Transcript

[Robin Greenfield] Welcome to the Idaho Project for Children and Youth with Deaf-Blindness podcast series. This project provides training and consultation to service providers and families of children and young adults who have a combined vision and hearing loss. My name is Robin Greenfield and I am your host. In this series, you will hear from some of the most well respected experts in the field of deaf-blindness.

Good morning! Our fourth podcast in the Idaho Project series is with Phil Schweigert. Phil has been a teacher, a writer, a researcher, and a consultant, and is well known in the field of deaf-blindness for his work in the area of communication. Welcome, Phil. I'm so happy you could join me today.

[Phil Schweigert] Oh, thank you for the opportunity, Robin.

[Robin] So let's begin by you talking about how you got into the field of education.

[Phil] Okay, well. I'll tell you what. I was thinking about that and it's certainly not a straight line. When I was a kid, I wanted to be a milkman or a fireman. And that kind of changed, obviously. My father was a minister. And I do recall a time when I saw him doing hand-in-hand signing with the parishioner. And that was an interesting observation for a youngster. 

In high school, I went to school with several friends and teammates that were deaf, hard of hearing, John and Bob and Dale and Prudie. My sister actually earned a master's degree in deaf education as well. But again, like I said, my plan wasn't a very straight line. I started out thinking theology when I hit college, then physical therapy maybe, and then to be a cabinet maker, and then railroad. So yeah, like I said, not a straight line. 

But my own graduate studies eventually took me into the field of deaf education, with periodic breaks to go back to the railroad to make enough money for tuition, you know. So I ended up with a master's degree in Deaf Ed. And at that juncture, I pretty quickly decided that I wanted to work with kids with severe disabilities. And I did so for a number of years working with kids with sensory and multiple disabilities. You know, it was a pretty diverse population, as you know. And so it warranted, you know, additional studies, looking at sensory processing issues, looking at motor development, looking at vision development, and how that affects or impacts the kids we're working with. And but, you know, when it came to communication instruction, back in that time, if they didn't talk, we taught them sign language, or we attempted to, right? 

[Robin] Yes, absolutely. 

[Phil] And it you know, it really reflects not only the time, but I think my ignorance about communication. And I'll tell you, the bottom line was an extremely frustrating experience, both for the children, as well as for myself as an educator trying to provide them some means for communication. So I think we can all relate to that if we've been in the field long enough to recall those days.

[Robin] Absolutely. So the whole area of, again, you just talked about how you have been working with children or your background at a certain time with multiple disabilities, including deaf blindness for a long time, and again, in the area of communication. So did it just sort of naturally morph into that area of communication? Or did you all of a sudden say, “Boy, that's an area I want to target, particularly for kids at that pre-symbolic level?”

[Phil] No, I can't say it was just a natural transition. But what happened in the early 80s was, I was given the opportunity to be part of a national Consortium, looking at communication development in young children with deaf blindness. And the program I was working in was the largest program in the state serving children with dual sensory impairments. And I happened to be, at that time, Program Manager, so they needed someone to work within the public schools to kind of serve as a liaison with the project and help identify and coordinate services. So that was an amazing moment, I think, and a point of transition for me. You know, when you think about that group, back in the 80s, I mean it included people like Dr. Charity Rowland and Kat Stremel and Dr. Doug Guess,Ellen Siegel, David Yoder,Pam Mathy-Laikko, Maddy Appel, a name you remember, I’m sure. 

[Robin] Oh, yes. Incredible group of people. Yes.

[Phil] Yeah, yeah. So now within two years, then I did resign my position with the public schools and went on to join this research team. So for 22 years, I then had the chance to work with Dr. Charity Rowland and learn from her. And I think that pretty much was my immersion into communication.

[Robin] Into communication. Wow. Lucky you.

[Phil] Yeah, yeah, yep. But like you said, you know, it's kind of an opportunity to do something, too, about your frustrations as a teacher and learning, realizing, that you - there might be some other way to make this happen for those guys, those kids.

[Robin] Exactly. Well you're really recognized as one of the experts in the country, perhaps the world, along with some other folks who focused on assessments and strategies for developing communication systems, particularly for those children at that pre-symbolic level. Can you talk a little bit about what that term means? And how it fits into the different levels of communication?

