The Family Center on Technology and Disability
Assistive Technology Works
Newsletter for October 2009
October 2009 - AT in the Classroom - Give Us the Tools |
|
AT in the Classroom
The benefits of these technologies are apparent to a growing number of educators and administrators nationwide: they provide students with disabilities access to the curriculum and to standards-based instruction; and they enable differentiated instruction that takes into account individual learning styles. When AT and IT are married, the result can be a Universal Design for Learning (UDL) environment that enhances the inclusion concept and may benefit an entire classroom. Some obstacles to wider AT/IT use are as apparent as the benefits to such use: lack of funding; a large population of reluctant digital immigrants who lack awareness of technology’s vast potential to improve classroom performance; and traditionalists bound to a non-digital classroom. Among obstacles that are less apparent are young pre-service teachers, the long-anticipated first wave of digital natives, who are adept at technology use but, due to skimpy academic exposure to AT, are not yet sufficiently aware of its classroom potential. Despite the obstacles, however, avid AT adherents persist in pushing for increased AT/IT awareness and use among all parties with a stake in the education of children with disabilities. This issue is dedicated to AT/IT experts like the Satterfields of Georgia who understand the tools of technology and are anxious to use them to enhance learning for all children. The Satterfields Speak Ben Satterfield recalls their AT epiphany: Ben was employed by a company that made a combination educational hardware and software product. “I was taking a turn in customer service and was conversing by phone with three or four parents of children with disabilities. They all said the same thing, ‘My child could use this product but I don’t have any software that would do what my child needs it to do.’ I approached my boss and asked him, ‘Are we ever going to address this special needs market?’ He replied, ‘Nope, that market’s not big enough; we’d go out of business if we focused on special needs’.” Ironically, Mr. Satterfield says, the company went out of business anyway. “It bothered me that we might not do anything about this need,“Ben said. “ I went home and prayed about it. And I got a distinct impression that I should do something about it.” Satterfield talked to his boss who encouraged Ben to start a company that would address the need for technology among the special population. Mr. Satterfield continues, “We thought that technology could be powerful for children with disabilities but we lacked the proof. We certainly have the proof now. The blessing for us personally is that technology has made an enormous difference for Blake. To have an 18-year-old with Down syndrome who can read almost anything, who knows more about Romeo and Juliet than I do, because of the Start to Finish books (http://www.donjohnston.com/products/start_to_finish/library/index.html). Blake can find his way around a computer because the computer environment is so friendly and patient. This has been a revelation for the entire family and has informed much of our work with AT and instruction.” Says Pat Satterfield: “For Blake the computer was a very patient tutor. On a computer repetition is encouraged, while in a therapy environment he, or anyone, would give up long before reaching the pivotal repetition that ensures success.” Ben Satterfield earned a doctoral degree in instructional technology and distance education from NOVA Southeastern University, a B.A. in history from the College of William & Mary and a Masters degree in curriculum and instruction from the University of Virginia. He was a teacher in a Richmond, Virginia public high school for seven years and spent five years as a college coach and sports administrator before joining Chalkboard, Inc. as a software designer. He and Ms. Satterfield then founded the Dunamis Educational Foundation with which CREATE is affiliated. Pat Satterfield is an instructional designer, conference presenter, AT consultant, and workshop instructor as well as a consultant and instructor for CREATE. She home-schooled four sons and has “taught every grade at least once.” In addition to Blake, she and Ben were foster parents of another child with a disability. Ms. Satterfield served as technology coordinator for several private school programs serving students with disabilities. She holds a B.S. in biology from William & Mary and a B.S. in medical technology from the Medical College of Virginia. She earned a Masters degree in Christian Education from the Presbyterian School of Christian Education. Of their work with CREATE, Ms. Satterfield states, “Our focus has first been to increase awareness of the current best practices in AT. We believe that training for teachers, therapists, and families is essential for optimum AT implementation.” The CREATE team collaborates with local agencies to provide training to the community. Supporting our interview with Ben and Pat Satterfield are resources related to curriculum modification and adaptation, and instructional technology and design. We also feature members of our Knowledge Network. We invite you to contact these members for further information. Please share this newsletter with other organizations, families and professionals who may benefit from it. We invite you to visit us at http://www.fctd.info. We welcome feedback, new members and all who contribute to our growing knowledge base. The Family Center on Technology and Disability Improving Teaching and Learning through Technology Moderated by: November 9 – 27, 2009 http://www.fctd.info/webboard/index.php See you online!
