Despite the emphasis on technology and the rapid proliferation of assistive technology devices, little is known about the specific uses of assistive technology with persons who vary in disability type, severity, and age. The present study conducted a comprehensive review and a systematic analysis of published reports of assistive technology and skill acquisition of persons with disabilities. Uses of assistive technology, its benefits and obstacles, are reviewed. The results provide indications why technology is often abandoned. Implications for practitioners and researchers are discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AlperS. (2003). An ecological approach to identifying curriculum content for inclusive settings. In RyndakD. L.AlperS. (2003), Curriculum and instruction for students with significant disabilities in inclusive settings (2nd ed., pp. 73–85). Boston: Pearson Education.
2.
AlperS.MullC.SoenksenD. (2004). Enhancing inclusion and access through assistive technology. Unpublished manuscript, University of Northern Iowa, Cedar Falls, IA.
3.
Anderson-InmanL. (1999). Computer-based solutions for secondary students with learning disabilities: Emerging issues. Reading and Writing Quarterly, 15, 239–249.
4.
*Anderson-InmanL.Knox-QuinnC.HorneyM. A. (1996). Computer-based study strategies for students with learning disabilities: Individual differences associated with adoption level. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 29(5), 461–484.
5.
*Anderson-InmanL.Knox-QuinnC.SzymanskiM. (1999). Computer-supported studying: Stories of successful transition to postsecondary education. Career Development for Exceptional Children, 22(2), 185–212.
6.
Assistive Technology Act of 1998, Pub. L. 105–394, §§ 2 & 3.
7.
Assistive Technology Act of 2004, Pub. L. 108–364, § 3.
8.
*AyresK. M.LangoneJ. (2002). Acquisition and generalization of purchasing skills using a video enhanced computer-based instructional program. Journal of Special Education Technology, 17(4), 15–28.
9.
*BerningerV.AbbottR.RoganL.ReedE.AbbottS.BrooksA.VaughanK.GrahamS. (1998). Teaching spelling to children with specific learning disabilities. The mind's ear and eye beats the computer or pencil. Learning Disability Quarterly, 21, 107–122.
10.
BryantB.RiveraD.WardeB. (1993). Technology as a means to an end: Facilitating success at the college level. LD Forum, 19, 13–18.
11.
BurgstahlerS. (2002). The role of technology in preparing youth with disabilities for postsecondary education and employment. Manoa: University of Hawaii, The Post-Outcomes Network of the National Center on Secondary Education and Transition (NCSET). Available from http://www.ncset.hawaii.edu/Publications/.
12.
*CalhoonM. B.FuchsL. S.HamlettC. L. (2000). Effects of computer-based test accommodations on mathematics performance assessments for secondary students with learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 23(4), 271–282.
13.
*CavalierA. R.BrownC. C. (1998). From passivity to participation: The transformational possibilities of speech-recognition technology. Teaching Exceptional Children, 30(6), 60–65.
14.
CavalierA. R.FerrettiR. P.OkoloC. M. (1994). Technology and individual differences. Journal of Special Education Technology, 12, 175–181.
15.
CowenS. (1993). Transition planning for college-bound students with learning disabilities. InVogelS.AdelmanP. B. (Eds.), Success for college students with learning disabilities (pp. 39–56). New York: Springer-Verlag.
16.
DahlkeC. (1993). Making a successful transition from high school to college: A model program. InVogelS.AdelmanP. B. (Eds.), Success for college students with learning disabilities (pp. 56–79). New York: Springer-Verlag.
17.
*DaltonB.WinburyN. E.MoroccoC. C. (1990). “If you could just push a button”: Two fourth grade boys with learning disabilities learn to use a computer spelling checker. Journal of Special Education Technology, 10, 177–191.
18.
*DattiloJ.CamarataS. (1991). Facilitating conversation through self-initiated augmentative communication treatment. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 24, 369–378.
19.
*DattiloJ.GuerinN.CoryL. (2001). Effects of computerized education on self-determination of youth with disabilities. Journal of Special Education Technology, 16(1), 5–17.
20.
*DaviesD. K.StockS. E.WehmeyerM. L. (2001). Enhancing independent internet access for individuals with mental retardation through use of a specialized web browser: A pilot study. Education and Training in Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities, 36, 107–113.
21.
*DaviesD. K.StockS. E.WehmeyerM. L. (2002a). Enhancing independent time-management skills of individuals with mental retardation using a palmtop personal computer. Mental Retardation, 40(5), 358–365.
22.
*DaviesD. K.StockS. E.WehmeyerM. L. (2002b). Enhancing independent task performance for individuals with mental retardation through the use of a handheld self-directed visual and audio prompting system. Education and Training in Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities, 37, 209–218.
