Assistive technology can benefit students with disabilities in terms of independence and performance. Yet more research is needed regarding usage of assistive technology. Using the National Longitudinal Transition Study 2012 database, the authors explored reported use regarding assistive technology by secondary students with disabilities. Overall, the authors found low rates of assistive technology reported use among students with disabilities aggregated, although there were large ranges across disability categories (e.g., 14.5%–74.0% for use of assistive technology). Disability category had a statistically significant relationship with reported assistive technology use for secondary students.
AtangaC.JonesB. A.KruegerL. E.LuS. (2019). Teachers of students with learning disabilities: Assistive technology knowledge, perceptions, interests, and barriers. Journal of Special Education Technology[Advance online publication]. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162643419864858
3.
BauschM.AultM. (2012). Status of assistive technology instruction in university personnel preparation programs. Assistive Technology Outcomes and Benefits, 8, 1–14.
4.
BlackhurstA. (1997). Perspectives on technology in special education. Teaching Exceptional Children, 29(5), 41–48.
5.
BlackorbyJ.WagnerM. (1996). Longitudinal post school outcomes of youth with disabilities: Findings from the National Longitudinal Transition Study. Exceptional Children, 62, 399–413.
6.
BouckE. C. (2016). A national snapshot of assistive technology at the secondary level. Journal of Special Education Technology, 31(1), 4–13.
7.
BouckE. C.BouckM. K.HunleyM. (2015). The calculator effect: Understanding the impact of calculators as accommodations for secondary students with disabilities. Journal of Special Education Technology, 30(2), 77–88.
8.
BouckE. C.FlanaganS. M. (2016). Exploring assistive technology and post-school outcomes for students with severe disabilities. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology, 11, 645–652.
9.
BouckE. C.MaedaY.FlanaganS. (2012). Assistive technology and students with high incidence disabilities: Understanding the relationship through the National Longitudinal Transition Study-2. Remedial and Special Education, 33, 298–308.
10.
BryantD.BryantB. (2003). Assistive technology for people with disabilities. Allyn & Bacon.
11.
BryantD.BryantB. (2012). Assistive technology for people with disabilities (2nd ed.). Allyn & Bacon.
12.
BryantD. P.BryantB. R. (1998). Using assistive technology adaptations to include students with learning disabilities in cooperative learning activities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 31, 41–54.
13.
BurghardtJ.HaimsonJ.LipscombS.LiuA. Y.PotterF.WaitsT.WangS.SekinoY.SilverbergM. (2017). National Longitudinal Transition Study 2012 design documentation. Institute of Education Sciences.
14.
CrouseT.RiceM.MellardD. (2018). Learning to serve students with disabilities online: Teachers’ perspectives. Journal of Online Learning Research, 4, 123–145.
15.
CullenJ.RichardsS. B.FrankC. L. (2008). Using software to enhance the writing skills of students with special needs. Journal of Special Education Technology, 23, 33–44. https://doi.org/10.1029/96GB03939
16.
DeanK. L.ForrayJ. M. (2018). The secret to staying on technology’s cutting edge? Ask a teenager. Journal of Management Education, 5, 571–575. https://doi.org/10.1177/1052562918792279
17.
EdyburnD. (2005). Assistive technology and students with mild disabilities: From consideration to outcomes measurement. In EdyburnD.HigginsK.BooneR. (Eds.), Handbook of special education technology research and practice (pp. 239–270). Knowledge by Design.
18.
EdyburnD. L. (2000). Assistive technology and students with mild disabilities. Focus on Exceptional Children, 32(9), 1–24.
19.
EtscheidtS. L. (2016). Assistive technology for students with disabilities: A legal analysis of issues. Journal of Special Education Technology, 31, 183–194. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162643416673912
20.
GierachJ. (Ed.). (2009). Assessing students’ needs for assistive technology (ASNAT): A resource manual for school district teams (5th ed.). http://www.wati.org/?pageLoad=content/supports/free/index.phpIndividuals with Disabilities Education Act Regulations, 34 C.F.R. § 300.5 et seq.
21.
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, 20 U.S.C. § 1400. (2004).
22.
Kamei-HannaC.HoweJ.HerreraR. R.ErinJ. N. (2012). Perceptions of teachers of students with visual impairments regarding assistive technology: A follow-up study to a university course. Journal of Visual Impairment and Blindness, 106, 666–678.
23.
LaiS. A.BerkeleyS. (2012). High-states test accommodations: Research and practice. Learning Disability Quarterly, 35, 158–169.
24.
LipscombS.LacoeJ.LiuA. Y.HaimsonJ. (2018). Preparing for life after high school: The characteristics and experiences of youth in special education: A summary of key findings from the National Longitudinal Transition 2012 [NCEE evaluation brief]. Institute of Education Sciences. Retrieved January 9, 2020, fromhttps://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED583066.pdf
25.
MacciniP.GagnonJ. C. (2000). Best practices for teaching mathematics to secondary students with special needs. Focus on Exceptional Children, 32, 1–22.
MaushakN. J.KelleyP.BlodgettT. (2001). Preparing teachers for the inclusive classroom: A preliminary study of attitudes and knowledge of assistive technology. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 9, 419–431.
28.
McNichollA.CaseyH.DesmondD.GallagherP. (2019). The impact of assistive technology use for students with disabilities in higher education: A systematic review. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology[Advance online publication]. https://doi.org/10.1080/17483107.2019.1642395
NewmanL.WagnerM.CametoR.KnokeyA. M. (2009). The post-high school outcomes of youth with disabilities up to 4 years after high school: A report from the National Longitudinal Transition Study-2 (NLTS2). Retrieved January 9, 2020, fromhttps://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED505448.pdf
ParetteH. P.StonerJ. B. (2008). Benefits of assistive technology user groups for early childhood education professionals. Early Childhood Education Journal, 35, 313–319. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-007-0211-6
34.
PilgrimJ.BledsoeC.ReilyS. (2012). New technologies in the classroom. Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin, 78, 16–22.
35.
QuinnB. S.BehrmannM.MastropieriM.BauschM. E.AultM. J.ChungY. (2009). Who is using assistive technology in schools?Journal of Special Education Technology, 24(1), 1–13.
36.
SatsangiR.MillerB.SavageM. N. (2019). Helping teachers make informed decisions when selecting assistive technology for secondary students with disabilities. Preventing School Failure, 63, 97–104. https://doi.org/10.1080/1045988X.2018.1483314
37.
SchaafD. N. (2018). Assistive technology instruction in teacher professional development. Journal of Special Education Technology, 33, 177–181. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162643417753561
ShaheenN. L.LazarJ. (2018). K-12 technology accessibility: The message from state governments. Journal of Special Education Technology, 33, 83–97. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162643417734557
40.
Technology-Related Assistance for Individuals with Disabilities Act, 29 U.S.C. § 2201 et seq. (1988).
41.
ThomasC. N.PeeplesK. N.KennedyM. J.DeckerM. (2019). Riding the special education technology wave: Policy, obstacles, recommendations, actionable ideas, and resources. Intervention in School and Clinic, 54, 295–303. https://doi.org/10.1177/10534518819201
42.
ThurlowM. L.LazarusS. S.ThompsonS. J.MorseA. B. (2005). State policies on assessment participation and accommodations for students with disabilities. Journal of Special Education, 38, 232–240.
