Assistive Technology

Research Assignment

An Overview of 6 articles on Assistive Technology and The Universal Design of Learning:

Article 1:

Balajyhy. E. (2005). Text-to –Speech Software for helping Struggling Readers

This article provides an overview of some text to speech technology and its application and then summarizes the research on benefits of TTS for struggling readers.

The article discusses how students who are struggling readers can be taught to use adjunct computer based materials such as simpler versions of the text, list of main ideas, links to reference tools such as a dictionary and encyclopedia, note-taking tools and animated graphical presentations. The article also discusses the use of online textbooks but points out that these online texts are time-consuming and expensive because of the effort involved to design and create them. The article also discusses how simple “text to speech” which uses voice syntheses that provided oral reading of electronic text files, web page texts and e-books has an advantage over these online textbooks because they are less expensive and more accessible. Talking word processors are also seen as valuable in encouraging students’ writing. TTS software packages (also called electronic readers, assistive reading software, reading machines, screen readers, computer text readers or e-readers) can read aloud from a variety of file types.

The article discusses the impact this TTS software has on the struggling reader. There was some positive feedback from teachers and some evidence from some studies about improvement in comprehension, more access to important information on the internet, increased retention of subject knowledge increased speed in word identification, and increased attention to text. It was also noted that research on has indicated that the effectiveness of e-readers appears to be highly dependent on individual student traits.

The author discussed the various type of TTS software that is available, such as ReadPlease2003 and Help Read (both free down loads from the internet. CAST e-Reader and TextHelp, which are both moderately priced, and Kurzweil 3000 and WordSmith, which are considerably more expensive but include more options and a variety of websites that make available extensive collections of digitalized books.

In conclusion, the article notes that so far there are only a handful of studies that have investigated the effectiveness of TTS software, but researchers and teachers who have gone public with their experiences are unanimous about these two things:

1. Effectiveness varies according to the attributes of the student using the software, but there is some evidence that shows poorer readers will find electronic software more helpful than better readers and that the engaging effect of electronic readers may work well with students with ADHD.

2. Effectiveness varies according to the use to which the software is put. Software that is purchased without thought about a plan for implementation will often go unused.

The article also provide some suggestions for using TTS such as; students need class time and teacher guidance to learn software operation and it needs to be frequently used, formal planning should precede purchase, providing ongoing resources for necessary scanning and OCR, developing an ongoing library operation to save and make available relevant documents, providing ongoing resources (time) for teachers to examine and evaluate potential software websites relevant to their students’ needs, recognize that students will not always be able to function independently with TTS and in addition to TTS software the use of other tools (such as Reading Pen 11) that use text-to-speech capabilities should be considered.

This article gave some good information on how TTS can benefit students and great suggestions for using and implementing TTS properly. The software information was useful but a bit outdated because of the relatively recent introduction of IPADS in schools.

Article 2:

(Rose, Hasselbring, Stahl, & Zabala, 2005). Assistive Technology and Universal Design for Learning: Two Sides of the Same Coin.

I have always been a bit confused about the definitions of Assistive Technology and The Universal Design for Learning. This article was very interesting because it provided a framework for discussion by articulating the points of commonality and difference between AT and UDL. The authors point out that many individuals may see AT and UDL as identical or conversely antithetical. The authors believe that AT and UDL while different, are completely complementary-much like two sides of the same coin. (hence, the title!)

Both approaches have similar goals, which include; increasing the access, participation and progress of students with disabilities in our schools and both approaches depend significantly on modern technology. However, the approaches differ in important ways.

In AT, modern technology is directed at the level of the individual student to help him or her overcome barriers in the curriculum and living environments. AT can be carefully engineered, fitted, and adapted to the specific strengths and weaknesses of each person. Thus, making AT unique, personal, customized and dedicated (it TRAVELS with the individual)

With UDL, modern technology is used to create curriculum and environments that by their design, lack traditional barriers to learning. So the focus of UDL is not on the individual student but on the learning environment and curricula to make learning accessible to the widest range of students. UDL is a process for designing general products or structures in such a way to reduce barriers for any individual (with or without disabilities) and to increase opportunities for the widest possible range of users. UDL are often malleable and variable rather than dedicated. They are not unique or personal, but universal and inclusive. They do not travel with the individual.

