This paper provides an analysis of federal policy, legislation, and adjudication related to assistive technology for students with disabilities. The authors review the expanded mandate for assistive technology in IDEA 1997 and its implications, including associated costs and benefits of assistive technology. Recent federal court decisions, hearing decisions, and Section 504 rulings that address assistive technology are discussed. School district responsibilities are explored, and recommendations are offered to special education professionals and parents who have children who may benefit from assistive technology devices and services.
Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq. (2000).
3.
Americans with Disabilities Act Regulations for Title II and Title III, 28 C.F.R. Part 35 and Part 36.
4.
Assistive Technology Act of 1998, 29 U.S.C. § 3001 et seq. (2000).
5.
Austin Independent School District, 25 IDELR 875 (SEA TX 1997).
6.
Barber v. Bogalusa City School Board, 2001 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8156 (E.D. La. 2001).
7.
BehrmannM. M. (1995). Assistive technology training. In FlippoK. F.IngeK. J.BarcusM. J. (Eds.), Assistive technology a resource for school, work, and community. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes Publishing.
8.
BlackhurstA. E. (1997). Perspectives on technology in special education. Teaching Exceptional Children, 29(5), 41–48.
9.
BlackhurstA. E.EdyburnD. C. (2001). A brief history of special education technology. Special Education Technology Practice, 2(1), 21–36.
10.
Board of Education of Harford County v. Bauer, 33 IDELR ¶ 267 (D. Md. 2000).
11.
Board of Education of the Mamaroneck Union Free School District, 34 IDELR ¶ 107 (SEA NY 2000).
12.
Board of Education v. Rowley, 458 U.S. 176 (1982).
13.
Bradley County (TN) School District, 34 IDELR ¶ 239 (OCR 2000).
14.
Brandywine Public Schools, 35 IDELR ¶ 81 (SEA MI 2001).
15.
ChambersA. C. (1997). Has technology been considered? A guide for IEP teams. Albuquerque NM: The Council of Administrators of Special Education.
16.
Detroit (MI) Public Schools, 29 IDELR 619 (SEA MI 1998).
17.
Douglas County School District Re-1, 32 IDELR ¶ 188 (SEA CO 1999).
18.
DubbelsK. (n.d.). Assistive technology in the individual education plan outline. Retrieved February 1, 2001, from the Neighborhood Legal Services site: http://www.nls.org/atiep.htm.
19.
East Penn School District v. Scott B., 1999 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2683 (E.D. Pa. 1999).
20.
East Whittier City Elementary School District, 34 IDELR ¶ 49 (SEA CA 2000).
21.
EyerT. L. (1998). Greater expectations: How the 1997 IDEA amendments raise the basic floor of opportunity for children with disabilities. Education Law Reporter, 126, 1–19.
22.
Fort Bend Independent School District, 34 IDELR ¶ 246 (SEA TX 2001).
23.
GoldenD. (1998). Assistive technology in special education policy & practice. Reston, VA: Council for Exceptional Children.
24.
Greater Albany Public School District, 32 IDELR ¶ 157 (SEA OR 1999).
25.
Gwinnett County School System, 27 IDELR 890 (SEA GA 1998).
26.
HagerR. M. (1999). Funding of assistive technology. Retrieved February 1, 2001, from the Assistive Technology Funding & Systems Change Project United Cerebral Palsy Association site: http://www.nls.org/specedat.htm.
27.
HuefnerD. S. (2000). Free appropriate public education under IDEA. In Getting comfortable with special education law. Norwood, MA: Christopher-Gordon Publishers.
28.
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, 20 U.S.C. § 1400 et seq. (2000).
29.
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, 20 U.S.C.§ 1400 et seq. (1993).
30.
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act Regulations for Part B, 34 C.F.R. Part 300 (1999).
31.
Individuals with Disabilities Education Law Report, Cumulative Digest and Tables, Vols. 16–19, 20–23 (1993, 1996), Horsham, PA: LRP Publications.
32.
In Re: Student with a Disability, 29 IDELR 809 (SEA DE 1998).
33.
In Re: Student with a Disability, 31 IDELR ¶ 99 (SEA DE 1999).
34.
Jefferson County School District R-1, 34 IDELR ¶ 212 (SEA CO 2001).
35.
JulnesR. E.BrownS. E. (1993). Legal mandate to provide assistive technology in special education programming. West's Education Law Quarterly, 2(4), 552–563.
36.
Kevin T. v. Elmhurst Community School District No. 205, 2002 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4645 (N.D. Ill. 2002).
37.
Laredo Independent School District, 27 IDELR 856 (SEA TX 1997).
LRP Publications. (1999, June). Guide: Assistive technology can decrease special education numbers. In Lexis-Nexis Academic Universe-Document (Inclusive Education Programs, Vol. 6, No. 6) Retrieved February 9, 2001, from http://web.lexis-nexis.com/universe/ [under legal research then under legal news].
41.
ParetteP.VanBiervlietA.HourcadeJ. J. (2000). Family-centered decision making in assistive technology. Journal of Special Education Technology, 15(1), 45–55.
42.
Polk v. Susquehanna Intermediate Unit 16, 853 F. 3d 171 (3d Cir. 1988).
43.
Red Oak (TX) Independent School District, 29 IDELR 797 (SEA TX 1998).
44.
Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 29 U.S.C. §794(a) (2000).
45.
Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 29 U.S.C. §794d (2000).
46.
SheldonJ. R.HagerR. M. (1997). Funding of assistive technology for persons with disabilities. Retrieved February 1, 2001, from the Neighborhood Legal Services, Inc. site: http://www.nls.org/atart.htm.
47.
Smithtown Central School District, 29 IDELR 293 (SEA NY 1998).
Texas City Independent School District, 28 IDELR 1237 (SEA TX 1998).
50.
Technology Related Assistance Act for Individuals with Disabilities, 29 U.S.C.§ 2201 et seq. (1994) (repealed, P.L. 105–394, Nov. 13, 1998).
51.
Tuscaloosa County Board of Education, 29 IDELR 435 (SEA AL 1998).
52.
United States Department of Education Regulations for Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 34 C.F.R. Part 100 (1999).
53.
Upper Darby School District, 26 IDELR 1183 (SEA PA 1997).
54.
WaddellC. D.UrbanM. D. (2000). An overview of law & policy for IT accessibility: A resource for state and municipal IT makers. Retrieved February 19, 2001, from the International Center for Disability Resources on the Internet site: http://icdri.mondosearch.com/.
55.
Williford School District, 27 IDELR 667 (SEA AR 1998).
56.
Williams Bay School District, 29 IDELR 1141 (SEA WI 1999).
57.
ZirkelP. (1998). Assistive technology: What are the legal limits?The Special Educator, 14 (5) 4–5. Horsham, PA: LRP Publications.
