Using Assistive Technology in Teaching Students with Disabilities
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.61841/mxhp0p88Keywords:
Assistive Technology, Disabilities, SETT Framework, WATI, Quality Indicators of ATAbstract
This paper was written to expose the meaning, benefits, and answer in what ways do laws,
regulations, resources, district practices, and theoretical understandings of disability and
special education influence accessibility and decision- making for students with disabilities in
the area of assistive technology (AT)? The paper discussed promotes and detracts from
understanding AT in schools and evidenced-based practices to implement AT. It pointed out
the potential short term and long-term impact on learners with disabilities of utilizing
concepts from WATI, Quality Indicators of AT, the assistive technology continuum (highlow tech), and the SETT Framework. It provided implications of influences (procedures,
practices, resources, cost/funding, referral, professional development, attitudes/beliefs) on
incorporating assistive technology in schools. It concluded that recommendations for how to
address possible obstacles that may influence the implementation of AT in the IEP
Downloads
References
Adebisi, R. O., Liman, N. A., &Longpoe, P. K. (2015). Using assistive technology in
teaching children with learning disabilities in the 21st century. Journal of Education
and Practice, 6(24), 14-20.
Ahmad, F. K. (2015). Use of assistive technology in inclusive education: Making room for
diverse learning needs. Transcience, 6(2), 62-77.
Alkahtani, K. D. (2013). Teachers’ knowledge and use of assistive technology for students
with special educational needs. Journal of Studies in Education, 3(2), 65-86.
Alper, S., &Raharinirina, S. (2006). Assistive technology for individuals with disabilities: A
review and synthesis of the literature. Journal of Special Education Technology,
21(2), 47-64.
Bausch, M. E., & Ault, M. J. (2008). Assistive technology implementation plan. Teaching
Exceptional Children, 41(1), 6-14.
Bausch, M. E., Mittler, J. E., Hasselbring, T. S., & Cross, D. P. (2005). The Assistive
Technology Act of 2004: What does it say and what does it mean? Physical
Disabilities: Education and Related Services, 23(2), 59-67.
Baxter, S., Enderby, P., Evans, P., & Judge, S. (2011). Barriers and facilitators to the use of
high-technology augmentative and alternative communication devices: A systematic
review and qualitative synthesis. International Journal of Language &
Communication Disorders, 47(2), 115-129.
Beyer, S., & Perry, J. (2013). Promoting independence through the use of assistive
technology. Tizard Learning Disability Review, 18(4), 179-185.
Boot, F. H., Owuor, J., Dinsmore, J., &Maclachlan, M. (2018). Access to assistive
technology for people with intellectual disabilities: A systematic review to identify
barriers and facilitators. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 62(10), 900-921.
Browder, D. M., Wood, L., Thompson, J., &Ribuffo, C. (2014). Evidence-based practices for
students with severe disabilities(Document no. IC-3). Retrieved from
http://ceedar.education.ufl.edu/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/IC-3_FINAL_03-03-
15.pdf
Council for Exceptional Children. (2014). Council for Exceptional Children standards for
evidence-based practices in special education. Retrieved from
https://www.cec.sped.org/~/media/Files/Standards/Evidence%20based%20Practices%
20and%20Practice/EBP%20FINAL.pdf
Dunst, C. J., &Trivette, C. M. (2011). Evidence-based strategies for training adults to use
assistive technology and adaptations. Research Brief, 5(1), 1-9.
Dunst, C. J., Trivette, C. M., Hamby, D. W., &Simkus, A. (2013). Systematic review of
studies promoting the use of assistive technology devices by young children with
disabilities. Practical Evaluation Reports, 5(1), 1-32.
Dyal, A., Carpenter, L. B., & Wright, J. V. (2009). Assistive technology: What every school
leader should know. Education, 129(3), 556-560.
Engeström, Y. (1987). Learning by expanding: An activity-theoretical approach to
developmental research. Helsinki, Finland: Orienta-Konsultit.
Every Student Succeeds Act. (2015). Sec. 1001 statement of purpose. Retrieved from
http://www.everystudentsucceedsact.org/title-1-
Hwang, W. Y., Shadiev, R., Kuo, T. C., & Chen, N. S. (2012). Effects of speech-to-text
recognition application on learning performance in synchronous cyber classrooms.
Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 15(1), 367-380.
Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act. (2004).Sec. 300.105assistive
technology.Retrieved fromhttps://sites.ed.gov/idea/regs/b/b/300.105
Judge, S. L. (2000). Accessing and funding assistive technology for young children with
disabilities. Early Childhood Education Journal, 28(2), 125-131.
Lahm, E. A., & Mendonca, R. (2008). Assistive technology assessment tools. Technology in
Action, 3(4), 1-12.
Lersilp, T. (2016). Access to information for learning by using assistive technology for
undergraduate students with disabilities in Northern Thailand. Information, 7(4), 54,
1-10.
Mittler, J. (2007). Assistive technology and IDEA. In C. Warger (Ed.), Technology
integration: Providing access to the curriculum for students with disabilities (pp. 81-
85). Arlington, VA: Technology and Media Division (TAM).
No Child Left Behind Act (2001). Sec. 1001 statement of purpose. Retrieved from
https://www2.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/esea02/107-110.pdf
Odden, A., Archibald, S., Fermanich, M., & Gallagher, H.A. (2002). A cost framework for
professional development. Journal of Education Finance, 28(1), 51-74.
Parette, P., Peterson-Karlan, G. R., & Wojcik, B. W. (2005). The state of assistive technology
services nationally and implications for future development. Assistive Technology
Outcomes and Benefits, 2(1), 13-24.
Peterson-Karlan, G. R., &Parette, H. P. (2007). Evidence-based practice and the
consideration of assistive technology effectiveness and outcomes. Assistive
Technology Outcomes and Benefits, 4(1), 130-139.
Reed, P. (2007). A resource guide for teachers and administrators about assistive
technology. Retrieved from https://dpi.wi.gov/sites/default/files/imce/sped/pdf/atwati-resource-guide.pdf
Rohaan, E. J., Taconis, R., &Jochems, W. G. (2009). Measuring teachers’ pedagogical
content knowledge in primary technology education. Research in Science &
Technological Education, 27(3), 327-338.
Sadao, K. C., & Robinson, N. B. (2011). Assistive technology for young children: Creating
inclusive learning environments. New York, NY: Brookes Publishing.
Scheeler, M., Congdon, M., &Stansbery, S. (2010). Providing immediate feedback to coteachers through bug-in-ear technology: An effective method of peer coaching in
inclusion classrooms. Teacher Education and Special Education, 33(1), 83-96.
Silman, F., Yaratan, H., &Karanfiller, T. (2017). Use of assistive technology for teaching learning and administrative processes for visually impaired people. EURASIA Journal
of Mathematics Science and Technology Education, 13(8), 4805-4813.
The QIAT Community. (2006). Quality indicators for assistive technology. Retrieved from
https://ttac.vcu.edu/media/ttac/documents/at-service-delivery/QIAT_facts.pdf
The QIAT Community. (2012). Quality indicators for assistive technology implementation.
Retrieved from Retrieved from
https://qiat.org/docs/4%20QIs%20for%20Implementation.pdf
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Wisconsin Assistive Technology Initiative. (2004). Assessing students’ needs for assistive
technology: A resource manual for school district teams. Retrieved from
Witte, L. D., Steel, E., Gupta, S., Ramos, V. D., & Roentgen, U. (2018). Assistive technology
provision: Towards an international framework for assuring availability and
accessibility of affordable high-quality assistive technology. Disability and
Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology, 13(5), 467-472.
Wong, M. E. (2018). Guiding teachers of students with visual impairments to make assistive
technology decisions: Preliminary experience using the Wisconsin Assistive
Technology Initiative. Support for Learning, 33(4), 429-439.
Zabala, J. (2005). The SETT framework: Critical areas to consider when making informed
assistive technology decisions. Retrieved from
http://www.joyzabala.com/uploads/Zabala_SETT_Leveling_the_Learning_Field.pdf
Zabala, J., Bowser, G.,&Korsten, J. (2005). SETT and Re-SETT: Concepts for AT
Implementation. Closing the Gap, 23(5), 1-3.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Author
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
You are free to:
- Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format for any purpose, even commercially.
- Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
- The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.
Under the following terms:
- Attribution — You must give appropriate credit , provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made . You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
- No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
Notices:
You do not have to comply with the license for elements of the material in the public domain or where your use is permitted by an applicable exception or limitation .
No warranties are given. The license may not give you all of the permissions necessary for your intended use. For example, other rights such as publicity, privacy, or moral rights may limit how you use the material.
