ABSTRACT At least one third of autistic people have limited or no speech. Most nonspeaking autistic people are never provided alternatives that would enable the full range of expression that speech allows, significantly limiting their access to educational, social, and employment opportunities. In this commentary, we argue that assisted methods to teach nonspeaking autistic people to type—long dismissed because the assistant could influence the text they produce during training—warrant fresh study. Although these teaching methods developed in practice rather than research, the practice (including the range of support the assistant provides in the motor, sensory, and attentional domains) is aligned with contemporary research about nonspeaking autistic people's strengths and challenges. We suggest that past research showing that influence can occur during training has been over‐interpreted to mean that influence always occurs and that nonspeaking autistic people instructed using assisted methods never learn to type independently. In fact, other research shows that influence does not always occur, and there are independent typers who attribute their skill to the range of assistance they received during training. We believe it is time to revisit assisted methods to teach typing in order to understand their potential, as well as their limits, including how successful learners became independent and for whom these methods would be a good match. These efforts have the potential to result in greater access to effective communication and better quality of life for more nonspeaking autistic people.
Jaswal et al. (Mon,) studied this question.