Barrier+Statements+with+Clarification

= Table 2 Region 1- List of Barriers with Clarification =

== Triggering Question: ""What are barriers for your region to what "ought to be done" to create a sustainable model of assistive technology to support students in accessing and progressing in the general education curriculum?" ==

** Barrier 1: PD IS VIEWED TRADITIONALLY ** // I meant that people are slow to embrace a new method for brining PD to them. I mean whether it is a webinar or virtual or another means rather than driving somewhere and sitting down for PD. //

** Barrier 2: LACK OF COMMITMENT BY OUR DIRECTORS ** // It seems that more and more people have been pulled out of Region 1 when we meet. // // If our Directors were committed to AT they would be sending more than pulling us away from that. // // Q-Lack of directors - what class are you talking about? Administrators or IT directors? // // A-Talking about our Directors at ISD level that allow us to come to ISD meetings. // // Q-Lack of commitment by our Directors to just send people to Region 1 consortium or more than that? // // A-more than that, seems like they send us but don't give us time to go back to the locals and educate. Don't have time to teach locals about resources. We have great libraries but nobody knows we have them. //

** Barrier 3: LACK OF AWARENESS FROM STAFF OF THE NEED AND THE BENEFIT OF ASSISTIVE TECH ** // I just meant that people aren't necessarily asking about how the need can benefit them or their students. They are not asking the administration about how that can help them. // // Q - Are you talking about general education staff? // // A - I think all of them - general ed. and special education // // Q- Do you think it is a lack of awareness of need and also a lack of what is available in assistive technology? // // A - I would agree at even the basic level. // // Q - I think what you are saying is - if you don't know, you don't know what questions to ask. // // A - Right if they don't know specifically how it can help students or make others lives easier it is hard to understand what to ask. //

** Barrier 4: INSUFFICIENT AMOUNT OF TIME USING ASSISTIVE TECH AND DEEMING IT INAPPROPRIATE ** // If a student is using AT and they've only been using it for a week, and they are proficient in that piece of equipment, then staff may deem it inappropriate because they have not given it enough time for student to learn. // // Q-Do you feel like this happens because staff expects immediate results from AT? // // A-yes. // // Q-do you feel the staff that are working with these students have been given sufficient training before implementation? // // A-may or may not be the problem, sometimes comes from both ends. //

** Barrier 5: DIFFICULTY KEEPING UP WITH TRAINING FOR EVER-CHANGING TECHNOLOGY ** // Basically technology is changing all the time so as soon as we learn a version the new one is out. So to even have a region wide knowledge of what technology is out I don't know how we can keep up. //

** Barrier 6: INFLEXIBLE STAFF WHO FEEL THERE IS NO NEED FOR TECHNOLOGY ** // Working with different ISDs, I come across teaching staff that feel the old way of teaching is fine. They feel that if the kids get it they get it and that is just the way it is. // // Q-are you saying those staff were given sufficient training in order to make that judgment that there's no need for technology or that they were given sufficient training? // // A-given mandatory training, they just don't want to use it // // Q-given perhaps one day of training and asked to implement? // // A - varies, main thing is the mindset. //

** Barrier 7: LACK OF A REGIONALLY ADOPTED PLAN FOR ASSISTIVE TECH ** // In order to implement assistive technology effectively within ISD and then schools and with students, I think we need an agreement among directors at the regional level that they are willing to stand behind and that can then be implemented with authority. // // Q- Could you clarify the plan? I'm looking for clarification about what the plan is. It can mean different things to different people, so what are you looking for at a regional level? // // A - I'm looking for a direction for assistive technology to take within region one that can then be implemented within an ISD and to schools and students. // // Q - A shared vision? // // A - A direction that will then be supported by the people in authority that will help us do what needs to be done. Probably with directors. // // Q- The adopted plan or vision would come from whom? // // A - I am not sure I thought about that. I imagine it would come from a collective a group of people: state, region, local schools. So // // that it is a collective plan not something that one person thinks should be implemented by another. // // Q - Are you saying the plan would be derived from the guidelines that have been developed by region 1? // // A - No I am not saying that. //

