The AT continuum in education: Novice to power user

Abstract

What factors regarding partnership/collaboration on a statement of AT (assistive technology) need result in students obtaining AT that they use and are satisfied in using? This is one of the questions posited in a study, which investigated both quantitatively and qualitatively the impact of assistive technology on quality of life, self-esteem and satisfaction of AT use of students with disabilities. A mixed methods approach was used to gather data from 45 students with disabilities in their final year of second level education. Following data analysis clear groupings emerged signifying key characteristics which defined novice to power users of AT in education.

Teachers' use of assistive listening devices in inclusive schools

“…If the microphones exhibited positive effects, were easy to manage, and were straightforward to use for both the teachers and the classmates, the teachers appeared to integrate both consistently. Other studies also point to teachers' attitudes towards assistive technologies as central factors (Copley and Ziviani 2004;Hemmingsson, Lidströ m, and Nygård 2009;Craddock 2006), which this current study seems to support. Consequently, factors that can promote positive attitudes are important issues.…”

“…Accordingly, there is a need for systematic information concerning the technical equipment and hearing impairment. Such information improves the teachers' understanding of the need for teaching interventions (Lynas 1986;Antia et al 2009;Punch and Hyde 2010;Chmiliar 2007;McGregor and Pachuski 1996;Wright et al 2006;Craddock 2006), and therefore encourage positive attitudes towards and frequent use of the equipment.…”

“…Assistive listening devices can improve the children's ability to perceive and participate in classroom communication (Luckner and Muir 2001). However, the use of assistive technologies often depends on the teachers' willingness to integrate them into their classroom routines (Luckner and Muir 2001;Wright et al 2006;Murchland and Parkyn 2010;Craddock 2006;Hemmingsson, Lidströ m, and Nygård 2009;Skär 2002;Eriks-Brophy et al and less likely to be implemented. The type of technology supplied, may therefore be important; several studies strongly support the implementation of sound field system in all schools, because of the positive implications for all children's academic performance and for teachers' health and teaching (Crandell, Flexer, and Smaldino 2005;Heeney 2007;Rosenberg et al 1999).…”

“…This technology can be important for inclusive schools which are the guiding political vision in Norway; every child has the right to attend a school in their local community, and all teaching must be adapted to the individual's abilities and interests. Participation in education is critical to success, but for many children with disabilities, participation is a constant struggle (Craddock 2006). Classroom noise, rapid discussions, frequent changes in topics, and large numbers of people involved in the conversations prevent in particular children with hearing loss (HL) from hearing, understanding, and participating in the verbal classroom communications that are fundamental activities in schools (Crandell, Flexer, and Smaldino 2005).…”

“…To effectively integrate this technology, teachers must be provided with sufficient information regarding the children's specific impairment and the technical aids supplied to them (Lynas 1986;Antia et al 2009;Punch and Hyde 2010;Chmiliar 2007;McGregor and Pachuski 1996;Wright et al 2006;Craddock 2006). Furthermore, they should be involved in the assessment process along with the therapists (Wright et al 2006).…”