23.
DefurS. H.Todd-AllenM.GetzelE. E. (2001). Parent participation in transition planning process. Career Development for Exceptional Individuals, 24(1), 19–36.
24.
*DicarloC. F.BanajeeM. (2000). Using voice output devices to increase initiations of young children with disabilities. Journal of Early Intervention, 23(3), 191–199.
25.
EdyburnD. L. (2001). 2000 in review: A synthesis of the special education technology literature. Journal of Special Education Technology, 16(2), 5–25.
26.
*ElkindJ.CohenC.MurrayC. (1993). Using computer-based readers to improve reading comprehension of students with dyslexia. Annals of Dyslexia, 43, 238–259.
27.
*EllerdD. A.MorganR. L.SalzbergC. L. (2002). Comparison of two approaches for identifying job preferences among persons with disabilities using video CD-ROM. Education and Training in Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities, 37(3), 300–309.
28.
*EmbregtsP.J.C.M. (2002). Effects of video feedback on social behaviour of young people with mild intellectual disability and staff responses. International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 49(1), 105–116.
29.
*EmbregtsP.J.C.M. (2003). Using self-management, video feedback, and graphic feedback to improve social behavior of youth with mild mental retardation. Education and Training in Developmental Disabilities, 38(3), 283–295.
30.
*EpsteinJ. N.WillisM. G.ConnersC. K.JohnsonD. E. (2001). Use of a technological prompting device to aid a student with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder to initiate and complete daily tasks: An exploratory study. Journal of Special Education Technology, 16(1), 19–28.
31.
Federal Acquisition Regulations for Content of IEP, 64 Fed. Reg. (March 12, 1999) (34 CFR pt. 300). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
32.
*FerrettiR. P.MacArthurC. D.OkoloC. M. (2001). Teaching for historical understanding in inclusive classrooms. Learning Disability Quarterly, 24(1), 59–71.
33.
*FurnissF.LancioniG.RochaC.CunhaB.SeedhouseP.MoratoP.O'ReillyM. F. (2001). VICAID: Development and evaluation of a palm-based job aid for workers with severe developmental disabilities. British Journal of Educational Technology, 32(3), 277–287.
34.
*GlaserC. W.RiethH. J.KinzerC. K. (1999). A description of the impact of multimedia anchored instruction on classroom interaction. Journal of Special Education Technology, 14(2), 27–43.
35.
*GoldsworthyR.BarabS. A.GoldsworthyE. L. (2000). The STAR Project: Enhancing adolescents' social understanding through video-based, multimedia scenarios. Journal of Special Education Technology, 15(2), 13–26.
36.
*GrahamS.MacArthurC. (1988). Improving learning disabled students' skills at revising essays produced on a word processor: Self-instructional strategy training. The Journal of Special Education, 22(2), 133–152.
37.
*HigginsK.BooneR. (1990). Hypertext computer study guides and the social studies achievements of students with learning disabilities, remedial students, and regular education students. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 23(9), 529–540.
38.
*HigginsK.BooneR.LovittT. C. (1996). Hypertext support for remedial students and students with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 29(4), 402–412.
39.
*HigginsK.RaskindM. H. (1995). Compensatory effectiveness of speech recognition on the written composition performance of postsecondary students with learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 18, 159–174.
40.
*HigginsE. L.RaskindM. H. (2000). Speaking to read: The effects of continuous vs. discrete speech recognition systems on the reading and spelling of children with learning disabilities. Journal of Special Education Technology, 15(1), 19–30.
41.
*HineM. S.GoldmanS. R.CosdenM. A. (1990). Error monitoring by learning handicapped students engaged in collaborative microcomputer-based writing. The Journal of Special Education, 23(4), 407–422.
42.
*HollenbeckK.RozekT.M.A.TindalG. (2000). An exploratory study of student-paced versus teacher-paced accommodations for large-scale math tests. Journal of Special Education Technology, 15(2), 27–36.
43.
*HowellR. D.EricksonK.StangerC. (2000). Evaluation of a computer-based program on the reading performance of first grade students with potential for reading failure. Journal of Special Education Technology, 15(4), 5–14.
44.
*HutingerP. L.JohansonJ.StoneburnerR. (1996). Assistive technology applications in educational programs of children with multiple disabilities: A case study report on the state of the practice. Journal of Special Education Technology, 13, 16–35.
45.
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act Amendments of 1997, 20 C.F.R. § 1400 et seq. (1997).
46.
Individuals With Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004, Pub. L. 108–446, §§ 601 & 602.
47.