** Barrier 8: LACK OF KNOWLEDGEABLE STAFF TRAINED IN ASSISTIVE TECH ** // In my area there is nobody trained in AT at the local level. I'm the full time OT and I'm the only person who knows anything about AT and that in itself could be a full time job. There's just nobody trained in it. // // Q-Are you talking about more than having an AT consultant? Are you talking about staff as being local teachers as well as other staff members? // // A- anybody, there's nobody trained in AT. //

** Barrier 9: LACK OF BUILDING NETWORKS AND LACK OF MULTIPLE SUPPORT PEOPLE IN EACH LOCAL ** // My thought was that people who are familiar with using technology in education are isolated. I would like to see more people familiar // // with assistive technology so that it becomes a tipping point and there are more people comfortable than not. // // Q- The way this is worded does not sound like a barrier to me. // // A- The barrier is that there is not a network. There is a lack of barriers and multiple supports. // // Q- Are these two separate things? // // A - In my mind it is one thing because the building network is the support for the people in the building. // // Lack of building networks and lack of multiple support people in each local. //

** Barrier 10: LACK OF COMMUNICATION TO WHAT IS AVAILABLE AND HOW TO OBTAIN ASSISTIVE TECH DEVICES AND ** ** SERVICES ** // Speaking from my ISD, we have a lot of AT devices and a lot of money behind us to order these devices but not a way to get them out to the locals. We all have our own jobs and there's no way to let them know. We basically have a roomful of devices sitting there. // // Q-do you feel it's only a lack of communiation for devices that are available or services or a separate thought? // // A-probably both. // // C-ok to add "and services" // // Q-is your concern about the lack of communication or the obtaining with it? // // A-it's both, we have lack of communication with locals. They don't even know what to ask for. We could have it in our library. //

** Barrier 11: ASSISTIVE TECH IS LEFT TO TEACHERS WITHOUT FOLLOW-UP ** // I just feel like, and this might be ISD specific and I know I am guilty of it, I know that I leave a device and I intend to go back and help but I might forget that I gave it out. Then the teacher is not using it and when I come back I find out it hasn't been used. // // Q- You are saying that primarily the itinerant staff and not the teacher? // // A - Typically the itinerant staff forgets they put the item in place and it may not come up until the next IEP. //

** Barrier 12: PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT OPTIONS ARE DECIDED BY PEOPLE WITHOUT KNOWLEDGE OFASSISTIVE TECH ** // At least on a local level there is people who set up pd days who are not necessarily people in special ed so they're more geared toward general ed kinds of training, which is great, but they're not providing opportunities for gen ed teachers about AT. //

** Barrier 13: NON-EXISTANT IMPLEMENTATION MODEL AT REGIONAL AND LOCAL LEVELS ** // What I meant is that PD is done for a day and then people are left to figure it out. There is no model- once you have the training there is no support for it. This happens at a regional level as well as a local level. //

** Barrier 14: INSIGNIFICANT FUNDS AT THE LOCAL LEVEL ** // What I find is when you put AT in for a student and they try it, they can't buy it. They have no money. //

** Barrier 15: TIME TO IMPLEMENT TRAINING FOR ASSISTIVE TECH ** // I'm from the local level and it seems we put the technology in the classroom but we expect the staff to figure it out on their own. We don't have time to get the training because of all of the other PD we have scheduled throughout the year. //

** Barrier 16: CHALLENGE TO ALIGN STUDENT NEEDS WITH ASSISTIVE TECH AVAILABILITY ** // Knowing as a teacher there is stuff available for certain things going on with my students that could be assisting them. // // There has been a voice, all of a sudden it's "oh, you could be doing this, and tech things as well. Need for general awareness for what's there and how we can assist different students with those needs. Goes back to barrier 10 and just knowing what's available. //

** Barrier 17: LACK OF RELEASE TIME FOR STAFF TO LEARN MORE ** // The districts that I work in do not have PD money for staff to learn more. It is limited and we are rural. It is not a priority and we don't have the money. // // Q - Are you saying it might be worth it to put the word "priority" in there? // // A - Yes I think so. I think if the board and administration said it was a priority then it would take place. // // Aleco - Put the priority concept in later. //

