EDUC 5163 - Assistive Technology

Assistive Technology and Universal Design for Learning: Two Sides of the Same Coin

David H. Rose, Ted S. Hasselbring, Skip Stahl, and Joy Zabala

​

As technology has been evolving, it has been providing opportunities for growth in many areas. Specifically, Rose et al. described how technology can be used in conjunction with the Universal Design for Learning approach to provide assistance to many students with disabilities. They brought up many interesting points, which will be discussed below.

Rose et al. discuss the notion that many people think of Assistive Technology when they imagine how technology can help someone with a disability. Some of the newer, higher tech devices available are making a huge difference in the education field. For example, students with visual impairments might use screen enlargers and text-to-speech technology, whereas someone with a physical disability might be using an electronic mobility switch, or an alternative keyboard. I believe that since the time this article was written, more advancements have been taking place in this field, for individuals with physical as well as learning disabilities. The development of apps and other software, as well the fine tuning of devices like head switches, neuro-switches, and eye gaze technology have made profound improvements to the lives of those requiring assistive technology. Rose et al. also describe universal design as the idea of designing a task with a wide range of abilities and disabilities in mind, so that more people are accommodated for than using traditional applications. Universal Design for Learning is more specific to the education setting, where educators are asked to design their curricula and environments to make the learning accessible to the widest range of students possible.

I believe that, as Rose et al. discuss, Universal Design for Learning and Assistive Technology are on the same continuum, as both are used to reduce barriers for students with challenges. The authors make a point of distinguishing the two ideas in the following way: Assistive Technology employs modern technology at an individual level, in order to adapt to the curriculum or environment, whereas with Universal Design for Learning, modern technology is used to establish the curriculum or environment with the least amount of traditional barriers to learning. Assistive Technology can be carefully fitted to the specific strengths and weaknesses of an individual with a disability, whereas Universal Design for Learning makes sure the techniques, methods, scaffolds and processes that are embedded in curricula are accessible, and that the measure of success is the learning. There are some assistive technologies that are helpful for many students, but I do not believe it is not feasible in the current state of education to make these available to every individual who may benefit. There are many constraints that are working against students in our current system. For one thing, the time needed to determine the best match of Assistive Technology to each student is not available. Secondly, the resources needed to implement these technologies are not present. When using Universal Design for Learning, it would be amazing if teachers could truly present students with multiple forms of technology to demonstrate their learning, but it is not often accessible in an average classroom. It is similar to the idea of architectural design for mobility discussed in the article, where the challenges presented can be viewed on an individual level, where the proper technologies are needed,  as well as an environmental level, where the design should be inclusive of mobility challenges. If either Universal Design or Assistive Technology is focused on more than the other, it can be costly and impractical. If both ends of the continuum are kept in perspective, and integrated as the authors describe, a building can be built that is accommodating for more individuals than just those with mobility issues, and they are also more economical. In working with a student in a wheelchair, I agree with the authors on this point. Trying to manoeuvre day to day things in our school and community have been eye opening for us this year. If someone had taken care to design our school with a Universal Design perspective, he may have an easier time getting around.

The authors also bring up an issue with accessible textbooks, and that traditional print is what is most prevalent in classrooms. I disagree with this to some extent, in that I believe that in today’s classrooms, textbooks are used less frequently than they have been in the past, and that more internet access to information is being used. That being said, I can see where the authors are coming from with their points about reading demands on learners with disabilities, as well as the costs associated with making all texts accessible in different formats, and the copyright issues that arise. As technologies continue to advance, as they have in recent years, accessibility to information will only become easier. Cost of access to these technologies, however, may continue to be a barrier.

Rose et al. keep universally designed curricula at the forefront of their arguments throughout this article, and the awareness of how assistive technologies can be integrated in order to complement one another. If one is not aware of how common assistive technologies work, then the features will not properly be used. Overall, I agree with the perspectives taken by the authors, and the research used to support their point of view. In order to maximize student success, Universal Design for Learning and Assistive Technology belong on the “same coin”.

​