Using Assistive Technology Outcomes Research to Inform Policy Related to the Employment of Individuals With Disabilities

Abstract

We know that work is recognized as a central component of life for individuals with and without disabilities. It yields many physical and psychological benefits to the individual while simultaneously contributing numerous benefits to society. Lawmakers have enacted a plethora of laws designed to prevent discrimination, provide incentives for employers to hire individuals with disabilities, and facilitate job training/career preparation. Assistive technology figures prominently in disability employment law as a critical strategy for gaining access and supporting employment and upward mobility in the workplace. However, little systematic effort has been devoted to examining assistive technology use and outcomes as they relate to the employment of individuals with disabilities. The purpose of this article is to articulate a series of issues that permeate assistive technology outcome measurement in employment settings and subsequently affect the use of research knowledge for federal and state policy makers. For each issue, the authors pose three questions for critical analysis: Does the law compel the provision of assistive technology? Does outcome data play any part in the operation of the law? When it does, what kind of data would be useful to collect and where could it be found? Finally, the authors provide a brief glimpse of the current and future research efforts concerning the RSA-911 database. The recent database summaries exemplify the importance of such a national data collection system for informing federal policy, particularly concerning the contributions of assistive technology device use and services on improving the employment of individuals with disabilities.

Attitudes of special education teachers towards using technology in inclusive classrooms: a mixed‐methods study

“…Special education technology research and development have directly have an impact on public policy as manifested in the influence of research on wireless technologies, high stakes-testing accommodations, assistive technology and employment of individuals with disabilities (Baker and Moon, 2008;Bolt and Thurlow, 2004;Mendelsohn, Edyburn, Rust, et al, 2008). The Ministry of Education strives to spread technology in schools.…”

Can social media reduce discrimination and ignorance towards patients with long term conditions? A chronic kidney disease example in the UK and more widely

“…[29][30] Not surprisingly people with disabilities and LTCs seek peerto-peer support via SM which offers advantages over standard forms of engagement/education with wide accessibility, immediacy and offers an opportunity for patient education. 31,32 The overwhelming penetration of SM into lives necessitates a renewed commitment to changing the way society addresses the use of media to raise awareness in topics of disability and LTCs and to preclude feelings of discrimination and ignorance. [33][34][35] The use of Information Communication and Technology (ICT) and highlighting the challenges of living with a disability or LTC through SM is important for most patients.…”

“…"The NHS workforce will increasingly need to attract and retain staff with disabilities" 48 Assistive Technology (AT) for example should be acknowledged and understood by employers of individuals with disabilities, allowing healthier work environments. More awareness is needed.…”

Critical Issues in Advancing the Special Education Technology Evidence Base

“…Special education technology research and development has directly impacted public policy, as evidenced by the influence of research on wireless technologies (Baker & Moon, 2008), on high stakes-testing accommodations (Bolt & Thurlow, 2004), and on assistive technology and employment of individuals with disabilities (Mendelsohn, Edyburn, Rust, Schwanke, & Smith, 2008). Although the size of the special education technology policy research base is small, there are select examples of quality research methods being used to directly inform public policy.…”