*IrishC. (2002). Using peg- and keyword mnemonics and computer-assisted instruction to enhance basic multiplication performance in elementary students with learning and cognitive disabilities. Journal of Special Education Technology, 17(4), 29–40.
48.
IzzoM.LambP. (2002). Self-determination and career development: Skills for successful transition to postsecondary education and employment. A white paper written in collaboration with Ohio State University, the Center on Disability Studies at the University of Hawaii at Manoa, and the National Center on Secondary Education and Transition. Available from http://www.ncset.hawaii.edu/Publications/.
49.
*KellyB.GerstenR.CarnineD. (1990). Student error as a function of curriculum design: Teaching fractions to remedial high school students and high school students with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disability, 23(1), 23–29.
50.
*KhemkaI.HicksonL. (2000). Decision-making by adults with mental retardation in simulated situations of abuse. Mental Retardation, 38(1), 15–26.
51.
*KhylR.AlperS.SinclairT. J. (1999). Acquisition and generalization of functional words in community grocery stores using videotaped instruction. Career Development for Exceptional Individuals, 22(1), 55–67.
52.
JudgeS. L. (2001). Computer applications in programs for young children with disabilities: Current status and future directions. Journal of Special Education Technology, 16(1), 29–40.
53.
*LancasterP. E.SchumakerJ. B.DeshlerD. D. (2002). The development and validation of an interactive hypermedia program for teaching a self-advocacy strategy to students with disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 25, 277–302.
54.
*LancioniG. E.BracalenteD. O. (1998). A portable control device for prompting independent indoor travel by persons with severe multiple disabilities. Journal of Visual Impairment and Blindness, 92(1), 63–70.
55.
LodeC. (1992). How technology assists my daughter to compete in the mainstream of life. Exceptional Parent, 22(8), 34, 41.
56.
*MacArthurC. A. (1998). Word processing with speech synthesis and word prediction: Effects on the dialogue journal writing of students with learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 21, 151–166.
57.
*MacArthurC. A.GrahamS.HaynesJ. B.DeLaPazS. (1996). Spelling checkers and students with learning disabilities: Performance comparisons and impacts on spelling. The Journal of Special Education, 30(1), 35–57.
58.
*MacArthurC. A.HaynesJ. B. (1995). Student Assistant for Learning from Text (SALT): A hypermedia reading aid. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 28(3), 150–159.
59.
*MakiH. S.VaurasM.M.S.VainioS. (2002). Reflective spelling strategies for elementary school students with severe writing difficulties: A case study. Learning Disability Quarterly, 25(3), 189(19).
60.
MartellaR. C.NelsonR.Martella-MarchandN. E. (1999). Research methods: Learning to become a critical research consumer. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
61.
*MechlingL. C.GastD. L. (1997). Combination audio/visual self-prompting system for teaching chained tasks to students with intellectual disabilities. Education and Training in Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities, 32(2), 138–153.
62.
*MechlingL. C.GastD. L. (2003). Multi-media instruction to teach grocery store word associations and store location: A study of generalization. Education and Training in Developmental Disabilities, 38(1), 62–76.
63.
*MechlingL. C.GastD. L.LangoneJ. (2002). Computer-based video instruction to teach person persons with moderate intellectual disabilities to read grocery aisle sings and locate items. Journal of Special Education, 35(4), 224–240.
64.
*MitchellR. J.SchusterJ. W.CollinsB. C.GassawayL. J. (2000). Teaching vocational skills with a faded auditory prompting system. Education and Training in Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities, 35(4), 415–427.
65.
MullC.SitlingtonP. L.AlperS. (2001). Postsecondary education for students with learning disabilities: A synthesis of literature. Exceptional Children, 68(1), 97–18.
66.
NormanK. L. (1994). Spatial visualization: A gateway to computer-based technology. Journal of Special Education Technology, 12, 195–205.
67.
*NormanJ. M.CollinsB. C.SchusterJ. W. (2001). Using an instructional package including video technology to teach self-help skills to elementary students with mental disabilities. Journal of Special Education Technology, 16(3), 5–18.
68.
*OkoloC. M. (1992). The effects of computer-based attribution retraining on the attributions, persistence, and mathematics computation of students with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 25(5), 327–334.
69.
*OkoloC. M.FerrettiR. P. (1996a). The impact of multimedia design project on the knowledge, attitudes, and collaboration of students in inclusive classroom. Journal of Computing in Childhood Education, 7(3/4), 225–251.
70.
*OkoloC. M.FerrettiR. P. (1996b). Knowledge acquisition and technology-supported projects in the social studies for students with learning disabilities. Journal of Special Education Technology, 13, 91–103.
