Synopsis
This playful yet professional book is designed to help educators select, acquire and implement technology to help all students, but especially those with special needs.
School districts often struggle to develop consistent practices for meeting the needs of special education students. With this book, you’ll learn how embracing student-centered approaches like project-based learning and growth mindset works to support students with disabilities. You’ll get guidance on how to plan and execute educational experiences using technology centered around the needs of students with disabilities. And you’ll learn how to effectively and consistently consider and select technological supports based on the specific needs of an individual student with a disability.
This book:
- Details how an educational team can request assistance to determine technology needs.
- Explains how to conduct and document assessments to help an educational team make informed decisions about technology needs.
- Describes a proactive approach to professional development for individuals and for those who train others on the use of technology.
- Assists individuals or teams in creating an action plan for developing a culture of inclusion.
- Interweaves stories, songs and other exciting features to make learning fun!
The New Assistive Tech is a catalyst for breaking down walls between special education and general education, and will help all educators realize they have tech knowledge (and can build upon that knowledge) that can be used to support students with disabilities.
Audience: K-12 educators
"synopsis" may belong to another edition of this title.
About the Author
Christopher Bugaj is a founding member of the Assistive Technology Team for Loudoun County Public Schools in Ashburn, Virginia, and co‐author of The Practical (and Fun) Guide to Assistive Technology in Public Schools (ISTE). He hosts the award-winning podcast A.T.TIPSCAST; has presented over 200 sessions at local, national and international events; and has designed and instructed online courses on assistive technology.
Excerpt. © Reprinted by permission. All rights reserved.
[CN]Chapter 7
Requesting Assistance
Sometimes an educational experience designer (or EED) needs help using technology to craft accessible and inclusive lessons. Sometimes an IEP team needs assistance considering technology that should be implemented to ensure a free appropriate public education. Sometimes an educational institution needs guidance on how to establish and maintain practices for the benefit of every constituent. This assistance can come from a variety of sources including the accessible-design facilitator.
How does one go about requesting assistance? Is it as simple as climbing to the tallest rooftop and yelling, “I need help!” or does the process need to be more sophisticated than that? Let’s dive into this chapter to find out.
In this chapter, you’ll:
[List]
1. Learn who can provide assistance when assistance is needed.
2. Explore a process by which an IEP team requests assistance in the consideration of technology.
3. Examine agency-wide implications for allocating resources to providing assistance.
[/List]
[List head]ISTE Standards Addressed
• ISTE Standards for Educators 2a: Shape, advance, and accelerate a shared vision for empowered learning with technology by engaging with education stakeholders.
• ISTE Standards for Educators 2b: Advocate for equitable access to educational technology, digital content, and learning opportunities to meet the diverse needs of all students.
• ISTE Standards for Educators 2c: Model for colleagues the identification, exploration, evaluation, curation, and adoption of new digital resources and tools for learning.
[A]Who Can Help?
Help for educational experience designers and IEP teams can come from various sources, such as a school psychologist, educational diagnostician, instructional-technology resource teacher, speech-language pathologists, occupational therapists, physical therapists, vision specialists, hearing specialists, other disciplines and educators, accessible-design facilitators, or any combination of professionals. Assistance in considering technology need not come from one specific source (like someone with “assistive technology” in her or his job title); instead, it can come from any variety of sources.
[[Speech Bubble]]
Awesome Insight
Recognize that no matter who makes the suggestion, if it involves the use of a tool or an action that accesses a tool, by definition, it is considered assistive technology. Thinking that suggestions for technology use need to come from someone with the words “assistive technology” in her or his job title is like thinking that only jockeys can ride horses and only race-car drivers can operate automobiles.
[[/Speech Bubble]]
When two colleagues have lunch together and the conversation turns to how to best serve a student, both parties are discussing changes to the environments, tasks, and tools that could be made (the SETT framework). When parents talk to friends at a party about what’s going on with their child and that friend offers advice about tools to explore or an approach to take, this is helping to determine technology options. Consulting with anyone can be considered a form of assessment. The act of analyzing the documentation and corresponding evidence provided for any situation and then brainstorming what a student could use is another form of assessment. A discussion about the merits of implementing any item along with a discussion about adjustments to the task and environment are discussions about assistive technology.
[[SIDEBAR]]
[SB Head]A Match Game!
Let’s play a matching game to illustrate who can participate as a member of an IEP team to determine the needs of a student and who can provide support to an IEP team in making this determination. Grab something to draw with (a pencil, pen, marker, crayon, or some annotation tool if you’re looking at a digital version).
Look at the two columns shown here, each describing people who are invested in a student’s performance. Match the items from the IEP team column to the support column (those who the IEP team might reach out to for support). Take your time as you carefully consider which of the parties in each column can participate in determining what a child with a disability could use to increase, maintain, or improve his or her functional capabilities. (Remember, it’s okay to scribble all over this book!)
[Designer: If possible, can this line up with the end of the page so the reveal paragraph is on the next page?]
[[Designer, please create one column for each grouping (IEP Team and Support).]]
[List head]IEP Team
• Student
• Parent
• Case manager / educational experience designer
• General educator / educational experience designer
• Administrator
• Related service staff
• Advocate
[List head]Support
• Friends
• Family
• Other educators
• Accessible-design facilitators
• Community members
• Outside consultants
If the two columns look like you let a toddler loose on a bowl full of wet spaghetti, then you’re on the right track. The lines on the page should crisscross repeatedly. Anyone in the support column can provide assistance to anyone in the IEP column. Good ideas can come from any source!
[[/SIDEBAR]]
[A]Just Ask! Requesting Assistance Need Not Be Formal
When any member of the IEP team needs assistance with considering options, it’s appropriate to reach out for help. The request could be initiated informally and not written into the IEP, like when colleagues are just conferring and collaborating. Or the assistance could be a parent asking another parent for advice, an educator asking an accessible-design facilitator for help, or an administrator reaching out to anyone else for advice.
For example, suppose a second-grade student is demonstrating difficulty with spelling. It seems that most words he attempts to spell are done using his memory and not phonemically. The members of his IEP team have implemented various strategies to help increase his spelling accuracy, including explicit reading instruction using a multisensory approach, with tools and strategies such as Elkonin boxes, breaking-down words into component sounds (using a sing-song voice), playing rhyming games, and accessing a leveled web-based application that targets specific phonemic patterns. However, after two quarters of consistent practice, the student has yet to make sufficient progress toward his goal.
