A GUIDE TO FACILITATE ASSISTIVE TECHNOLOGY BEST PRACTICES FOR
USE BY INDIVIDUAL EDUCATION PROGRAM TEAMS
by
William Douglas Cunningham
This project is submitted in partial fulfillment of the
requirements for the degree of
Master of Curriculum and Instruction
Ferris State University
School of Education
College of Education and Human Services
August 4, 2014
A GUIDE TO FACILITATE ASSISTIVE TECHNOLOGY BEST PRACTICES FOR
USE BY INDIVIDUAL EDUCATION PROGRAM TEAMS
by
William Douglas Cunningham
Has been approved
August, 2014
APPROVED:
__________________________________________________________________, Chair
________________________________________________________________, Member
________________________________________________________________, Member
Supervisory Committee
ACCEPTED:
__________________________
School of Education Graduate Coordinator
i
Abstract
The purpose of assistive technology (AT) in a Kindergarten through 12th grade publicschool is to facilitate the access of academic and social strengths of an individual learner.
Assistive technology enhances and allows for the learner’s disability to be minimized.
These AT resources must be set in place in order for the assistive component of the
technology to occur. The focus of this project is to fill a void within the process of
integrating AT into the learning environment of Kindergarten through 12th grade public
school students. This includes the absence of resources, procedures, and policies within
small elementary schools. Even with the mandate of federal and state laws for the
application of assistive technology, this lack of support is a reality within small rural
school districts. Specifically, the result of this project is to establish a working resource
guide for the AT integration process into a specific small rural Kindergarten through 12th
grade public school. This project will include application of tools to support fine motor
skills and speech to text technologies for both lower and upper elementary learners. The
implications of this guide will allow for IEP team decision-makers to properly consider
AT and how it applies to individual students. The IEP team decision-making will also be
guided into compliance with current law as they create and implement the individual
education program decisions into the school setting.
ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER
1
Introduction…………………………………………………….
1
2
Review of Literature……………………………………………
3
The Law……………………………………………………..
3
Assistive Technology Consideration……………………….
6
Using Assistive Technology………………….…………….
9
Decision Making Resources………………………………..
11
Employing Assistive Technology…………………………..
12
Methodology…………..………………………………………
15
Contents of the Project………………………………..…….
15
Application of the Project ………………………………….
15
The Project…………………………………………………….
17
Moodle Site Checklist ……………………………………..
20
Michigan’s Integrated Technology Supports ……………...
21
District AT Template ………………………………………
29
3
4
5
Conclusions, Recommendations, and Limitations...…………
30
Conclusions……………………………………………….
30
Recommendations…………………………………………
32
Limitations…………………………………………………
32
References……………………………………………………
35
Appendices……………………………………………………
41
1
Chapter 1
Introduction
In today's fast-paced world of education there exists tools that need to be used to
its full potential within the general education classroom setting. These tools are known as
assistive technology (AT). The implementation of assistive technology requires
availability to guidelines for its integration. The lack of guidance for implementing AT is
often an occurrence within small rural elementary schools. The focus of this project is to
help facilitate the improvement of specific individual education programs or (IEP) teams
and their AT decision-making with a distinct rural elementary school.
With the advent of the information age, new methods of communication of
knowledge across the disciplines of education are now available to special education
professionals and IEP team decision makers. These methods are known to be costeffective and user-friendly to the technologically savvy professional educator. The need
to implement and activate this knowledge of AT is imperative.
The difficulty or restriction to implementing these AT guidelines involves several
areas. They include structural limitations involving cost, professional development, and
logistics. Looking at the cost, small elementary school districts often operate on a very
limited budget. This limited budget does not allow for extra support within a kindergarten
through twelfth grade school. Many of these schools must downsize their staff and
maximize the classroom population of students. School buses and classrooms are often
filled to maximum capacity. Additional cost limitations include the burden of elementary
staff teachers who must instruct all subject areas. Many elementary schools in Michigan
2
must have their students learn elementary art, music, and physical education, in addition
to the core academic curriculum, from a single general education teacher. The planning
time for this large list of daily tasks is immense.
This huge commitment of time with educating all areas of learning directly
impacts the availability for professional educators to obtain professional development in
the areas of understanding and implementing AT. Many educators in these rural
elementary schools work long hours with copious teacher/student interactions throughout
the school day and are only able to access technology late in the evening. The logistics of
not having easily accessible technology throughout the school day for the IEP team
decision maker can be a constraint to the implementation of AT.
Legal mandates under The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA,
2004) for all students with an IEP requires that the IEP team determine if AT is to be
implemented or not. The need for quality educational AT services must be offered in an
effective, legal, ethical, and cost effective manner for all special education students
(Bowser & Reed, 2004).
The purpose of this project is to implement a user friendly heuristic tool for
participants of elementary IEP teams to use in order to facilitate the improved integration
of Assistive Technology into classrooms for special education students. The project
goals include an increased understanding of the mandated laws, an increase in awareness
of the availability of AT devices, and an increase in the knowledge of AT support
services. All of this is meant to develop a shared vision (Bowser & Reed, 2004) of AT
among all participants of an IEP team and their important role in the successful
determination of the use of AT for each individual special needs learner.
