special education teachers

[Glenda Anderson]

In your mind, if you had the control... What should special education teachers know about technology?

[Brian Wojcik]

Hmmm...this is a good question and not one that is easily answered.

In looking at NETS-T, there are some common information and communication technologies with which all teachers should be familiar and, based on the revisions to the NETS-S, all teachers should have a pedagogical foundation in how to use these tools within instructional environments and build technological skills within the students with whom they work. In addition, I believe that all teachers should have an understanding of how to use technology as a means to differentiate instructional experiences for students.

But, for me, the interesting part of the question: What should special education teachers know about technology? - is the term special education teachers. I would propose that special education teachers need to have additional knowledge and skill sets in instructional technology AND assistive technology. Specifically, many pieces of instructional technology either have embedded features to increase adaptability for multiple populations or are specifically designed to work with one or more specific populations. Furthermore, many of these technologies can be made further accessible by the incorporation of assistive technology. There should be an awareness of these tools but more importantly, a skill set to be able to locate, evaluate and match the use of these technologiesto meet individual student needs.

Just some thoughts...

[Glenda Anderson]

So how does one build the "skill set to locate, evaluate and match the use of these technologies"? Is this something that should be taught to them in their credentialing program? If so, how?

I am looking at this from two domains:
1. I am teaching technology to special education teachers in our local state university. I have found there is so much to teach that it is sometimes hard to narrow it down so I am re-evaluating my approach; what is it that they really need to know?
2. I am the AT for our county districts/schools and train teachers in the field. There are so many gaps in their knowledge of technology... what is it that they really need to know?

I agree in the 2 areas of need: Instructional and AT. There is also one more, basic computer abilities/skills. I am often surprised to still see how much is still lacking in this area.

But to keep a focus- I love your comments and would like to go back to the:
So how does one build the "skill set to locate, evaluate and match the use of these technologies"? Is this something that should be taught to them in their credentialing program? If so, how?

[Wendy Homlish]

One of the things I am seeing in this discussion is the sense that teachers should need to know everything, and they don't. What we need is a TEAM who knows about their specific area - SLPs for AAC with OTs and PTs assisting with the access issues, Learning Support teachers understanding, in a general way, when students might need something like text-to-speech, and the tech department of the district actually knowing what that is and how to get it, etc. There is such a dearth of information about technology implementation taught at the university level - it scares me! But in reality, what they need to know is that technology solutions exist, the features of some of the technology, and who to call, when. I view my role as an AT Consultant (and we have 14 school districts in 2 counties) as a facilitator - I certainly don't know everything, but I sure know who to call! I know, in general, features of most technology solutions, and what might work for a student or students. I know what questions to ask to narrow down the TOOLS (OK, yes, I am big user of the SETT framework!) and know where to get them for trials, and how to set up a short-term implementation plan. But I do it with my TEAM, not alone. So..guess i didn't answer this question, but maybe I brought a different perspective?

[Lisa Jenkins]

I agree with your perspective. As a special ed teacher, I regularly consult with the SLP, PT and OT on issues for my students. There's no way that I could learn everything that would apply to or benefit each student. However, with each new situation and/or student, I do learn a little more through the help of my co-workers.
AT consultant sounds like a very interesting position. How does someone go about becoming an AT consultant?

[Brian Wojcik]

I think that the credentialing program can be part of the answer. However, I think that there are different levels that need to be address in credentialing programs. A colleague and I have done some presenting proposing a model that differentiates knowledge and skills into 4 different levels, with each subsequent level adding onto the skills of the previous level.

Level one: The general educator
This level incorporates all educators and looks at developing basic awareness of types and breadth of assistive technologies and an understanding of how these technologies allow students with disabilities to access the curriculum.

Level two: The special education teacher (aka, the AT practicioner)
This level focuses on an increased awareness of assistive technologies including issues of consideration and implementation. Skills related to teaming, where to go to get information, and mulitdisciplinary collaboration are emphasized. This level is also akin to the entry level OT, PT, or SLP. Persons at this level are team players and bring their own training and perspective to the table and contribute to the problem solving model. They each have a good awareness of AT with respect to their field of study, skills to work together, knowledge of where to go to get additional information and consideration and implementation skills.

Level 3: The AT Specialist
In most systems where I have worked, there seemed to be students whose educational difficulties exceeded the experience and skills of the team who worked with those students. This is the scenario for this level. The AT Specialist has advanced training with respect to his or her field in the area of assistive technology. This person has developed advanced skill in the areas of consideration, implmentation and evaluation of effectiveness. She or he can serve in facilitating a problem solving process with regard to AT decision making and has the knowledge and skills to effectively diffuse issues that may arise around AT. Furthermore, this person would provide training and ongoing support to those actually implementing tha AT in the classroom. The important note here is that this person focuses on specific cases where AT experience may be lacking the the student's team and then provides the necessary supports to help the team and student consider and implement the AT. In many ways, this is graduate level credential.

Level Four: The AT Leader
This is a system level role in which the AT Leader would have different system wide responsibilities including professional development in the area of AT, the tracking of AT equipment and usage, budgetary and fiscal oversight, and maintaining knowledge of contemporary issues in AT. This person support the implementation of AT but at a system and administrative level. Definitely a graduate level credential.

There are some tenets that have been assumed in this model:
1. AT knowledges and skills need to owned by all educational professionals.
2. AT knowledge and skills differ based on the role a person has in an educational system.
3. AT knowledge and skills increase with experiences and training.
4. AT knowledge and skills in education both have relation to AT knowledge and skills used in systems other than education but some AT knowledge and skills are unique to educational systems.