[Phil] Yeah, I think so. I'll give it a shot. But I want to clarify something - I'm certainly not an expert.

[Robin] I don’t know (laughter), I would argue with that. I think a lot of people would. 

[Phil] So back to the term pre-symbolic. And I think, you know, there's one word that would probably summarize that best, and that is foundation. You know, it's the foundation for communication for understanding what it takes to communicate. And it's there. In our kids, it may need to be nurtured for sure. But it is there long before they use their first word, or they use their first sign or point to their first picture, you know? And I think that, you know, again, when I think back, communication instruction at that point, to me meant teaching symbols. And clearly, I hadn't at that point really considered beyond that what it takes to communicate. 

So you think about your kids, and you think about certain students, you know, that really stick in your mind. And one guy – Ben - three years old, visually impaired, hearing impaired, significantly hearing impaired and legally - totally blind, I'm sorry. He had been immersed in sign language since he was diagnosed. So at least a year and a half. And by the time he was three, he was not exhibiting a single sign expressively. And in fact, he became tactually defensive, withdrawing from people who are trying to assist him to form those signs, okay? And I thought, you know, boy, you look at this guy, and you think, nobody's listening to him. Nobody's listening to him, right? And when you consider things like Werner and Kaplan's work and realize that, so much of our effort has been focused on the means of expression, but we have ignored relationships. We have ignored access to the world, to topics to communicate about. And we have ignored whether or not that child has a sense of self - who he is and how he relates, how he controls the world around him. And so it's pretty humbling. But it's also eye opening, I think. 

So, you know, really, at that juncture, then it's really time to rethink what it takes to communicate. And, you know, again, that's what pre-symbolic is all about. This is where we learn what it takes to communicate, that that idea that there is somebody out there that gets me; there is somebody out there that is able and accessible to me to share experiences with me. You know, John McDonald said, “the sharing of a common world is essential for a communicative relationship.” And for our kids with those sensory impairments, it is essential because we are their access point to that world around them. We are how they gain those experiences and develop those interests and preferences that give them something to want to communicate about. And I think that this is all happening pre-symbolically. Yeah, it is foundation.

[Robin] Well, and I love that you use that word foundation. I try to emphasize that when I go out and see teachers and see children, and you know, it's like a new term because people have jumped so far ahead, because that's where they think they should be going. But I'm always trying to pull them back to do exactly what you who - I've always learned so much from how you've approached your work. And that foundation is absolutely key and a keyword to talk about. Yes. Yeah, for sure.

[Phil] I think it takes us to one last point, which is what Warren and Yoder referred to as that pivotal juncture, which is where that child makes the transition between purposeful behavior and intentionally communicative behavior. And you know, when you think about it, that's where all the pieces come together. That's where that child figures out that this is what it takes to communicate. And you know, from there on, I think movement forward movement into symbolic communication is a far easier, you know, transition.

[Robin] It’s a far easier road. Yeah, yeah. Well, and you also often refer to social contingency awareness. Can you explain why that is important in building a child's communication skills? You started on it, but can you talk about it a little further? 

[Phil] I think so. Yeah. I mean, contingency awareness is the awareness that your behavior matters. That you can cause things to happen, that you can affect change. You know, Watson said, it's critical for future learning. You know, and when you think about it, if we didn't recognize that our behavior mattered, why would we bother trying? And you know, and then you look at the flip side of that, and Martin Seligman says, you know, people who have stopped trying are demonstrating this learned helplessness. They have learned that their behavior doesn't matter. So I think recognizing your ability to affect change is critical for moving ahead, for wanting to engage in that world. You think about our kids. And you think about how challenging that discovery is for kids with profound disabilities with limited doable movements, and who may not be able to see or hear or physically experience the impact of their behaviors. How tough is it then to connect themselves to that world and to have that awareness of? So yeah, I think it's huge.

[Robin] And why should they try? Absolutely, and very easy to just stop when no one's recognizing their effort. Being as subtle as it may be. Absolutely.

[Phil] Ed Zuromski – I don't know if you remember that name, back in the late 70s. Active stimulation programming. You know, he came out and said, “You know, there is a way to use the technology to create an environment that is more contingently responsive to these kids, so that they make that connection, or so that they're able to demonstrate what they know they can do, but we've been missing.” And so that was watershed for me. That was enormously important. And we began to replicate that in my classroom with my kids. We fast forward, you know, several years. And now Dr. Rowland and I are crafting an investigation, looking at the use of this same technology as a way to create a social contingency awareness in our kids. The realization that your behavior matters to other people, that you can act on and expect a response from other people, not just from things. 