3
Chapter 2
Review of Literature
The Law
During the Individual Education Program (IEP) team decision making process;
there exist laws that provide parameters around certain specific decisions that are made
during each meeting. These laws are in place to ensure that decisions are made in
accordance to the contents of these laws. Edyburn, D. L., & Howery, K. (2014) discuss
how supplemental supports including assistive technology are often not implemented due
to budgetary and or education establishments of hierarchical priority influences.
One such decision during all IEP meetings is to determine if Assistive
Technology (AT) is a needed support for each learner with an Individual Education
Program (IEP). In other words, the intent is to understand the process of whom, how, and
why AT is to be decided by the IEP team.
Among the team participants, there should be an AT support person or a special
education teacher included that “should understand, and have the ability to explain, legal
issues associated with current AT legislation when developing transition plans for
individuals with disabilities" (Marino, Marino, & Shaw, 2006, p. 19). Many IEP teams do
not have an AT support person on staff. This is a global view that demonstrates the
4
vision that all learners, including those with disabilities, are to become productive
citizens as a result of their education within our society.
In addition to a team member having a professional understanding of AT law, the
IEP team should also be aware that "educational law and policy generated from these
laws require that AT consideration be based upon evidence of AT effectiveness and that
claims of effectiveness arise from scientifically-based research" (Peterson-Karlan &
Parette, 2007, p. 130). This would make certain that the educational practice of AT
implementation relies on what has already been shown to work effectively within the
classroom.
What is assistive technology that is to be as applied to K-12 public schools?
There are laws that are currently in place that describe it. Some are specific to education,
the workplace, and public access, while others are all encompassing to all areas of life in
the United States. For example, one such explanation of the federal law is:
The Assistive Technology Act of 1998. This Act stipulated that further
development and use of AT has profound implications for improving the lives of
individuals with disabilities throughout the United States. It provided states with
additional funding to develop comprehensive AT programs and advocacy services
for individuals with disabilities (Marino, Marino, & Shaw, 2006, p. 19).
These comprehensive programs most often are focused within a local ISD. They include
visual, hearing, occupational, and physical therapies that utilize AT tools within the
specialized instruction of specific IEP goals and objectives. An example of a visual AT
would be a document enlarger with a camera and a screen that would be located within
the classroom for the visually impaired student. Hearing impaired students may have to
5
their disposal a teacher microphone and speaker system. Occupational therapy and
physical therapy students may have devices to hold onto a pencil to support difficulties
with their fine motor skills.
To further explain AT, there is found within various government documents a
description of its physical properties. "Assistive technology device means any item,
piece of equipment, or product system, whether acquired commercially off the shelf,
modified, or customized, that is used to increase, maintain, or improve the functional
capabilities of a child with a disability (IDEA - Building).”
Additionally, the parameters of these procedures for professional staff are also
found in existing law. For example, "§ 300.324 Development, review, and revision of
IEP. (a) Development of IEP—(1) General. In developing each child’s IEP, the IEP Team
must consider. (v) Consider whether the child needs assistive technology devices and
services (IDEA - Building).”
Additional rules exist for specific members of decision making team members
within Michigan law.
R 340.1781 Teachers of students with disabilities; endorsement requirements.
Rule 81.(1) A teacher seeking an endorsement or full approval by the department
shall meet all of the following requirements... (a) The requisite knowledge,
understanding skills, and dispositions for effective practice related to all of the
following: (iv) Assessing, implementing, and supporting all levels of assistive
technology for individual students(Michigan Administrative Rules for Special
Education (MARSE), n.d., p. 98).
6
There are also parameters within the law as to the method of curriculum design
and application of AT into the classroom setting of the individual special needs learner.
The “Assistive Technology Act of 1998 provides insights into developing instructional
units that incorporate AT utilizing the principles of Universal Design" (Marino, Marino,
& Shaw, 2006, p. 19). The overriding principles of Universal Design are that teachers
"need work that will develop greater empathy and self-understanding if they are to truly
understand how to cause learning" (Marino, Marino, & Shaw, 2006, p. 19). Along with
this principle, there are “vital opportunities to make education more honest, invigorating,
and self-correcting for everyone” (Wiggins & McTighe, 2005, p. 320). This second
principle counters the tendency for teachers to resist to adapting their instruction to the
learning needs of disabled students. Some teachers are “used to working alone and
thinking that smooth control of all that happens in their space, based on their habits, is
what matters most” (Wiggins & McTighe, 2005, p. 320).
In addition, the contributions
to universal design teach to the needs of the student while focusing on the individual
learning strengths to provide the greatest opportunity for educational benefit (Turnbull,
Turnbull, Shank, & Smith, 2004).
Assistive Technology Consideration
Consideration of AT into the learning environment of a learner with a disability is
also an important responsibility that ensures that AT support will be in place for the child
and will enhance their education. These considerations need to be guided. For example,
"in order to effectively guide IEP teams during the AT consideration process, special
education teachers must possess both a thorough understanding of AT resources and the
legislation governing their implementation" (Marino, Marino, & Shaw, 2006, p. 19).
