BooneR.HigginsK. (2005). The role of instructional design in assistive technology research and development. Reading Research Quarterly, 42, 135-140.
7.
BooneR.HigginsK. (2007). The Software Checklist: Evaluating educational software for students with disabilities. Technology in Action, 3(1), 1-16.
8.
CarnineD. W. (1997). Bridging the research-to-practice gap. In LloydJ.KameenuiE.ChardD. (Eds.), Issues in educating students with disabilities (pp. 363-373). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
CooperA. (2004). The inmates are running the asylum: Why high tech products are driving us crazy and how to restore the sanity (2nd ed.). Indianapolis, IN: Sams.
11.
CooperL. Z. (2005). Developmentally appropriate digital environments for young children. Library Trends, 54, 286-302.
12.
CoppleC.BredekampS. (2009). Developmentally appropriate practice in early childhood programs serving children from birth through age 8 (3rd ed.). Washington, DC: National Association for the Education of Young Children.
13.
Craig-UnkeferL. A.KaiserA. P. (2002). Improving the social communication skills of at-risk preschool children in a play context. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 22, 3-13.
14.
Division for Early Childhood. (2007). Promoting positive outcomes for children with disabilities: Recommendations for curriculum, assessment and program evaluation. Available from http://www.dec-sped.org
15.
DunstC. J.TrivetteC. M. (2009). Using research evidence to inform and evaluate early childhood intervention practices. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 29, 40-52.
GreenwoodC. R.AbbottM. (2001). The research to practice gap in special education. Teacher Education and Special Education, 24, 276-289.
18.
Grisham-BrownJ.Pretti-FrontczakK.HawkinsS. R.WinchellB. N. (2009). Addressing early learning standards for all children within blended preschool classrooms. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 29, 131-142.
19.
HauglandS. W. (2005). Selecting or upgrading software and web sites in the classroom. Early Childhood Education Journal, 32, 329-340.
20.
HigginsK.BooneR.WilliamsD. (2000). Evaluating educational software for special education. Intervention in School and Clinic, 36, 109-115.
21.
HornE.BanerjeeR. (2009). Understanding curriculum modifications and embedded learning opportunities in the context of supporting all children’s success. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 40, 406-415.
22.
JensenR. A.KileyT. J. (2005). Teaching, leading, and learning in preK-8 settings: Strategies for success. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
23.
JudgeS.PuckettK.BellS. M. (2006). Closing the digital divide: Update from the early childhood longitudinal study. Journal of Educational Research, 100, 52-60.
24.
LieberJ.HornE.PalmerS.FlemingK. (2008). Access to the general education for preschoolers with disabilities: Children’s school success. Exceptionality, 16, 18-32.
MasonC.OrkwisR.ScottR. (2005). Instructional theories supporting universal design for learning—Teaching to individual learners. In Council for Exceptional Children and Merrill Education (Ed.), Universal design for learning: A guide for teachers and education professionals (pp. 21-40). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.
NewbyT. J.StepichD. A.LehmanJ.RussellJ. (2006). Instructional technology for teaching and learning: Designing instruction, integrating computers, and using media (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle, NJ: Prentice Hall.
31.
NikolopoulouK. (2007). Early childhood educational software: Specific features and issues of localization. Early Childhood Education Journal, 35, 173-179.
ParetteH. P.QuesenberryA. C.BlumC. (2010). Missing the boat with technology usage in early childhood settings: A 21st century view of developmentally appropriate practice. Early Childhood Education Journal, 37, 335-343.
34.
Pretti-FrontczakK.BrickerD. (2004). An activity-based approach to early intervention. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.
ScottS. S.McGuireJ. M.ShawS. F. (2001). Principles of universal design for instruction. Storrs: Center on Postsecondary Education and Disability, University of Connecticut.
Sivin-KachalaJ.BialoE. R. (2000). Research report on the effectiveness of technology in schools (7th ed.). Washington, DC: Software and Information Industry Association.
StremmelK. (2005). DEC recommended practices: Technology applications. In SandallS.HemmeterM. L.SmithB. J.McLeanM. E. (Eds.), DEC recommended practices: A comprehensive guide for practical application in early intervention / early childhood special education (pp. 147-162). Missoula, MT: DEC.
42.
TraversJ. C.HigginsK.PierceT.BooneR.MillerS.TandyR. (2011). Emergent literacy skills of preschool students with autism: A comparison of teacher-led and computer assisted instruction. Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities, 46, 326-338.
43.
TraversJ. C.MoreC. (in press). Tech it: Obtaining, evaluating, and using emerging instructional technology in early childhood education. In ParetteH. P.BumC. (Eds.), Instructional technology in early childhood classrooms: Helping all children learnBaltimore, MD: Brookes.
44.
WoleryM. (2005). DEC recommended practices: Child focused practices. In SandallS.HemmeterM. L.SmithB. J.McLeanM. E. (Eds.), DEC recommended practices: A comprehensive guide for practical application in early intervention/early childhood special education (pp. 71-76). Missoula, MT: DEC.
45.
WoleryM.AnthonyL.CaldwellN.SnyderE.MorganteJ. (2002). Embedding and distributing constant time delay in circle time and transitions. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 22, 14-25.
46.
ZevenbergenR. (2007). Digital natives come to preschool: Implications for early childhood practice. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 8(1), 19-29.