Assistive Technology Models of Assessment

Assistive Technology according to Hersh and Johnson 2008a is "a generic or umbrella term that covers technologies,equipment, devices, apparatus, services, systems, processes and environmental modifications used by the disabled and or elderly people to overcome the social, infrastructural and other barriers to independence, full participation in society and carrying out activities safely and easily".

From what I have read assistive technology is any tool or device a student with a disability will use to do a task that he or she could not otherwise do without it, this device will allow the student to do the task more easily and in a better way.

There are different models used to assess how effective a technology is or can be I looked at the following five models:

• Chambers Consideration Model (1997)
• Unifying Functional Model (Melichar and Blackhurst, 1993)
• Matching Person and Technology Model
• Student, Environment, Task, Tool (SETT) Model (Zabala, 2002)
• Education Tech Points Model (Bowser and Reed, 1995)

CHAMBERS CONSIDERATION MODEL (Antonette C. Chambers,1997)

Chambers 1997 introduced a model to deal with ongoing consideration of assistive technology. The model was derived from responses received from assistive technology experts and focus groups that consisted trainers and consumers of assistive technology services. Chambers model contains a series of open end questions arranged in a flow chart configuration, these questions address the students needs within the educational program. Chambers proposal was that the model facilitate the documentation process and support evidence gathering as the team attempts to answer each question. The questions are geared at leading the school team to reflect upon whether current strategies devices and modifications are working or not. Evidence is gathered about what strategies and tools are tried the period for which they were implemented the implementation procedures and the outcome of the trials.

Using these tools the school team are to reflect upon their level of assistive technology knowledge and available resource, this process helps to keep the IEP team up to date and knowledgeable about the process.

http://cte.jhu.edu/accessibility/primer/resources/data/assistivetech/brochure_edy_burn.pdf

EDUCATION TECH POINTS (Gayle Bowser & Penny Reed, 1995)

This model was developed containing a series of questions which are referred to as points that facilitate the assistive technology consideration process within the service delivery process.

• Education Tech Point 1-Initial Referral Questions, school's teams are directed to ask whether commonly available, simple technology would meet the students needs thus avoiding the need for referral for special education services

• Education Tech Point 2- Evaluation Questions, focus on whether assistive technology devices are necessary to support an assessment process that reflects the students abilities and needs. Assessment team members consider recommendations for what types of devices, modifications or equipment might be needed in order to improve the students educational performance.

• Education Tech Point 3- Extended Assessment Questions, Directs school teams attention toward gathering data during the students trial periods with a variety of assistive technology. Decisions at this point should take into account both environment and task variables

• Education Tech Point 4- Plan Development Questions, This corresponds to the time that school teams would be involved in IEP development and deciding whether or not to ensure that students receive a free appropriate public education (FAPE)

• Education Tech Points 5- Implementation Questions, Focuses on practical Who, What, When, How questions for implementing the students plan. Logistics of daily monitoring and maintenance are carried out at this time.

• Education Tech point 6- Periodic Review, Corresponds with the time that the program evaluation or planned periodic review would take place. The time for this review should be flexible to meet changing students needs, as well as unpredictable events such as a mechanical breakdown of a device or introduction of a new innovation in AT. 

http://www.educationtechpoints.org/

http://www.educationtechpoints.org/manuals-materials

http://www.educationtechpoints.org/manuals-materials/education-tech-points-manual

THE STUDENT, ENVIRONMENT, TASK, TOOLS MODEL (SETT- Joy Zabala)

This model was developed by Zabala basically as a guide to focus on the four areas:

1. Student
2. Environment
3. Task 
4. Tools

These areas are used to enhance performance of the student. In this model Zabala describes the following elements associated with her framework; collaboration, communication, incorporation of multiple perspectives, gathering of pertinent information, use of shared knowledge, flexibility and on-going process. A series of  questions in each of the four areas are intended to stimulate thought and promote dialogue among team members and guide the decision making process. The information is gathered and then shared about the students abilities preferences and special needs. Within this framework team members identify the areas that are of greater importance and decide how modifications can be made to increase student participation.

http://secure.edc.org/ncip/workshops/sett3/SETT.htm

UNIFYING FUNCTIONAL MODEL ( Melichar and Blackhurst, 1993)

A flowchart was provided for this model which details elements of the consideration process in their Unifying Functional Model, this model is sometimes referred to as the Human Function Model. The emphasis of their model is on the interrelationships among numerous dynamic elements. These elements are:

1. The functioning of the student with a disability across environment (home, school, community) and the contexts within this environment
2. The functional demands placed on the student
3. The exploration of options for the students
4. The students personal perceptions 
5. The personal resources available to them
6. The existence of external supports

All of these elements in combination with each other, guide the functional responses of the school team. A functional response may include resource allocation, individualized plan , program implementation and support services. According to Melichar and Blackhurst the last two remaining elements of this model are,

      

     7.  Resulting personal changes for the students across several dimensions such as (achievement, coping      strategies, control)

     8.  An evaluation and feedback loop that encourages the school team to continually review all elements               previously considered.

The model emphasises the entire process as an ever changing one.

http://www.eiltsfamily.org/udl_at/resources/AT/Four_Models_for_AT.pdf

http://natri.uky.edu/resources/fundamentals/function.html

MATCHING PERSON AND TECHNOLOGY MODEL (Marcia Scherer, 1986)

This model was developed due to the continued advances in technology functions and features to alleviate the feeling of being overwhelmed by the consumer.  The MPT organizes influences on the successful use of a variety of technologies.The MPT process contains a series of instruments ( self report checklist about consumer predispositions to and outcomes of technology use) which take into account:

• The environments in which the person uses the technology
• The individual's characteristics and preferences
• The technology's functions and features.

Characteristics within these three components can each contribute either a positive or a negative influence on technology use. The MPT model is operationalized by a series of reliable and valid measures that provide a person centered and individualized approach to matching individuals with the most appropriate technologies for their use.

The MPT seems targeted for adults with disabilities. There are three major components of this model:

1. Milieu
2. Person
3. Technology

These components are assessed using a series of questionnaires.

The Milieu focuses on characteristics of the settings in which the AT is to be used, the person component provides information about the users personal characteristics and temperament, the technology component focuses on specific characteristics of the technology itself, including design factors and funding. The MPT offers six assessment forms as parts of the evaluation process.

For more on the evaluation process click here   

The ultimate outcome of the using the MPT process is selection of an appropriate AT device that does not get abandoned prematurely.

Strengths  of Assistive Technology Models

Each model allows for multiple assessment opportunities over time and for the provisions of a consistent view of the students abilities, needs and outcomes thus proving the educational assessment feature of ongoing longitudinal approach.

For more strengths and limitations of the models click here

http://www.extension.org/pages/70238/matching-wounded-warriors-with-assistive-technology#.U2h21vldWb8

http://cirrie.buffalo.edu/encyclopedia/en/article/115/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matching_Person_%26_Technology_Model

http://www.matchingpersonandtechnology.com/index.html