7
Sometimes assistive technology choices are hard to make. When considering learners
with similar disabilities, the application of different AT tools can be adapted in differing
ways into the learning environment. Appropriate application decisions of a various AT
tools is critical. (Bausch & Hasselbring, 2004). This understanding of AT application
comes from time spent during teacher preparation courses within various colleges of
education coupled with ongoing efforts to maintain an awareness of the latest trends
within the targeted domain of Assistive Technology.
Special educators often carry not only the responsibility of an awareness of the
current best practices of Assistive Technology, but also possess documents to support the
guidance of decisions for AT integration by the IEP teams. Coordination of the
completion of these support documents is vital. For example, “a special educator should
plan a meeting just to complete this form, or provide a copy to team members well in
advance of the meeting" (Marino, Marino, & Shaw, 2006, p. 21). This will support the
decision making by IEP teams as they “identify whether specific skills such as decoding,
oral reading, letter identification, and comprehension are relative strengths or weaknesses
for the student” (Marino, Marino, & Shaw, 2006, p. 22). This skill identification allows
for the correct AT tool to be applied within the individual’s learning environment. Within
these documents, evaluations by personnel that are qualified to observe the student
should be included. This is accomplished when "an assessment of the student's AT needs
within the context of the learning environment is complete, IEP teams can recommend
specific AT devices and services" (Marino, Marino, & Shaw, 2006, p. 22). Collaboration
among team members must include the dissemination of these documents with a
8
thorough interpretation of the represented data. Collaboration should transpire during
meetings set for this purpose prior to the IEP meeting.
Using Assistive Technology
Guides are often used in many ways within a school setting. For example,
schools have student handbooks to guide student behaviors and expectations during the
school year, have school board policies in place that guide school personnel through
many facets of employment, and teachers have curriculum guides that provide a
framework to meet individual State curriculum standards.
IEP teams make important guiding decisions based on the curriculum and must be
prepared to utilize all available guides in making those decisions. While IEP teams look
at the capacities of each individual student, decisions are made that support deficits in
academic areas that most often include reading and math. Messinger-Willman and
Marino (2010) describe how scaffolding academic progress provides a means for the
student to circumvent barriers in literacy. First, adding the support of computer-based
applications will assist with reading disabilities to access grade-level text. Second, AT
will provide support for reading as an intervention tool (p. 9). This information supports
more widespread use of Ipad applications (Apps) that directly support reading disabilities
and are more and more common within districts that have AT support.
Best practices in teaching today often include technology integration as a
consistent component of lesson planning. Implementing the latest technologies into the
classroom of today allows for an increase in comprehension. Bowser and Reed (2004)
state, "another benefit of teaching with emerging technologies is the potential they hold
for crafting multisensory learning experiences, which is more akin to the way the brain is
9
wired to learn” (p. 7). For example, the Ipad presently allows for the visualization of
spoken language through speech to text apps and research shows its effectiveness.
Research has shown this to be highly effective with learning. Burton, Anderson, Prater,
& Dyches (2013) state that they had observed an abrupt change in student performance
each time they introduced the video. They assert that this data demonstrates the efficacy
of using visual stimuli to enhance skill acquisition when working with learners disabled
with autism and limited cognitive abilities.
Not only do learners better understand written language through Ipad integration
into the learning environment, but the acquisition of math skills are also better supported
through this assistive technology. Increasingly, "students are now able to access online
mathematics tools (e.g., using their iPhones, iPads, iPods) to further assist them in their
attempts at accessing the general education mathematics curriculum" (Brown, 2013, p.
55). Mathematics within education today focuses more on the real world application of
mathematics along with the need for acquiring the automaticity of mathematical
calculation. The barrier of math calculation automaticity is minimized with the advent of
calculation technologies with AT integration. This may include calculators, smart
phones, tablets, and Ipads and the focus now can be placed more on the understanding of
the purpose of mathematics and not so much on the process of mathematics.
This raises the issue of the merit or educational benefit of special education
services that persistently focus on the remediation of basic math calculation skills. If
educators feel that calculation automaticity is without exception, a life skill that must be
mastered by all general education students, then it slows down the educational process.
This outdated paradigm of math skill automaticity needs to be evaluated thoroughly.
10
Research by Bouch & Flanagan (2009) has shown that students with learning disabilities
make minimal progress in computation skills. They often show about one year's growth
for every two years of mathematics instruction. They are often less likely to pass basic
math assessments; and leave high school with about a fifth-grade mathematics skill level.
The time to integrate AT into the hands of learners that have a math calculation
disability is now. AT will provide them with promising educational experiences within
the classroom setting. This will also provide “increasing access to mathematical ideas and
helping them experience higher levels of success" (Bouch & Flanagan, 2009, p. 18). This
is often a prevailing thought among many educators that tend to emphasize the ability to
use a pencil to add and subtract is a skill that must occupy a significant portion of time
spent within the special education setting. For the person with disabilities, time spent
remediating math calculation deficits often is not an educational benefit and often hinders
their support needed to access the general education curriculum. Research by Van
Garderen, Thomas, Stormont, & Lembke (2013) has shown that with the advent of
calculators, the support for students with working memory deficits and/or processing
speed deficits provides them with the accuracy and speed required with facts and
computations. This enables them to access instruction in higher level critical thinking and
problem solving.
Therefore, the time spent in the special education setting remediating the
disability of math calculation should be focused on building familiarity and automaticity
with AT tools that are now in the hands of the general public each and every day.
