Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Continuing QIAT Conversations Joan Breslin Larson Follow up webinar post Feb 18-19 for AT Conference for AT Teams Hosted by Oklahoma.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Continuing QIAT Conversations Joan Breslin Larson Follow up webinar post Feb 18-19 for AT Conference for AT Teams Hosted by Oklahoma."— Presentation transcript:

1 Continuing QIAT Conversations Joan Breslin Larson Follow up webinar post Feb for AT Conference for AT Teams Hosted by Oklahoma ABLE Tech AT Act Program Oklahoma State University Webinar services provided by ATIA.org

2 Protocol for the call Keep phone muted unless you want to talk- and you are very welcome to ask questions or provide input, so just unmute! Can also use chat box to ask questions or provide feedback.

3 Quality Indicator Areas Quality Indicator Areas Consideration Assessment Including in the IEP Implementation Evaluation of Effectiveness Transition Administrative Support Professional Development

4 Quality Indicators in Assistive Technology (QIAT) Developed by practitioners, determined to be valid and reliable Useful in multiple settings ◦ Schools ◦ Professional development ◦ University programs Supported by a range of resource documents

5 Consideration Required as one of five special factors included in IDEA since 1997 What is meant by consideration? ◦ Brief process ◦ Occurs in each IEP meeting ◦ Results in a outcome ◦ Different states and districts document consideration outcome in different ways

6 What is the functional skill in the area of concern? Reading Written Expression Math Problem-solving Communication Recreation Daily organization Seating/Positioning Hearing Seeing Self-Care Mobility Behavior Specific task-related skills 6

7 What aspects of the student’s performance should change?  Speed/Frequency  Accuracy  Independence  Spontaneity  Duration  Latency  Quality  Quantity  What else?? 7

8 What kind of change will there be in the way the student completes the task(s) in the area of concern?  New tools  New instructional strategies  Accommodations  Modifications 8

9 Consideration is Always about the student ◦ Not the teachers, peers or building Focuses on what the student needs to achieve IEP goals or provide access to academic tasks

10 Outcomes of consideration 1. AT is not needed. The student is making adequate progress through task modification, skill remediation or other interventions. 2. AT is needed, and is successfully being used. In this case, it is appropriate to state in the IEP the AT services and devices have been found to be effective to assure that they are available to the student.

11 Continued… 3. AT may be needed, but the IEP team is unsure what service or device would meet the student’s needs. The team may decide that new AT should be tried and additional data be collected to determine what an appropriate service or product might be. This may or may not trigger an evaluation. 4. The team is unsure what AT is, and so must find resources in order to make an informed decision regarding consideration. Credit Penny Reed

12 Quality Indicators for Consideration 1. Assistive technology devices and services are considered for all students with disabilities regardless of type or severity of disability. Intent: Consideration of assistive technology need is required by IDEA and is based on the unique educational needs of the student. Students are not excluded from consideration of AT for any reason. (e.g., type of disability, age, administrative concerns)

13 2. During the development of an individualized educational program, every IEP team consistently uses a collaborative decision- making process that supports systematic consideration of each student’s possible need for assistive technology devices and services. Intent: A collaborative process that ensures that all IEP teams effectively consider the assistive technology of students is defined, communicated, and consistently used throughout the agency. Processes may vary from agency to agency to most effectively address student needs under local conditions.

14 3. IEP team members have the collective knowledge and skills needed to make informed assistive technology decisions and seek assistance when needed. Intent: IEP team members combine their knowledge and skills to determine if assistive technology devices and services are needed to remove barriers to student performance. When the assistive technology needs are beyond the knowledge and scope of the IEP team, additional resources and support are sought.

15 4. Decisions regarding the need for assistive technology devices and services are based on the student’s IEP goals and objectives, access to curricular and extracurricular activities, and progress in the general education curriculum. Intent: As the IEP team determines the tasks the student needs to complete and develops the goals and objectives, the team considers whether assistive technology is required to accomplish those tasks

16 5.The IEP team gathers and analyzes data about the student, customary environments, educational goals, and tasks when considering a student’s need for assistive technology devices and services. Intent: The IEP team shares and discusses information about the student’s present levels of achievement in relationship to the environments, and tasks to determine if the student requires assistive technology devices and services to participate actively, work on expected tasks, and make progress toward mastery of educational goals

17 6. When assistive technology is needed, the IEP team explores a range of assistive technology devices, services, and other supports that address identified needs. Intent: The IEP team considers various supports and services that address the educational needs of the student and may include no tech, low tech, mid-tech and/or high tech solutions and devices. IEP team members do not limit their thinking to only those devices and services currently available within the district.

18 7. The assistive technology consideration process and results are documented in the IEP and include a rationale for the decision and supporting evidence. Intent: Even though IEP documentation may include a checkbox verifying that assistive technology has been considered, the reasons for the decisions and recommendations should be clearly stated.

19 Common Errors AT is considered for students with severe disabilities only. No one on the IEP team is knowledgeable regarding AT. Team does not use a consistent process based on data about the student, environment and tasks to make decisions.

20 And more errors…. Consideration of AT is limited to those items that are familiar to team members or are available in the district. Team members fail to consider access to the curriculum and IEP goals in determining if AT is required in order for the student to receive FAPE. If AT is not needed, team fails to document the basis of its decisions.

21 Team input

22 Resources for Consideration SETT Framework ◦ Joyzabala.com WATI.org Minnesota Manual for Consideration of AT ◦ QIAT resourceshttp://qiat.orghttp://qiat.org ◦ AT Consideration Guide ◦ Consideration Guiding Document

23 Questions? Next call April 1, 2014 at 3:30 April 28, 2014 at 3:30


Download ppt "Continuing QIAT Conversations Joan Breslin Larson Follow up webinar post Feb 18-19 for AT Conference for AT Teams Hosted by Oklahoma."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google