Quality Indicators for Administrative Support of Assistive Technology Services
Indicator Statements
This area defines the critical areas of administrative support and leadership for developing and delivering assistive technology services. It involves the development of policies, procedures, and other supports necessary to improve quality of services and sustain effective assistive technology programs.
1. The education agency has written procedural guidelines that ensure equitable access to assistive technology devices and services for students with disabilities, if required for a free, appropriate, public education (FAPE).
Intent: Clearly written procedural guidelines help ensure that students with disabilities have the assistive technology devices and services they require for educational participation and benefit. Access to assistive technology is ensured regardless of severity of disability, educational placement, geographic location, or economic status.
2. The education agency broadly disseminates clearly defined procedures for accessing and providing assistive technology services and supports the implementation of those guidelines.
Intent: Procedures are readily available in multiple formats to families and school personnel in special and general education. All are aware of how to locate the procedures and are expected to follow procedures whenever appropriate.
3. The education agency includes appropriate assistive technology responsibilities in written descriptions of job requirements for each position in which activities impact assistive technology services.
Intent: Appropriate responsibilities and the knowledge, skills, and actions required to fulfill them are specified for positions from the classroom through the central office. These descriptions will vary depending upon the position and may be reflected in a position description, assignment of duty statement, or some other written description.
4. The education agency employs personnel with the competencies needed to support quality assistive technology services within their primary areas of responsibility at all levels of the organization.
Intent: Although different knowledge, skills, and levels of understanding are required for various jobs, all understand and are able to fulfill their parts in developing and maintaining a collaborative system of effective assistive technology services to students.
5. The education agency includes assistive technology in the technology planning and budgeting process.
Intent: A comprehensive, collaboratively developed technology plan provides for the technology needs of all students in general education and special education.
6. The education agency provides access to on-going learning opportunities about assistive technology for staff, family, and students.
Intent: Learning opportunities are based on the needs of the student, the family, and the staff and are readily available to all. Training and technical assistance include any topic pertinent to the selection, acquisition, or use of assistive technology or any other aspect of assistive technology service delivery.
7. The education agency uses a systematic process to evaluate all components of the agency-wide assistive technology program.
Intent: The components of the evaluation process include, but are not limited to, planning, budgeting, decision-making, delivering AT services to students, and evaluating the impact of AT services on student achievement. There are clear, systematic evaluation procedures that all administrators know about and use on a regular basis at central office and building levels.
Common Errors
- If policies and guidelines are developed, they are not known widely enough to assure equitable application by all IEP teams.
- It is not clearly understood that the primary purpose of AT in school settings is to support the implementation of the IEP for the provision of a free, appropriate, public education (FAPE).
- Personnel have been appointed to head AT efforts, but resources to support those efforts have not been allocated. (Time, a budget for devices, professional development, etc.)
- AT leadership personnel try to or are expected to do all of the AT work and fail to meet expectations.
- AT services are established but their effectiveness is never evaluated.