So, the educational experience designer contacts her accessible-design facilitator. Together, they brainstorm research-based intervention options, like the use of word prediction; turning on the captions while watching videos; selecting reading materials of high interest; using kinesthetic, gross-motor activities to walk out the letters of sounds; using gross-motor activities on the interactive whiteboard; standing while working on existing activities; and using a consistent graphic organizer like the Frayer model to teach the meanings of words (Frayer, Frederick, & Klausmeier, 1969). The educational experience designer then begins to implement these strategies when constructing the lessons of the day.
The accessible-design facilitator documents the suggestions in an email to the EED, who, in turn, shares the options with the IEP team. Using existing observable and documented data along with its members’ experience, the IEP team makes decisions about which of the options are necessary to guarantee a free appropriate public education. The new interventions, in conjunction with the old, continue to be implemented, and performance continues to be measured.
In this ideal example, the request for assistance and the ideas generated did not originate through any formal request. The educational experience designer simply asked for help, and the help was provided.
[[Speech Bubble]]
Awesome Insight
In the previous example, the professional contacted by the educational experience designer was the accessible-design facilitator. It could easily have been the occupational therapist, speech-language pathologist, an instructional-technology facilitator, or anyone else capable of brainstorming and researching strategies about how to improve spelling.
[[/Speech Bubble]]
[A]Requesting Assistance Prior to an IEP Meeting
IEP team members working with students analyze the performance of a student to decide what actions to take. When educators review data collected on the goals of the IEP, and the analysis of that data shows that the student is demonstrating difficulty achieving that goal, it might be appropriate to ask someone for help. Asking for help can be a decision driven by data.
However, one doesn’t necessarily need to analyze the data to know when a student is demonstrating difficulty. Concerns can arise for any variety of reasons, and any IEP team member can ask for help at any time prior to or during an IEP meeting. Asking for help prior to an IEP has advantages—one can arrive at the meeting with the options and ideas generated from that discussion, which saves time for the student, as the strategies can be implemented in a more timely fashion. This also results in one less meeting for the IEP team. If the request for help comes at the IEP meeting, then a second IEP meeting needs to be scheduled to review the options and ideas generated from that discussion.
Consider the following two scenarios. Which would you rather see happen?
[B]Scenario 1
The educational experience designer is reflecting on the results of multiple experiences her students have had over the last several weeks. Through reflection, she suspects that despite having access to numerous tools in the environment, and despite the accommodations outlined in the IEP to ensure this access, one of her students, who has a goal of composing a five-paragraph essay, is demonstrating continued difficulty with composing thoughts to express himself through writing.
The educational experience designer asks the case manager if the data being collected on this goal bears out her suspicions. Together, the case manager and the EED analyze the data collected as well as the student’s work samples, and they determine that, in fact, the student is demonstrating difficulty. They brainstorm interventions together but wonder about other technologies that could be used to assist this student.
The case manager writes an email to the building’s accessible-design facilitator and the instructional-technology resource teacher, asking both for assistance. As soon as possible, all the educators meet to discuss the student, and a list of ideas is generated, including the addition of pictures to graphic organizers for use as prompts, turning off real-time grammar and spell-check to minimize distractions when generating sentences, and inviting the student to voice-record his thoughts rather than writing them. These strategies utilize features of technology already existing in the student’s environment.
The next day, the educational experience designer introduces these ideas not only to this student but to the entire class, and the student begins to implement the new strategies. Over the next several weeks, the data collected on this student’s ability to compose thoughts through writing shows improvement. An IEP meeting is called to discuss if these new strategies should be written as accommodations.
[B]Scenario 2
All the members of the IEP team are gathered in a conference room and begin a review of a student’s proposed plan. When the conversation turns to goals and what is needed for the student to meet those goals, the parents state that they are concerned about the student’s ability to compose five-paragraph essays on various topics. They ask if any additional technology could be used to help with the act of composition, and the school’s team members explain that a request for assistance can be written into the IEP. The request for the case manager to meet with an accessible-design facilitator is documented, including a statement about when the IEP team will reconvene to discuss the results of that meeting.
Following the IEP meeting, the case manager contacts the accessible-design facilitator to schedule a meeting to fulfill the request. As soon as possible, all the educators meet to discuss the student and generate a list of ideas, including the addition of pictures to graphic organizers for use as prompts, turning off real-time grammar and spell-check to minimize distractions when generating sentences, and inviting the student to voice-record his thoughts rather than writing them. These strategies utilize features of technology that already exist in the student’s environment, which the accessible-design facilitator details in a document. Soon after, the educational experience designer introduces these ideas not only to the student but to the entire class, and the student begins to implement the new strategies.
The IEP team reconvenes by the date determined during the first meeting to discuss this document and whether these new strategies should be written as accommodations.
[B]Scenario 1 versus Scenario 2
In both scenarios, the individual student and the larger body of students benefit from the conference between the case manager and the accessible-design facilitator. However, in the first scenario, the strategies are put in place more expeditiously and with less paperwork. The cost in hours to the educational agency is minimized. Further, in the first scenario, the educators have taken a proactive role in analyzing the data and implementing corrective actions. In the second scenario, the educators are responding reactively to the concerns brought up by the parents. In both scenarios, everyone wins, but in scenario 1, the winning takes place a little bit sooner and with a little less energy.
[A]Eliminate Barriers to Requesting Assistance
Some people hate paperwork and forms. Filling out an intake form, no matter how easy, can act as a barrier to someone requesting assistance. The process should be welcoming, not daunting. The first step in requesting assistance should be to reach out to a person rather than interacting with a form.
If you are attempting to be as accessible to people’s needs as possible, then scratch the form and invite people to contact you via email, phone, or another means—especially if the information contained in the form can easily be found elsewhere, like on a student’s IEP. Any necessary information that is not already documented can be collected via conversations and discussions with those asking for assistance. Making the first step in obtaining assistance more inviting than the impersonal nature of a form sends a message that the overall experience will be friendly, worthwhile, and collaborative.