The authors emphasize that the importance of interaction and integration of AT and UDL. They often work in concert to achieve optimal and practical results. The articles provides a variety of examples of this process and they point out that the most powerful and cost-effective solutions are ones that integrate these two approaches, producing Universal designs that are aware of AT (buildings whose ramps have corners and inclines that are accessible to power wheelchairs) and AT that are aware of the affordances of universal designed buildings. (wheelchairs that incorporate infrared switches to activate universally designed doors and elevators buttons)

The authors provide very good example of this interaction and integration in the classroom with an example of a student with a reading disability trying to master a history concept. Taking a AT perspective, the problem is considered the students problem, their reading disability. So provide them with a spellchecker or audio version of the history book.

Taking a UDL perspective, the problem is considered an environmental problem because the history curriculum over-relies on printed text that raises barriers to engagement and mastery for many students. This UDL looks at the limitations to the curriculum rather then limitations to the student. AT is also provided as a solution to the problem but in the form of a digitalized universally designed history book, for viewing and manipulating content and expressing knowledge. Within this flexible curriculum, fewer students face barriers, thus enhancing learning for many different kinds of students. (blind, deaf, dyslexia, language based disabilities, physical disabilities)

The authors point out that in reality, both kinds of solutions are needed and that in the past there have been all too few examples of UDL curricula and even fewer examples of the optimal linkages between such curricula and AT.

The authors go on to discuss new developments in policy and practice that are illuminating the educational landscapes and shaping the operational linkage between AT and UDL that will provide a flexible but sturdy foundation for curricula that will embody UDL and capitalize on AT’s to make the learning accessible to everyone.

This article was very enlightening for me and really clarified the essential relationship between Assistive Technology and the Universal Design for Learning and the importance of creating optimum learning environments for students with both these approaches in mind.

Article 3:

Edyburn. D. L. (2003) Learning from Text

The purpose of this article is to examine the critical issues associated with the mismatch between the skills that students with disabilities bring to the regular classroom and the deep-rooted expectations we have about learning from text instructional models. The author focuses on the various systematic decision-making skills that educators have to make about the types of instructional and assistive technology interventions that make it possible for students with disabilities in decoding, fluency and comprehension to learn from the text.

The author points out that historically educators have focused their energy and efforts exclusively on instruction and remediation but there is a critical, often overlooked question in the field of education; how do we as educators decide that the best course of action is remediation (additional instructional time, different instructional approaches) versus compensation? (recognizing when remediation is not working)

The author also points out that there are few guidelines available for making an informed decision about compensation in the form of assistive technology. When do teachers intervene and THEN what do they do? The article discusses the efforts made by assistive technologists specialists to make reading materials more accessible such as scanning textbooks into computers, and teaching students to use speech to text software and the extensive time required by teachers to make these modifications.

Edyburn also addresses the lack of theoretical constructs and systematic decision-making guidelines that have contributed to confusion about the type of modifications that should be made and who would benefit form them. He provided the reader with the work of Dyck and Pemberton(2002) who designed a model for making decisions about text adaptations and outlined the theoretical rationale for 5 types of text adaptations and the AT related to each type.;

1.Bypass reading: using audio formats such as Books aloud, audio books for free, WordQ, Read Please, Write OutLoud, Kurzweil, TextHelp. Cast e Reader

2.Decreased reading: cognitive rescaling by using software such as Windows on the Universe, AutoSummary feature in Microsoft Word, Slater Software’s Picture

3.Support reading: by providing vocabulary support or illustrations through Little Explorers English Picture Dictionary, Usborne’s Animated First Thousand Words

4.Organize reading graphic organizers: Kidspiration, Inspiration

5. Guide reading: study guides and notes with the use of Cliffnotes, Sparknotes, NovelGuide, Free Book Notes, Pink Monkey

The author also provides a detailed systems approach to making text accessible.

This article was very relatable and brought to the forefront the issues that so many educators, including me, struggle with every day. When do we decide that remediation is not working and move on to compensatory strategies? There is a lot of debate and conflicting views on this topic. How long do we persevere with reading interventions? How young is too young to provide assistive technology for reading. With the universal design of learning maybe that becomes a non-issue because we will be providing assistive technology to everyone, it will just depend on the individual needs, how they will use it.

Article 4:

Using Assistive technology to Support Writing:

This article provided a basic overview of how to use assistive technology to support writing. The author starts off by stating how effective, if not necessary, assistive technology is for the student with disabilities in the writing process.

The author provides some very basic information for teachers on selecting technology tools for writing such as; considering the individual student’s abilities and needs, the goals of the curriculum, the growing body of effective instructional practices and ways to assess or monitor student progress.