Teaching with AT is a useful learning tool for students that is often shaped by
best teaching practice, emerging technology, and by existing law. As stated earlier, the
11
researched based educational model of Universal Design provides a substantial library of
examples with designing the general education curriculum and teaching to the specific
needs of a diverse learner. AT does support the effective access to general education
curriculum. In order to end the old-school practice of paper, pencil and ditto learning
models of the past, teachers must understand that the “ UDL framework helps educators
move beyond a “one size fits all” model of instruction, which can maximize the
educational benefits inherent in a diverse classroom community" (Messinger-Willman &
Marino, 2010, p. 8). When looking at the needs of a specific student, the classroom
teacher along with the IEP team need to view both the AT and UDL perspective. This
includes the understanding that the student will overcome their limitations and gain
access to instruction and assessment in meaningful ways (Messinger-Willman & Marino,
2010).
Decision Making Resources
With the many aspects of AT now in focus, the need for the guidance for
decision-makers is crucial. This guidance can be in the form of "information
technologies will need to be developed and/or sustained to insure access to such
information by educational and family consumers" (Peterson-Karlan & Parette, 2007, p.
138). As the IEP team convenes and seeks AT guidance, they must also know that
"decision makers must examine available evidence-based practice reports and decide if
the reported intervention can be adapted to meet local circumstances” (Peterson-Karlan &
Parette, 2007, p. 138). These local circumstances may include budgetary, staffing, and
AT accessibility limits. Additionally, understanding the research behind the application
of AT is important as it relates to all of the education system stakeholders. "In today's
12
educational environments, demands for evidence-based practice in assistive technology
(AT) decision-making are being articulated with increasing frequency by administrators,
policy-makers, researchers, and classroom practitioners" (Peterson-Karlan & Parette,
2007, p. 130).
The whole child needs to be supported. This support includes an understanding
that AT can also support learner’s pre and post K-12 education. For example, Horn &
Kang (2012) state that “AT intervention, which includes the provision of individually
appropriate devices and instruction on the use of the device, has the potential to assist the
young child with multiple disabilities in successfully accessing and then engaging his or
her environment and thus, more readily attaining critical developmental milestones” (p.
247).
Employing Assistive Technology
The work of professionals that actively share their knowledge base of AT
interventions is essential to IEP team decision-making. Peterson-Karlan & Parette (2007)
say that IEP teams also need to be aware that many researchers in the field of AT are
often aligned with university settings. They value publications in peer-reviewed journals
and often seek new knowledge, particularly evidence-based findings. However, these
venues of research knowledge may not be effective for IEP team decision makers.
Unfortunately, this knowledge of peer reviewed research not always available to IEP
teams within many poorer school districts. This may be due to barriers of “time
constraints on the part of decision-makers intervention settings may be such that reading
professional journals is a low priority activity” (Peterson-Karlan & Parette, 2007, p. 135).
These professionals include special education teachers and AT specialists. As another
13
limit or hindrance to knowledge exchange there exists "a critical shortage of AT
specialists who help IEP teams make decisions regarding assistive technology for
students with disabilities" (Marino, Marino, & Shaw, 2006, p. 18). Ultimately, the
responsibility for the application of AT into the schema of the special needs learner lies
with the special educator. For example, when "a viable AT device has been identified, it
is the special educator's responsibility, unless otherwise noted, to ensure fidelity of AT
implementation” (Marino, Marino, & Shaw, 2006, p. 22). Seldom does this take place in
unsupported districts. This is especially true when school special education teaching staff
have no comprehension of the multilayered facets of AT and perceive that any attempt of
ensuring this fidelity is not within their job description. Additionally, administrations are
often compelled to set special education issues toward the bottom of their administrative
agendas. This attitude of low priority then permeates into the general education staff and
in turn causes dissention when special educators attempt to follow laws tied to an IEP.
"Federal law mandates the consideration of AT when writing a student's IEP. It is the
special educator's responsibility to inform members of IEP teams about in the absence of
trained AT specialists." (Marino, Marino, & Shaw, 2006, p. 24).
The consideration of AT for each disabled student by law, must be a part of IEP
team decision making. Teams need to be informed and this can be facilitated by
completing the following tasks:
First, they can explain the definitional issues that surround AT and provide team
members with concrete examples of AT that pertain to the student. Second, they
should examine the student's current functional level. Third, they must identify
available accommodations, modifications, and AT that promote access to the
14
general education curriculum. Fourth, they should oversee the documentation,
implementation, and assessment of AT. Finally, they need to advocate for the
types of AT that meet the student’s needs while providing the greatest potential
for student success” (Marino, Marino, & Shaw, 2006, p. 18).
It is unlikely that poorer schools with a lack of resources know of these mandated steps
that must be followed in order to comply with law.