It’s important to note that not having a form to request assistance does not mean that documentation should not exist. Once assistance is requested, the person receiving the request should document the request, but this could be as simple as an online form that feeds a database about the location and nature of the request. (Note: the responsibility of entering that data into the database falls to the person who is receiving the request, not the one making it.)
Taking the time to collect and then analyze this data later can provide insights into trends, helping to shape goals while providing the necessary evidence to make alterations to action plans regarding how best to provide assistance.
[A]Requesting Assistance During an IEP Meeting
According to federal law, an assistive technology service is defined as “any service that directly assists a child with a disability in the selection, acquisition, or use of an assistive technology device,” which includes the evaluation of the needs of the child and a functional evaluation of the child’s needs in his or her customary environment. Due to the words “functional evaluation” and the awareness of speech-language, occupational therapy, and physical therapy evaluations, some have interpreted that the only way to request assistance is through a formal event called an “assistive technology evaluation.”
The law, however, does not specify the term assistive technology evaluation. There is no stipulation stating that an evaluation needs to be a formal process resulting in a report. Rather, the act of evaluating can (and perhaps should) be informal. There is also no stipulation that the act of evaluating needs to be completed by one individual; the act of evaluating can be a collaborative, multidisciplinary, and/or interdisciplinary effort.
If the term functional evaluation in the law is interpreted to mean “evaluating to help determine needs,” then school districts can offer flexible models for how to help IEP teams determine necessary technologies. This allows IEP teams to take advantage of these different structures based on the circumstance, situation, and needs of the student. Just as there is no singular tool that will fit every student, there is likely no singular process that will fit every situation when evaluating needs. Offering an array of options for how to determine a student’s needs (and being open to creating even more options) provides the greatest opportunity to meet the needs of every student. And whichever option the IEP team chooses can still be documented in the IEP.
There are a few reasons why IEP teams might choose to formalize a request for assistance by writing it into the IEP. Documenting the request serves to protect all the parties involved; it provides verification that the IEP team has met its obligations, offering assurance to the family that the appropriate and necessary actions have been performed. Furthermore, when a request is documented in the IEP, future educators working with the student can read exactly what has happened in the past. Although documentation can also occur outside the IEP, documenting as much as possible in the IEP keeps everything in one location for current and future teams to review. Finally, as hard as people may work to build relationships and gain each other’s trust, sometimes it just doesn’t work out that way. If anyone ever feels uncomfortable, unsettled, or unsure, it is appropriate to put everyone’s minds at ease by documenting the request for assistance in the IEP. Fulfilling the obligations written in the request will go a long way toward building that trust.
[[SIDEBAR; Designer: this sidebar can float somewhere nearby, doesn’t have to be in this exact spot]]
[SB Head]Leading with Trust
Imagine a parent contacting an educational experience designer to brainstorm ideas. During that conversation, the EED states that she will meet with the accessible-design facilitator to brainstorm some more, and following that meeting, a list of ideas will be provided to the parent.
A short time later, the EED and accessible-design facilitator meet, discuss the student, generate a list of ideas, and then send that on to the parent, explaining that they’ll be implementing some of the options.
In this scenario, everyone has done exactly what they promised to do. When every person does this, trust grows. Goodwill wins, relationships grow stronger, and confidence is emboldened—all to the benefit of the student and his or her right to a free appropriate public education.
Whenever possible, lead with trust.
[[/SIDEBAR]]
[[SIDEBAR][
[SB Head]Assessing Rather Than Evaluating
One of the best resources for helping people design and develop programs related to ensuring the proper consideration of technology is Assessing Students’ Needs for Assistive Technology: A Resource Manual for School District Teams, 5th edition (2009) (http://bit.ly/asnatchapters) from the Wisconsin Assistive Technology Initiative (wati.org). As the authors note, the words evaluation and assessment hold different meanings in education. An evaluation is often perceived as a one-time action performed by a professional or expert in the discipline. Although evaluations might produce recommendations or offer suggestions for new tools and strategies, their primary function is to determine a student’s eligibility to qualify as a person with a disability. Assessments, by contrast, are ongoing actions conducted by relevant stakeholders. Assessing what a student needs in order to achieve his or her goals does not impact a student’s eligibility status, and evaluating if a student is eligible to receive special-education services has no bearing on assessing which tools and strategies a student might need to achieve goals.
[[/SIDEBAR][
[B]How to Document a Request for Assistance in the IEP
When documenting a request for assistance, the IEP team specifies the details of what is expected to occur. The team should avoid using vague terms like assessment, evaluation, and/or consultation unless they are explicitly defined in a location accessible to all members of the IEP team, as these terms can be interpreted differently by different people. And even with specific definitions, using one word to describe the act of assisting in the determination of options can still lead to incorrect interpretations. Instead, write an entire statement describing the specific actions the IEP team wants to happen. The more explicitly the statement is written, the better the chances that everyone will have the same expectations. The statement should include the following parameters whenever requesting assistance in the IEP:
[Lists—numbered and bulleted]
1. What is the problem?
• What, exactly, does the IEP team need help with determining?
• What goal is the student having trouble accomplishing?
2. Who is going to assist the IEP team?
• Will it be someone knowledgeable in the area in which the problem is occurring?
• Should it be a related-service staff member?
• Might it be appropriate for more than one staff member to provide the assistance?
3. What specific actions should be taken by the professional(s) helping to determine options for support?
• Should the professional(s) providing assistance review relevant documentation pertaining to the student, and if so, which documents should be reviewed?
• Should an observation in the child’s customary environment occur during the time when the student is working on the specified goal?
• Do interviews with the educators, the parents, and/or the student need to be conducted?
4. How is the help going to be documented?
• Will a list of options be generated and provided for the IEP team to consider?
5. By when will the specific actions occur?
• What is a reasonable amount of time in which to complete the actions being requested?
• By when will the IEP reconvene to review the actions taken?
[/Lists—numbered and bulleted]
[B]Sample Requests for Assistance In an IEP
The IEP team might write something similar to one of the following three examples:
[BQ]
The case manager will meet with an accessible-design facilitator, speech-language pathologist, occupational therapist, reading specialist, and/or any other staff member(s) with knowledge relevant to reading difficulties to review progress notes, assessment data, and the current IEP, which includes the goal(s) pertaining to reading and provides a list of potential options for intervention within 60 business days. The IEP team will reconvene within 10 business days of having the list of options presented.