** Barrier 18: UNLESS A HIGH QUALITY IS MANDATED, IT WILL PROBABLY BE PUT ON THE 'BACK BURNER' ** // There is so much on everyone's plate and I have seen technology plans in school that are basic. Unless a high quality of technology is on paper, so to say that it's just not on everyone's high priority list because there is so much else to do. //

** Barrier 19: INSUFFICIENT RESOURCES FOR DELIVERING RELEVANT PD ** // There is not enough money or time. There is a lack of information about what is needed. All of the resources that go into providing relevant PD are lacking. //

** Barrier 20: [DELETE] LACK OF RELEASE TIME FOR STAFF TO LEARN MORE [DELETED] ** // Even if we are offering experiences to staff for free, the schools just won't let the staff come. Similar to #17. // // Q-are they identical or different? // // A-they are pretty much the same. // // Delete #20 //

** Barrier 21: ACCESS TO TYPES OF TECHNOLOGY AND SOFTWARE DIFFER FROM SCHOOL DISTRICT TO SCHOOL ** ** DISTRICT WITHIN OUR REGION ** // I am thinking that if we have some type of assistive technology that all districts have we would not have to carry assistive technology from one place to another. // // Q - Does it also include building to building within a district? // // A - Yes building to build and district to district // // Q - ISD to ISD also? // // A - Yes that too. // // C - I am wondering if we need to change the wording to make it general to all those areas. // // Aleco - We do not need to add everything in the wording because we captured the response and it covers the information. //

** Barrier 22: CURRENT TECHNOLOGY IS INEQUITABLE WHICH IMPACTS STAFF ATTITUDES FOR NEW ASSISTIVE TECH ** // It was not well articulated. From even within a school bldg within local school districts there is an unequal level of technology. I have computers so old that they break down on a daily basis and then have state of art technology in two classes down hall. When trying to implement AT, like software, some teachers don't want it because they thing what's the point, it will be out of date before I get time to learn it. //

** Barrier 23: FEAR AND IGNORANCE COMPROMISES FOLLOW-THROUGH OF ASSISTIVE TECH AT BOTH THE PARENTAL ** ** AND TEACHER LEVEL ** //In my experience I have found that first and foremost there is an ignorance of assistive technology and they see it as something complicated and they cannot use it. Especially at home because it is strange and unknown to them. Therefore, we can go and do training but they don’t follow through with it. We need to get to more of a knowledge base of what assistive technology really is.//

** Barrier 24: THERE IS AN ASSISTIVE TECH AND INSTRUCTIONAL TECH DISCONNECT ** // I find in several of the local districts that I work with, I've been asked to go in and bring in technology that I can't administer because their tech dept have locked us out or refused to give us a password or something in that manner. //

** Barrier 25: INSUFFICIENT FUNDS FOR DISTRICTS TO OBTAIN THEIR OWN ASSISTIVE TECH RESOURCES ** // The ISD provides assistive technology via lending library to locals. A student is very successful with that technological device but a local cannot afford to but it for that student. //

** Barrier 26: CONFUSION REGARDING THE LEGALITIES AND LOGISTICS OF ACQUIRING ASSISTIVE TECH ** // Thinking of the alternative to instructional materials but it holds to AT. Can a general ed student have AT, who do I talk to. //

** Barrier 27: CURRENT AND STATEWIDE MANDATES ON WHAT TECHNOLOGY OR TOOLS ARE USED IN THE ASSESSMENT PROCESS ** // She was speaking to the statewide mandates as to what tools were used for statewide testing. She said that statewide testing only uses some tools based on what is written in the IEP. There is no use of universal design tools. // // Q- I want to understand the assessment process. Are we talking state only not the assistive technology assessment process? // // A - She mentions state testing. // // REVISIT 27 //

** Barrier 28: LACK OF COMMUNICATION BETWEEN ISDs PERTAINING TO ASSISTIVE TECH ** // I find that there really is a lot of good things happening in the classroom with technology but it's not being shared. There's a school in Royal Oak using a smart board with SXI students but not being shared. As a region, we need to share within our ISDs and schools some of the technology that is being used and how it's being used successfully. //

