With the re-authorization of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), Individual Educational Program (IEP) teams are required to consider assistive technology devices and services as a special factor in the development, review, and revision of Individual Education Programs for students with disabilities.
Assistive technology devices are identified in the IDEA as "any item, piece of equipment or product system, whether acquired commercially off the shelf, modified, or customized, that is used to increase, maintain, or improve the functional capabilities of children with disabilities". This definition is very general and provides IEP teams with the flexibility to provide a range of low technology to high technology devices to assist students in completing tasks within relevant instructional or access areas. Assistive technology devices are available to support student performance in academic areas such as writing, spelling, reading, and math. Moreover, assistive technology devices are available to support student performance and independence in communication, listening, mobility, recreation and leisure, vocational training, and daily living activities. IEP teams must determine whether or not the student requires assistive technology and, if required, what type of assistive technology devices are appropriate.
The IDEA also mandates the consideration of assistive technology services. As defined in IDEA, an assistive technology service is "any service that directly assists a child with a disability in the selection, acquisition, and use of an assistive technology device". Assistive technology services include but are not limited to evaluation, device acquisition, device maintenance and repair, training for the student, his family, and educators as needed, and technical assistance. Often, IEP teams focus their efforts on the identification and documentation of required assistive technology devices, but they fail to address the services such as training and technical assistance which are critical to the student’s successful use of the recommended assistive technology. In order for IEP teams to effectively consider assistive technology needs of students with disabilities, they must address assistive technology services as well as devices.
Although the IDEA has clearly mandated the requirement that IEP teams consider assistive technology devices and services for each student, many IEP team members have questioned how this requirement could be effectively implemented for individual students. The Quality Indicators for Assistive Technology (QIAT) Consortium has developed a list of indicators that clearly define the critical elements of effective consideration. They are known as the Quality Indicators for Consideration of Assistive Technology Needs and are included below:
These indicators clearly address several critical elements of effective consideration of assistive technology needs. First and foremost, assistive technology must be considered for all students based on the unique needs of the student. Historically, IEP teams have done better in meeting the assistive technology needs of students with severe physical, intellectual, communication, and sensory impairments. In fact, the first assistive technology devices were developed to meet the needs of these students. Moreover, initial professional development activities in assistive technology were focused on educators working with students with the most severe disabilities. Historically, very little attention has been given to the assistive technology needs of students with learning disabilities, mild intellectual disabilities, and behavioral disorders. This may be attributed to the fact that many of the relevant assistive technology solutions have been developed within the past few years and limited professional development training has been provided to educators working with students with what many consider to be "mild disabilities".
Secondly, in order to effectively consider assistive technology, IEP teams must be knowledgeable about the student’s needs, abilities, and curriculum. Moreover, one or more members of the IEP team should be knowledgeable about potential assistive technology solutions that can be used to enhance the student’s ability to meet the goals, objectives, and educationally relevant tasks required in the student’s educational program. If members of the IEP team are not knowledgeable about assistive technology solutions that are available to address the student’s needs, it will be necessary to involve other individuals that are knowledgeable about assistive technology in the decision making process. Assistance may be obtained from other professionals within the school, within the school system, from a regional support agency, or from a statewide agency.
Thirdly, IEP teams must use a well-defined decision-making process to consider the student’s assistive technology needs. Although the IDEA mandates the consideration of assistive technology, it does not define a required process. This means that school systems must develop a process that will be used by its IEP teams when considering assistive technology needs. This process should be relatively brief and should include a review of the student’s needs and abilities as well the instructional tasks across environments within the student’s curriculum. All special educators must be trained in the use of the process.
Fourthly, when considering assistive technology needs, IEP teams must consider a continuum of assistive technology devices. This encourages teams to consider low technology solutions as well as high technology solutions. When considering the range of assistive technology tools available, IEP teams should consider tools that are readily available to the student as well as tools that may be need to be obtained outside the school or school system.
Fifthly, decisions regarding the consideration of assistive technology should be based on the student’s access to the general education curriculum as well as the individually defined special education program. IEP teams should consider whether or not assistive technology is required to accomplish the educational tasks required of the student within his or her curriculum.
Lastly, the decisions regarding the consideration of assistive technology should be documented in the student’s IEP. The various methods for documenting the consideration of assistive technology are addressed later in this document.
Shortly, after the Re-authorization of the IDEA, assistive technology specialists from the Georgia Project for Assistive Technology (GPAT) started to develop a decision-making process that could be used by IEP teams to consider the assistive technology needs of students with disabilities. When developing a process that could be used to consider assistive technology, the GPAT staff determined that the following critical elements must be addressed:
GPAT’s work on a decision-making
process resulted in the development of an Assistive Technology Consideration
Checklist that could be used to assist IEP teams in considering assistive technology.
