 I find it really interesting to talk about attributing meaning to random attempts because often teachers feel like this is crazy. This feels really uncomfortable. But what we need to do is look at what we do with young, typically developing children. We attribute meaning all the time to typically developing children. That child says, da, da, da. And we say, daddy! He said daddy! And the kid looks us like, oh, really? But you know what? He just became much more likely that that child was going to say daddy. That child so was not saying daddy. We heard it. We attributed meaning. It became more likely. When a student is using a communication device and says something, I attribute meaning. So if we're reading a book and that student says who, and now I attribute meaning. I assume that they're asking a question about the character in the book. And I say, oh, who? Well, I think that was that dog that's the really bad dog in my book. That's who it was. And by doing that, I'm telling them, what does it mean to say who? Maybe that student didn't know that before, and I can help attribute meaning. By the time we have students scribbling, by the time we get goods communication systems in place, they're a lot older. And we feel like everything should be meaningful, and they should just know how to do it. No, they shouldn't, because they never got a chance to scribble with writing. They never got a chance to babble with language. And so we need to give them a chance to explore their communication sets and to explore the alphabet and to scribble. And we need to be really good about attributing meaning so that it becomes very meaningful to them and so that they can grow and learn from their initial attempts that really weren't intentional, possibly, and that possibly weren't meaningful, but we can add intentionality and we can add meaning and we can help them grow and learn.