Last Class

Overall this class has really taught me a lot about technology. I came in thinking I already knew how to use devices to help children communicate - but this class is not all about programming devices. This class opened my eyes to so many different forms of technology and Web 2.0 tools. I could not believe how much is out there. I think Janette's comment two classes ago, really struck home "read through airplane magazines, and always think of what could be best for your students." This line of thinking was definitely new to me! I had never thought - well the technology for my students doesn't have to be something that was designed specifically for that purpose - it could be something else that might have been intended for a different purpose, but now could serve another. It really makes the world of technology and what it has to offer, that much more accessible and larger.

I learned that participating in an online discussion can be just like sitting in class. I think before this class, I took other online classes where I would simply be required to post on a discussion board which really didn't feel like I was participating or a member of the class. However, when we talk on Adobe, and there is video incorporated, I definitely feel like online is similar to being in person.

Furthermore, we did a lot of group work. I learned to exercise my collaboration and cooperative skills. I think we learned that we can use technology to communicate and send ideas and meld them together. We really learned to work with a lot of different people with different experiences with technology - which was very helpful to people like me who are not very good with technology!

This class was great and I learned a lot. I feel like I have a really good toolbox for teaching now, and am equipped to view things as a challenge not an obstacle. I also feel like I can use anything to help me kids, which is really inspiring!

Digital Minds

This week we talked about how technology influences us, both negatively and positively. This reminded me of the interview of Dr. Keller. He explained that bundling technology forms in one package actually hurts people who need one single accommodation. For example, a phone that also accesses the internet, serves as a camera, and can play music is more expensive because it performs so many functions. However, what if Dr. Keller only wanted a phone to be a phone? Wouldn't it be cheaper if he was just trying to buy a simple cell phone that has no other functions? Furthermore, it's harder to find a phone that just serves as a phone!

When we think about dilemmas such as this one, it really makes us think about how technology affects us. Technology is ever evolving, and it reminds us of the age old question of: what is going to happen to our books? It has actually been really hard for me to find books for my reports as a graduate student. There is only one bookstore near me: Barnes and Nobles! Borders is out of business! And why would I go to B&N if I could order a book online on Amazon for a much cheaper price? But why even buy a physical copy of a book if google reader can digitze text? What is essentially the purpose of books? How about newspapers? I read the NYT online, and can't even remember the last time I read a real newspaper. What is this doing to our society? What is it telling us about ease of access of information? I remember when I played for the Maccabi Basketball Olympics, and my teammate and I were hosted by a family. When we were greeted the father said to us "I googled your families and I know all about you already!" He laughed - my roommate and I felt really uncomfortable. Is this acceptable? What is technology doing to our society?

To play devil's advocate, what about our students who benefit greatly from advancing technology? As far as student learning profiles - students like Sarah, need technology to communicate and participate! The SmartScan is essential for Sarah! More advancing technology would help her even more so in the future. For students like Jack, with ADHD, technology like the SmartBoard could seriously aid him in his difficulty to maintain attention. What can we develop in the future to help him?

When we consider other students, what about communicating with students all around the world? What about technology like Gchat, or AIM? These really help to make our world that much smaller. Whether or not this is a good or bad thing, is controversial, but I think it really helps to make people more worldly and united. I think the only way these technologies become bad is when people abuse them.

How can we find a balance? What can we do? Will this be an everlasting problem as technology continually advances? I personally have a laptop, an iPhone, and iPod, TVs with HD. I read NYT online and read most articles online. I don't consider myself too advanced technologically, but am I? What is "normal" these days for use of technology? I find myself preferring to text and email rather than make a phone call. How is this influencing my social skills? What can we do to remedy these issues?

Assessment Issues

This week we discussed issues with assessment. There are so many. In essence, I think it is very challenging to make a test 100% fair for every student to take. However, this is only what is legal and right. We have to consider what each child is able to do and what they really need in order to show mastery of that skill. The question in my mind arises about state testing. When we have state testing, or laws like No Child Left Behind, we are subtly encouraging teachers to "teach to the test." This is not always as full or fulfilling education children deserve or can have. If we only teach children to pass a test, what are we really teaching them? How is education unique, and how can we justify that what is on the test are the only essential items students need to know? Is this stifling both student and teacher creativity?

There is a line of thought where students are given choice and independence when selecting a specific unit of study within a larger unit. Student feel interested and ownership of their learning. Learning becomes unique and special. This cannot be achieved when we teach to the test, and when we are given strict curricula and guidelines of how to accomplish this.

This is especially applicable for special education students. What if we had a student like Sarah with CP, or a student like Michael with Aspergers? Would they benefit and get the most out of their education from a clearly defined curricula? Also, with hypothetical students like our learning profile students we have to consider testing accommodations. It is hard, because these accommodations aren't always provided even if they are listed on the IEPs. If it interferes with the skill they are being tested on, then they aren't provided. This makes me think the test should not require any accommodations to begin with, right? Shouldn't we be considering UDL always with our students? This is something that is challenging but that we need to accomplish.

Overall, testing is a tough issue. There are so many things we have to consider. Is it necessary? What things should we be testing? How do we determine that? If we didn't have testing, would some students not be educated at all? Is it really just a regulation tool for teachers? What about accommodations? Shouldn't UDL be used?

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.

Kurzweil 3000

This week I explored Kurzweil. I actually ordered a disc in the mail and it arrived within 3 days! I was so surprised. Anyway I think Kurzweil is a fantastic program for kids with disabilities. It would work really well for students with expressive language disabilities (due to its feature of changing text to speech).

Kurzweil could be considered both an adaptational form of technology as well as an instructional form of technology. It could be considered adapatational because it could be used for one student as an aid, if that particular student has problems reading aloud. It could also be used as an instructional tool for a class of students that have severe and multiple disabilities, many of which that include expressive language disabilities.

As for the student learning profiles, there are a few for which Kurzweil would benefit. First, it would benefit Sarah, with ataxic cerebral palsy. Because Sarah loves impressing her teachers and is excited to try new things, learning how to use Kurzweil could extremely benefit her. Additionally, because she might have difficulty with balance or fine motor skills, Kurzweil could assist her by actually reading aloud the text. She would not have to actually hold the material or book, and it would be displayed on the screen for her. Additionally, text could be highlighted for her so that she would not have to use a highlighter when thinking that certain things are important. Furthermore, because she is non-ambulatory, Kurzweil would allow her to read the material without her having to hold the material and trying to use her wheelchair to navigate. Last, she already uses SmartScan, so she is already familiar with adaptive communication devices, and uses them successfully.

It would also benefit Michael, with Aspergers and SPLD. It would benefit him because he is a visual learner and really enjoys visual presentations. This is exactly what Kurzweil would provide for him. Although reading material could sometimes be difficult or abstract for Michael to understand, the teacher would be able to highlight certain pieces of the text in order to signal to him that she is aware of those parts and will explain it to him. She could also include a text bubble that re-words the text in more literal terms for Michael. He also adapts well, so being introduced to a new form of technology, would be received well by Michael.

Last, it would greatly benefit Luke, who has Dyslexia and Executive Function Difficulty. The text would be read aloud to Luke so if he did not read them correctly (or backwards), the program would read aloud the text correctly. Additionally, his Executive Functioning Difficulty might make it hard for him to read texts and focus, but perhaps if the text was presented in a different format and read to him (which is different from which he used to), it might be more entertaining.

Overall, Kurzweil is a great program and I plan to use it in my future classroom!