SET-BC - 59 - February 2007

Section 4: Identify Assistive Technology Solutions

Description, Rationale and Guidelines

Once the AT trial phase is complete, it should be a relatively straightforward process to identify and select the assistive technology solution that will best meet the student’s needs and educational goals. Selection of the AT solution, then, would be the end result of the AT trial phase. For some teams, however, AT trials are not possible and identification of the AT solution must be made based on the student profile gathered in the first step of implementation and the identified IEP goals. When faced with the wide range of features now available in assistive devices and software, teams may become overwhelmed and struggle to narrow the options to one or two solutions. It is important for teams to access the necessary consultation and support from school or district staff who are knowledgeable in the field of assistive technology and who can make recommendations based on the student and team requirements. Teams may find it helpful to follow a three step process when selecting an AT solution for their students.

1. Brainstorm all the possible solutions that would appear to meet the student and curricular needs.

2. Narrow the list by identifying the various features of each solution and eliminating those that do not have the necessary features.

3. Consider these additional questions and select the best solution. a. Will the technology work in all necessary settings or environments? b. If it will be moved regularly, how portable is it? c. How easy is it to learn and operate? d. How reliable is it under school and / or home conditions? e. Does it need to work with other technologies? f. Are there sufficient technical resources available at the school or

district level to support the technology? No matter what solutions are suggested during the selection process, teams should consider the following general guidelines:

• Match the features of the technology to the student need and IEP goals. As more and more assistive technologies are developed, manufacturers work hard to include as many features as possible in any one device or piece of software. The technology features should be matched, as closely as possible, to student need and IEP goals. Teams will often find that there are several possible solutions that could be considered. Careful examination of the individual features of the device or program usually narrows the choices and makes the appropriate solution more obvious. The importance of this consideration cannot be over emphasized – the research literature clearly shows that the most often reported cause of assistive technology abandonment is a mismatch of

SET-BC - 60 - February 2007

technology features to student need. Teams often make the mistake of selecting the technology solution based on the technical potential of the device or software, rather than how well the technology would work for the specific student.

An obvious example of this type of mismatch can occur when a middle or high school student requires technology to help with written output. The team assumes the student needs a laptop computer. However, there are dedicated word processors which are much simpler, more reliable, easier to manage, and more cost effective than laptops and provide the student with the exact tool that he or she might need to improve or increase written output. Teams implementing a laptop in that situation often find it is “too much” technology for the student and that it creates additional work and challenges for both the student and team.

• Select technology that meets the student at their present level of functioning. It is important to put a technology solution in place that suits the student’s current level of functioning, but, since assistive technology can be costly, it is also important to consider the student’s potential growth. The challenge is finding technology that will serve the student effectively now and for as long as possible.

• Look at possible technology solutions with a critical eye. Most assistive technology solutions offer a wide variety of features which may be superficially appealing. It is important that teams move past initial impressions and examine the various aspects of the technology critically. Teams should question the performance, ease of use, reliability, safety, practicality, cost effectiveness, and personal acceptance of any assistive technology solution before selecting it for the student.

• Be prepared to change the technology solution if needed. The effective

selection of an assistive technology solution is often more art than science. Because there are so many complex human factors to consider – the student’s and the team’s – and teams may be dealing with technology they have not actually implemented before - the initial selection (particularly if it is not informed by an AT trial) is a “best guess”. Once the technology is selected and put into place, teams should assess, as quickly as possible, whether or not the technology immediately meets the student’s physical and cognitive needs (e.g. the adapted mouse is the right size, the student can activate the AAC device, the computer screen is large enough for screen magnification, etc.). Team members who have expertise in functional assessments are key when determining if the assistive technology is a good “fit”. Based on these initial assessments, the assistive technology may have to be adjusted or replaced. Assessment of the overall effectiveness of the technology solution will then take place over time as part of the overall implementation plan.

• Make use of the many tools that are available to help identify and compare

the features of various technology solutions. There are many print and electronic tools that are now available to help teams with the AT selection process. Teams who do not have access to an assistive technology consultant can still make informed decisions based on information provided in AT feature

SET-BC - 61 - February 2007

matrices, decision making software, and lists of possible AT solutions. Here are some examples of these AT selection tools:

o EvaluWare: Assessment Activities for AAC and Computer Access Software that leads the user through the selection process based on responses to questions. http://www.assistivetech.com/p-evaluware.htm (free demo available)

o LD Online (Assistive Technology) Website with many articles and links to help teams when selecting assistive technology. http://www.ldonline.org/indepth/technology

o Closing the Gap (Solutions) Extensive website featuring a searchable software and hardware solutions database. http://www.closingthegap.com

• Be realistic about the student’s capabilities. No matter how remarkable the

features of the technology may be, the student can only take advantage of the features if they have the capability to do so. Each type of assistive technology has some basic prerequisites for use. For example, to use a computer, a student, at minimum, must understand cause and effect. Access to the computer can be accomplished through a myriad of ways (e.g. adapted mice, switches, lightpointers, etc.) but to be used effectively, the student must understand that their actions or behaviours cause something to happen on the computer. In the same way, successful use of a communication device is only possible if the student has, even at a rudimentary level, communicative intent. Having said this, it is not necessary for students to have all the prerequisite skills before a technology solution is put in place – it is only necessary that they have the potential capability to use the technology effectively.

