Assistive technology is used to help maximize the educational outcomes of students with disabilities. However, few schools or districts effectively measure the outcomes of assistive technology. This article describes activities of Project OATS (Outcomes of Assistive Technology in the Schools), including identification and piloting of existing assessment instruments for possible use as an outcome measure; examining the validity of an existing instrument called the School Function Assessment (SFA), and field testing the School Function Assessment-Assistive Technology Version, an adaptation of the SFA.
Christiansen, C. (Ed.). (1991). Occupational therapy: Overcoming human performance deficits. Thorofare, NJ: Slack, Inc.
3.
Christiansen, C. (Ed.). (1994). A social framework for understanding self-care intervention. Rockville, MD: The American Occupational Therapy Association .
4.
Christiansen, C., & Baum, C. (Eds.). (1997). Person-environment occupational performance: A conceptual model for practice (2nd ed.). Thorofare, NJ: Slack, Inc.
5.
Clark, P.N. (1979). Human development through occupation: A philosophy and conceptual model for practice, part 2. The American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 33(9), 577-585.
6.
Coster, W., Deeny, T., Haltiwanger, J., & Haley, S. (1998). School Function Assessment manual. San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation.
7.
David, K.S. (1996). Clinical concerns: Monitoring progress for improved outcomes... PT's and OT's working with students in special education. Physical andOccupational Therapy in Pediatrics, 16(4), 47-76.
8.
Demers, L. (1997). The Quebec User Evaluation of Satisfaction with Assistive Technology Manual. Montreal, Canada: Louise Demers.
9.
Dunn, W., Brown, C., & McGuigan, A. (1994). The ecology of human performance: A framework for considering the effect of context. The American Journal of Occupational Therapy,48(7), 595-607.
10.
Embleton, A.J., & Spencer, K.C. (1996). Interrater reliability of the technology team assessment process. American Journal of Occupational Therapy , 51(4), 297-302.
11.
Haley, S.M., Coster, W.J., Ludlow, L.H., Haltiwanger, J.T., & Andrellos, P.J. (1992). Pediatric Evaluation of Developmental Inventory 1.0. Boston, MA: New England Medical Center Hospitals, Inc., and PEDI Research Group.
12.
Hutinger, P., Johanson, J., & Stoneburner, R. (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(1), 16-35.
13.
The Institute for Matching Person and Technology, Inc. (July 14, 2000). Matching Person and Technology [on-line] Available from: http://members.aol.com/IMPT971/MPT.html
14.
Judd-Wall, J. (1995). Assistive Technology Screener: A Diagnostic Checklist Manual and Resource Guide. Austin, TX: Technology and Inclusion.
15.
McGregor, G., & Pachuski, P. (1996). Assistive technology in the schools: Are teachers ready, able and supported?Journal of Special Education Technology , 13(1), 4-15.
16.
Messick, S. (1989). Validity. In R. L. Linn (Ed.), Educational measurement (3rd ed., pp. 13-103). Washington, DC: American Council on Education and National Council on Measurement in Education .
17.
Messick, S. (1991). Validity of test interpretation and use. In M. C. Alkin (Ed.), Encyclopedia of educational research (6 ed., pp. 1487-1495). New York: Macmillan.
18.
Messick, S. (1995a). Standards of validity and the validity of standards in performance assessment. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 14(4), 5-8.
19.
Messick, S. (1995b). Validity of psychological assessment validation of inferences from persons' responses and performances as scientific inquiry into score meaning. American Psychologist, 50(9), 741-749.
20.
Moyers, P.A. (1999). The guide to occupational therapy practice. The American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 53(3), 247-322.
21.
Plante, E. (1996). Observing and interpreting behaviors: An introduction to the clinical forum. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools,27, 99-101.
22.
Portney, L.G., & Watkins, M.P. (1993). Foundations of clinical research: Applications to practice. Norwalk, CT: Appleton & Lange.
23.
Silverman, M., Smith, R.O., Edybum, D., & Taylor, D. (1998). Project OATS: Understanding the impact of assistive technology in the schools. Paper presented at the Soaring Into A Grand Millennium, Milwaukee, WI.
24.
Silverman, M.K. (1999). Interpretation of the School Function Assessment for use as an assistive technology measure. Unpublished Master's thesis, University of Wisconsin- Milwaukee.
25.
Smith, R.O. (1998). Accountability in assistive technology interventions: Measuring outcomes. In Resna (Ed.), Volume I: RESNA Resource Guide for Assistive Technology Outcomes: Measurement Tools (Vol. 1, pp. 14-42). Arlington, VA : RESNA.
26.
Smith, R.O., Benge, M., & Hall, M. (1994). Chapter 14: Technology for self care. In C. Christiansen (Ed.), Ways of living: Self care strategies for special needs (pp. 379-422). Rockville, MD: American Association of Occupational Therapy, Inc.
Stratman, K.F. (1999). Examination of the Task Supports Section of the School Function Assessment as a measurement of assistive technology outcomes. Unpublished master's thesis, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee .
29.
Todis, B. (1996). Tools for the task? Perspectives on assistive technology in educational settings. Journal of Special Education Technology, 13(1), 49-61.
30.
Trombly, C.A. (1993). The issue is - anticipating the future: Assessment of occupational therapy function. The American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 47(3), 253-257.
31.
Trombly, C. (1995). Occupation: Purposefulness and meaningfulness as therapeutic mechanisms. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 49(10), 960-972.
32.
Trombly, C.A., & Scott, A.D. (1977). Occupational therapy for physical dysfunction . Baltimore, MD: The Williams & Wilkins Co.
33.
Williams, W.B., Stemach, G., Wolfe, S., & Stanger, C. (1994). Lifespace access profile upper extension: Assistive Technology assessment and planning for individuals with physical disabilities . Sebastopol, CA: Lifespace Access .
34.
Williams, W.B., Stemach, G., Wolfe, S., & Stanger, C. (1995). Lifespace access profile: Assistive technology assessment and planning for individuals with severe or multiple disabilities . (revised ed.). Sebastopol, CA: Lifespace Access.
35.
Wisconsin Assistive Technology Initiative. ( 1997). Assessing students' needs for assistive technology: A resource manual for school districts and teams. Oshkosh : Wisconsin Assistive Technology Initiative.