Becoming informed as to AT within an education setting often falls under the
umbrella of professional development (PD) activities. Professional development agendas
are often established by administrators that value general education curriculum
effectiveness over special education issues like AT. Additionally, administrators must
work within the constraints of a busy school calendar. For example, many “teachers have
limited time to explore, experiment, and study AT and UDL integration. Some school
districts use top-down professional development models, which fail to produce consistent
change over time. This leads to nonexistent, inconsistent, or inadequate support for
educators” (Messinger-Willman & Marino, 2010, p. 10). When AT is actually offered as
PD, it is often given low priority and minimal time. "Oftentimes when AT professional
development is offered, it attempts to include too much information during a limited
amount of time" (Messinger-Willman & Marino, 2010, p. 10). Often, the design of
learning within the PD itself follows the outdated handout and lecture format and real
change in the classroom rarely takes place.
15
Chapter 3
Methodology
Contents of the Project
The contents of this project attend to the goal of providing a guide to better
understand the mandated assistive technology (AT) laws. The contents will also address
the availability of traditional and cutting-edge AT devices and provide a knowledge base
of AT support services. This information will be updated regularly within a World Wide
Web Moodle page that will contain many resources from many sources. It will be
available for local districts and their IEP teams to use when considering AT decisions
within an ISD.
The project guide will include a checklist for AT consideration during an IEP
meeting along with active links to two significant resources that will provide sufficient
support to the team consideration process. The content will include a hyperlink to the
local ISD AT referral document. This document will provide the team with guiding
language for consideration as decisions are made for the application of AT. In addition,
the content will include with permission access to the Michigan Integrated Technology
Supports resource site that will provide the most recent best practice information for AT
decision making (L. Taylor, Personal communication, November 11, 2013).
Application of the Project
The purpose of this project is to create and implement of a usable guide on
Assistive Technology (AT) to be used in a small rural school district. This guide will
16
include the use of livebinders.com with the ability to share the document for internal use
only by the district personnel. Filling a known void in an educational system with
corrective, problem solving initiative is to the writer’s understanding, a worthwhile and
productive endeavor. Understanding the law directing the integration of AT into the IEP
process from all aspects of consideration will assist administration, special education
teachers, intermediate school district personnel, and IEP team members. The intended
use of this guide is for IEP team access to allow for informed decisions as to the
individual need of Assistive Technology as it applies to each individual special needs
student. This guide will facilitate the IEP team in developing ideas and options for each
individual student and will answer the question of how a guide to facilitate assistive
technology decision processes for Individual Education Program (IEP) teams within a
rural school district. It is my hope that this AT guides will assist in filling this void.
17
Chapter 4
The Project
The setting of the Assistive Technology Guide will exist on a public domain web
site URL within an ISD Moodle interface.
http://moodle.manistee.org/course/view.php?id=1043. The participants using this guide
will include present and future IEP team members in a school within the Manistee ISD.
The data sources for this Guide will come from current AT professionals within the local
ISD and within Michigan’s Integrated Technology Supports web resource pages. The
procedures for the use of this Assistive Technology Guide will be described within the
content of the site. This will include an introduction, a review of the law and literature,
methodology used, details of the project, and conclusions with recommendations.
What follows are the content of the guide as is presently published. The content
is under continuous revision as technology updates occur and best practices for AT
implementation and communication present itself. This guide provides the resources that
IEP teams need to accomplish the task of AT consideration to AT implementation.
(Edyburn, 2003) It also gives access to the approved form within the district for
Assistive Technology implementation. Lastly, it provides a wealth of AT information
that already is in place on the Internet. The content of these resource pages have been
18
approved by the Michigan’s Integrated Technology Supports (see appendix A) and the
Manistee ISD (see appendix B).
During the process of creating and implementing this project, the writer was
recognized by the Manistee ISD Special Education Superintendent for efforts in
supporting special education with technology. The writer was offered and did accept a
position as an Assistive Technology Representative of the Special Education Director's
Region 1, Northern workgroup (KND, 2014). The responsibilities of this position
correlate directly to the goals of this project which are to understand mandated laws,
increase in awareness of the availability of AT devices, and an increase in the knowledge
of AT support services. This position will provide all necessary approvals for
maintaining, revising, and updating the content of this project.
19
This first image (screenshot) shows the image of the web presence on a Moodle
site. This shows the location of the project as listed under the first item titled Assistive
Technology Resources for IEP Team Use. Its web URL is:
http://moodle.manistee.org/course/view.php?id=1043 This screenshot shows the Home
Page of the project containing icons that link to an introduction, AT law, AT
consideration, AT tools, applications and checklists, and guide resources and documents.
The page contains a link to a forum specifically designated to this project. Questions and
suggestions may be posted in forum by the webmaster (project author) and the World
Wide Web user. The page may be navigated at the top or the bottom of the page. All
images and icons were cited from and found within the contents of the project.
20
The second image shows a biographical page with a purpose statement. In
addition, the page contains information as to the origins of the content of the project
21
The third image of this Assistive Technology Guide shows the information within
the contents of the guide that reference law. Links are provided to give information of
AT definition, FAPE, and legislation. Additional links are in place to provide an
overview of AT law through a slide presentation and a direct link to the law section under
the US Department of Education.
22
The next screenshot provides IEP team decision guidance through flowcharts and
documents. These documents include information specific to the parent or guardian on
the team along with a myriad of consideration information through the Michigan’s
Integrated Technology Supports Consideration Resource for AT page.
23
The page titled AT Tools provides links to multiple resources provided by MITS. These
resources focus on both the available AT tools along with numerous data collection tools.
