Augmentative Communication

After working in a D75 classroom for children with severe and multiple disabilties, I have had much experience with augmentative communication devices. In our single classroom, we had multiple different kinds of communication devices (that were both lo and hi tech) including a GoTalk, PECS and a dynavox. These devices really allowed our students to participate and become involved in class discussions and lessons. If it weren't for these devices, it would have been extremely difficult for them to do so. We had students who were ESL learners in addition to not being able to speak or use their expressive language abilities, so these devices really served as instructional technology.

When considering whether a student used a communication device as either adaptational or instructional technology, I usually try to decipher whether or not they could learn without the device (instructional), or if it was simply just a modification that enhanced their learning (adaptational). With respect to my students they had varying disabilities. One of my students had Cerebral Palsy, so it was very difficult for him to maintain both fine motor control and receptive language expression. Therefore, his Dynavox very much aided him in an instructional way. I do not think he would have been able to participate without his Dynavox. Therefore, I would consider this an instructional technology.

However, for our student that implemented PECS, he also knew sign language and had limited expressive language abilties. Therefore, PECS really just helped him by enhancing his ability to speak. Therefore, I would say that this was an adaptational use of technology.

For my student who used the GoTalk, he used it in more of an instructional way. He did not speak and was not ambulatory, therefore without his GoTalk (which was implemented by hand over hand with his paraprofessional), he would not have been able to participate at all. In fact this was vital for his membership in the classroom, so we as teachers knew if he was OK or needed something.

As far as the learning profiles, Sarah, with ataxic CP, uses an augmentative communication device - SmartScan. I would also determine just from the summary that this serves as an instructional form of technology because it allows Sarah to participate, when otherwise she would not be able to.

Additionally, Sam, who as an expressive written language disability, could probably benefit from a computer or typepad. Could this be considered an augmentative communication device in this circumstance?

I think it is amazing how far technology has come, and how we are able to help our students who struggle with expressive communication! Without these devices, these students would really not be able to participate. They literally are life changing. It is exciting for what may happen in the future. what kind of devices do you think we may have in 10 or 20 years? Will more students be able to be accessed and involved?

Planning with Technology

This week's lecture began with an intriguing thought: that sometimes the best learners are the worst teachers. I think this statement holds much truth. I remember when I was in an 8th grade pre-calculus class and my teacher told me that he was a "math whiz" and he was a member of Mensa. He was simply brilliant, and I do not think anyone denied that. However, he was not very good at explaining things in more than one way. Also, I think certain concepts were so basic to him, that he found it either unnecessary or difficult to teach them to people who were not familiar with them. As explained, this phenomena is very important for special educators, especially in reference to using technology. Teaching children who need technology to communicate or learn, may seem impossible for us, because either we are saavy with certain modes of technology or Web 2.0 tools, that we do not know how to explain them to children, or because we do not know how to explain simple concepts using technology, because these concepts seem so basic to us. This is why we need to become familiar and organized with technology.

When we learn about technology, especially if we are unfamiliar with it, I think we really need to keep ourselves organized - perhaps we need graphic organizers!? I tend to confuse different modes or their adaptations, which will be detrimental to me as a teacher in the future. I think as a teacher I will need to figure out how to effectively allow each student access the curriculum, with each respective form of technology. By having this organized in the beginning, I can really focus my comprehension and studying of the different forms of technology to better accommodate my students. Also, after I know which form is effective for each student, I can do research on similar forms, to see which new forms of technology may be developing that could be even more helpful for my students.

It is important to consider learning technology for both adapatational and instructional methods. I think knowing which form, and which tool works best for each student is key to a successful teaching session. If one student would benefit from Kurzweil and another from Titanpad, from the very same lesson, it is the teacher's responsibility to try to incorporate both modes. The ideal teacher will figure out a way. Further, the teacher may need Kurzweil as an adaptational mode of technology for one student because the bubble notes can provide scaffolding or structure, while another student may benefit from Kurzweil in more of an instructional way because text can be read aloud to him, the teacher has to figure out how to provide both forms for the student.