71.
*OkoloC. M.FerretiR. P. (1998). Multimedia design projects in an inclusive social studies classroom. Teaching Exceptional Children, 31(1), 50–57.
72.
*OlneyM. F. (1995). Reading between the lines: A case study of facilitated communication. The Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 20(1), 57–65.
ParetteH. P. (1997). Assistive devices and services. Education and Training in Mental Retardation and Development Disabilities, 32, 267–280.
75.
PollowayE. A.PattonJ. R. (1993). Strategies for teaching learners with special needs (5th ed.). New York: Macmillan.
76.
RaskindM. H. (1994). Assistive technology for adults with learning disabilities: A rationale for use. InGergerP. J.ReiffH. B. (Eds.), Learning disabilities: Persisting problems and evolving issues (pp. 152–162). Boston: Andover Medical Publishers.
77.
*RaskindM. H.HigginsE. (1995). Effects of speech synthesis on the proofreading efficiency of postsecondary students with learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 18, 141–158.
78.
*RaskindM. H.HigginsE. (1999). Speaking to read: The effects of speech recognition technology on the reading and spelling performance of children with learning disabilities. Annals of Dyslexia, 47, 251–281.
79.
RepettoJ. B.CorreaV. I. (1996). Expanding views of transition. Exceptional Children, 62, 551–563.
80.
Rozenthal-MalekA.BloomA. (1998). Beyond acquisition: Teaching generalization for students with developmental disabilities. InHiltonA.RinglabenR. (Eds.), Best and promising practices in developmental disabilities (pp. 139–155). Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.
81.
RyndakD. L.AlperS. (2003). Curriculum and instruction for students with significant disabilities in inclusive settings (2nd ed.). Boston: Pearson Education, Inc.
82.
SchererM. J. (1993). Living in a state of stuck: How technology impacts the lives of people with disabilities. Cambridge, MA: Brookline.
83.
*SchlosserR. W.BlischakD. M.BelfioreP. J.BartleyC.BarnettN. (1998). Effects of synthetic speech output and orthographic feedback on spelling in a student with autism: A preliminary study. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 28(4), 309–319.
84.
SharpeM. N. (2002). Project Grad: Preliminary analysis of instructional accommodations, assistive technology, and employment outcomes for postsecondary students with disabilities. Available from http://www.ncset.hawaii.edu/Publications/.
85.
*TaberT. A.AlbertoP. A.HughesM.SeltzerA. (2002). A strategy for students with moderate disabilities when lost in the community. Research & Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 27(2), 141–152.
86.
TaylorH. (2004, June 24). 2004 National Organization on Disability/Harris Survey of Americans with disabilities. Paper presented at the National Press Club, Washington, DC. Retrieved September 19, 2004, from http://www.nod.org.
87.
Technology-Related Assistance for Individuals with Disabilities Act (Tech Act), P.L. 100–407 (1988). Retrieved May 5, 2005, from http://www.ed.gov/offices/OSERS/.
88.
Technology-Related Assistance for Individuals With Disabilities Act Amendments of 1994, P. L. 100–407 & 103–218 (1994). Retrieved May 5, 2005, from http://www.ed.gov/offices/OSERS/.
89.
TodisB. J. (1996). Tools for the task? Perspectives on assistive technology in education settings. Journal of Special Education Technology, 13, 49–61.
90.
TodisB.WalkerH. (1993). User perspectives on assistive technology in educational settings. Focus on Exceptional Children, 26, 1–16.
91.
*van DaalV. H. P.van der LeijA. (1992). Computer-based reading and spelling practice for children with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 25(3), 186–195.
92.
WallaceJ. F.FlippoK. F.BarcusJ. M.BehrmannM. M. (1995). Legislative foundation of assistive technology policy in the United States. InFlippoK. F.IngeK. J.BarcusJ. M. (Eds.), Assistive technology: A resource for school, work, and community (pp. 3–21). Baltimore: Brookes.
93.
WehmeyerM. L. (1998). National survey of the use of assistive technology by adults with mental retardation. Mental Retardation, 36, 44–51.
94.
*WiseB.OlsonR.AnstettM.AndrewsL.TerjakM.SchneiderV.KostuchJ.KrihoL. (1989). Implementing a long-term computerized remedial reading program with synthetic speech feedback: Hardware, software, and real-world issues. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 21(2), 173–180.
95.
*ZhangY. (2000). Technology and the writing skills of students with learning disabilities. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 32(4), 467–479.
96.
*ZhangY.BrooksD.FrieldsT.RedelfsM. (1995). Quality of writing by elementary students with learning disabilities. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 27(4), 483–499.