“AT Is Not Just Another Classroom Tool” An Interview with
Assistive Technology can impact instruction with varying degrees of disability. “Thanks to AT,” says Pat Satterfield, “students with high-incidence disabilities, are able to access their text material and to access their tests independently with no human filter. They can do what everyone else is doing but have different ways of doing those things. This, after all, is the premise assistive technology has been based upon for nearly three decades.” “AT,” she adds, “enables students with more significant disabilities to access learning activities, present information, respond to that information, participate in a class discussion, and develop vocabulary, all of which are of critical importance to these children.” Access to AT-supported standards-based instruction has played a key role in the Satterfields’ curriculum modification and adaptation activities. Says Pat Satterfield: “Much of what I’ve been working on is the result of the push for standards-based instruction for students with significant disabilities. I’ve been working to bring some standardization to material that teachers might want to include in any unit of study addressing standards-based content. For example, I’ve helped teachers use several programs that are easily available and aid them in creating activities aimed at providing students with the means to practice vocabulary for a unit or to demonstrate conceptual understanding.” She utilizes two primary symbol libraries, including Boardmaker (http://www.mayer-johnson.com/) Picture It (http://www.slatersoftware.com/pit.html), and is looking forward to using the new Symbolstix (http://symbolstix.com.) PixWriter (http://www.slatersoftware.com/pixwriter.html), Clicker 5 (http://www.cricksoft.com/us/products/clicker/), and Classroom Suite (http://www.intellitools.com) also have symbols included for word processing. “I produce some materials in PowerPoint but more in Classroom Suite,” she says, “because Classroom Suite has highlighted reading of text and quiz features. Some of the teachers I work with use activities in Classroom Suite in order to have a data collection piece for their students’ portfolios.” She has helped develop curriculum materials for sale. “Teachers say they lack the time to create materials or the comfort level to use technology. If they can just get some of these programs in front of their students, they realize very quickly that their students could be achieving at a higher level with technology than without it.” A Shudder “In classrooms where students are lower functioning, technology tools that can be used to build an interactive environment, providing the hooks students need to hang new information on,” states Ms. Satterfield. “It’s very difficult for teachers who don’t have technology. They’re reduced to cutting pictures out of newspapers and magazines.” “At that point,” Ben Satterfield replies, “it’s more a matter of a teacher’s force of personality. There are teachers who are gifted and do a great job with the tools they possess but it’s much easier to differentiate instruction, and to provide an environment within which those students can learn, using technology.” However, even if no technology exists in a classroom, “there are strategies that can be taught to teachers to help improve instructional methods,” Ms. Satterfield notes. Nevertheless, she cautions, “the best scenario for teachers and students of all abilities is to marry solid, imaginative instruction with technology implementation. Just providing AT to a teacher does not necessarily result in good instruction.” “Blake Is Motivated to Learn about Science and History” “Blake,” he father adds, “is very curious. He is just coming into his own with his reading ability. He’s very motivated to learn about science, history, and drama for example. The school system, however, has given priority to functional learning. That’s not to say that functional learning is not important – it is -- but with the technology to assist him in academic learning, he could address content area learning as well as daily living and job skills.” Implementation of AT-aided differentiated instruction in Blake’s classroom would have helped him address grade-level standards, Ben Satterfield asserts. Current Educational Initiatives Most teachers, even special educators who are in a co-teaching situation, are overwhelmed by the amount of material and the speed with which they must attempt to cover it, she insists. “I am in many classrooms where high school students are not responsible for their own learning. They are reviewing material as a single group rather than using any AT or instructional technology to differentiate and promoting individual initiative. I see this environment often perhaps because I am present where needs exist.” Adds Dr. Satterfield: “There are pockets and instances where gifted teachers are accomplishing much with and without technology. There are some who are applying technology in creative ways. Technology can help teachers who are struggling to teach a classroom of diverse learners.” For a decade, Ms. Satterfield states, “we saw technologies put into place but they failed to be well implemented. Teachers did not want to scan in textbooks. This was a huge issue; teachers lack sufficient time for adequate preparation of materials. Now they can take advantage of resources such as NIMAS files, Bookshare, and usable electronic formats that are now being provided to us free by publishers.” “It should be so much easier for me now to use a screen reader to access text material than it was 10 years ago,” she