It is easier to understand how to plan technology when examining examples like the learning profiles. If a student like Sarah who has ataxic cerebral palsy, she may benefit from a mode of technology like Kurzweil because text could be read aloud to her and she would not have to hold the book. However, for a student like Jack, with ADHD, Smartnotebook could really be beneficial in capturing his attention due to its different features.

It is important to note that using too many modes of technology at once is another obstacle. A teacher needs to be streamlined and organized when instructing his or her students. This is why planning is key. For instance, if you have a student like Jack, so many different forms of technology being accessed at once by different students could prove to be very distracting.

Overall, learning how to use technology is essential for successful special educators. Shouldn't this be a mandatory aspect of our education? How else can we become the best teachers if we do not have knowledge of how to use all of the tools out there? Furthermore, don't all students deserve this?

Assistive Technology

This week's articles, video and interview really impressed me with how far we have come in terms of technology. I realized how important technology is for students with disabilities.

Things that typical students make take for granted are things that these students need to be able to function in a classroom. I think this brings up a great point about the difference between instructional technology and adaptive technology. The circumstance completely depends on what technology could qualify as and why. The first video Assistive Technology: Enabling Dreams, and the article that accompanied it drove this point home for me. The children featured in the film all had very positive attitudes and explained to viewers that if they didn't have technology, they would not be able to be participatory students. For example, the girl who is featured who has cerebral palsy, uses computers to record all of her assignments and submit oral work. What if she didn't have a computer? What if her mom didn't "know how to get around all the red tape?" She is lucky she has a mother like that, but we as teachers need to make it easier for students to be able to participate.

It reminds me of the interview between Dr. Paweleski and Dr. Keller. UDL is what we are striving for and has to be not only the ideal but the expectation. Children are already built with a drive and a desire to excel. When we look at Lukas, he still wanted to play the horn. He wanted to pursue it even after it was stolen. It its because of the good graces of his family and the amazing innovations of technology that he is still able to play the horn and play it well. I was particularly amazed by the man that made the horn because apparently his family has been making adaptive instruments for a very long time do to his grandfather's accident. But this pertains to our class because it makes me question, should the school have horns available like the one Lukas plays? Is that UDL? I understand it is expensive, but isn't that the law? Where should we draw the line?

Dr. Keller brought up an interesting point about hi and low tech technology. As technology advances he said, things that used to be considered high tech, are now low tech. It is all relative. Moreover, if we shouldn't need technology to have ideal UDL, why should we even be labeling things as high and low tech. In playing devil's advocate I guess, why is it necessary to classify things? I thought it was extremely amazing that he has a color identifier. It made me really curious as to how it works. It just makes me think that this form of what a person with sight would call adaptive technology is actually imperative or needed technology for him. It would be more than an accomodation in class if he were being taught because he would be fulfilled by the lesson that much more. I think we really need to think about classifying things.

Another thing we need to think about, as teachers, is believing in students. The video about "adapting classrooms" really made me feel bad at certain points. I could not believe students were actually saying that they were not even given a chance in activities such as P.E. This really breaks my heart. This is where UDL should be at least attempted more often. Students are excited to do P.E. and simply because they might not be sighted should not only not limit them from an activity but should not be told to them that this is the reason they cannot participate. How are we supposed to instill confidence and independence if it is all going to be retracted in activities like this? There was one boy in a wheelchair who said he could play football, basketball and every sport in his wheelchair. His teacher is making the neccesary accommodations. All teachers should do this.

Assitive technology and adaptive technology, no matter how you label them, even if we label them as instructional technology - they are ALL necessary! That is what the label should indicate. Children and students needs these, children of all abilities. This is what UDL is. This is what our job is as teachers, it is a given - to make the world and curriculum accessible to them.