SET-BC - 62 - February 2007

Tools for Identifying AT Solutions There are a number of tools available to help identify appropriate AT solutions – some are more general and some are very technology specific. One of the challenges with technology is how quickly it evolves and changes. While technology feature matrices can be very valuable when narrowing the list of possible solutions, the information may go out of date quickly. Decisions must be based on the most current information possible – consulting with an assistive technology consultant helps ensure this will happen. 1. The SETT Framework – Part II (Joy Zabala, 1998)

(http://sweb.uky.edu/~jszaba0/SETTFORMS2003.PDF) The second part of the SETT framework provides forms for identifying features of AT systems and identifying the most promising AT tools. 2. WATI Assistive Technology Assessment Technology Checklist

(www.wati.org) One component of the larger WATI assessment package is their Technology Checklist. It lists possible AT solutions categorized by curriculum or student need. This checklist is often used when brainstorming possible solutions. 3. Continuum of Considerations (University of Kentucky AT Project) (http://serc.gws.uky.edu/www/ukatii/index.html) A reinterpretation of the WATI checklist, the UKAT continuum offers a range of AT solutions from least adaptive to most adaptive for a large number of situations (e.g. computer access, communication, vision, learning / studying, etc.). This tool helps teams choose an appropriate level of technology solution. 4. Assistive Technology Devices for Writing and Spelling (Georgia Project for Assistive Technology www.gpat.org) GPAT provides a number of updated technology feature matrices with the most commonly selected technology solutions organized according to task. The sample tool included here is for writing and spelling but matrices for augmentative communication, and study and organization are available.

SET-BC - 63 - February 2007

SET-BC - 64 - February 2007

SET-BC - 65 - February 2007

SET-BC - 66 - February 2007

SET-BC - 67 - February 2007

SET-BC - 68 - February 2007

SET-BC - 69 - February 2007

SET-BC - 70 - February 2007

SET-BC - 71 - February 2007

SET-BC - 72 - February 2007

SET-BC - 73 - February 2007

Case Study of Effectively Identifying an AT Solution Blaine is a bright Grade 5 student with low vision. He had been managing in class with minor adjustments – preferential setting, high contrast overhead, enlarged photocopies of text, etc. – but as the text load increased in the intermediate grades, his team noticed that he was tiring a great deal by the early afternoon. His classroom teacher requested a team meeting that included the vision teacher to discuss possible assistive technology solutions to help him complete the regular Grade 5 curriculum. At the meeting, everyone gave their perspective on Blaine’s needs and the vision teacher gave the team information on his vision issues. It was agreed that he required some sort of technology support, particularly because there was concern that his vision would deteriorate over time if he continued to strain to see the board and textual materials. During the meeting the team created a chart that looked something like this: Area of need Tech features

needed Possible technology Meets need y/n

Reading books enlarge text from books, sheets, novels

CCTV Kurzweil 3000 BookPort eText with talking word processor Microsoft eReader

Y Y N Y N

Seeing board Bring what is written on board closer to him

CCTV Monocular

Y Y

From this chart, they were able to identify one type of device, a CCTV, that would meet both primary needs. The vision teacher then gave the team CCTV options – showing the team members the different features by going online and viewing the vendor websites. After much discussion about Blaine’s current and future needs, as well as the characteristics and features of the device, the team identified a Flipper and laptop (http://www.enhancedvision.co.uk/flipper_family.php) as the technology solution of choice. Blaine was brought into the meeting at this point and was shown the information about the device. At first he was somewhat reluctant as he was concerned that he would stand out from his peers using a “weird” laptop. However, with further explanation and some discussion as to how he would like to see it used, he became excited with the possibilities. His classroom teacher’s discussion about using the device to magnify bugs and worms for the whole class really won him over! The vision teacher agreed to pursue the acquisition of the equipment and the team scheduled a second meeting to develop the technology implementation plan that included an early assessment phase to ensure the Flipper was the right tool for Blaine in the Grade 5 classroom.