And you know, so I run this idea by Zuromski and he says, “no, you can't do it.” And he says, “the difference is that the physical world is predictable. The social world is not predictable.” Which to me begs the question, well, then how on earth are our kids supposed to make the connection with other people? If it is so unpredictable, how are we expecting them to realize that their behavior matters? 

And so, you know, we went ahead, we didn't take the “no.” We went ahead and conducted a three year study. And yeah, you bet. Our kids could demonstrate that. And I think, you know, as important as anything is, when our kids demonstrate that competency, how different the world begins to look at them. Does that make sense? Yeah, absolutely. We see these kids totally differently when we suddenly discovered how competent they are. And I think that is very, very important for our kids.

[Robin] Yes, absolutely. And I think, you know, it plays off what obviously other people in this series have said, David, you know, Tanny, Maurice, about being good observers - about really being paying attention to things that we don't always pay attention and you know, those are some, including yourself, some of the key people that are able to teach teachers or model for people how to be good observers and pay attention to those very subtle behaviors that are giving you that information. And that it's a goldmine when you discover that. 

[Phil] Yes, it is. I mean, they are a tremendous teacher for us. If we just allow that to happen. Yep. Okay, I would just I would just add this one last point about the technology. I think it's really critical. And I think you've seen it as well, and all your travels around Idaho, and where else, that the technology sometimes becomes an end. It becomes our goal. And that, to me is a mistake. The technology is simply a tool. And it should always force us to ask the next question. It should always encourage us to look beyond what that child is now showing us he can do and ask, what else can you do? And to the extent that that technology will serve in that discovery, great, but it's simply a tool.

[Robin] It’s simply a tool. And I think, Phil, that's such an important point that you make, because I often go - and, you know, you can't fault people because this is what they've learned. But you go in, and then automatically someone has given a child a switch. Well, because they don't know what else to do with the child. And it's like, I'm like, “No, no, no, no.” You're several steps ahead of where you need to be, and you're not thinking about, and then again, trying to go back to build that foundation, and emphasize that something like a switch is not communication. Number one, necessarily. That's down the road a bit. But I just see that so often. But again, going back to they just don't know what else to do. So the switch comes into their mind automatically. Yeah. Yeah. So I replicate what you say all the time. 

So what are some of the strategies that you suggest to parents and teachers, when they're trying to move a child? You know, I'm moving ahead a little bit. But from that pre-symbolic level to a more symbolic level. If that is the moment. Are there particular things you look for or say to teachers, “you looking for this?” as you start to make that transition?

[Phil] Yeah, yeah, I think about that a lot. I think about whether or not they've put all those pieces together. Is it clear in your observation from that learner, that he knows that he is deliberately directing his behavior, his attempts to communicate to somebody else? So does he know it's important to have somebody to communicate with? Does he have something to say? Is it clear in his attempt that he is trying to get a point across? And, you know, does he have a way to do it that's reliable for him? That's doable for him. You know, that's detectable for you. 

You think about that - I kind of run through some of those bullet points that Weatherby and Prizant talked about back in the 90s. You know, you look for that intent. I mean, you look for a persistence, if you will. If that child has something to say he's going to keep plugging away at it until he gets his point across. Yeah? You're going to look for a child who has the means to change the way he's trying to get his point across. If strategy A isn't working, that kind of repair. You look for evidence that there is a direct attempt to engage somebody else. That, you know, we call it joint attention, or one of the obvious examples they give is this alternating gaze. Well, you know, that's not the only strategy guys, you know. Eye contact might be overrated sometimes - for our kids particularly. 

Yeah, the point is, what are they doing to get you into the conversation? That's a critical piece. So some of those things are the signals I would be looking for as we talk about making that transition. You know, again, I think you go back and I mentioned Ben already. And I'm not sure that he ever evidenced topics that were motivating to him, you know. He was being imposed on with topics that we wanted him to communicate about. He was, I mean, we never gave him the opportunity to evoke our attention. We were always demanding his. And so for him, I think I would have to say we needed some more work foundationally. 