24
The page titled Applications and Checklists provide a wealth of information about the
setting of the Assistive Technology. This includes dealing with the issues of inclusion
and the curriculum. Lastly, a simple IEP Team checklist is provided for teams to work
through before, during, and after the AT decision process.
25
The last page of the project provides a template for local use when referring students for
supplemental aid services through the local Intermediate School District. Additionally, a
link is given to the Michigan’s Integrated Technology Supports main web site along with
their purpose statement. Within this site are resources for professional development
opportunities.
26
The page showing the Professional Development information is shown in this image.
27
Template
CONFIDENTIAL ASSISTIVE TECHNOLOGY MULTIDISCIPLINARY EVALUATION REPORT
NOT FOR SECONDARY RELEASE
NAME:
SCHOOL:
GRADE/TEACHER:
DISTRICT:
BIRTH DATE:
CHRONOLOGICAL AGE:
PARENT:
EVALUATOR(S):
TELEPHONE:
ADDRESS:
Reason for Referral
Sources of Information
What:
Completed By:
Date:
Background Information
Start writing here
Social/Emotional Evaluation
Parent Input
Family Constellation
Developmental History
Health History
Primary Concern
Current Functioning
Rating Scales
Educational History and Current Functioning
Teacher Input
Rating Scales
28
Observation
Student Input
Student was observed by the school social worker on May 5th, 2011.
Psycho-educational Evaluation
Behavioral Observations
School Psychologist Observations
Teacher Consultant Observations
Intellectual Functioning
The NAME OF TEST HERE was administered by the school psychologist on DATE. Average
standard scores range between 90 and 110, and average scale scores fall between 8 and 12.
Academic Test Interpretation
The Kaufman Test of Educational Achievement-II was administered by the teacher
consultant/school psychologist on
Occupational Therapy
On DATE the occupational therapist assessed Xxx.
Speech & Language Evaluation
The NAME OF TEST HERE was administered by the speech-language pathologist on DATE.
Articulation
Start Writing Here
Language
Start Writing Here
Pragmatics & Behavior
Start Writing Here
Teacher Input
Start Writing Here
Assistive Technology
The Student
What are the student’s special needs?
What are the student’s current abilities?
The Environment
What materials and equipment are currently available in the environment?
What is the physical arrangement?
Any particular concerns?
What is the instructional arrangement?
Are there likely to be changes?
What supports are available to the people supporting the student?
The Task
29
What activities take place in the environment?
What activities support the student’s curriculum?
What are the critical elements of the activities?
How might the activities be modified to accommodate the student’s special needs?
How might technology support the student’s active participation in those activities?
The Tool
What strategies might be used to invite increased student performance?
What no-tech, low-tech, and high-tech options should be considered when developing a system
for a student with these needs and abilities doing these tasks in these environments?
How might these tools be tried out with the student in the customary environments in which they
will be used?
Summary
Psycho-educational
Start writing here
Occupational Therapy
Start Writing Here
Social Work
Start Writing Here
Speech & Language
Start Writing Here
Assistive Technology
Start Writing Here
Eligibility Statement
Start Writing Here
Suggestions
Start Writing Here
Your Name & Letters
School Psychologist
Phone: XXXX XXXX ext. XXXX
XXXX Intermediate School District
Your Name & Letters
Your Title
Phone: XXXX XXXX ext. XXXX
XXXX Intermediate School District
Your Name & Letters
Your Title
Phone: XXXX XXXX ext. XXXX
XXXX Intermediate School District
Your Name & Letters
Your Title
Phone: XXXX XXXX ext. XXXX
XXXX Intermediate School District
30
Chapter 5
Conclusions, Recommendations, and Limitations
This final chapter of this project contains the authors reflections on conclusions,
recommendations, and limitations experienced during the process of creating this work.
Conclusions
The major conclusion that the author can articulate is that this project allowed for
significant discoveries to be placed into the mind of the author. These discoveries
included uncovering a significant void within the understanding of assistive technology
and it's application. This was especially true within my own school district. In addition,
there existed a lack of accountability or corrective measures to ensure compliance within
the IEP document. The author considers himself to be proficient in understanding and
applying special education law. Yet, when this project was initiated and the content of it
was researched, even the most experienced assistive technology specialists conveyed
similar words of concern. This included an awareness of a void in applying assistive
technology decision-making and accountability into the IEP process. This was especially
noted within the initial email permission request to Laura Taylor of MITS. She
responded in her email to the author by stating her experience with working the process
of completing an IEP. She said that whenever she convened an IEP her team would not
check the box in the PLAAFP statement saying that they did consider assistive
technology until they had finished going through all of the supplementary aids, goals, and
31
objectives. Only then would the team go back and answer if Assistive Technology had
been considered.
This example from Laura Taylor transitions well into the most significant
conclusion that this author considers to be the most important finding during the process
of creating this project. This has to do with the question itself on the IEP. It is a short
question. It only asks if assistive technology was considered. The most important finding
of this entire project is that this question needs to be answered yes and the affirmative
answer needs to be supported with a significant effort in determining the answer.
