Assistive Technology (AT) devices and services have been legally mandated for several years. However, the passage of the Individuals with Disabilities Act Amendments P.L. 105–17 (IDEA1997), which states that every student with an Individualized Education Program (IEP) must be considered for AT, had enormous implications impacting approximately six million school-aged students identified with a disability. As a result, states have written assistive technology policies, procedures, guidelines, and technical assistance manuals to reflect the change in federal laws. In order to comply with state policies, school districts are in need of qualified personnel to plan, develop, and implement assistive devices and services. However, because of the lack of AT degree and certification programs at the preservice level, it is often problematic for districts to find AT trained personnel, thus, directly impacting the services that can be provided for students with disabilities.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ABLEDATA (2004). [Online database of assistive technology and rehabilitation equipment] Available from http://www.abledata.com/Site_2/project.htm.
2.
Abner, G. (2000). Teacher's perception of computer-based technology use and unmet needs of students who are visually impaired in Kentucky. Unpublished educational specialist thesis, University of Kentucky Lexington.
3.
Bauder, D. K. (1999). The use of assistive technology and the assistive technology training needs of special education teachers in Kentucky schools. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Kentucky Lexington.
4.
Bell, J. K. (2001). Assistive technology policies of state departments of education and the impact of the 1997 reauthorization of the individuals with disabilities act on those policies. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Kentucky Lexington.
5.
Bowser, G., & Reed, P. (1995). Education TECH points for assistive technology planning. Journal of Special Education Technology, 12(4), 325–338.
6.
Closing The Gap (2003). Closing The Gap Resource Directory.Henderson, MN: Author.
7.
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act of1990, PL 101-476. (October 30, 1990), Title 20, U.S.C. 1400 et seq.: U.S. Statutes at Large, 104, 1103-1151.
8.
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, Amendments of 1997, Public Law No. 105-17, s602, U.S.C. 1401 [On-line] Available: http://www.ed.gov/offices/OSERS/IDEA/the-law.html.
9.
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.
10.
Judge, S. L. & Parette, H. P. (1998). Assistive technology for young children with disabilities: A guide to family-centered services, Cambridge: Brookline Books.
11.
Lesar, S. (1998) Use of assistive technology with young children with disabilities: Current status and training needs. Journal of Early Intervention, 21, 146–159.
12.
McGregor, G., & Pachuski, P. (1996). Assistive technology in schools: Are teachers ready, able, and supported?Journal of Special Education Technology, 2, 4–15.
13.
National Assistive Technology Research Institute (2001). [Assistive technology state policies]. Unpublished raw data.
14.
National Assistive Technology Research Institute (2004a). [Status of assistive technology use]. Unpublished raw data.
15.
National Assistive Technology Research Institute (2004b). [Assistive technology state case studies]. Unpublished raw data.
16.
National Center for Educational Statistics. (2000). What are the barriers to the use of advanced telecommunications for students with disabilities in public schools? (Rep. No. 2000-042). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement.
17.
National Council on Disability. (2000). Federal policy barriers to assistive technology.Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved March 6, 2004 from http://www.ncd.gov/newsroom/publications/assisttechnology.html
18.
Scherer, M. J. (1993). Living in the state of stuck.Cambridge, MA: Brookline Books.
19.
Smith, S. J., & Jones, E. D. (1999). The obligation to provide assistive technology: Enhancing the general curriculum access. Journal of Law and Education, 28(2), 247–265.
20.
Technology-Related Assistance for Individuals with Disabilities Act of 1998, 29 U.S.C. s 2201 et seq.
21.
Todis, B. (1996). Assistive technology in educational settings. Journal of Special Education Technology, 13 (2), 49–61.
22.
Todis, B., & Walker, H. M. (1993). User perspectives on assistive technology in educational settings. Focus on Exceptional Children, 26 (3), 1–16.
23.
Vash, C. L. (1983). Psychological aspects of rehabilitation engineering. In M. Redden, & V. Stern (Eds.). Technology for independent living II.Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science.
24.
Wahl, L. (2002) Alliance for Technology Access Report on the Need for Assistive Technology Expertise in Education and the Creation of New Models. Retrieved March 6, 2004, from http://www.atacess.org/resources/atk12/Training_Report.pdf
25.
Wahl, L. & Buzolich, M. (2001, December). [Consultant's Report to the Mt. Diablo Unified School District AT/AAC Taskforce].Concord, CA: Author.