The article also provides some information on general and specific technology tools and whom these would benefit. Ex. general technology tools such as a word processor and/or graphic organizers can help students with mild disabilities that struggle with minor language production, difficulties transferring thoughts to paper, illegible handwriting, and organization of thoughts.

Specific technology tools are those that are typically not used or even available for use for most students. There are 3 categories of these.

1. Tools for physical and sensory access: These writing tools are for students with significant motor or sensory impairments that make it difficult to engage in writing without some sort of technology. Appropriate tools range from a larger keyboard, to a computer-generated voice.

2. Tools for Creating Text: These writing tools are for students who have significant spelling problems or by students with illegible handwriting or by students who are unable to learn to type effectively. AT tools for text creation are word prediction, small electronic keyboard, speech recognition software

3. Tools for Revising Text: these writing tools can help a variety of students that have those with learning disabilities who have difficulty reading text they have created. AT tools for reviewing text are text to speech engines. Students can hear the text read back and thereby detect errors they have made while writing, thus helping them become independent in making a first revision of their work.

The article concludes with the various requirements and challenges in using AT to support writing. A knowledgeable AT person should always be consulted when deciding on the appropriate writing tools. The student’s teachers and team members must also be trained to help the student use the AT and integrate it effectively in the classroom. Students initial writing tasks should be calibrated to balance the difficulty they might have in learning to use the technology and data should be collected from the student before and after the use of technology in order to measure the AT’s success. This article would be beneficial for educators who need some basic information on how to use assistive technology for students with writing difficulties.

Article 5:

Mechling. L.C. (2006) Comparison of the Effects of Three Approaches on the Frequency of Stimulus Activations, via a single Switch, by Students With Profound Intellectual Disabilities.

This article provided some very interesting research on a comparison of three different types of reinforcing stimuli to measure the frequency of stimulus activations via a single switch. Because students with profound disabilities who are nonverbal and have limited control over their movements have been identified as the most challenging in the field of analyzing behavior, it has been very difficult to provide quality educational programs. Assistive technology such as switches, alternative and augmentative communication devices and environmental controls have provided an alternative means for students to learn simple tasks, access their environment, exert control and express themselves. Providing a variety of stimuli has been identified as a key component in teaching switch technology.

Many teachers struggle with finding and accessing meaningful items of interest for their students with profound disabilities. This study was designed to address the need to teach cause and effect to students with profound disabilities and the difficulty of presenting meaningful items of interest in the classroom.

The purpose of the study was to compare the effects of three stimulus classes of reinforcement:

1. traditional switch-activated toys and devices

2. commercially available cause-and-effect software programs

3. instructor-created, student-specific, computer-based video recordings on the frequency of single-switch activations by students with profound intellectual disabilities.

Three students were selected based on their emerging cause-and-effect skills. Each was able to use a single switch to activate devices, but use was inconsistent. None of the three students had independent expressive communication skills, or did they respond consistently to verbal, gestural or physical prompts. All required assistance with self-care.

Very simply put, the results were that all three students demonstrated a greater number of stimulus activations for the instructor-created computer-based video recordings when compared with the other two reinforcements. So the data indicated that the application of personal created video recordings, which were individually meaningful to the learner, was an effective strategy for teaching single-switch activation to students with profound disabilities when compared to

traditional methods for teaching single-switch use. The author cautioned that one limitation of the study was the lack of measurement of effect over an extended period of time. The author states that assistive technology has done much to improve the quality of life for persons with disabilities by promoting their independence and helping them overcome learned helplessness. She points out that when these students learn that activating a switch can control their environment, these students may replace the tendency to acquire learned helplessness or dependency on others with a sense of empowerment and promotion of increased independence, including regulation of stimuli, gaining attention, requesting activities and increasing opportunities in play. The article cautions that technology itself, however, may not provide a means to teach cause and effect without proper attention to the individual and unique interests of the students.

This study has shown that the delivery of stimuli through individually created video programs holds considerable promise. The skills required to develop these programs included the use of PowerPoint, a digital video camera, video streaming and Windows Movie maker. These are all products that are relatively available and easy to use for all teachers. This article was very interesting and does provide hope for using AT to teach students with profound disabilities. I especially found it quite inspiring. I have taught students with both physical and profound intellectual disabilities that I found very challenging to program for and ultimately provide a quality educational program. I always felt that I WAS not properly trained to meet their educational needs. With research like this and the advances made in providing assistive technology to schools and students I am feeling much more prepared and hopeful!