Edyburn (2002) states that this question is seldom asked. There is even a bold statement
on the page within the essay from the perspective of an illiterate adult student that leaves
school and asks a similar question. “If the instructional and remediation efforts of all of
my teachers have failed to teach me to read, will I be provided with compensatory tools
that allow me to access the meaning of text that I cannot read by myself?” As for math,
Edyburn (2002) goes on to state that "we would not have secondary students unable to
solve math problems because they never mastered their basic math facts." A Calculator
would have been introduced into the students learning environment as a compensatory
strategy with expectations associated with higher level math achievement. Without this
use of a calculator as assistive technology, the student would not be able to perform at the
high achievement level of their peers. The essay goes on to state that it is common for
struggling students to drop out of school due to their lack of ability to engage the
curriculum at the same level of their peers. In other words, the never ending cycle of
remediation increased the dropout rates for students.
32
Recommendations
Reflecting on the past, the author feels fortunate to have been involved with the
integrations of new technologies even prior to the beginnings of the World Wide Web.
These technology integrations included experience with some of the first Apple and IBM
computers. For educators of the author’s age that have not had a background in
technology, it is a very difficult task to acquire and to seek the assistive technology
vocabulary and best practice experience. For the present, the author recommends that
assistive technology needs to be promoted through various methods. These methods
include utilizing the Internet and online learning. To promote online learning experiences
and assistive technology, the author suggests that merit pay and effective teacher ratings
be tied to the number of hours spent on assistive technology and accompanying
curriculum of Universal Design for Learning. Learnport.org, a Michigan Virtual
University resource provides professional development curriculum for understanding and
implementing assistive technology. For the future, the author recommends that the
vendors of assistive technology visit and showcase their products in schools. This visit
would allow for hands on interactions with the products and opportunities for inquiry to
their use and implementation. This has been a common practice selling tools to
mechanics in automotive repair shops across our country for many years. Assistive
Technology tools should be sold in the same manner.
Limitations
This project focused on assistive technology. One of the significant limitations
that the author sees among his own peers is the lack of technology. This lack of
technology is mostly due to funding issues. Many of my fellow teachers do not have
33
access to the Internet within their own homes. These teachers cannot afford to purchase
Internet access even on a phone. Within the state of Michigan, funding cuts to education
have caused many teachers to be receiving less overall income then they had received a
decade ago. With the cost-of-living and many of the medical expenses now being shifted
to educators, the cost of Internet access is unattainable. In addition to the lack of
technology, there exists the reality that much of the technology within education is
outdated. The computers that the author’s district uses for students presently utilize the
XP computing platform which no longer is supported by Microsoft. Another reality of
known limitation to this project has to do with the time it takes to learn and become
informed to the decision-making process of assistive technology for individual special
needs learners. Many hours are spent during noninstructional time before and after school
with educators that are involved in many of the needed supports for students. These
include sports activities, tutoring activities, and lesson planning. The author’s own school
has eliminated prep time during the school day. The last limitation, that the author wishes
to convey, deals with the depth of content within this assistive technology guide project.
In reality, the content of this project is often evanescent. The author realizes that there are
unnumbered resources of support to assistive technology, the majority of which the
author has no knowledge of. The author has gained knowledge during the process of
creating this project. Unfortunately, IEP team members may not have a similar
availability of time and effort to gain a similar level of knowledge.
In conclusion, this assistive technology project is in its beginning stages and will
need to be maintained to ensure that current technology and practice is updated regularly.
34
The limitations of this guide will continue through a lack of understanding, a lack of
time, a lack of professional development opportunities, and apathy that is often the focus
toward special education programs.
35
REFERENCES
Bausch, M. E., & Hasselbring, T. S. (2004). Assistive technology: Are the necessary
skills and knowledge being developed at the preservice and inservice levels?
Teacher Education and Special Education: The Journal of the Teacher Education
Division of the Council for Exceptional Children, 27(2), 97-104. doi:
10.1177/088840640402700202
Blank FinalJoint-AT report (Rep.). (n.d.). Retrieved November 23, 2013, from
http://www.manistee.org/a/manistee.org/manistee-isd/documents-andforms/special-education-documents-forms
Bouch, E. C., & Flanagan, S. (2009). Assistive technology and mathematics: What is
there and where can we go in special education? Journal Of Special Education
Technology, 24(2), 17-30.
Bowser, G., & Reed, P. R. (2004). A school administrator's desktop guide to assistive
technology. Arlington, VA: Technology and Media Division, Council for
Exceptional Children.
Bowser, G., & Reed, P. n.d. (2013). Assistive Technology Pointers for Parents : A
strategy for working with schools. Pointers for Parents Web.pdf. Retrieved from
http://www.uwyo.edu/wind/_files/docs/watr/pointers%20for%20parents%20web.
pdf
36
Brown, M. R. (2013). Mathematics, secondary students with disabilities, and web 2.0
technologies. Intervention in School and Clinic, 49(1), 54-58. doi:
10.1177/1053451213480032
Burton, C. E., Anderson, D. H., Prater, M. A., & Dyches, T. T. (2013). Video selfmodeling on an iPad to teach functional math skills to adolescents with autism
and intellectual disability. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental
Disabilities, 28(2), 67-77. Retrieved November 8, 2013, from
http://foa.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/28/2/67
Cropped-blogbanner.jpg [Digital image]. (n.d.). Retrieved November 21, 2013, from
http://wp.vcu.edu/assistivetechnolgy/files/2012/08/cropped-blogbanner.jpg
Edyburn, D. (2002). Remediation vs. compensation: A critical decision point in assistive
technology consideration: An Essay by Dave L. Edyburn. [online]
anzatresearch.wikispaces.com. Available at:
http://anzatresearch.wikispaces.com/file/view/Edyburn+2002RemediationvsComp
ensation.pdf [Accessed 10 Jul. 2014].