notes. “Nevertheless, many individuals still don’t know how to access these files or they try to access the files but their students don’t meet the specific criteria for NIMAS (National Instructional Material Accessibility Standard). Even if students do not qualify for NIMAS files, the Chafee amendment – the federal law governing copyrights that provides special educators a separate level of permission to create accommodations of copyrighted materials for students with print disabilities – may be used to help provide students the alternative formats they need. Under IDEA, we still have to provide accommodations, and give students access to the curriculum. We are working through these issues.” The point, she continues, “is that it should be getting easier, because electronic formats are provided to a much greater degree than ever before, particularly for children with high-incidence disabilities.” In a Perfect World: Designing the Ideal Pre-Service AT Training Program However, he adds, “if we have just a single class in AT and we instruct students that AT use is special and not a daily necessity and benefit, then AT use will be viewed by pre-service teachers as exotic and not as a necessity. In other words, a pre-service instructor will say to his/her class, ‘We’ll work with assistive technology only on Tuesdays’ or ‘We’ll only use AT when we get to the lab.’” Pre-service teachers, Dr. Satterfield insists, might assume that AT is not a universally applied tool, available to students in all environments where needed. “The program will need to feature good instruction modeled using technology in multiple courses, not only in a single course. In the ideal program technology will be infused throughout the curriculum.” The ideal pre-service AT program must include hands-on opportunities to become familiar with technology from a working standpoint, he insists. “There are many individuals able to navigate through instruction in AT and never roll their sleeves up and play with equipment to get a feel for it. The reason a hands-on approach is a necessity is because the technology is in a constant state of flux. There’s an excellent chance that by the time pre-service teachers enter the field another technology will replace the technology on which they were trained. Yet if they have an idea of how the technology operated during their exposure to it in pre-service training they will have a foundation to help them understand the next iteration. “ Finally, he declares, “there has to be an understanding of how children learn and the ability to analyze the tasks involved in instruction. For example, if we give kids an assignment to complete or an activity to participate in, we need to know what the component steps are. In other words, a task analysis should be conducted. If an entire class, except for Johnny, is proficient at completing an assignment or an activity and Johnny continues to be stymied at the same point in the process, we have to know what kind of a scaffold ought to be built to support Johnny and the tool that should be brought to bear to solve the problem.” He adds: “Those who emerge from this ideal program should have been taught how to target technology, to use specific tools in specific instances, instead of simply throwing technology at a problem and using a one-size-fits-all approach with AT.”
Mismatched Pre-Teaching Skills Fortunately, she says that she has encountered the following useful resources for addressing the pre-teaching of vocabulary to students with disabilities:
“When I work with teachers on the planning process, I try to get them to think first about UDL [Universal Design for Learning]. If special education students are included in the general classroom, then teachers should be asking about what will work for all students, including brain-based teaching strategies like graphic organizers, music, technology, storytelling and analogies.” “If teachers have students with more significant disabilities, then choosing vocabulary for a unit of study that will generalize to everyday life is very important. These students need lots of work on language and vocabulary. Also, creating learning activities that are modifications of the grade level standards to give students exposure to the general curriculum while working on IEP goals will help students progress toward individual goals and in the content areas.” In-service training is not exempt from criticism. In fact, Ben Satterfield terms such training “a drive-by event in which an expert is on-site for a day, makes an impression and leaves.” The attendees for these trainings, he observes, “have been blessed with a learning experience but often it is a one-day, single-experience training event with little chance that what was learned will actually be implemented in a classroom.” This is true especially where AT is concerned, he says. “However, research indicates that follow-up activities, or the opportunity for peer coaching, if not direct coaching, would be very beneficial.” Online communities, he notes, can be a source for post-training AT coaching. “Coaching or other post-training support can have a lasting carry-over impact because it is more likely to bring about change in classroom practice.” Coaching, he notes, provides support when participants begin to implement the concepts of the in-service training. IT Managers Are Pivotal Gatekeepers IT managers, he continues, are also responsible for seeing to it that the IT continues to be available. “There are ‘gotchas’ that IT personnel have to navigate, like the Deep Freeze program which shields children from downloads that are inappropriate.” Programs