[/BQ]
[BQ]
Within 30 business days, an accessible-design facilitator, speech-language pathologist, and/or any other staff member(s) with knowledge relevant to communication difficulties will review the IEP along with goal(s) pertaining to communication, observing the student in his customary educational environment, interviewing stakeholders (including the student), and providing a list of potential options for intervention within 65 business days. The IEP team will reconvene within 10 business days of having the list of options presented.
[/BQ]
[BQ]
Within 30 business days, an accessible-design facilitator will meet with the case manager to review the IEP and coach the case manager through a process for considering needs related to technology selection, acquisition, and implementation. The IEP team will reconvene within 10 business days of the coaching session to use the process to consider and determine the technology necessary to ensure the student continues to have access to a free appropriate public education.
[/BQ]
[A]The Hidden Costs of Requesting Assistance
Requesting assistance to consider technology has associated costs. For instance, time is a limited commodity, so asking someone to provide assistance has a double cost. The age-old adage remains true: time is money. No matter the job title, those providing assistance will expect to be compensated for their time; and this compensation has fiduciary consequences that impact budgets, taxes, and livelihoods.
The cost of asking for and receiving someone’s help can be calculated (if anyone is so inclined) to determine an average dollar amount per request. This calculation can be used as a metric for making staffing decisions, altering policies and practices, and generally informing administrators and the public about where and how monies are being spent. To make the calculation, one would need the following variables:
[[Designer: What follows is meant to look like a mathematical equation.]]
If a is the average time it takes to request and receive assistance, b is the average hourly rate of the person making the request, c is the average time it takes for the person being asked to provide this assistance, and d is the average hourly rate of the person assisting in the request, then e is the average hourly cost of making and assisting with the request:
(a × b) + (c × d) = e.
Note: This calculation only accounts for the time it takes to request, provide, and review the provision of assistance. The time it takes to acquire a support (tool) and train individuals on how to use this support would have an additional cost per hour.
The number of hours in the day are finite, and the expense associated with choosing to take one action over another does not have a formula associated with calculating the cost; the cost is related to the opportunity. When staff are engaged in the task of providing assistance for an individual, they are not necessarily working on other projects that might benefit the masses (such as creating a professional-development opportunity).
When determining which action to take, ask which action will make the most significant impact in the shortest amount of time. What gives you the biggest bang for your buck? Building professional-development experiences, creating support mechanisms, and serving on collaborative committees where decisions are made for the entire educational agency are all examples of opportunities that also cost time. With limited time and resources, which opportunity are you going to choose?
[[Speech Bubble]]
Awesome Insight
Time is a limited resource—use it wisely. Collect media and other artifacts during daily activities so they can be used in longer-term initiatives or projects that impact the entire agency, like building an online course, creating instructional videos, making an informative website, or constructing any other professional-development experiences.
[[/Speech Bubble]]
Costs related to time and opportunity can be perceived as invisible by those not consciously thinking of them when working for or with an education agency. As such, requesting assistance can seem like an entitlement or a free resource. Conversations about the costs in time and opportunity shape perspectives and bring about a greater understanding of the bigger picture. Dollars—often tax dollars—are being used to pay for the time being spent, and there is a responsibility that comes with spending that money. Being transparent about how those dollars are spent reminds people about the true cost associated with the decisions being made.
[A]Synergistic Value
Costs in money, time, and opportunity should not be used as a reason to not ask for help. The actions taken to help others have the potential to effectively alter a student’s future life permanently and for the better. The options provided, along with the decisions surrounding the implementation of these options, have social, emotional, educational, and financial ramifications that impact a student’s entire life. Often, this assistance is what can turn a situation around—not just for the student but for everyone working with that student. If you change the life of even one student, isn’t it worth it?
The ripple effect of providing assistance can be of significant and immeasurable value. Providing options to an educator helps them shape educational experiences for every student with whom they work, now and in the future. And if you change the impact of even one educator, isn’t it also worth it?
Requesting Assistance
Sometimes an educational experience designer (or EED) needs help using technology to craft accessible and inclusive lessons. Sometimes an IEP team needs assistance considering technology that should be implemented to ensure a free appropriate public education. Sometimes an educational institution needs guidance on how to establish and maintain practices for the benefit of every constituent. This assistance can come from a variety of sources including the accessible-design facilitator.
How does one go about requesting assistance? Is it as simple as climbing to the tallest rooftop and yelling, “I need help!” or does the process need to be more sophisticated than that? Let’s dive into this chapter to find out.
In this chapter, you’ll:
[List]
1. Learn who can provide assistance when assistance is needed.
2. Explore a process by which an IEP team requests assistance in the consideration of technology.
3. Examine agency-wide implications for allocating resources to providing assistance.
[/List]
[List head]ISTE Standards Addressed
• ISTE Standards for Educators 2a: Shape, advance, and accelerate a shared vision for empowered learning with technology by engaging with education stakeholders.
• ISTE Standards for Educators 2b: Advocate for equitable access to educational technology, digital content, and learning opportunities to meet the diverse needs of all students.
• ISTE Standards for Educators 2c: Model for colleagues the identification, exploration, evaluation, curation, and adoption of new digital resources and tools for learning.
[A]Who Can Help?
Help for educational experience designers and IEP teams can come from various sources, such as a school psychologist, educational diagnostician, instructional-technology resource teacher, speech-language pathologists, occupational therapists, physical therapists, vision specialists, hearing specialists, other disciplines and educators, accessible-design facilitators, or any combination of professionals. Assistance in considering technology need not come from one specific source (like someone with “assistive technology” in her or his job title); instead, it can come from any variety of sources.
[[Speech Bubble]]
Awesome Insight
Recognize that no matter who makes the suggestion, if it involves the use of a tool or an action that accesses a tool, by definition, it is considered assistive technology. Thinking that suggestions for technology use need to come from someone with the words “assistive technology” in her or his job title is like thinking that only jockeys can ride horses and only race-car drivers can operate automobiles.