The checklist provides a framework for considering assistive technology that
is appropriate for students of all ages and ability levels and serves as documentation
of the procedure used to consider assistive technology. It addresses all instructional
areas in which assistive technology may be required. The Assistive Technology
Consideration Checklist also addresses a continuum of assistive technology solutions
as well as standard classroom tools, modifications, and accommodations that
are currently in place to address the student’s needs. The checklist is
available on GPAT’s website at:
http://www.connsensebulletin.com/ConsiderationChecklist.pdf
GPAT also developed a Assistive Technology Consideration Resource Guide in order to assist IEP teams in identifying potential modifications, accommodations, standard classroom tools, and assistive technology solutions that may be in place or to identify modifications, accommodations, and technology solutions that may need to be implemented. This document is designed as a companion to the Assistive Technology Consideration Checklist and is included on GPAT’s website at the URL above.
When completing the Assistive Technology Consideration Checklist, IEP team members are asked to identify instructional or access areas that are relevant for the student (Column A). After all of the instructional and access areas have been identified, IEP team members completing the checklist are then asked to identify the required tasks within the instructional or access areas. For example, taking notes in class, completing written tests and worksheets, and writing in a daily journal may be identified as relevant tasks in the area of writing for a student with a learning disability participating in the general education curriculum. For a student with a more severe disability, required tasks such as asking for assistance when needed and expressing desired choices might be identified in the area of oral communication.
After identifying the required tasks within the relevant instructional areas, IEP team members are then asked to determine whether or not the student can complete the identified tasks independently using standard classroom tools (Column B). Standard classroom tools are defined as technology solutions that are typically available in the general education curriculum. If the student can independently complete the required tasks within an identified instructional area using standard classroom tools, then the consideration process for that area is completed. If the student cannot complete the identified tasks independently, then the educators must determine whether or not the student’s needs are currently being met with modifications and accommodations that are in place or with currently available assistive technology tools (Column C). If the student’s needs are being met in one or more of these ways, then the consideration process for this particular area is completed. If the student’s needs are not being met, then the IEP team must identify additional solutions (Column D) that may be needed. These solutions may include additional accommodations and modifications that may need to be implemented, trial use of an assistive technology device if the IEP team is aware of technology solutions that may be appropriate to meet the student’s needs, or referral for an assistive technology consultation or evaluation if potential assistive technology devices are not known to the IEP team.
Regardless of the process used for considering assistive technology, there are a limited number of outcomes. The possible outcomes are listed below:
As required in the IDEA, IEP teams must document their consideration of assistive technology in the IEP. The section entitled Consideration of Special Factors is the required component of the IEP in which to document the consideration of assistive technology. This section includes the following statement:
Does the student require assistive technology devices and services? ____Yes ____No
If yes, describe: _________________________________________________________
If the student does not require assistive technology, the IEP team should check "No". If the student does require assistive technology the IEP team should check "Yes" and describe the assistive technology that is required by the student. Typically, it is recommended that features of devices be used rather than name brands and models. For example, the statement of assistive technology needs for a student who is using assistive technology to support writing skills may be written as "Johnny uses a portable word processor with a spell check feature when completing longer writing assignments".
Checking yes or no to the above consideration question (and if yes, describing the technology required) is considered minimal compliance to the requirement for considering assistive technology. However, it is best practice to document the decision making process used to consider the student’s need for assistive technology. For example a statement regarding the discussion of assistive technology needs may be documented in the minutes of the IEP meeting and may be included in other components of the IEP as described below. For example, a statement such as "An analysis of the required tasks within the relevant instructional areas revealed that Steve can independently accomplish the tasks; therefore, assistive technology is not required." could be used to document that assistive technology assistive technology was considered but not required. For a student requiring assistive technology, a statement such as "An analysis of the required tasks within the relevant instructional areas revealed that John has difficulty completing math calculations; therefore, it is recommended that he have access to a hand held calculator to complete math calculations in all classes." could be used to document the consideration process for a student who requires assistive technology.
Assistive technology required by the student may also be addressed in other components of the IEP including the present performance levels, the listing of special education and related services, the listing of supplemental aids and services, the listing of required accommodations and modifications, the listing of modifications and accommodations required for participation in district-wide and state-wide assessments, and in the annual goals and benchmarks.
The QIAT Consortium Leadership Team. (2000). Quality indicators for assistive technology services in school settings. Journal of Special Education Technology, 15(4), 25-36.
Wisconsin Assistive Technology Initiative. (1998). Assistive technology consideration. Retrieved July 7, 2002, from http://www.wati.org/atconsideration.htm
Zabala, J.S. (1995). The SETT framework: Critical areas to consider when making informed assistive technology decisions. Houston, TX: Region IV Education Service Center. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED381962).
Home | What's New | Articles | Washington Updates | Resources | Positions | ConnSENSE Reviews | Links | Conferences | About Us