like Deep Freeze, he adds, “are useful tools but sometimes if the AT for a specific student is not properly installed or installed at just the right interval, the child may lose the previous day’s work -- or the install is wiped out.” There are “tricky aspects” to installation and proper operation of assistive technologies, he says. “IT managers are skilled at these tasks.” At some point, Dr. Satterfield explains, “there’s a refresh that is periodically performed on almost every computer. IT personnel, he says, “have got to keep in mind that the AT tool must be preserved when a refresh is planned. Often the IT team will make the AT tool part of the image or the image for a specific computer or set of computers and be able to reinstall if they have a problem. Otherwise, rafts of AT software purchased with specific students in mind are lost because a computer freezes up and the contents evaporated along with all the student work.” A Crucial IT/AT Collaboration Such collaborative efforts are more prevalent in metropolitan districts in the Satterfield’s region than in rural areas, Ms. Satterfield notes. “The metro AT personnel have been in place for several years and are established whereas in more rural areas there has been less need because there are fewer special education students.” Sometimes the rural districts, she adds, “may not have an ongoing AT team or may not have implemented anything systemwide. Instead these districts focus on individual students. In larger districts, on the other hand, there are enough special education students to justify core AT implementation in selected classrooms.” Four years ago the Satterfields wrote a widely read article describing the potential benefits of a marriage between assistive and instructional technologies. They were asked if, in their experience, any significant progress has been made toward such a marriage since the publication of their article. Declares Pat Satterfield: Wider acceptance of RTI and differentiation has created a more acute need for support in general education classrooms, where there are now more students with mild disabilities who are included in standards-based instruction.” These trends, she notes, require more collaboration than a few years ago “In some districts AT coordinators are members of the IT planning committee. Conversely, an IT team member may be assigned fulltime as the county’s IT specialist for AT. There is a set-aside for space, time and resources to accommodate the needs of special education. We’ve seen some instances where this is built into the organizational structure. Administrators or teachers are sometimes ‘deputized’ to learn the AT network. IT managers have devised ways to incorporate the needs of special education students and classroom personnel.” “There are some methods that are just good instruction,” Ms. Satterfield remarks, again citing the use of graphic organizers and brain-based strategies and connections to real-life experiences. “These are approaches that good teachers use instinctively but that other teachers must be taught in order to ensure that differing learning styles and multiple intelligences are addressed. Good core instruction means that less scaffolding is necessary. This reflects the [UDL] approach because good instruction works for everyone.”
Classroom Suite, she emphasizes, is a tool that could be employed at all tiers. She says that she hopes to see more technology tools that have features for students with significant disabilities embedded but not apparent unless a child needs the features and the teacher turns that feature on for the child. According to Ms. Satterfield, other tools that share Classroom Suite’s versatility include:
The point, she adds, “is that tools do not have to be complicated to be useful to a large number of students.” As far as covering the most students – ranging from those with very significant needs to general education students in high school – there are only a very few programs with that versatility, she points out. “If a school system has a network version of Kurzweil 3000, for example, and there are students who require reading support, that program works for them, as well as for other students who could take advantage of the study skills features and the writing support.” It is unfortunate, she says, that sometimes “some students don’t get to use the program at all because they are not identified as having a reading disablility and as needing the screen reading feature. But there is so much universal capability in some of these programs that is not utilized because we don’t differentiate potential uses and discern the UDL-type versatility that is built-in. Nevertheless, we are moving in the direction of UDL. There are some methods and programs that we know work well for everyone. If we focused on those methods and programs we would need fewer interventions.” Somehow, Dr. Satterfield interjects, “we have to have an opportunity to see those tools work for a wider range of student abilities. I’ll revert to the curb cut analogy: a curb cut works as well for someone pushing a baby stroller as it does for someone in a wheelchair.” Closed-captioning fits this mold as well, he points out. “It’s wonderful for those with hearing impairments but is also great if you are working out at the gym and you want to keep track of the ballgame on TV. There are many features with serendipitous applications that most people aren’t aware of until they are exposed to them.” He cites an anecdote about a Georgia school “where the principal one day emerged from his office after school and looked down the corridor to see a line of