[[/Speech Bubble]]
When two colleagues have lunch together and the conversation turns to how to best serve a student, both parties are discussing changes to the environments, tasks, and tools that could be made (the SETT framework). When parents talk to friends at a party about what’s going on with their child and that friend offers advice about tools to explore or an approach to take, this is helping to determine technology options. Consulting with anyone can be considered a form of assessment. The act of analyzing the documentation and corresponding evidence provided for any situation and then brainstorming what a student could use is another form of assessment. A discussion about the merits of implementing any item along with a discussion about adjustments to the task and environment are discussions about assistive technology.
[[SIDEBAR]]
[SB Head]A Match Game!
Let’s play a matching game to illustrate who can participate as a member of an IEP team to determine the needs of a student and who can provide support to an IEP team in making this determination. Grab something to draw with (a pencil, pen, marker, crayon, or some annotation tool if you’re looking at a digital version).
Look at the two columns shown here, each describing people who are invested in a student’s performance. Match the items from the IEP team column to the support column (those who the IEP team might reach out to for support). Take your time as you carefully consider which of the parties in each column can participate in determining what a child with a disability could use to increase, maintain, or improve his or her functional capabilities. (Remember, it’s okay to scribble all over this book!)
[Designer: If possible, can this line up with the end of the page so the reveal paragraph is on the next page?]
[[Designer, please create one column for each grouping (IEP Team and Support).]]
[List head]IEP Team
• Student
• Parent
• Case manager / educational experience designer
• General educator / educational experience designer
• Administrator
• Related service staff
• Advocate
[List head]Support
• Friends
• Family
• Other educators
• Accessible-design facilitators
• Community members
• Outside consultants
If the two columns look like you let a toddler loose on a bowl full of wet spaghetti, then you’re on the right track. The lines on the page should crisscross repeatedly. Anyone in the support column can provide assistance to anyone in the IEP column. Good ideas can come from any source!
[[/SIDEBAR]]
[A]Just Ask! Requesting Assistance Need Not Be Formal
When any member of the IEP team needs assistance with considering options, it’s appropriate to reach out for help. The request could be initiated informally and not written into the IEP, like when colleagues are just conferring and collaborating. Or the assistance could be a parent asking another parent for advice, an educator asking an accessible-design facilitator for help, or an administrator reaching out to anyone else for advice.
For example, suppose a second-grade student is demonstrating difficulty with spelling. It seems that most words he attempts to spell are done using his memory and not phonemically. The members of his IEP team have implemented various strategies to help increase his spelling accuracy, including explicit reading instruction using a multisensory approach, with tools and strategies such as Elkonin boxes, breaking-down words into component sounds (using a sing-song voice), playing rhyming games, and accessing a leveled web-based application that targets specific phonemic patterns. However, after two quarters of consistent practice, the student has yet to make sufficient progress toward his goal.
So, the educational experience designer contacts her accessible-design facilitator. Together, they brainstorm research-based intervention options, like the use of word prediction; turning on the captions while watching videos; selecting reading materials of high interest; using kinesthetic, gross-motor activities to walk out the letters of sounds; using gross-motor activities on the interactive whiteboard; standing while working on existing activities; and using a consistent graphic organizer like the Frayer model to teach the meanings of words (Frayer, Frederick, & Klausmeier, 1969). The educational experience designer then begins to implement these strategies when constructing the lessons of the day.
The accessible-design facilitator documents the suggestions in an email to the EED, who, in turn, shares the options with the IEP team. Using existing observable and documented data along with its members’ experience, the IEP team makes decisions about which of the options are necessary to guarantee a free appropriate public education. The new interventions, in conjunction with the old, continue to be implemented, and performance continues to be measured.
In this ideal example, the request for assistance and the ideas generated did not originate through any formal request. The educational experience designer simply asked for help, and the help was provided.
[[Speech Bubble]]
Awesome Insight
In the previous example, the professional contacted by the educational experience designer was the accessible-design facilitator. It could easily have been the occupational therapist, speech-language pathologist, an instructional-technology facilitator, or anyone else capable of brainstorming and researching strategies about how to improve spelling.
[[/Speech Bubble]]
[A]Requesting Assistance Prior to an IEP Meeting
IEP team members working with students analyze the performance of a student to decide what actions to take. When educators review data collected on the goals of the IEP, and the analysis of that data shows that the student is demonstrating difficulty achieving that goal, it might be appropriate to ask someone for help. Asking for help can be a decision driven by data.
However, one doesn’t necessarily need to analyze the data to know when a student is demonstrating difficulty. Concerns can arise for any variety of reasons, and any IEP team member can ask for help at any time prior to or during an IEP meeting. Asking for help prior to an IEP has advantages—one can arrive at the meeting with the options and ideas generated from that discussion, which saves time for the student, as the strategies can be implemented in a more timely fashion. This also results in one less meeting for the IEP team. If the request for help comes at the IEP meeting, then a second IEP meeting needs to be scheduled to review the options and ideas generated from that discussion.
Consider the following two scenarios. Which would you rather see happen?
[B]Scenario 1
The educational experience designer is reflecting on the results of multiple experiences her students have had over the last several weeks. Through reflection, she suspects that despite having access to numerous tools in the environment, and despite the accommodations outlined in the IEP to ensure this access, one of her students, who has a goal of composing a five-paragraph essay, is demonstrating continued difficulty with composing thoughts to express himself through writing.
The educational experience designer asks the case manager if the data being collected on this goal bears out her suspicions. Together, the case manager and the EED analyze the data collected as well as the student’s work samples, and they determine that, in fact, the student is demonstrating difficulty. They brainstorm interventions together but wonder about other technologies that could be used to assist this student.
The case manager writes an email to the building’s accessible-design facilitator and the instructional-technology resource teacher, asking both for assistance. As soon as possible, all the educators meet to discuss the student, and a list of ideas is generated, including the addition of pictures to graphic organizers for use as prompts, turning off real-time grammar and spell-check to minimize distractions when generating sentences, and inviting the student to voice-record his thoughts rather than writing them. These strategies utilize features of technology already existing in the student’s environment.
The next day, the educational experience designer introduces these ideas not only to this student but to the entire class, and the student begins to implement the new strategies. Over the next several weeks, the data collected on this student’s ability to compose thoughts through writing shows improvement. An IEP meeting is called to discuss if these new strategies should be written as accommodations.