** Barrier 29: INSUFFICIENT INTERACTION AND COLLABORATION BETWEEN GEN ED AND SPECIAL ED ** // I see this happening in a lot of different areas. Beginning stages of curriculum planning, PLCs, and other building level meetings. There is not a lot of interaction between general and special ed. We are working with all students and we need to see collaboration between teachers who will be working with the students across special and general ed. //

** Barrier 30: LACK OF STAFF INTEREST TO LEARN ABOUT ASSISTIVE TECH ** // Sometimes the opportunity can be given or ideas can be brought up and I run into a lot of "yea, it's ok," I run into a lot of lack of interest. They don't want to learn about it, take the time to hear about it, those kinds of issues. // // Q-are you finding that with certain age groups? // // A-no, not so much student lack of interest, its the staff. It ranges. Some of them aren't that old, not the old traditional teachers, sometimes it's the middle aged and younger teachers. Had a teacher who didn't know what a flash drive was and didn't care to find out. She said teach the aid or whoever, I don't want to know. // // Q-do you think their lack of interest is partially because they don't know what to ask? // // A-I think more often they don't want to take the time to learn. // // Q-you think they know what's available but not interested? // // A-sometimes, yes. //

** Barrier 31: FAILURE TO ADDRESS ASSISTIVE TECH ON IEPs ** // This is coming from the IEPs that I do which is about 80 IEPs a year. We just use it as a check box and move on. We don't discuss assistive technology we just check it and move on. // // Q - So are you saying that "check the box and move on" is from a lack of understanding or from not doing assistive technology // // "recon" for lack of a better word? // // A - I think it is the first more than the second. //

** Barrier 32: TEAMS MEET ONLY ONCE A YEAR AND MAY MISS IMPORTANT CHANGES IN THE CLASSROOM ** // If there is a team approach being implemented, and often there's not, often there is one person implementing AT. If a child has a team they may meet once a year, we might miss the opportunity of what happens in the classroom. We miss things by not meeting very often. // // Q-the teams are child assisted, teachers or IEP teams? // // A-anybody involved in implementation of AT, aids, parents, therapists, teachers, that kind of thing. //

** Barrier 33: LACK OF ACCEPTANCE OF ASSISTIVE TECH USED IN THE CLASSROOM AS AN INTEGRAL PART OF THE ** ** CURRICULUM (E.G. UDL) ** // Think it is tied in well with number 42. Primarily it means that if our classrooms were set up to be more proactive and receptive to assistive technology for all kids not just labeled kids it would be more accepted because it would be the norm rather than just for some kids. // // Q - Is it the lack of acceptance that is a barrier? // // A - Yes //

** Barrier 34: INFLUENCE OF JOB COMMITTMENTS NEGATIVELY EFFECTS THE IMPORTANCE OF ASSISTIVE TECH TRAINING ** // This has been spoken about with another. Everyone has a primary job but oh by the way you need to be doing this too. It's not held as an important thing. Providing for students, you make your job easier in the end. It's a big key. // // Q-are you referring to within the classroom to make it easier overall? // // A-yes, every level, regional to ISD, those that go out to the schools to the administrators to the teachers in the classroom. // // Q-long term investment golden? // // A-yes, because you have other commitments in your face every day. // // Q-confused with what the word meaning says to me. // // A-influence, this is what I have to do. I'm a gen ed teacher, I have to grade papers, all these things, makes it more important than getting AT training in my classroom. The influence of my job negatively affects the importance of AT training. // // Q-influence negatively affects training or? // // A-could be both. Starts with training, my need to know that I need training. Implementation is the next step //

** Barrier 35: THE NEED FOR ONGOING TRAINING AND PD FOR ALL STAFF ** // Sometimes we are offered PD for a certain type of assistive technology or for something specific for a student and we don't use it right away and then we forget how. //

** Barrier 36: TECH USED IS OFTEN BLOCKED OR NOT ALLOWED DUE TO FEAR OF INAPPROPRIATE USE ** Stems from two things. Sometimes students have technology that may or may not be allowed in schools and teachers don't want them to use it. They're afraid they will be texting or using inappropriately, also administrators sometimes are afraid to allow you access to certain areas for fear of inappropriate use. ** Barrier 37: LACK OF INSIGHT INTO THE PARTICULAR NEEDS OF EDUCATORS, PARENTS, AND ADMIN TO PROVIDE PD ** ** THAT IS RELEVANT ** // Those of us who try to provide relevant PD need to know what those people need to know. We don't know what they need to know. We need to find a way to tap into their current knowledge and their current needs so that we can provide the appropriate PD on assistive technology. //