students outside of a resource room. He went to check out the reason for the congregation at that location.” The students were waiting in line to use a screen reading program. The principal asked why the students wanted to use the program after school. “These kids had heard that a member of the football team and a cheerleader had used the program and had dramatically improved their academic performance. ‘The program reads the assignments to us,’ the kids in the line told the principal. That’s an application that has been inadvertently withheld from the general public, the opportunity to have assignments read or to use electronic dictionary look-ups. These features would help all students.” Once again, however, copyright constraints intrude, according to Ms. Satterfield. ”It is difficult to obtain permission to provide general education students access to electronic versions of the textbooks.” Nevertheless, Dr. Satterfield comments, “We can put these programs and features in front of those kids and see that the features work. I had to read an enormous volume of very dull articles in my doctoral studies. I scanned them into Kurzweil and read them to myself. I turned the reading speed up very high and got through them. I never would have been able to get through that reading with my own eyes. This stuff really works!” Declares Pat Satterfield: “We have word prediction on our phones and nobody gives that a second thought. At some point all of this will be moot because we’ll be talking to our computers and the computer will be reading to us. There will be no more arguments over this issue.” Given the apparent inevitability of universal use, will copyright constraints atrophy like the arms of a Tyrannosaurus Rex? “Publishers certainly have a right and a duty to protect their copyrighted material,” Ms. Satterfield replies, “but 10 years from now, it may not be an issue.” Ben Satterfield offers a contemporary example of how copyrighted material could be protected yet easily accessible. Pearson Education, is one example of a publisher that has made material available online. “Pearson is taking a market-model approach by recognizing that the content it publishes must have an electronic component. But Pearson will control how its content is disseminated.” Pearson, he says, invites consumers to access material on its website in formats the company controls. “There is an intelligent solution and it is becoming apparent that this market-model approach works and lights the way to the future for textbook publishers that make the transition into the digital era while maintaining the copyright, their income streams and their integrity.” Free, Ready-to-Use Technology with a UDL Touch Dr. Satterfield predicts more AT features will accompany Microsoft Windows and Apple OS that broaden the concept of these features as UDL. A subset of the features found in Dragon Naturally Speaking (http://www.nuance.com/talk/) capability is already included in Windows. “There will be more of those tools. We can do screen magnification and sticky keys. There is more and more capacity for access in operating systems with every new release.” Academic Support Technology for Home Use Says Pat Satterfield: “There are some programs that are web-hosted so that they can be accessed by children at home or at school. The licenses float to a server that’s off-campus for the school so they can be used at home as well.” Kurzweil, and Classroom Suite are in this category, she notes. “There are programs for which a license can be assigned to a home computer or accessed via the web from home. There are other programs with take-home privileges.” Replies Dr. Satterfield: “If the child is working with Bookshare (http://www.bookshare.org/) Don Johnston Inc. now has an arrangement with Bookshare where a subset of the Read:OutLoud text reader is available. Bookshare subscribers have free access to this software.” As for the lower-functioning students, says Ms. Satterfield, “we point families toward the online PowerPoint activities. There are free PowerPoints on the web that are easy to find.” “As we mentioned earlier,” Dr. Satterfield reiterates, “there are activity exchanges available from several companies that have Boardmaker boards, Classroom Suite activities or Clicker activities. But most families have PowerPoint on their home computers. “ For lower-functioning students the Accessible Book Collection (http://www.accessiblebookcollection.org/) offers books for younger children in a screen reading format, says Ms. Satterfield. Laureate software (http://www.laureatelearning.com/) has a home version available to parents at a discount, she points out, “and there’s a home version of Boardmaker as well.” For children with mild disabilities, she adds, “we use Inspiration (http://www.inspiration.com/) programs. Inspiration has been very beneficial for Blake. The program enables him to visualize the relationships between concepts he is learning.” Graphic organizers can also be made interactive, she notes. “I’m a huge proponent of graphic organizers for kids at all levels. With Blake we use a static graphic organizer that be embedded in multimedia tools such as PowerPoint or Classroom Suite thereby making those tools interactive. I use Classroom Suite because one of the features is highlighted reading on the screen.” Response to Intervention: “RTI Is Very Beneficial” “Contrary to the sprit of RTI, in some instances the process has had the result of delaying identification and delivery of special education services to students who legitimately need them. The good news is that this negative approach is not nearly as common