You know, then I think about somebody like Travis. Ten years old, deafblind, rubella, young man. That's when we first met him in the public school setting. He'd been in a state school learning sign, not very well, given the opportunity to do that anyway. But his primary mode of communication was behavior. It was injurious to other people, and self-injurious. And that, you know, really speaks of the frustration. I mean, clearly the intent to get a point across was there. But he didn't have the means to successfully do it and had then to resort to these other strategies. 

Another guy is Dean, thirty-seven years old when he comes out of the institution. He is deafblind as well. He was institutionalized from the time he was nine. He came out of that institution and with one sign - it was coffee. And, but I think I was excited about it being coffee, because I figured he and I could relate on that level, you know. But what he struck me as being is somebody who’d pretty much just given up. He was pretty docile. He was pretty easygoing. Didn't really seem to have any desire to engage. But he was okay with being engaged. 

You know, and so each one of those guys tells me a different story about that transition, and how, you know, the need for making that change, it might manifest itself in in our kids. So, you know, you think about not only what's holding them up and making that change, but also what's going to move them forward. I mean that's our job as practitioners, not just researchers, but what's going to move them forward? All right, that's what our job is.

[Robin] And how to give that information that’s sustainable to other people. And give those things. Yes, absolutely. So given all the work you've done, do you have a favorite resource you'd like to give to teachers and parents? And it can be one of your own in your case. That's fine. But do you have something you suggest if you had one or two that you would give to teachers and or parents to sort of enhance the work that you've been talking about doing?

[Phil] Well, we touched on one of them, and that resource is our learners. Our students. You know, who is a better teacher than those guys?

[Robin] (Laughter) I love that! Absolutely. Yeah. 

[Phil] Who is better prepared to show us what they need, what they want, then they are? And so it challenges us to go into these things eyes open and be good observers and engage them and be willing to learn from them. I mean, we don't know it all. We do not know it all. This is not a homogeneous group of kids. Thankfully. They’re individuals and they each have a different story. And, you know, so yeah, I think definitely, it's our learners.

[Robin] That's a perfect answer, Phil. It's a perfect answer. And really emphasizes again, how, you know, we aren't just looking through a lot of books and things. It's really the focus is on the child and our skills to be able to be good observers and pay good attention. And yes.

[Phil] I would say one other resource that I would encourage people to avail themselves of is the research. The literature. Because this group - because all of our kids - and particularly those kids with significant and multiple disabilities are so unique, so individual, no one size is going to fit all. No one strategy is going to work for every kid. And so you have to be students. You know, you have to - even after you've gotten your degrees and you've gotten your tenure and all of that stuff, you are still a student. And avail yourself of the literature. And be skeptical. Scrutinize it. Ask the questions, you know, that's your job. So yeah, those two things.

[Robin] And again, such good advice and advice that isn't always given to everybody, you know, we're looking for other things. So yeah, I appreciate you saying both those things. So finally, is there a quote or two that you think reflects you and your work all these years?

[Phil] Yeah, I think so. It's more life in general than it is specifically my career. But I think it applies. One is Albert Einstein. He said, “Life is like riding a bicycle. To keep your balance, you must keep moving.” And to me moving equates to thinking, learning, trying, and failing, you know, and reassessing. Being willing to reassess and try something a different way. 

And I think the other one would probably be – I’ll probably butcher the name here, but it's Father Pierre Chardin. And he says, “Above all, trust in the slow work of God.” And you know, to me, that's about patience with yourself. Becoming is a process. And so you know, I didn't end up being a milkman; I didn't end up being a fireman, or a cabinet maker. But, you know, I guess I'm still in the process of becoming so who knows. Right? But yeah, I think recognizing. It doesn't mean being passive. It doesn't mean sitting back and waiting for things to happen. It means recognizing that you may not get it right the first time and that you have to go back in and be willing to acknowledge that and change because it's a process.

[Robin] It's a process. Well, Phil, I could talk to you all day. As you well know, this is my favorite topic about children with communication issues, and pre-symbolic children and I am so thrilled that you are part of this podcast series and that there are people all over the country, they're going to hear your voice one more time. And I really, really thank you for being here today.

[Phil] Well, I thank you so much for the opportunity, Robin. 

[Robin] Thank you. Bye.