Article 6:

Cummings. T.C. Strnadova, I. Singh. S. Ipads as instructional Tools to Enhance Learning Opportunities for Students with Developmental Disabilities: An Action Research Project.

This article discusses a study that involved an action research project completed by Information and Communications Technology Integration Coordinator and a team of 5 special education teachers who all participated in extensive professional development to learn how to use the devices themselves and incorporate them into their instruction. The project focused on the process and outcomes of the introduction of Ipad technology to support 4 high school students with developmental disabilities in Sydney, Australia.

The core questions the teachers addressed through this research was:

1. How can mobile devices such as ipads assist and enhance learning opportunities for students?

2. What are the perceptions of students with developmental disabilities and their teachers in regard to using an ipad as an instructional tool?

The aim and questions of the study were well aligned with the UDL model, which involved planning the classroom environment and instruction so that it is accessible for all students from the start, without the necessity of adaptations or modifications from the start. Using this UDL model, the teachers identified the areas of greatest student need and outlined how and where they would implement the ipads for students. The teachers had to identify the apps they would need and apps were carefully choses for each student to benefit him/her in the content areas.

The teachers decided how they would use the ipad and apps. They focused on;

a. providing students with content area material in a variety of ways

b. increasing academic engagement in the content are courses

c. giving students with literacy and communication difficulties effective communication tools and new ways to express themselves

d. assisting the students to be more independent and to take responsibility for their own learning

Six weeks of anecdotal baseline data was collected on the students’ academic abilities, achievement and levels of engagement in academic activities through IEP goal review, observations, pictures and videos. The team also participated in a series of professional development sessions on both action research and using an ipad.

Data was collected through teacher blogs, (voluntary) student video interviews, teacher video interviews and focus group meetings. In answer to question #1, both teachers and students agreed that the ipads enhanced learning opportunities for students. The ipad benefitted students in the general areas of communication, access, engagement, learning and independence. The students preferred reading text on the ipad because it gave then instant access to the pronunciation and definitions of unfamiliar words, but it also could be paired with a screen reader, that allowed them to hear the words as they read them. It also gave them the ability to change the size, font and color of the text.

The teachers reported that with the use of apps, the students were able to learn and practice what they were learning independently, by using electronic flashcards and content area-themed games to practice memorizing facts in reading, math, spelling, cooking and Hebrew. Students also used the built-in camera to engage with learning. (took digital photographs to help them remember steps of a recipe in cooking class)

The ipad cameras were also used to demonstrate what they learned instead of the more traditional methods such as exams or written reports.

In answer to question #2, the teachers found that the ipad digital screen provided more rich and vivid pictorial representations of different topics than a traditional book. The students also used the ipad to access the internet and research topics for papers and projects. The ipad was used for reading text and reduced reading times significantly and ipad games were used in learning spellings words and parts of speech. They also used the ipad to view movies of the novels they had read in class which helped with comprehension.

Some limitations of the study were noted. The sample of students and teachers were relatively small. The data collected in the study were qualitative and dealt mostly with teacher and student perceptions and descriptions of how the ipad was integrated. Also the study was undertaken at a school with a high socio-economic population where students had similar devices at home.

Overall the results were very positive and I have been even more motivated to work with the classroom teachers at my school to help incorporate ipads into their classrooms. What I am realizing more and more is that this assistive technology has to be introduced in the early grades so that is just considered a “normal” part of their learning. I also realize that teachers need to have some training and background information such as articles like this to help them use and realize the benefits of ipads for all their students to help create that universal design of learning.

All these articles have one thing in common for sure. They all have shown that assistive technology can benefit students but they all have cautioned that the AT must be matched properly to the user and that teachers need to be properly trained in how to use them and incorporate them into their classrooms and instruction. All the articles have pointed out that AT has the potential to enhance the quality of life for students with various disabilities by providing them with a means to compensate for their difficulties, and highlight their abilities. Because students with disabilities have individual strengths, limitations, interests, and experiences, a technology tool that is be helpful in one situation or setting may be of little use under different circumstances. As a result, selecting the appropriate technology for a student requires a careful analysis of the dynamic interaction between the individual, technology, task, and context.

I am also really intrigued by the common thread and emphasis throughout each article on how assistive technology can support the learning of ALL students within the UDL framework. I finally feel that I am finally coming to an understanding of the relationship between the Universal Design of Learning and Assistive Technology and how we as educators all need to step up to the plate and embrace this type of learning and classroom for all our students!