Edyburn, D.L. (2003). Learning from text. Special Education Technology Practice, 5(2),
16-27. pdf
Edyburn, D. L., & Howery, K. (2014). How is Technology Used to Support Instruction in
Inclusive Schools?. Handbook of Effective Inclusive Schools: Research and
Practice, 170.
37
G, Dr. (n.d.). Assistive Technologies. Retrieved from
http://www.bagtheweb.com/b/nkBpG
G, Dr. (n.d.). Untitled image.jpg [Digital image]. Retrieved November 21, 2013, from
https://bagtheweb.s3.amazonaws.com/images/Bag/30472/pictures/large.jpeg?137
2253418
Horn, E., & Kang, J. (2012). Supporting young children with multiple disabilities: What
do we know and what do we still need to learn? Topics in Early Childhood
Special Education, 31(4), 241-248. Retrieved November 7, 2013, from
http://tec.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/31/4/241
IDEA - Building The Legacy of IDEA 2004. (n.d.). Retrieved November 25, 2013, from
http://idea.ed.gov/
"KND Reduces Staff Due to Budget Constraints." KND Reduces Staff Due to Budget Constraints |
Manistee News. 10 June 2014. Web.
<http://news.pioneergroup.com/manisteenews/2014/06/10/knd-reduces-staff-due-budgetconstraints/>.
Logo-new.jpg [Digital image]. (n.d.). Retrieved November 21, 2013, from
http://mits.cenmi.org/Portals/4/Skins/mitsSkinV2/images/logo-new.jpg
Marino, M. T., Marino, E. C., & Shaw, S. F. (2006). Making informed assistive
technology decisions for students with high incidence disabilities. TEACHING
Exceptional Children, 38(6), 18-25. Retrieved November 8, 2013, from http://0search.proquest.com.libcat.ferris.edu/docview/815955810?accountid=10825
38
Messinger-Willman, J., & Marino, M. T. (2010). Universal design for learning and
assistive technology: Leadership considerations for promoting inclusive education
in today's secondary schools. NASSP Bulletin, 94(1), 5-16. doi:
10.1177/0192636510371977
Michigan Department of Education. (n.d.). Michigan Administrative Rules for Special
Education (MARSE). Retrieved November 9, 2013, from
http://www.michigan.gov/documents/mde/MARSE_Supplemented_with_IDEA_
Regs_379598_7.pdf
Oregon Department of Education. (n.d.). Oregon Technology Access Program - OTAP.
Retrieved November 8, 2013, from http://www.otaporegon.org/Documents/AT%20Model%20Operating%20Guidelines.pdf
Parent and Educator Guide for Assistive Technology (AT). (n.d.). Home MITS Technology Assistance for Students with Disabilities. Retrieved from
http://mits.cenmi.org/
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. Retrieved November 8, 2013,
from http://0search.proquest.com.libcat.ferris.edu/docview/762477256?accountid=10825
Smoking Gavel [Icon]. (n.d.). Retrieved November 20, 2013, from
http://31.media.tumblr.com/avatar_99da279da051_96.png
39
Taylor, L. (2012, April 13). Assistive Technology Resources - LiveBinder. Assistive
Technology Resources - LiveBinder. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from
http://www.livebinders.com/play/play?id=370196
Taylor, L. (2013, November 11). My Masters Project [E-mail to the author].
Turnbull, R., Turnbull, A., Shank, M., & Smith, S. (2004). Exceptional lives: Special
education in today's schools (4th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ:
Pearson/Merrill/Prentice Hall.
University, F. By Penn State (2011, May 17). Assistive tech law. Assistive Tech Law.
Retrieved July 24, 2014, from http://www.slideshare.net/SFecich/assistive-techlaw
U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education Programs. (n.d.). IDEA Building The Legacy of IDEA 2004. Retrieved November 8, 2013, from
http://idea.ed.gov/explore/home
Useful Websites - Michigan Region IV Assistive Technology Consortium.png [Digital
image]. (n.d.). Retrieved November 21, 2013, from
http://miregioniv.weebly.com/useful-websites.html
Van Garderen, D., Thomas, C. N., Stormont, M., & Lembke, E. S. (2013). An overview
of principles for special educators to guide mathematics instruction. Intervention
in School and Clinic, 48(3), 131-141. Retrieved November 8, 2013, from
http://isc.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/48/3/131
40
Wiggins, G. P., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by design (2nd ed.). Alexandria,
VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development
41
APPENDICES
A.
Letter of permission to use the MITS Live Binder as a resource in the KND
Assistive Technology Guide Project
42
43
44
B.
Letter of permission to use the Manistee ISD CONFIDENTIAL ASSISTIVE
TECHNOLOGY MULTIDISCIPLINARY EVALUATION REPORT template as a
resource in the KND Assistive Technology Guide Project.