[B]Scenario 2
All the members of the IEP team are gathered in a conference room and begin a review of a student’s proposed plan. When the conversation turns to goals and what is needed for the student to meet those goals, the parents state that they are concerned about the student’s ability to compose five-paragraph essays on various topics. They ask if any additional technology could be used to help with the act of composition, and the school’s team members explain that a request for assistance can be written into the IEP. The request for the case manager to meet with an accessible-design facilitator is documented, including a statement about when the IEP team will reconvene to discuss the results of that meeting.
Following the IEP meeting, the case manager contacts the accessible-design facilitator to schedule a meeting to fulfill the request. As soon as possible, all the educators meet to discuss the student and generate a list of ideas, including the addition of pictures to graphic organizers for use as prompts, turning off real-time grammar and spell-check to minimize distractions when generating sentences, and inviting the student to voice-record his thoughts rather than writing them. These strategies utilize features of technology that already exist in the student’s environment, which the accessible-design facilitator details in a document. Soon after, the educational experience designer introduces these ideas not only to the student but to the entire class, and the student begins to implement the new strategies.
The IEP team reconvenes by the date determined during the first meeting to discuss this document and whether these new strategies should be written as accommodations.
[B]Scenario 1 versus Scenario 2
In both scenarios, the individual student and the larger body of students benefit from the conference between the case manager and the accessible-design facilitator. However, in the first scenario, the strategies are put in place more expeditiously and with less paperwork. The cost in hours to the educational agency is minimized. Further, in the first scenario, the educators have taken a proactive role in analyzing the data and implementing corrective actions. In the second scenario, the educators are responding reactively to the concerns brought up by the parents. In both scenarios, everyone wins, but in scenario 1, the winning takes place a little bit sooner and with a little less energy.
[A]Eliminate Barriers to Requesting Assistance
Some people hate paperwork and forms. Filling out an intake form, no matter how easy, can act as a barrier to someone requesting assistance. The process should be welcoming, not daunting. The first step in requesting assistance should be to reach out to a person rather than interacting with a form.
If you are attempting to be as accessible to people’s needs as possible, then scratch the form and invite people to contact you via email, phone, or another means—especially if the information contained in the form can easily be found elsewhere, like on a student’s IEP. Any necessary information that is not already documented can be collected via conversations and discussions with those asking for assistance. Making the first step in obtaining assistance more inviting than the impersonal nature of a form sends a message that the overall experience will be friendly, worthwhile, and collaborative.
It’s important to note that not having a form to request assistance does not mean that documentation should not exist. Once assistance is requested, the person receiving the request should document the request, but this could be as simple as an online form that feeds a database about the location and nature of the request. (Note: the responsibility of entering that data into the database falls to the person who is receiving the request, not the one making it.)
Taking the time to collect and then analyze this data later can provide insights into trends, helping to shape goals while providing the necessary evidence to make alterations to action plans regarding how best to provide assistance.
[A]Requesting Assistance During an IEP Meeting
According to federal law, an assistive technology service is defined as “any service that directly assists a child with a disability in the selection, acquisition, or use of an assistive technology device,” which includes the evaluation of the needs of the child and a functional evaluation of the child’s needs in his or her customary environment. Due to the words “functional evaluation” and the awareness of speech-language, occupational therapy, and physical therapy evaluations, some have interpreted that the only way to request assistance is through a formal event called an “assistive technology evaluation.”
The law, however, does not specify the term assistive technology evaluation. There is no stipulation stating that an evaluation needs to be a formal process resulting in a report. Rather, the act of evaluating can (and perhaps should) be informal. There is also no stipulation that the act of evaluating needs to be completed by one individual; the act of evaluating can be a collaborative, multidisciplinary, and/or interdisciplinary effort.
If the term functional evaluation in the law is interpreted to mean “evaluating to help determine needs,” then school districts can offer flexible models for how to help IEP teams determine necessary technologies. This allows IEP teams to take advantage of these different structures based on the circumstance, situation, and needs of the student. Just as there is no singular tool that will fit every student, there is likely no singular process that will fit every situation when evaluating needs. Offering an array of options for how to determine a student’s needs (and being open to creating even more options) provides the greatest opportunity to meet the needs of every student. And whichever option the IEP team chooses can still be documented in the IEP.
There are a few reasons why IEP teams might choose to formalize a request for assistance by writing it into the IEP. Documenting the request serves to protect all the parties involved; it provides verification that the IEP team has met its obligations, offering assurance to the family that the appropriate and necessary actions have been performed. Furthermore, when a request is documented in the IEP, future educators working with the student can read exactly what has happened in the past. Although documentation can also occur outside the IEP, documenting as much as possible in the IEP keeps everything in one location for current and future teams to review. Finally, as hard as people may work to build relationships and gain each other’s trust, sometimes it just doesn’t work out that way. If anyone ever feels uncomfortable, unsettled, or unsure, it is appropriate to put everyone’s minds at ease by documenting the request for assistance in the IEP. Fulfilling the obligations written in the request will go a long way toward building that trust.
[[SIDEBAR; Designer: this sidebar can float somewhere nearby, doesn’t have to be in this exact spot]]
[SB Head]Leading with Trust
Imagine a parent contacting an educational experience designer to brainstorm ideas. During that conversation, the EED states that she will meet with the accessible-design facilitator to brainstorm some more, and following that meeting, a list of ideas will be provided to the parent.
A short time later, the EED and accessible-design facilitator meet, discuss the student, generate a list of ideas, and then send that on to the parent, explaining that they’ll be implementing some of the options.
In this scenario, everyone has done exactly what they promised to do. When every person does this, trust grows. Goodwill wins, relationships grow stronger, and confidence is emboldened—all to the benefit of the student and his or her right to a free appropriate public education.
Whenever possible, lead with trust.