as are implementations of the intended approach, which is to help students be successful in a general education classroom setting.” How Parents Can Work with Schools and Teachers: “No AT Decision Is Lifelong” She cautions parents that just because they have heard about a particular device or program does not mean that the tool or program is the best or only way to support their child. “Parents should also be made aware that some kinds of AT may not be their child’s least restrictive environment. What we are seeking is AT that fits best into a child’s least restrictive environment. It may not be the laptop the parents had set their sights on or the jazziest, most expensive program.” In fact, she emphasizes, the best solution may be a tool as basic as a pencil grip. “Our job is to help parents understand that there is a continuum of AT and there may be several options that might help make their child more successful.” But what parents most need to understand, she says, is that AT must be aligned with student goals otherwise the technology may be not be successfully implemented. “We also should be certain that when we document AT in a child’s IEP, that there is a process in place to ensure that the AT is successfully implemented. In all likelihood, Ben Satterfield warns, “one piece of AT will not solve all of a child’s problems for the remainder of his or her life. More often than not we will go through a process, more a journey than a destination. A child’s needs change as the child matures and technology evolves as well. No AT decision is lifelong.” AT and English Language Learners Boardmaker, adds Ben Satterfield, has multiple languages that can accompany a symbol, even Mandarin Chinese. “As Pat points out, you can have a symbol but also have multiple languages.” Academic AT Research: Why It’s Slow – but Valuable Wearing his AT researcher hat, Ben Satterfield explains: “Especially with the low-incidence populations, it is so difficult to obtain a legitimate sample that would be considered a scientifically rigorous representation of participants for any study. Each person with a disability has such unique characteristics that locating two or more of the same age with the same cognitive ability performing the same task is extremely difficult. So we don’t have the kinds of scientifically-based studies available because of the challenges we face conducting scientific research. The uniqueness of individuals demands that we utilize single-subject studies or small-group designs which are considered quasi-experimental research.” Even when such studies are well-designed, he points out, “it’s difficult for them to stand up to the same level of scientific rigor of studies that involve two groups that are randomly selected from a pool of roughly equivalent participants. It’s very difficult to produce the type of study that the scientific community wants.” The research community, he adds, is now seeing the necessity for academic research on AT. “The research community is trying to be creative about ways to make that happen. One way is to take single-subject and small-group designs that are similar enough and then take the studies together. If 10 or 12 are sufficiently similar in that they have consumers with like characteristics, then larger studies called ‘meta-analyses’ can be developed that examine the combined weight of evidence contained in those studies.” The goal, he emphasizes, is to consolidate the research. “We need the research because policy and purchasing decisions are based on evidence-based research. Unfortunately there’s not much available to draw on. So everything that we can present that has any value is worth collecting.” The research community, he adds, “is trying to move into areas where it sees the capability to produce usable research. The studies take time. There are many safeguards that are built into the systems and into academic research that require the expenditure of time.” “We are seeing additional focus upon research emerging as a result of the integration of Evidence Based Practice (EBP) into the professional practice of Speech Language Pathologists (SLPs). They use research to determine the best treatment approach for individual clients. SLPs work in the school with students who have communication disorders. It will be worth watching how EBP influences best practice in schools as well as private practice.” Nevertheless, responds Pat Satterfield, “there are examples of collaborations between researchers and manufacturers in the development new AT products.. These research-based products are already having a positive impact upon students. Where we have coordination between research and product development, we can have greater likelihood of beneficial results.” There are many products in the marketplace that were developed with a specific group or set of individuals in mind, Mr. Satterfield asserts. “The vendors know what they have created is viable but they require feedback in the form of research that tells them which features make the most difference for consumers and the ways those features can be refined.” Until recently, he comments, “the AT market has been described as a boutique market. Many vendors make a specific product; others make products for a specific group of users. That configuration is changing now as companies merge and the industry consolidates. Nevertheless, a ‘mom & pop’ image remains. Small companies usually don’t have the resources to conduct research studies. They are confident that their products are viable because they have seen consumers’ lives changed by the introduction of their product. But, again, without