We have started to implement this model with good reviews...more on that later...if there is interest....

[Nichole Thomason]

I am in a Rehabilitation Counseling graduate program right now at San Diego State University. One of the requirements of the program is a class in Rehabilitation Technology. For the past 2 years I have been coordinating an AT Center, so I know a little more about AT than many of my peers in the course. Caren Sax, the professor does an EXCELLENT job at this beginning level reminding us all that assistive technology is a TEAM effort. I think this is huge! Reminding teachers assistive technology is so broad that we cannot be expected to know everything. Ask for help! Make use of your SLP's, O.T's, P.T.'s, paraprofessionals, parents...anyone you can pull in!
I agree with you that there is SOOOO much to learn. But maybe while we teach about all the cool "Stuff" we teach about the process. Getting teachers comfortable with asking for help, being creative, and being okay with trial and error.
As far as helping build that skill, Caren has us all doing a "Tech Team Project". Finding a person (we can already be working with them but she has contacts as well) interested and who may benefit from assistive technology, and to help them make decisions about what kind of AT might be appropriate for their needs. We use the MPT assessment surveys and interviews to determine the AT needs of the individual. Then we have to research resources and funding sources the person could use to get the technology they need. This is a great project because it makes it real. Sorry if I rambled but I hope that helps.

[Glenda Anderson]

Thanks, Nicole for your insights. One problem I see however is that we are not teaching an AT class as part of a special education credential program. AT, I feel does need to be a required course for all College credential programs but until it is we are looking at technology as a whole. ( By the way, I love the project you are doing. That sounds like a very applicable approach.) I also agree with your statement about teaching them the need to ask for help! That statement alone is huge. I cannot imagine trying to do iAT part time as so much of it is just this- staying on top of the latest products, ideas, theories, etc.

Brian, I love the way you broke it down into the 4 levels and your tenets that have been assumed might be just the perfect place to begin because I don't know that we can assume those skills are in place.

[Brian Wojcik]

I agree...I don't think we can make that assumption....at least not broadly across different educational systems. However, I consider it a vision of systems change. The average special education or, for that matter, general education teacher, does not have the time to 'stay on top of the latest products, ideas, theories, etc." but can develop their expertise at becoming a 'good teacher' who incorporates AT into the classroom as a means of supporting their students. These folks need a resource to 'go to' to get that help when situations arise that are beyond their experience, knowledge, and skill bases. That's where the AT specialist level comes in. I believe, at this level, there is a knowledge and skill set that is specialized enough that it warrants the employment of an individual or individuals with these skillsets.

This model attempts to replace the traditional 'expert model' because the initial responsibility for AT consideration and implementation lies with the education professionals that are directly working with the student.

That being said, if we look at teachers that work predominantly with specific populations (e.g., students with high incidence disabilities, students with autism, early childhood), beyond consideration and implementation issues, is there a set of tools that each of these teachers should have increased familiarity with which can serve as their initial 'go to' set of tools for their students?

[Samuel Charles Sennott]

The SETT and...

get every teacher a tablet loaded with demo software, and have the very best practioners, trainers, and researchers create video based interactive modules.

Spend to make it super tight and that way you can distribute it to every teacher training program in the country. Paying for the computers is just a bit of an issue, but in my estimation a wise and progressive move.

This way in one fell swoop, you can up the ante in teacher training, and you avoid the painful issue that there are not enough trainers to really cover all the bases of SLP, SPed, gen ed., ot, etc.

[Wendy Homlish]

WOW! You really took this to the next level! I think this is SO within the realm of possibility even with iPod-like tools. What do you think?

[Samuel Charles Sennott]

Don't get me wrong, I firmly believe in an AT specialist, licensed position, very similar to the instructional technology position currently popular in todays schools. I think it should be called Universal Design and Differentiated Instruction Specialist. It should be a master's degree program or rigorous certificate, very similar to the current Simmons College Graduate Degree Program in Assistive Technology. Having one of those positions in each school, provides the ground level support for the teachers, administrators, and aides.

Then adding in an AT/UDL/ Differentiated Instruction with Technology/ fill in any other buzz phrase to the teacher training programs would be incredibly effective because you would have a set of knowledgeable new teachers with support at the school level. Having it formatted for personal video players is a great idea.

Yet, I maintain that without the access to the "real" time with a computer, let alone students, the effectiveness would be undermined.

It seems like a long road to get an AT credentialed person in that many schools, but it seems as if one school incorporated it, then one district, and then one part of a state, that in time and with grants it could become a viable model. Nothing is perfect, but the popular current model of running the person who knows the stuff ragged is not viable, nor desirable for attracting new students and practitioners into the field.

I have heard from various sources that NIMUS will probably be the driving force for our work. I believe that this is true and following that is very important in that the stuff that gets into legistlation is usually the stuff that "they" try to cover first. By "they", I mean the administration workers who care about the bottom line more than other things. No disrespect to them, but "they" are an important exponent in the equation we are considering.

[KarenJanowski]

Sam,
This is excellent. I know how every school has a reading teacher (at least in my district) and has several special education teachers. Incorporating a Universal Design/Differentiated Instruction Specialist position into every school seems like a better idea to me. How many of us who work with students who are discouraged/frustrated as learners, feel they are stupid and see school as drudgery because it reinforces what is difficult for them? I see it ALL the time in my consulting practice.
Advocating a position such as you describe allows for accommodating for deficits, builds on student strengths, embeds best practice so that all students can learn and better demonstrate what they know independently.
This is great thinking outside the box.
Love these discussions and they are much easier to follow using this format, don't you think?