[[/SIDEBAR]]
[[SIDEBAR][
[SB Head]Assessing Rather Than Evaluating
One of the best resources for helping people design and develop programs related to ensuring the proper consideration of technology is Assessing Students’ Needs for Assistive Technology: A Resource Manual for School District Teams, 5th edition (2009) (http://bit.ly/asnatchapters) from the Wisconsin Assistive Technology Initiative (wati.org). As the authors note, the words evaluation and assessment hold different meanings in education. An evaluation is often perceived as a one-time action performed by a professional or expert in the discipline. Although evaluations might produce recommendations or offer suggestions for new tools and strategies, their primary function is to determine a student’s eligibility to qualify as a person with a disability. Assessments, by contrast, are ongoing actions conducted by relevant stakeholders. Assessing what a student needs in order to achieve his or her goals does not impact a student’s eligibility status, and evaluating if a student is eligible to receive special-education services has no bearing on assessing which tools and strategies a student might need to achieve goals.
[[/SIDEBAR][
[B]How to Document a Request for Assistance in the IEP
When documenting a request for assistance, the IEP team specifies the details of what is expected to occur. The team should avoid using vague terms like assessment, evaluation, and/or consultation unless they are explicitly defined in a location accessible to all members of the IEP team, as these terms can be interpreted differently by different people. And even with specific definitions, using one word to describe the act of assisting in the determination of options can still lead to incorrect interpretations. Instead, write an entire statement describing the specific actions the IEP team wants to happen. The more explicitly the statement is written, the better the chances that everyone will have the same expectations. The statement should include the following parameters whenever requesting assistance in the IEP:
[Lists—numbered and bulleted]
1. What is the problem?
• What, exactly, does the IEP team need help with determining?
• What goal is the student having trouble accomplishing?
2. Who is going to assist the IEP team?
• Will it be someone knowledgeable in the area in which the problem is occurring?
• Should it be a related-service staff member?
• Might it be appropriate for more than one staff member to provide the assistance?
3. What specific actions should be taken by the professional(s) helping to determine options for support?
• Should the professional(s) providing assistance review relevant documentation pertaining to the student, and if so, which documents should be reviewed?
• Should an observation in the child’s customary environment occur during the time when the student is working on the specified goal?
• Do interviews with the educators, the parents, and/or the student need to be conducted?
4. How is the help going to be documented?
• Will a list of options be generated and provided for the IEP team to consider?
5. By when will the specific actions occur?
• What is a reasonable amount of time in which to complete the actions being requested?
• By when will the IEP reconvene to review the actions taken?
[/Lists—numbered and bulleted]
[B]Sample Requests for Assistance In an IEP
The IEP team might write something similar to one of the following three examples:
[BQ]
The case manager will meet with an accessible-design facilitator, speech-language pathologist, occupational therapist, reading specialist, and/or any other staff member(s) with knowledge relevant to reading difficulties to review progress notes, assessment data, and the current IEP, which includes the goal(s) pertaining to reading and provides a list of potential options for intervention within 60 business days. The IEP team will reconvene within 10 business days of having the list of options presented.
[/BQ]
[BQ]
Within 30 business days, an accessible-design facilitator, speech-language pathologist, and/or any other staff member(s) with knowledge relevant to communication difficulties will review the IEP along with goal(s) pertaining to communication, observing the student in his customary educational environment, interviewing stakeholders (including the student), and providing a list of potential options for intervention within 65 business days. The IEP team will reconvene within 10 business days of having the list of options presented.
[/BQ]
[BQ]
Within 30 business days, an accessible-design facilitator will meet with the case manager to review the IEP and coach the case manager through a process for considering needs related to technology selection, acquisition, and implementation. The IEP team will reconvene within 10 business days of the coaching session to use the process to consider and determine the technology necessary to ensure the student continues to have access to a free appropriate public education.
[/BQ]
[A]The Hidden Costs of Requesting Assistance
Requesting assistance to consider technology has associated costs. For instance, time is a limited commodity, so asking someone to provide assistance has a double cost. The age-old adage remains true: time is money. No matter the job title, those providing assistance will expect to be compensated for their time; and this compensation has fiduciary consequences that impact budgets, taxes, and livelihoods.
The cost of asking for and receiving someone’s help can be calculated (if anyone is so inclined) to determine an average dollar amount per request. This calculation can be used as a metric for making staffing decisions, altering policies and practices, and generally informing administrators and the public about where and how monies are being spent. To make the calculation, one would need the following variables:
[[Designer: What follows is meant to look like a mathematical equation.]]
If a is the average time it takes to request and receive assistance, b is the average hourly rate of the person making the request, c is the average time it takes for the person being asked to provide this assistance, and d is the average hourly rate of the person assisting in the request, then e is the average hourly cost of making and assisting with the request:
(a × b) + (c × d) = e.
Note: This calculation only accounts for the time it takes to request, provide, and review the provision of assistance. The time it takes to acquire a support (tool) and train individuals on how to use this support would have an additional cost per hour.
The number of hours in the day are finite, and the expense associated with choosing to take one action over another does not have a formula associated with calculating the cost; the cost is related to the opportunity. When staff are engaged in the task of providing assistance for an individual, they are not necessarily working on other projects that might benefit the masses (such as creating a professional-development opportunity).
When determining which action to take, ask which action will make the most significant impact in the shortest amount of time. What gives you the biggest bang for your buck? Building professional-development experiences, creating support mechanisms, and serving on collaborative committees where decisions are made for the entire educational agency are all examples of opportunities that also cost time. With limited time and resources, which opportunity are you going to choose?
[[Speech Bubble]]
Awesome Insight
Time is a limited resource—use it wisely. Collect media and other artifacts during daily activities so they can be used in longer-term initiatives or projects that impact the entire agency, like building an online course, creating instructional videos, making an informative website, or constructing any other professional-development experiences.
[[/Speech Bubble]]
Costs related to time and opportunity can be perceived as invisible by those not consciously thinking of them when working for or with an education agency. As such, requesting assistance can seem like an entitlement or a free resource. Conversations about the costs in time and opportunity shape perspectives and bring about a greater understanding of the bigger picture. Dollars—often tax dollars—are being used to pay for the time being spent, and there is a responsibility that comes with spending that money. Being transparent about how those dollars are spent reminds people about the true cost associated with the decisions being made.
[A]Synergistic Value
Costs in money, time, and opportunity should not be used as a reason to not ask for help. The actions taken to help others have the potential to effectively alter a student’s future life permanently and for the better. The options provided, along with the decisions surrounding the implementation of these options, have social, emotional, educational, and financial ramifications that impact a student’s entire life. Often, this assistance is what can turn a situation around—not just for the student but for everyone working with that student. If you change the life of even one student, isn’t it worth it?
