Facilitators and barriers to augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) adoption for children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD): Teachers' perspectives.
Teacher buy-in for AAC hinges on seeing it as useful AND easy—schools must provide hands-on training and reliable tech access.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Researchers asked 101 Saudi teachers what helps or blocks using AAC with autistic pupils. They used an online survey with 28 questions about usefulness, ease, attitude, and intent to adopt.
All teachers worked in public schools. Most taught special-ed classes. The survey took about 10 minutes to finish.
What they found
Two beliefs drive adoption: 'This tool helps my student' and 'I can use it without hassle.' When both are high, teachers say they will use AAC.
Teacher attitude acts like a volume knob. Positive feelings boost the link between 'useful + easy' and real intent to try AAC.
How this fits with other research
Balabanovska et al. (2025) asked parents the same questions about a talk therapy. Parents also needed to see value and simplicity before buying in. The pattern repeats: stakeholders first weigh effort versus payoff.
Aguirre Mtanous et al. (2026) interviewed Canadian teachers about evidence-based practices. They too cited lack of training and flaky tech as top barriers. The new Saudi data widen the map, showing the gripes are global.
Stasolla et al. (2013) proved AAC can work in single-case trials. Alhuzimi (2026) now warns that shiny devices sit in closets unless staff feel competent and supported.
Why it matters
Before you order that new speech app, audit teacher comfort first. Offer a 30-minute hands-on demo, a laminated quick-guide, and a tech help hotline. When staff leave training saying 'I can do this tomorrow,' you have cleared the real roadblock.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Schedule a 15-minute mock lesson where teachers practice one AAC function (e.g., request) with you watching and coaching live.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
BACKGROUND: Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) often experience significant challenges in verbal and social communication, which can hinder their ability to express needs, interact socially, and participate in educational settings. Augmentative and Alternative Communication (AAC) systems ranging from low-tech tools like picture exchange systems to high-tech speech-generating devices are widely used to support and enhance communication in individuals with limited or nonverbal speech abilities. AIM: This study investigated the perspective of teachers on identifying the facilitators and barriers of AAC usage using the TAM approach. METHOD: Questionnaires were completed by 101 in-service teachers from Saudi Arabia teaching with direct experience in using and supporting AAC in the classrooms. They responded to the developed questionnaire covering various types of facilitators, barriers, perceived usefulness of AAC use, perceived ease of use of AAC, teachers' attitude towards AAC, behavioral intention of teachers to use AAC, and adoption as well as implementation of AAC. The data obtained from the questionnaire were statistically analyzed using IBM SPSS software. RESULTS: The findings showed that perceived usefulness as well as perceived ease of use mediated the impact of facilitators and barriers of AAC. Moreover, teachers' attitude was also found to mediate the impact of perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use on behavioral intention to use. Along with this, the sequential mediation of perceived usefulness or ease of use with teachers' attitude was also established. CONCLUSIONS: To facilitate the effective adoption of AAC, it is imperative that educational institutions provide sustained, practice-oriented professional development, guarantee consistent and equitable access to AAC technologies, and cultivate a school culture that actively endorses and systematically integrates AAC practices across teaching teams.
Research in developmental disabilities, 2026 · doi:10.1016/j.ridd.2026.105227