Social Predictors of Assistive Technology Proficiency Among Teachers of Students with Visual Impairments

Abstract

Assistive technology (AT) is critical for K-12 students who have visual impairments to engage with their education and is predictive of positive postsecondary outcomes and future employment. Teachers of students with visual impairments (TVIs) act as the primary gatekeepers of AT for these students. Unfortunately, only about 40% of TVIs integrate AT into their practice. Efforts to predict TVIs’ AT proficiency based on their preservice training have been unsuccessful. The current study proposes and confirms that TVIs’ AT proficiency is related to their identification with a social community of practice (CoP) that values AT. Results from n = 505 North American TVIs produced a Spearman’s correlation of ρ = 0.49 between estimated AT proficiency and CoP identification. The relationship was strongest among TVIs with lower AT proficiency and CoP identification. Results have implications for industry, researchers, teacher preparation programs, personnel who administer and train assistive technologies, and policymakers concerned with ensuring that AT is available to students who have visual impairments. Mere availability of AT is insufficient to ensure its successful introduction to K-12 students with visual impairments, which relies on TVIs’ AT proficiency for meaningful implementation. Developers and advocates of AT for K-12 students with visual impairments must consider the social context in which AT proficiency develops and provide appropriate social supports.

References

1. Gerald Abner and Elizabeth Lahm. 2002. Implementation of assistive technology with students who are visually impaired: Teachers’ readiness. Journal of Visual Impairment 8 Blindness 96, 2 (2002), 98--105.
2. Paul M. Ajuwon and A. Olu Oyinlade. 2008. Educational placement of children who are blind or have low vision in residential and public schools: A national study of parents’ perspectives. Journal of Visual Impairment 8 Blindness 102, 6 (2008), 325--339.
3. Wam S. Cleveland. 1979. Robust locally weighted regression and smoothing scatterplots. Journal of the American Statistical Association 74, 368 (1979), 829--836.
4. Silvia Correa-Torres and Jennifer Howell. 2004. Facing the challenges of itinerant teaching: Perspectives and suggestions from the field. Journal of Visual Impairment 8 Blindness 98, 7 (2004), 420--433.
5. Barbara J. Edwards and Sandra Lewis. 1998. The use of technology in programs for students with visual impairments in Florida. Journal of Visual Impairment 8 Blindness 92 (1998), 302--312.
6. Bradley Efron. 1987. Better bootstrap confidence intervals. Journal of the American Statistical Association 82, 397 (1987), 171--185.
7. Nora Griffin-Shirley, Alan K. Koenig, Carol A. Layton, Roseanna C. Davidson, and others. 2004. A survey of teachers of students with visual impairments: Responsibilities, satisfactions, and needs. RE: View 36, 1 (2004), 7--20.
8. Phil Hatlen. 1996. The core curriculum for blind and visually impaired students, including those with additional disabilities. RE: View 28, 1 (1996), 25--32.
9. Robert Kaplan and Dennis Saccuzzo. 2008. Psychological Testing: Principles, Applications, and Issues (7th ed.). Wadsworth, Cengage Learning, Belmont, CA.
10. Gaylen Kapperman, Jodi Sticken, and Toni Heinze. 2002. Survey of the use of assistive technology by Illinois students who are visually impaired. Journal of Visual Impairment 8 Blindness 96, 2 (2002), 106--108.
11. Stacy M. Kelly. 2009. Use of assistive technology by students with visual impairments: Findings from a national survey. Journal of Visual Impairment 8 Blindness 103, 8 (2009), 470--480.
12. Stacy M. Kelly. 2011. The use of assistive technology by high school students with visual impairments: A second look at the current problem. Journal of Visual Impairment 8 Blindness 105, 4 (2011), 235--239.
13. Patrick Mair and Reinhold Hatzinger. 2007. Extended Rasch modeling: The eRm package for the application of IRT models in R. Journal of Statistical Software 20, 9 (2007), 1--20.
14. Punya Mishra and Matthew Koehler. 2006. Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. The Teachers College Record 108, 6 (2006), 1017--1054.
15. Jum C. Nunnally and Ira H. Bernstein. 1994. Psychological Theory. McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
16. Public Law 94-142. 1975. Education for All Handicapped Children Act. (1975). November 29.
17. Yue-Ting Siu and Valerie S. Morash. 2014. Teachers of students with visual impairments and their use of assistive technology: Measuring the proficiency of teachers and their identification with a community of practice. Journal of Visual Impairment 8 Blindness 108, 5 (2014), 384--398.
18. Derrick W. Smith and Pat Kelley. 2007. A survey of assistive technology and teacher preparation programs for individuals with visual impairments. Journal of Visual Impairment 8 Blindness 101, 7 (2007), 429--433.
19. Derrick W. Smith, Pat Kelley, Nancy J. Maushak, Nora Griffin-Shirley, and William Y. Lan. 2009. Assistive technology competencies for teachers of students with visual impairments. Journal of Visual Impairment 8 Blindness 103, 8 (2009), 457--469.
20. Wendy Strobel, Jennifer Fossa, Sajay Arthanat, and Jennifer Brace. 2006. Technology for access to text and graphics for people with visual impairments and blindness in vocational settings. Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation 24, 2 (2006), 87--95.
21. Anna M. Swenson. 1995. Itinerant teaching: An insider’s view. RE: View 27, 3 (1995), 113--16.
22. Etienne Wenger, Richard Arnold McDermott, and William Snyder. 2002. Cultivating Communities of Practice: A Guide to Managing Knowledge. Harvard Business Press, Cambridge, MA.
23. Mark Wilson. 2005. Constructing Measures: An Item Response Modeling Approach. Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ.
24. Meng Ee Wong and Libby G. Cohen. 2015. Access and challenges of assistive technology application: Experience of teachers of students with visual impairments in Singapore. Disability, CBR 8 Inclusive Development 26, 4 (2015), 138--154.
25. Benjamin D. Wright, John M. Linacre, J. E. Gustafson, and P. Martin-Lof. 1994. Reasonable mean-square fit values. Rasch Measurement Transactions 8, 3 (1994), 370.
26. Carmel C. Yarger and John L. Luckner. 1999. Itinerant teaching: The inside story. American Annals of the Deaf 144, 4 (1999), 309--314.
27. Li Zhou, Paul M. Ajuwon, Derrick W. Smith, Nora Griffin-Shirley, Amy T. Parker, and Phoebe Okungu. 2012. Assistive technology competencies for teachers of students with visual impairments: A national study. Journal of Visual Impairment 8 Blindness 106, 10 (2012), 656--665.
28. Li Zhou, Amy T. Parker, Derrick W. Smith, and Nora Griffin-Shirley. 2011. Assistive technology for students with visual impairments: Challenges and needs in teachers’ preparation programs and practice. Journal of Visual Impairment 8 Blindness 105, 4 (2011), 197--210.

Index Terms

• Human-centered computing

  • Accessibility

    • Accessibility theory, concepts and paradigms

• Social and professional topics

  • Professional topics

    • Management of computing and information systems

      • Project and people management

        • Computer and information systems training

  • User characteristics

    • People with disabilities