The ripple effect of providing assistance can be of significant and immeasurable value. Providing options to an educator helps them shape educational experiences for every student with whom they work, now and in the future. And if you change the impact of even one educator, isn’t it also worth it?
"About this title" may belong to another edition of this title.
Search results for The New Assistive Tech: Make Learning Awesome for All!
Seller Image
The New Assistive Tech: Make Learning Awesome for All!
Published by
International Society for Technology in Education, 2018
ISBN 10: 1564846881
ISBN 13: 9781564846884
Used
Softcover
Seller: Bay State Book Company, North Smithfield, RI, U.S.A.
Seller rating 5 out of 5 stars
Condition: good. The book is in good condition with all pages and cover intact, including the dust jacket if originally issued. The spine may show light wear. Pages may contain some notes or highlighting, and there might be a "From the library of" label. Boxed set packaging, shrink wrap, or included media like CDs may be missing. Seller Inventory # BSM.UQ8U
Stock Image
The New Assistive Tech: Make Learning Awesome for All!
Published by
International Society for Technology in Education, 2018
ISBN 10: 1564846881
ISBN 13: 9781564846884
Used
Softcover
Seller: World of Books (was SecondSale), Montgomery, IL, U.S.A.
Seller rating 5 out of 5 stars
Condition: Very Good. Item in very good condition! Textbooks may not include supplemental items i.e. CDs, access codes etc. Seller Inventory # 00096009584
Stock Image
The New Assistive Tech: Make Learning Awesome for All!
Published by
International Society for Technology in Education, 2018
ISBN 10: 1564846881
ISBN 13: 9781564846884
Used
Softcover
Seller: World of Books (was SecondSale), Montgomery, IL, U.S.A.
Seller rating 5 out of 5 stars
Condition: Good. Item in good condition. Textbooks may not include supplemental items i.e. CDs, access codes etc. Seller Inventory # 00094809969
Stock Image
The New Assistive Tech: Make Learning Awesome for All!
Published by
International Society for Technology in Educa, 2018
ISBN 10: 1564846881
ISBN 13: 9781564846884
Used
Paperback
Seller: ThriftBooks-Dallas, Dallas, TX, U.S.A.
Seller rating 5 out of 5 stars
Paperback. Condition: Very Good. No Jacket. May have limited writing in cover pages. Pages are unmarked. ~ ThriftBooks: Read More, Spend Less. Seller Inventory # G1564846881I4N00
Stock Image
The New Assistive Tech: Make Learning Awesome for All!
Published by
International Society for Technology in Educa, 2018
ISBN 10: 1564846881
ISBN 13: 9781564846884
Used
Paperback
Seller: ThriftBooks-Reno, Reno, NV, U.S.A.
Seller rating 5 out of 5 stars
Paperback. Condition: Very Good. No Jacket. May have limited writing in cover pages. Pages are unmarked. ~ ThriftBooks: Read More, Spend Less. Seller Inventory # G1564846881I4N00
Stock Image
The New Assistive Tech: Make Learning Awesome for All!
Published by
International Society for Technology in Educa, 2018
ISBN 10: 1564846881
ISBN 13: 9781564846884
Used
Paperback
Seller: ThriftBooks-Atlanta, AUSTELL, GA, U.S.A.
Seller rating 5 out of 5 stars
Paperback. Condition: Very Good. No Jacket. May have limited writing in cover pages. Pages are unmarked. ~ ThriftBooks: Read More, Spend Less. Seller Inventory # G1564846881I4N00
Stock Image
The New Assistive Tech: Make Learning Awesome for All!
Published by
International Society for Techno, 2018
ISBN 10: 1564846881
ISBN 13: 9781564846884
Used
Paperback
Seller: HPB-Red, Dallas, TX, U.S.A.
Seller rating 5 out of 5 stars
Paperback. Condition: Good. Connecting readers with great books since 1972! Used textbooks may not include companion materials such as access codes, etc. May have some wear or writing/highlighting. We ship orders daily and Customer Service is our top priority! Seller Inventory # S_425562902
Seller Image
The New Assistive Tech: Make Learning Awesome for All!
Published by
International Society for Technology in Education, 2018
ISBN 10: 1564846881
ISBN 13: 9781564846884
Used
Softcover
Seller: clickgoodwillbooks, Indianapolis, IN, U.S.A.
Seller rating 5 out of 5 stars
Condition: acceptable. Used - Acceptable: All pages and the cover are intact, but shrink wrap, dust covers, or boxed set case may be missing. Pages may include limited notes, highlighting, or minor water damage but the text is readable. Item may be missing bundled media. Seller Inventory # CSIV.1564846881.A
Seller Image
The New Assistive Tech: Make Learning Awesome for All!
Published by
International Society for Technology in Education, 2018
ISBN 10: 1564846881
ISBN 13: 9781564846884
Used
Softcover
Seller: Goodwill_NE_Indiana, Fort Wayne, IN, U.S.A.
Seller rating 5 out of 5 stars
Condition: good. A book that has been read but is in overall good condition. Very minimal wear damage to the cover including scuff marks, but no major holes or tears. The dust jacket if applicable may not be included. Binding may have minimal wear. The majority of pages are undamaged with minimal creasing or tearing. May have minimal pencil underlining and or highlighting of text and possible small amounts of writing. No missing pages. May have some light marks on the page edges or a remainder mark. May have pale yellow yellowed pages. Fast Shipping, safe and secure mailers. Stock photo used. Seller Inventory # FWV.1564846881.G
Seller Image
The New Assistive Tech: Make Learning Awesome for All!
Published by
International Society for Technology in Education, 2018
ISBN 10: 1564846881
ISBN 13: 9781564846884
Used
Softcover
Seller: tLighthouse Books, Onekama, MI, U.S.A.
Seller rating 5 out of 5 stars
Condition: acceptable. Reading copy. May have signs of wear and previous use scuffs, library copy, highlighting, writing, and underlining . May have foxing, slight water damage or tears. 100% GUARANTEE! Shipped with delivery confirmation. If you're not satisfied with purchase please return item for a full refund. Seller Inventory # HSV.1564846881.A