Week 3 - Assistive Technology

According to Bryant and Bryant (2012), there are several considerations one must take into account when thinking about selecting and/or adopting an AT device or service. In light of these considerations, what is your assessment of how Facilitated Commutation (FC) devices were adopted and used (as portrayed in the PBS documentary)? 

     Assistive Technology is a great tool used to help students with disabilities function and freely express themselves.  There are many things to consider before one selects an assistive technology device.  According to the readings, there were many things to consider before choosing an assistive technological tool.  I would like to focus on two main considerations one must take into account when deciding what AT device to use.  
     First, the team must decided the specific needs and ability of the student(s).  Once the specific needs are determined, one can make an easier decision on which device would best suit the students.  Also, the curriculum and goals of the student is another item to consider.  If one does not consider the long term and short term goals of the student it is very difficult to decide which device would be best to help the student. 

     After considering the readings suggestions in selecting an assistive technology I watched the Front line video. The video discussed different stories of people implementing facilitate communication techniques.  FC is defined as a variety of techniques used by professionals and caregivers to assist people with communication disabilities.  Some examples of FC's are as follows:

• An alphabet board
• Typing on a keyboard 
• Electronic devices showcasing symbols, letters or images

     The video mainly focused on Autistic students.  One student was  Ben Larr. He is an autistic male and  cant verbally speak on his own.  With the proper equipment, Ben is now able to type his thoughts to an entire audience during a presentation.  Based on the proper pairing of the device and given Ben's disability, he can now be free of his disability and speak his mind clearly.  To the people experience the achievements of students with disabilities they claim it is a "miracle" and an "awakening".  It is amazing to think, computers can allow non-verbal people to express themselves verbally. 

     Not all of the stories were beneficial for each student.  As the video went on, I started to question the accuracy of each technology.  Was everything taken into amount when choosing a specific assistive technological device for each student?  Could these students portray their own ideas onto devices they have never used before or was the idea of it working more of a greater influence.  
     Betsy is a girl in the video who cannot verbalize her words.  She was given a computer program with a facilitator to help translate her thoughts.  I do not believe the equipment was suited for her because she was new to the device and unfortunately was unable to translate her ideas through the device.  When tested, she would copy information more often then create her own thoughts.  She was taken from her parents because it was believed she was abused by them.  In an attempt to understand what really happened, Betsy underwent some testing.  During the testing she would need to identify everyday items through a picture and broadcast her thoughts by using a keyboard.  Unfortunately, Betsy copied her facilitators answers rather than recognized the picture itself.  

    Due to various negative allegations facilitated communication is not as successful as once thought, Syracuse University has developed a program of seven students doing research on the facilitated communication.  The questions was posed, could parents potentially be more blinded by facilitate communication because they are hoping it is real and it allows their child to be "free" and openly communicate?  The Front line video suggested facilitators had a greater influence on the success of facilitated communication techniques.  What this demonstrates is the importance of understanding the abilities of each student as well as considering the goals of each student. I believe when facilities do not pair assistive technology devices accurately with each student they lack an understanding of the child's disability. 

Resources:

1. Bryant, D. P., & Bryant, B. R. (2012)/ Assistive technology for people with disabilities (2^nd ed.). Upper Saddle River. Pearson Education.
2. Kelker, K. A., & Holt, R. (1997). Family guide to assistive technology. Billings, MT: Parents Let’s Unite for Kids.
3. Prisoners of Silence Front line video