** Barrier 38: DIFFICULTY IN DEALING WITH THE NUMEROUS INITIATIVES FACING EDUCATORS TODAY AND IDENTIFYING COMMONALITIES BETWEEN THEM ** // A lot of people see AT as just another thing that's out there and another thing they have to do. With all the initiatives out there bombarding everyone everyday, things get put on the back burner. Different districts are at different points. The big one right now is RTI and how do RTI and AT go together? // // There's a lot of different buzzwords that are out there today, teachers have a lot on their plates and it makes the sustainable model difficult. //

** Barrier 39: NOT ALL SCHOOL FAMILIES HAVE ACCESS TO NECESSARY TECHNOLOGICAL TOOLS AT HOME TO LINK SCHOOL-HOME ASSISTIVE TECH NEEDS ** // If you have some type of assistive technology that could be implemented at school and carried over to practice at home. If someone could have internet they would be able to have the support there as well. I am not too familiar with all of the assistive technology. // // Q- Do you feel like it is more than internet it is technology as a whole? Some students do not have landlines or TVs. // // A - yes I would like to change that to access to the necessary technological tools and take out internet. // // Q- I'd like clarification about what "not all school families" mean. // // A - I can't clarify because in some districts not all families would have access, others some do so I cannot say what that would be. It would vary by school and area. //

** Barrier 40: MANY DON'T UNDERSTAND OR KNOW WHO'S JOB IT IS TO PROVIDE ASSISTIVE TECH ** // A lot of times the teachers don't know whose job it is for AT epecially if that person works out of the ISD. Some of the locals don't know what you have to offer or what you can do for them. //

** Barrier 41: LACK OF FINANCIAL INCENTIVES AND REWARDS TO FACILITATE ASSISTIVE TECH ** // I think that school buildings with principals could develop some sort of an incentive program so that people are more motivated to use some of the tools. It is a little tongue in cheek but I think it is used in the business world and could work. //

** Barrier 42: MANY EDUCATORS VIEW ASSISTIVE TECH AS SITUATIONAL AND NOT AS A FUNCTIONAL PART OF THE ** ** CHILDS DAY ** // Thought this tied in with 33. What I have seen in the past is that a lot of educators will try a piece of equip and put it away or use it as an award for a child but not // // allow it as a part of the functionality part of the day. Ties in with 33 in that it should be used throughout the day. I think they are similar. // // C-I think they are similar but different because it relates to a child's part of the day. // // Q-I got a little mixed up with #s. 42 seems to me that we're talking about implementation of an IEP and is the barrier not in the writing of the IEP? // // A-no, I don't think so. Maybe the one time trial is not what I mean, maybe as a reward. // // Q-is what you saying a situational remedy? // // A-no, it may be that it's already written into the IEP. The child will communicate, request using this device, but it's not carried away. // // Example: I work with severely impaired children. As an example, I would go to the gym and have a switch for a child with multiple requests. I take the switch with me and record the message. As soon as that message is done, I change it to another communication and that's what the child needs to participate during the day. They might use it in the classroom to communicate a greeting but won't use it elsewhere. The child is left with no means of communication. They use it for one use but not the entire child's day. // // Q-understand but guess I see part of the barrier as part of the IEP implementation not being done correctly? // // A-I agree. Yes it's the barrier that it's not being implemented. // // Q-could trial be removed from the barrier? // // A-yes, added as situational. //

** Barrier 43: THERE ARE TOO MANY PD OPPORTUNITIES AVAILABLE ** // I meant that there are so many categories or PD opportunities out there, that there are so many choices, that staff and itinerant staff have to choose from that it muddies the water. If they even get a choice about PD there are still so many options that they may not even take something that addresses assistive technology. //