research to back them up they have only testimonials and case studies. That is not sufficient to meet the current funding requirements. Research would have a big impact on these companies and on the products they develop.” AT and IT Are Here to Stay Technology is and will continue to be a transformative force in education because it provides us with the capacity to achieve what only recently was impossible, he declares. Pat Satterfield comments: “Ben has communicated with people in South Dakota who are actively involved in distance education. There may be a teacher in one school with expertise in a specific area. That teacher may have only two students in her school who require her expertise but there may be 10 students across the state who need her help. They are using distance learning to link these students together around the state. This provides instruction for these students in a cost effective manner.” “As we look at the educational system as a whole, with challenges like the increasing costs of transportation and maintaining infrastructure, and the limits upon funding, we may find that distance education is a useful alternative. It may allow us to do things we would be hard-pressed to do otherwise. In the same way assistive technologies allow kids to do things they otherwise have difficulty doing. If I have word prediction in my phone, why should it be a giant leap to have word prediction when I’m writing? If using a touchscreen at the local bank ATM doesn’t bother me, why should it be a bother in the classroom?” Communication, she insists, is a major factor impacting professionals’ and policymakers’ postures on technology. “There are many individuals who have been in the field for a very long time. They are not digital natives. Some of us older folks approach that level of expertise but we’ve had to work at it. As younger teachers and professionals enter the field more thoroughly trained in assistive and instructional technologies, it should be easier for them to be amenable to implementing technological advances.” Sometimes a disconnect occurs, she alleges, at the administrator level. “.There are times many purchasing decisions that once were made at the district level that now are delegated to individual schools. District level special education professionals may or may not have much influence with the local building administrator. Depending on how much understanding of assistive or instructional technology local administrators possess there will be effective implementation at one school but inadequate implementation at another in the same district. In short there is much technology education that has to be absorbed by professionals and policymakers at all levels.” Who Decides? Technology’s role in the process, she says, is this: “If I’m having a heart attack, wouldn’t I want doctors to use all the technology they have at their disposal? Of course I would! The same holds true for children and learning. In education, why shouldn’t we bring all the available tools to bear? As Dave Edyburn ask, ‘How many times do kids have to fail before we give them a chance to find a different way?’” RESOURCES ARTICLES
This article is part of a series on this web site. Series topics include: the defining of AT, an examination of legal issues surrounding AT, the implementation of AT in different environments and quality measurement in terms of AT use and services.
Teaching by Design
http://its.leesummit.k12.mo.us/ KNOWLEDGE NETWORK MEMBERS The Assistive and Instructional Technology Lab: University of Texas, College of Education
For further information, contact: National Center for Culturally Responsive Educational Systems (NCCRESt)
For additional information, contact:
For additional information, contact: Funding provided by the US Department of Education under grant number H327F080003 Project Officer: Jo Ann McCann |
During World War II British Prime Minister Winston Churchill implored U.S. president Franklin D. Roosevelt, “Give us the tools…and we will finish the job.” Since the early days of the digital era, assistive and instructional technologies (AT/IT) have evolved along with other technologies, producing tools that can dramatically increase learning gains by children with and without disabilities. Still, getting that technology into the hands of those who need it the most remains a struggle in many schools and districts.
“Assistive technology is not just another classroom tool,” declares Pat Satterfield. “The presence of AT means that teachers must change their way of teaching; AT professionals, for a number of years, have viewed themselves as systems change agents, not only as specialists who support kids with disabilities. We are actually changing classroom practice. “ 
Technology was not regularly employed as a teaching tool in the school attended by the Satterfield’s 18-year-old son, Blake, who has Down syndrome. “We’ve decided to home-school him, which for us is not an unusual experience,” explains Dr. Satterfield. “His teachers were focused on daily living and job skills, which he needs, but not at the expense of other instruction such as reading and writing. Unfortunately, their curriculum was not well correlated with standards-based instruction. And many students like Blake are just getting to the point where they are ready to learn some academic skills when the curriculum transitions to a job focus. Again this is understandable because schools have to prepare students for the real world before graduation, but it may leave some without the basic reading and writing skills for meaningful job placement or knowledge to pass graduation tests.”
