Let’s say you’re in a room full of people who speak a different language. You can’t gesture, you can’t write, and all you can do is blink once for “yes.” Now imagine someone walks in and starts guessing what you want for lunch: “Pizza?” (Blink.) “Pepperoni or cheese?” (Long pause.) They try to guess again. After a while, they get tired or move on. “I know,” they say, “you used to like chicken nuggets. I’ll get you that!” And you are left being served your favorite food from when you were 5 years old.

This is the everyday reality for many individuals with complex communication needs, especially when they are completely reliant on their communication partner.

When we don’t provide students with a robust communication system, we don’t actually know what they want to say.

What Is a Robust Communication System?

A robust communication system provides access to a wide range of vocabulary—including core and fringe words, nouns, verbs, adjectives, and most importantly—language for learning, asking questions, expressing opinions, building relationships, and making repairs. It also includes access to a FULL keyboard. It’s multimodal and personalized, some offering symbol-based communication, text-based systems, and support for yes/no and partner-assisted communication techniques.

Why Doesn’t “Basic” Work?

When teams rely on non-symbolic communication strategies—like facial expressions, tone of voice, body language, or context clues—it puts the burden on the communication partner to guess. And guessing is not only unreliable, it’s filled with bias.

Let’s break that down:

• ‍Non-specific signals are open to interpretation. A head turn might mean “no,” “I’m bored,” or “I have a crick in my neck.” All partners need to know exactly what the movements mean.‍
• Limited tools lead to limited thoughts. If the user can only say “yes” or “no,” they can’t ask, clarify, object, or expand.‍
• It reinforces low expectations. When students can’t demonstrate what they know or how they feel, we may falsely assume there’s nothing there.
  

When Guessing Fails: A Real-World Example

In one classroom training, a team supported a student who had no facial expressions or gestures—just a single switch for “yes.” At first, they used structured presentations, asking yes/no questions to narrow down topics. But the team quickly realized the process was exhausting and inconsistent. Sometimes the student wouldn’t respond. Sometimes they’d respond “yes” to everything. It wasn’t working.

How did they change this situation to allow the student to say exactly what she wanted?

They stopped relying on guessing and started teaching, expecting and supporting. They:

• Introduced consistent communication routines.
• Built out a visual and auditory support system (using symbols, voice output, and scripts).
• Practiced motor patterns and language structures.
• Expanded the system to include commenting, greetings, descriptions, and requests—not just yes/no.
  

This wasn’t about assuming the student didn’t have more to say—it was about recognizing that without tools, he couldn’t say it.

Bias Is a Silent Barrier

When a student uses minimal communication behaviors, our brains naturally start to fill in the gaps. That’s human. But it’s dangerous.

• We assume preferences (“He must love music!”) without confirming.
• We skip harder content (“She can’t handle science vocabulary.”) because she can’t ask for clarification.
• We ignore breakdowns because we don’t know how to fix them—and the student can’t tell us.
  

This is why a robust system matters. It allows students to show us who they really are.

Bottom Line: Communication Is a Right, Not a Privilege

Everyone has something to say—and the tools to say it shouldn’t be limited to just what’s easy for adults to interpret. A robust communication system gives students the power to direct, negotiate, connect, learn, and grow.

Let’s stop guessing. Let’s start teaching. And let’s give every student the language they need to live fully.