** Barrier 44: DIFFICULTY OF INTEGRATING ASSISTIVE TECH IN THE HOME ** // There is a dis-connect with how do we get something in the home in order to generalize it in order to have that tool used everywhere. How do you have time to train the parents, getting the equipment in the home, whatever it might be. There's a real difficulty there. If you just do it at school but don't use it at home, we're talking about communication. If you don't use it everywhere, there's definitely a barrier there. //

** Barrier 45: LACK OF EFFECTIVE NETWORKING WITHIN THE REGION REGARDING ASSISTIVE TECH SERVICES WITHIN THE SCHOOLS ** // First of all can I make a correction? It is region not regions. We meet as an assistive technology consortium. We understand that different things are going on within our region for assistive technology, but networking and helping each other outside of the meeting every six weeks does not happen. We as a region have some rich resources but we are not taking advantage of it. Whether it is devices, training, or other options we do not take advantage of it or go beyond the meeting to take advantage of it. //

** Barrier 46: INSUFFICIENT OR INADEQUATE TECH AT THE BUILDING LEVEL ** // I'm pretty sure everyone knows what this means. Some of our buildings do not have adequate AT. In our center based program, there is one computer in the classroom. There are a lot of things you can do with kids, that you can't do with that. //

** Barrier 47: ISOLATED IMPLEMENTATION OF ASSISTIVE TECH MAY MAKE THE KIDS FEEL SINGLED OUT OR RIDICULED ** // I meant that if you have a student and you want them to use an AlphaSmart or another assistive technology device they don' t want to use it because they are the only ones using it. We need to make it a universal tool so that all students use it and it is not just a tool that someone uses because they are in special education. //

** Barrier 48: LACK OF ACCOUNTABILITY OF MAINTENANCE AND UP-KEEP OF ASSISTIVE TECH WHICH REDUCES THE USE OF IT ** // This is similar to how Megan feels. We have a variety of devices and some are up to date and some are old but even the old ones have a lot of potential. It's whoever is in charge of keeping them up to date. Even as a speech pathologist, I'm not in charge of that committee, you're the one. Who is accountable? Is the classroom teacher, the speech path, or the OT? Even the simplest thing as a battery change, they claim the device doesn't work, then the kid is without the device for two weeks because nobody would change the battery. Need accountability there. // // Q-see as a lack of buy in and understanding of AT or just not wanting to be responsible? // // A-like to say the first but it's alot the second. They're overworked, busy but don't want the responsibility of it. You can build a reputation on that by being there too often to change batteries for them. // // Q-lack of plan of implementation for this person can do this, we're going to use this tool and haven't spelled out steps? // // A- no, more of maintenance. Have a system set up for inventory, system set up discussed at many meetings, you have the protocol to take, it just doesn't happen. Even though you've educated and set up materials. // // C-I can give an example: When we implement overhead projectors on the ceiling, and the filter gets clogged and we put it up and we forget about it. The filter gets clogged and the bulb explodes. If you implement a protocol on who is responsible, the AT will continue to function. // // A-It's who is accountable. Who's job is it to do. If you don't have that protocol set up, it will happen. What happens when you do have the protocol and it still happens? //

** Barrier 49: THERE'S A LACK OF ADMINISTRATIVE INVOLVEMENT IN THIS COLAB ** // Just this morning when Aleco was talking about ownership I believe it stems from administrators need to hear what we have to say. They are the only one that can make changes to the regions. // // C- I wanted to agree whole-heartedly with Lisa. As much as I enjoy this process and you are doing a great job. I am concerned significantly about the time, and financial commitment put forth without administration // ** Barrier 50: LACK OF OR FAILURE TO DOCUMENT APPROPRIATELY THE USE OF ASSISTIVE TECH OF WHETHER IT'S WORKING OR NOT ** // It's important that we document what piece of equipment a student is using whether it's working or not. There's a failure of that. Going back to another barrier where someone was talking about communicating whether something is working or not. It's a way to document through the process. Also from a legal standpoint to support why or why not we are using it. // ** Barrier 51: IF ASSISTIVE TECH WAS ADDRESSED IN THE IEP THE BARRIER MAY BE THE IMPLEMENTATION ** // I think if we address technology in the IEP the barrier is that we need to make sure it is implemented so we need to make sure it is repaired. // // Q- are you saying if it descriptive in the IEP or documented and used? // // A I am saying that I guess all of that. // // C- in our IEPs it is almost like a checkmark. // // C- I think that barrier can be addressed because there is room to write in the comment area. So you might write “it is going to be used in the classroom, gym, cafeteria. There is room to write that in the IEP. // ** Barrier 52: LACK OF KNOWLEDGE OF WHAT ASSISTIVE TECH IS ** // Just seems as we were talking yesterday it came out that lot of our locals, gen ed teachers, special ed teachers, and some of us sitting here are not on the same page of what AT is. It encompasses a lot of different things. // // C-I think the word AT is very confusing and can be a barrier because people hear the word technology and shut down. Perhaps the word AT is a barrier. // // Q-does this encompass what you are meaning? // // A-yes. // // Q-do we want to write definition in the barrier? // // C-I think the word AT confuses others, people think automatically computers. // // Q-do you mean that AT is sometimes not viewed as a tool of UDL and a possible gen ed initiative, and rather that some people think it has to be a special ed thing? // // A-I think it's true. When in the classroom doing things normally UDL, I didn't realize it fell under AT. There's a lot of people out there ignorant as to what is AT. We throw that term around a lot. // // C-I agree. There is a lot of discrepancy of what people think of about AT. We had a discussion at a statewide meeting, by legal meaning AT is special ed. We see a broader view of it. // ** Barrier 53: LACK OF STUDENT INPUT INTO THE DECISION-MAKING PROCESS ** // I think sometimes with all the new technology coming up we say the child cant keyboard but we turn around and they have a phone in their hand and they are texting like crazy but that is not a tool they can use or have access to. // // Q - What did you mean by lack of student input? // // A - We don’t give the student a chance to say.. I guess I cannot explain it. // // We block them from using tools they have in place // // Q - Are you saying we do not allow the student to play a part in the decision making process? // // A - Yes // // Q - Does it cover student input with AT not being helpful for them? // // A - Yes // // Q Laura - I know where you are coming from but I wonder if it would be clearer if we added lack of decision making process. // // Aleco - They are titles so are you saying to clarify add that to the title? // // Laura - Yes I think for me it would make if clearer. // // Sue - could we make it more clear by putting lack of student input into the decision making process. // ** Barrier 54: LACK OF A PERSON ASSIGNED TO BE THE ASSISTIVE TECH PERSON ** // At our ISD we have an AT team but it's third on the list of what we do. We don' t have one person who is responsible for evals or lending out tools, it's kind of like our 3rd job there. It's put on the back burner. We just don't get to it. // // Q-thinking of more of the expert model? // // A-think we're making a team and lots of things we can do but nobody can do it. // // Q-at the ISD level, building level, district level or? // // A-the ISD level. Either ½-time jobs, or full times jobs plus add on jobs for people. // ** Barrier 55: A FAILURE TO SEE HOW ASSISTIVE TECH FITS INTO THE LARGER PICTURE ** // Sometimes assistive technology is addressed in the IEP but I feel when it is not we get a lot of people who use AT for the sake of using AT. We want them to hit the Big Mac to hit the Big Mac rather than to communicate. There is a disconnect between the bigger picture - trying to get them to communicate with the use of AT. // ** Barrier 56: STAFF EXPECTS IMMEDIATE RESULTS FROM ASSISTIVE TECH ** Came out of barrier#4. Thought it was a little more concise and a separate barrier. Too often we expect when you have a piece of technology they can use it immediately, instead of months or years to be effective in a student's life. Too often we give a device or AT to a student and expect that they would know how to use it immediately. If they don't, we deem it inappropriate. Our expectation is that they would know how to use it. C-regarding barrier#4 - not what I was saying. It takes more than just a week to see if a child is sufficient in using that piece of equipment so it needs to be used for a longer amount of time to be sure they are using it correctly before saying it's not working. Q–is that what you're saying, you are saying that we have the expectations that we think they know how to do it now? I think we need to give it time to make sure the student knows how to use the equipment. A-I concur. The term technology is a problem. As soon as people hear technology in assistive technology it creates a barrier.
 * Barrier 57: 'ASSISTIVE TECHNOLOGY' [THE TERM 'TECHNOLOGY' IN AND OF ITSELF] IS A BARRIER **