Not long ago the conventional wisdom was that the incoming crop of pre-service education majors, digital natives, would instinctively understand the benefits of AT. The trouble is, according to Ben Satterfield, that these digital natives have not seen technology applied as assistive technology. For example, he explains, “they haven’t seen good instruction with technology modeled. Teacher preparation institutions need to think not in terms of a single AT course but instead in terms of a more pervasive infusion of technology across the program. If I’m emerging from college as a teacher who will work with students with disabilities I should have seen technology involved in each of my classes as a part of the solutions for different situations in different classes and its use should have been encouraged in the projects I’ve completed.” That, he states, “is the ideal scenario.”
As a baseline, he declares, “program graduates should enter the field understanding that there are specific instances that require specific tools. They should have developed an understanding of the process of learning and the ability to perform an effective task analysis in terms of what a child is asked to do from a cognitive perspective, so that points of breakdown can be assessed.”
When it comes to getting AT and instructional technology into the hands of students and teachers, building and district IT managers play a key gatekeeper role, Dr. Satterfield explains. “Depending on how the systems are organized there will be a consideration process resulting in a decision that specific AT should be made available for a student for a trial period. Often this decision has to go through the IT group in order for it to be installed onto a school’s computers and then made available to teachers and students.” Installation of the technology is the province of IT managers.
In Georgia, she says, “at each of our four tiers different interventions are supposed to be used to support student progress. That’s a safeguard for the students so that we don’t persist in using the same unsuccessful approach. However, we do have tools that work for all students. These are UDL tools – an example would be Classroom Suite — that feature embedded instruction as well as open-ended tools for all. There may be whole class instruction in one classroom, and a student who is remediating in another classroom who can use these tools as an intervention at tier two or tier three. Plus these UDL tools all have features built in that offer students with more significant needs features such as scanning and word prediction.”
The Satterfields provide examples of technology that families can use at home to help support their children’s academic and functional success.
Where RTI is well implemented it has been successful, she remarks “However, I occasionally visit a school that is still just doing the probes. They’re monitoring the children on a regular basis but they seem to be having difficulty implementing a different approach for each tier. If what we are doing is not working, we need to try something different, especially if a research-based alternative is available.”
Academic research on assistive technology is notoriously slow. Why does it require so much time? Can the process be accelerated?
According to Dr. Satterfield, families, teachers, disability professionals, and policy makers should be assured that AT and IT are here to stay. 
Pyramid provides services and products for parents and educators of children and adults with autism or related disabilities. The organization is a consortium of trained autism professionals offering training opportunities and products that focus on the initiation of communication and the design of effective educational environments utilizing structural and instructional elements. Pyramid presents a blend of broad spectrum applied behavior analysis in conjunction with the development of functional communication skills. .The organization is a source of training from the Picture Exchange Communication System.
Operated by the Educational Testing Service (ETS), the Florida and the Islands Regional Comprehensive Center is one of 16 regional centers funded by the U.S. Department of Education. This center, which serves the state of Florida, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands, provides technical assistance in four areas: implementation of school improvement efforts to help meet Adequate Yearly Progress requirements; identification and adoption of instructional and assessment methods that have been proven effective through scientifically based research; designing programs and strategies and allocating resources to recruit, train and retain talented teachers and school leaders; enhancement of assessment and accountability systems. The center focuses on five prime initiatives:
NCCRESt provides technical assistance and professional development to students from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds and their peers to reduce inappropriate referrals to special education. The project targets improvements in culturally responsive practices, early intervention literacy and positive behavioral supports. For more information, contact:
TCTA provides technology access, support, and information to individuals with disabilities. The center’s services include: 
CITT at the University of Florida supports UF faculty in the implementation of technology to enhance and improve teaching, research and engagement. The center includes a staff of instructional designers, training specialists, web developers and faculty lab consultants and provides services to UF faculty in three areas: instructional design, training and the faculty media lab. Online training is available. CITT educational development services include:
NIUSI supports inclusive urban communities, schools and families in building capacity for sustainable, successful urban education through dialogue, networking, technology, action research, information systems, alliance and consensus building. The institute will build desired capacity by: