AlperS.RaharinirinaS. (2006). Assistive technology for individuals with disabilities: A review and synthesis of the literature. Journal of Special Education Technology, 21(2), 47–64.
2.
AndersonD. H.Lignugaris/KraftB. (2006). Video-case instruction for teachers of students with problem behaviors in general and special education classrooms. Journal of Special Education Technology, 21(2), 31–45.
3.
AnsonD.MoistP.PrzywaraM.WellsH.SaylorH.MaximeH. (2006). The effects of word completion and word prediction on typing rates using on-screen keyboards. Assistive Technology, 18(2), 146–154.
4.
BoonR. T.BurkeM. D.ForeC.SpencerV. G. (2006). The impact of cognitive organizers and technology-based practices on student success in secondary social studies classrooms. Journal of Special Education Technology, 21(1), 5–15.
5.
CarlsonD.EhrlichN. (2006). Sources of payment for assistive technology: Findings from a national survey of persons with disabilities. Assistive Technology, 18(1), 77–86.
6.
ChernekV. C. (2006). Systemic reading approach improves phonics instruction for exceptional needs students. Closing the Gap, 25(5), 23–25.
7.
DimmittS.HodappJ.JudasC.MunnC.RachowC. (2006). Iowa text reader project impacts student achievement. Closing the Gap, 24(6), 12–13.
8.
DudekK.BeckA. R.ThompsonJ. R. (2006). The influence of AAC device type, dynamic vs. static screen, on peer attitudes. Journal of Special Education Technology, 21(1), 17–27.
9.
DuerstockB. S. (2006). Accessible microscopy workstation for students and scientists with mobility impairments. Assistive Technology, 18(1), 34–45.
10.
EdyburnD. L. (2000). 1999 in review: A synthesis of the special education technology literature. Journal of Special Education Technology, 15(1), 7–18.
11.
EdyburnD. L. (2006a). Cognitive prostheses for students with mild disabilities: Is this what assistive technology looks like?Journal of Special Education Technology, 21(4), 62–65.
12.
EdyburnD. L. (2006b). Student performance data: Extracting meaning has never been easier. Journal of Special Education Technology, 21(3), 52–54.
13.
EdyburnD. L. (2006c). Searching for evidence of the effectiveness of assistive or instructional technology interventions. Journal of Special Education Technology, 21(2), 74–78.
14.
ElyR.EmersonR. W.MaggioreT.RothbergM.O'ConnellT.HudsonL. (2006). Increased content knowledge of students with visual impairments as a result of extended descriptions. Journal of Special Education Technology, 21(3), 31–43.
15.
FlemingJ.KearnsJ.DethloffA.LewisP.DolanR. (2006). Technology skills checklist for online assessment. Special Education Technology Practice, 8(1), 19–32.
16.
GerstenR.EdyburnD. (2007). Defining quality indicators for special education technology. Journal of Special Education Technology, 22(3), 3–18.
17.
HutingerP. L.BellC.DaytnerG.JohansonJ. (2006). Establishing and maintaining an early childhood emergent literacy technology curriculum. Journal of Special Education Technology, 21(4), 39–54.
18.
JeffsT.BehrmannM.Bannan-RitlandB. (2006). Assistive technology and literacy learning: Reflections of parents and children. Journal of Special Education Technology, 21(1), 37–44.
19.
JudgeS. (2006). Constructing an assistive technology toolkit for young children: Views from the field. Journal of Special Education Technology, 21(4), 17–24.
20.
LancasterP. E.LancasterS. J.SchumakerJ. B.DeshlerD. D. (2006). The efficacy of an interactive hypermedia program for teaching a test-taking strategy to students with high-incidence disabilities. Journal of Special Education Technology, 21(2), 17–30.
21.
LanceA. A.McPhillipsM.MulhernG.WylieJ. (2006). Assistive software tools for secondary-level students with literacy difficulties. Journal of Special Education Technology, 21(3), 13–22.
22.
MirendaP.TuroldoK.McAvoyC. (2006). The impact of word prediction software on the written output of students with physical disabilities. Journal of Special Education Technology, 21(3), 5–12.
23.
MolenbroekJ. F.de BruinR. (2006). Anthropometry of a friendly rest room. Assistive Technology, 18(2), 196–204.
24.
PenrodW. M.BauderD. K.SimmonsT.BelcherL.CorleyJ. W. (2006). Efficacy of the UltraCane: A product evaluation and pilot study to determine the efficacy of the UltraCane in outdoor environments. Closing the Gap, 25(5), 19–21.
25.
RuffinoA. G.MistrettS. G.TomitaM.HajareP. (2006). The universal design for play tool: Establishing validity and reliability. Journal of Special Education Technology, 21(4), 25–38.
26.
SilvermanM. K.SmithR. O. (2006). Consequential validity of an assistive technology supplement for the School Function Assessment. Assistive Technology, 18(2), 155–165.
27.
SmithL. E.HigginbothamJ.LesherG. W.MoultonB.MathyP. (2006). The development of an automated method for analyzing communication rate in augmentative and alternative communication. Assistive Technology, 18(1), 107–121.
28.
SusiL.LaskarzewskiJ. (2006). AT: Observe! A tool to support assistive technology teams. Special Education Technology Practice, 8(5), 16–17.
29.
TwymanT.TindalG. (2006). Using a computer-adapted, conceptually based history text to increase comprehension and problem-solving skills of students with disabilities. Journal of Special Education Technology, 21(2), 5–16.
30.
WellsJ. A.BarronA. E. (2006). School web sites: Are they accessible to all?Journal of Special Education Technology, 21(3), 23–30.
31.
WilcoxM. J.DuganL. M.GuimondA. (2006). Recommended practices and parent perspectives regarding AT use in early intervention. Journal of Special Education Technology, 21(4), 7–16.
