{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02471412762818148, 'fraction_numerical': 0.01217263002582073, 'mean_word_length': 5.457142857142857, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Making Informed Assistive Technology Decisions for Students with High Incidence Disabilities

individualized education program (IEP) team members throughout the country are struggling to make appropriate decisions regarding assistive technology (AT) for students with high incidence disabilities. Although numerous authors and organizations have developed tools to assist IEP teams when considering AT, the task can be overwhelming. Successful AT programs utilize preassessment, collaborative problem-solving, effective implementation, and systemic evaluation. Each of these issues present different challenges to special education teachers. This article is designed to simplify AT consideration for students with high incidence disabilities by highlighting several comprehensive resources that IEP teams can use to inform their decision-making process. Prior to our discussion of each resource, we identify barriers the IEP team may face when making AT decisions. It is our intention that the tools and resources presented herein should be used collectively by IEP teams to ensure that the AT needs of students with high incidence disabilities are addressed. The Individuals With Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004 (Pub. L. No. 108-446, Part A, Sec 602, pp. 11–12) defines an AT device as “any item, piece of equipment, or product system, whether acquired commercially off the shelf, modified, or customized, that is used to increase, maintain or improve the functional capabilities of a child with a disability.” Federal law mandates the consideration of AT when writing a student’s IEP. This means that it is a special education team’s responsibility to ensure that AT is considered for all students, including those with high incidence disabilities. This task can be overwhelming due, in large part, to a critical shortage of AT specialists who help IEP teams make decisions regarding assistive technology for students with disabilities (Edyburn, 2004). Research indicates that members of IEP teams often have limited expertise regarding the types of AT that are available to students because of a lack of adequate training for preservice teachers entering the field (Cavanaugh, 2002). Despite this, there has been little to no increase by school districts in hiring AT professionals who can plan and supervise the effective implementation of AT (Edyburn, 2004). In some cases, experienced special education teachers have limited knowledge of basic types of AT (Puckett, 2004). Even special educators who strive to stay current in the AT field have difficulty ascertaining current, appropriate information from the diverse resources that are available. For example, a special educator conducting