SOCIAL CONSTRUCTIVISM, POSITIVISM, AND FACILITATED COMMUNICATION - INVITED COMMENTARY

Facilitated communication, a technique that is said to enhance the com municative abilities of individuals with severe language impairments, has engendered much controversy. Biklen and Duchan (1994) and Green an d Shane (1994) present two sides of this controversy. Biklen and Ducha n argue that from a constructivist's perspective, the primary issue is the underlying cultural presuppositions regarding mental retardation and science rather than the efficacy of facilitated communication. Gre en and Shane present research evidence challenging the efficacy of fac ilitated communication within a positivist's framework. We present a b rief review of science as viewed through positivists' and constructivi sts' lenses. Using the framework of social constructivism adopted by B iklen and Duchan, we disagree with them on three points: (a) even thou gh the process of constructing scientific knowledge is strongly affect ed by human social, emotional, and cognitive processes, it also involv es matters of fact that cannot be ignored; (b) social constructivists' accounts of science can be accepted as descriptive without being pres criptive; (c) although we cannot prove that belief systems, including positivism and social constructivism, are true or false in the larger sense, belief systems have differential consequences for technological changes of the type that are valued by persons with severe impairment s of communication.